Formula One's governing body has announced that it has come to a settlement with Scuderia Ferrari after investigations into its 2019 power unit, considered the most powered in F1.
What is this saying at about the 3:10 mark?
Speculation or gospel?
Best that I can translate:
The Ferrari engine of Leclerc has been accused of overheating the supercharger located on the compressor.
The turbine works at 120,000 rpm and was subjected to thermal stresses in the order of 1100 degrees that on a circuit where you travel open throttle for 73 percent of the lap resulted in exceeding operating temperatures.
Earlier in the thread we used this video as speculation as to whether the turbocharger is split and with the compressor flipped around or / as back facing.
Given that failure I reckon it’ll be hard to analyse what failed here.
Whatever it was there were showers of sparks out the back aswell as smoke, eventually exploded somewhere it seems given parts exiting the engine covers. I never noticed any oil pooling out the back of the car like Charles in Baku, but imagine we will get media photos in a couple days of anything close up.
It was a valve that failed on Charles’ engine wasn’t it?
For something to exit out the engine cover, I’d strongly expect crank case damage. Be interesting to see some close up footage.
The fire was almost crazy. It started at the back and then flames came from the sidepods.
Could it be fuel spread all over the place?
It's extremely unlikely that it's fuel. The tank is fireproof and crashproof, you would need to focus a torch on it to pierce it, especially when it's basically 25% full and can take hard impacts.
It's like it happened for Gasly, MGU-H overheat burns the engine cover and then a bunch of stuff burns.
The fire was almost crazy. It started at the back and then flames came from the sidepods.
Could it be fuel spread all over the place?
It's extremely unlikely that it's fuel. The tank is fireproof and crashproof, you would need to focus a torch on it to pierce it, especially when it's basically 25% full and can take hard impacts.
It's like it happened for Gasly, MGU-H overheat burns the engine cover and then a bunch of stuff burns.
Fuel lines are not any-proof. Besides I'm quite sure a high speed piece of the turbine could penetrate the fuel bladder.
The fire was almost crazy. It started at the back and then flames came from the sidepods.
Could it be fuel spread all over the place?
It's extremely unlikely that it's fuel. The tank is fireproof and crashproof, you would need to focus a torch on it to pierce it, especially when it's basically 25% full and can take hard impacts.
It's like it happened for Gasly, MGU-H overheat burns the engine cover and then a bunch of stuff burns.
Fuel lines are not any-proof. Besides I'm quite sure a high speed piece of the turbine could penetrate the fuel bladder.
How can a high speed piece of the turbine penetrate the fuel bladder?.
Given that failure I reckon it’ll be hard to analyse what failed here.
Whatever it was there were showers of sparks out the back aswell as smoke, eventually exploded somewhere it seems given parts exiting the engine covers. I never noticed any oil pooling out the back of the car like Charles in Baku, but imagine we will get media photos in a couple days of anything close up.
It was a valve that failed on Charles’ engine wasn’t it?
For something to exit out the engine cover, I’d strongly expect crank case damage. Be interesting to see some close up footage.
That's how fragments of turbocharger blade look.
It was big misfire I think, or damaged valve, explosions travels into the exhaust, the peak pressure destroying the turbocharger and cracking the exhaust.
The fire was burnt plastic and possibly any oil I think. Fuel won't be there sitting like that.
I think you would have a BIG fireball has some turbo turbine penetrated the fuel tank. Im 99% sure that wasnt the case given how the car caught fire.
On that point, its interesting to note that only the RHS of the engine cover looks to have caught fire.
Given the talk of turbines exiting the turbo housing, on either the cold side or hot side....How often do you ever see a impellor make a complete exit out the casings of the turbo? Ive seen a few turbo failure videos before on much more highly strung setups than F1 engines, and on about 95% of them, the impeller is contained within the housings. Of course, F1 turbos might differ from your conventional road use Cast iron/steel hot side and aluminium cold sides so I guess there could be a greater potential.
Looking at some footage from Sky on Youtube, it does look like there has been 2 instances visibly noticeable of debris exiting out from behind the engine cover.
This is above the shell logo and around the Santander logo more towards the centre of the car. We can also see multiple instances where 'explosions' look to come out from the lower engine cover and just above the floor. This would take further away from the theory of fuel explosions, in my opinion.
What is interesting, is the failure actually happens a few seconds prior to 3x count (from my counts) coming out the engine covers after he rolls off the track. There are sparks and smoke exiting from the rear which is something we havent seen before from Charles Turbo failure in Spain, and PU failure in Baku. Note in Spain the car was still running and no smoke from the rear. Baku we had engine shutdown and plenty of smoke and oil out the back.
Its actually interesting to think what could have caused the sparks out the back of the engine together with the smoke. Turbo impellor id say would be unlikely to cause the sparks out the back, given if the impellor failed it would be instantaneously destroyed by rubbing against the turbo casing (exhaust side). If it had snapped, then it would have made its escape out the exhaust rather quickly. Plausible for the sparks, but it wouldn't explain the explosions and pieces exiting.
If it was the cold/air intake side of the turbo, I dont think we would see the sparks out the back either, plus I think the debris that exited is too far rearwards for this theory to be plausible.
The other theories is the engine has failed catastrophically and there are parts flying here there and every where. This would explain the debris exiting the engine, and also the chance of sparks out the back. However, I would have expected more smoke in this scenario, unless the failure was relatively high on the block and the contents of the sump were 'untouched' to a degree.
