Ferrari Power Unit Hardware & Software

[PhillipM]

Yes, just open the wastegate like normal. SS seems to believe a wastegate is some sort of diverter valve rather than just a bypass

[roon]

Yes, just open the wastegate like normal.

Can this explain the differences in wastegate sound between the different power units? Such that, the Ferrari sounds like a woosh, whereas the Merc preserves its exhaust pulses through the wastegate pipes? Seemingly.

[ringo]

We are kind of straying from the topic.
The question of throttling while braking to charge the MGUH, is still not answered.
Let's forget pulling in the clutch, can the driver throttle during braking and charge with MGUH, and could this be what Ferrari are doing?
Could this explain why ferrari has such huge brake ducts as well?

The whole idea behind this, is the suspicion that Ferrari has more deployment than Mercedes. Possibly deploying over a larger rev range, and for longer periods of time.

[gruntguru]

Yes, just open the wastegate like normal.

Can this explain the differences in wastegate sound between the different power units? Such that, the Ferrari sounds like a woosh, whereas the Merc preserves its exhaust pulses through the wastegate pipes? Seemingly.

The ideal wastegate would force the blowdown pressure pulse through the turbine housing then vent the rest of the exhaust flow directly to atmosphere. Not an expert on fluidic valves and such, but I imagine this must be possible to at least some extent - imagine a gap between the header tubes and the turbine housing but high pressure pulses reaching the turbine due to the header being "aimed at" the turbine entry. Think of a Pelton Wheel vs a Francis turbine. https://www.explainthatstuff.com/turbines.html Scroll down to impulse vs reaction turbines.

The more blowdown energy (which is the "noisy" part of the exhaust process) is delivered to the turbine during wastegate operation, the quieter the wastegate sound will be.

[saviour stivala]

Yes, just open the wastegate like normal. SS seems to believe a wastegate is some sort of diverter valve rather than just a bypass

Phillip. What is the difference between a diverter valve and a bypass valve?.
And what I believe is, the wastegates as used on formula one power units is designed specifically to bypass the exhaust turbine scroll housing and dumps exhaust gases to Atmosphere through its own exhaust tailpipe.

[Red Rock Mutley]

The question of throttling while braking to charge the MGUH... Let's forget pulling in the clutch, can the driver throttle during braking and charge with MGUH, and could this be what Ferrari are doing?

Seems unlikely: the braking time is short, the surplus energy is small and the fuel consumption high. Add to that the extra mass of the braking system and instability under downshift while managing PU output

[dren]

I wonder if a dual stage turbine would pass the regulations if you only used one stage at any given time? That way you aren't compromising your reaction turbine for impulse generation. Not likely it would, but maybe you could get away with calling it a single stage.

You're probably only covering maybe half of the compressor power, so it might not be worth the added weight, complexity. Any impulse recovery on a turbine designed for reaction efficiency would likely be very small I'd guess.

[subcritical71]

I wonder if a dual stage turbine would pass the regulations if you only used one stage at any given time? That way you aren't compromising your reaction turbine for impulse generation. Not likely it would, but maybe you could get away with calling it a single stage.

You're probably only covering maybe half of the compressor power, so it might not be worth the added weight, complexity. Any impulse recovery on a turbine designed for reaction efficiency would likely be very small I'd guess.

Hmm .. I've never thought a turbocharger as having impulse or reaction type blading. I'm used to seeing those terms as applied to Steam or Gas turbines which are axial flow engines. Reaction stages will produce the most power, with the same size unit, but sacrifices a small bit of efficiency. Impulse stages can only do about 1/3 the power of a reaction (again, for the same size)

I don't know if this is impulse vs. reaction, but I have seen a turbocharger turbine stage with radial blades which transition towards the centerline as an axial blade. It was called a diagonal flow turbine. To me as long as its one shape without nozzles in between then it should be classified as a single stage which is the regulation in F1. I believe it's the impulse stage which needs a nozzle to direct the stream(?)

[MtthsMlw]

Some hp figures calculated by RB (via AMuS):

From Silverstone Qualifying:
RB (Renault) being 30kw (40,8hp) behind Merc and 35kw (47,6hp) behind Ferrari.
Gives us a difference of 7hp between Ferrari and Merc which is more believable than the 40hp advantage Ferrari was rumoured to have I guess.

Additionally the data also shows that Ferrari is able to deploy energy longer than Merc, at least on the Hangar Straight.

The Mercedes engineers noticed that Ferrari can call up more electrical power at the end of the straight. Hamilton reaches his top speed of 320.8 km/h on the Hangar Straight at 4,719 kilometers. At the same point, Vettel is 321.9 km/h fast. Over the next 200 metres the Mercedes reduces slightly in speed and drops to 319 km/h. In contrast, the Ferrari continues to accelerate, reaching around 325.2 km/h at 4,845 kilometres and then dropping to over 320 km/h at 4,929 kilometres.

[hurril]

I'm wondering if this isn't an aerodynamics thing with those mirrors and the from-the-top inlet to the coolers. My guess is that above a certain speed, some combo of this, that or the other stalls something that produces downforce below that speed.

[alexx_88]

I'm wondering if this isn't an aerodynamics thing with those mirrors and the from-the-top inlet to the coolers. My guess is that above a certain speed, some combo of this, that or the other stalls something that produces downforce below that speed.

Some sort of aerodynamic wizardry sounds more plausible imo. Otherwise, why wouldn't you use the excess energy you have at the beginning of the straight?

[hurril]

I'm wondering if this isn't an aerodynamics thing with those mirrors and the from-the-top inlet to the coolers. My guess is that above a certain speed, some combo of this, that or the other stalls something that produces downforce below that speed.

Some sort of aerodynamic wizardry sounds more plausible imo. Otherwise, why wouldn't you use the excess energy you have at the beginning of the straight?

Exactly. So they probably have improved their PU even more, changed the ERS strategy to match (3) a very clever aero. Very impressive imho.

[Phil]

From Silverstone Qualifying:
RB (Renault) being 30kw (40,8hp) behind Merc and 35kw (47,6hp) behind Ferrari.
Gives us a difference of 7hp between Ferrari and Merc which is more believable than the 40hp advantage Ferrari was rumoured to have I guess.

I’m fairly certain that the 40hp figure that was being thrown around, wasnt mean as 40hp through sheer engine performance, but “normalized”. E.g. if you assume equal cars, identical aero, the sheer performance advantage the Ferrari pulls out on the straights would equal a 40hp advantage.

Here is the relevant quote in German from AMuS:

“Wenn der Speedgewinn allein auf den Antrieb zurückzuführen wäre, dann hätte Ferrari dort 28 Kilowatt (38 PS) mehr als Mercedes. „Das ist ein Sprung, für den du mit normaler Entwicklung zwei Jahren brauchst“, vergleicht Mercedes-Teamchef Toto Wolff.”

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... ro-benzin/

[henry]

Some hp figures calculated by RB (via AMuS):

From Silverstone Qualifying:

Additionally the data also shows that Ferrari is able to deploy energy longer than Merc, at least on the Hangar Straight.

The Mercedes engineers noticed that Ferrari can call up more electrical power at the end of the straight. Hamilton reaches his top speed of 320.8 km/h on the Hangar Straight at 4,719 kilometers. At the same point, Vettel is 321.9 km/h fast. Over the next 200 metres the Mercedes reduces slightly in speed and drops to 319 km/h. In contrast, the Ferrari continues to accelerate, reaching around 325.2 km/h at 4,845 kilometres and then dropping to over 320 km/h at 4,929 kilometres.

These figures are interesting.

It’s difficult to draw any conclusions from the drop in speed of the Mercedes. If it was a gradual decline it would imply a quite small reduction in power, perhaps 10 or 20 kW. It might have been that it continued at 321kph and then slowed under lift and coast. It isn’t, I think, consistent with switching off the MGU-K.

The Ferrari figures suggest a continued application of K assistance, although my crude simulation only requires around 80kW to achieve the rise from 321.9 to 325.2kph. Perhaps only the H is driving the K in self sustain mode. The fall then to 320kph over 104m is quick enough to suggest the K switches from driving to full 120kW recovery, over a period of a little less than 1 second harvesting about 100kJ.

[sosic2121]

Otherwise, why wouldn't you use the excess energy you have at the beginning of the straight?

They are, same as Mercedes is.
But extra energy doesn't mean extra power, just that they can deploy for longer. That would be a reason why when Mercedes start loosing speed, Ferrari keeps accelerating.
Before that, Ferrari is only slightly faster, hence 7 HP max power difference.