What I have noticed looking back at the footage again, is the location where Sainz stopped the car, which is at the blue part of the barrier after the yellow Pirelli boarding. Then rolls back. Clearly we can see there is quite a lot of oil in such a short time frame whilst the car was stationary before rolling backwards. This would further confirm a theory of PU failure rather than turbo failure like we seen in Spain. The oil has more of a resemblance of the Baku failure.
Either way, this PU, turbo, exhaust, MGU-H is almost confirmed as being scrap, which isnt good for the team and the cost cap given the damage to the engine covers on the Ferrari.
Hopefully the media will release some close up photo's which might indicate more things that the video footage has missed.
chrisc90 wrote:I think you would have a BIG fireball has some turbo turbine penetrated the fuel tank. Im 99% sure that wasnt the case given how the car caught fire.
On that point, its interesting to note that only the RHS of the engine cover looks to have caught fire.
Given the talk of turbines exiting the turbo housing, on either the cold side or hot side....How often do you ever see a impellor make a complete exit out the casings of the turbo? Ive seen a few turbo failure videos before on much more highly strung setups than F1 engines, and on about 95% of them, the impeller is contained within the housings. Of course, F1 turbos might differ from your conventional road use Cast iron/steel hot side and aluminium cold sides so I guess there could be a greater potential.
Looking at some footage from Sky on Youtube, it does look like there has been 2 instances visibly noticeable of debris exiting out from behind the engine cover.
This is above the shell logo and around the Santander logo more towards the centre of the car. We can also see multiple instances where 'explosions' look to come out from the lower engine cover and just above the floor. This would take further away from the theory of fuel explosions, in my opinion.
What is interesting, is the failure actually happens a few seconds prior to 3x count (from my counts) coming out the engine covers after he rolls off the track. There are sparks and smoke exiting from the rear which is something we havent seen before from Charles Turbo failure in Spain, and PU failure in Baku. Note in Spain the car was still running and no smoke from the rear. Baku we had engine shutdown and plenty of smoke and oil out the back.
Its actually interesting to think what could have caused the sparks out the back of the engine together with the smoke. Turbo impellor id say would be unlikely to cause the sparks out the back, given if the impellor failed it would be instantaneously destroyed by rubbing against the turbo casing (exhaust side). If it had snapped, then it would have made its escape out the exhaust rather quickly. Plausible for the sparks, but it wouldn't explain the explosions and pieces exiting.
If it was the cold/air intake side of the turbo, I dont think we would see the sparks out the back either, plus I think the debris that exited is too far rearwards for this theory to be plausible.
The other theories is the engine has failed catastrophically and there are parts flying here there and every where. This would explain the debris exiting the engine, and also the chance of sparks out the back. However, I would have expected more smoke in this scenario, unless the failure was relatively high on the block and the contents of the sump were 'untouched' to a degree.
What I have noticed looking back at the footage again, is the location where Sainz stopped the car, which is at the blue part of the barrier after the yellow Pirelli boarding. Then rolls back. Clearly we can see there is quite a lot of oil in such a short time frame whilst the car was stationary before rolling backwards. This would further confirm a theory of PU failure rather than turbo failure like we seen in Spain. The oil has more of a resemblance of the Baku failure.
Either way, this PU, turbo, exhaust, MGU-H is almost confirmed as being scrap, which isnt good for the team and the cost cap given the damage to the engine covers on the Ferrari.
Hopefully the media will release some close up photo's which might indicate more things that the video footage has missed.
chrisc90 wrote:I think you would have a BIG fireball has some turbo turbine penetrated the fuel tank. Im 99% sure that wasnt the case given how the car caught fire.
On that point, its interesting to note that only the RHS of the engine cover looks to have caught fire.
Given the talk of turbines exiting the turbo housing, on either the cold side or hot side....How often do you ever see a impellor make a complete exit out the casings of the turbo? Ive seen a few turbo failure videos before on much more highly strung setups than F1 engines, and on about 95% of them, the impeller is contained within the housings. Of course, F1 turbos might differ from your conventional road use Cast iron/steel hot side and aluminium cold sides so I guess there could be a greater potential.
Looking at some footage from Sky on Youtube, it does look like there has been 2 instances visibly noticeable of debris exiting out from behind the engine cover.
This is above the shell logo and around the Santander logo more towards the centre of the car. We can also see multiple instances where 'explosions' look to come out from the lower engine cover and just above the floor. This would take further away from the theory of fuel explosions, in my opinion.
What is interesting, is the failure actually happens a few seconds prior to 3x count (from my counts) coming out the engine covers after he rolls off the track. There are sparks and smoke exiting from the rear which is something we havent seen before from Charles Turbo failure in Spain, and PU failure in Baku. Note in Spain the car was still running and no smoke from the rear. Baku we had engine shutdown and plenty of smoke and oil out the back.
Its actually interesting to think what could have caused the sparks out the back of the engine together with the smoke. Turbo impellor id say would be unlikely to cause the sparks out the back, given if the impellor failed it would be instantaneously destroyed by rubbing against the turbo casing (exhaust side). If it had snapped, then it would have made its escape out the exhaust rather quickly. Plausible for the sparks, but it wouldn't explain the explosions and pieces exiting.
If it was the cold/air intake side of the turbo, I dont think we would see the sparks out the back either, plus I think the debris that exited is too far rearwards for this theory to be plausible.
The other theories is the engine has failed catastrophically and there are parts flying here there and every where. This would explain the debris exiting the engine, and also the chance of sparks out the back. However, I would have expected more smoke in this scenario, unless the failure was relatively high on the block and the contents of the sump were 'untouched' to a degree.
What I have noticed looking back at the footage again, is the location where Sainz stopped the car, which is at the blue part of the barrier after the yellow Pirelli boarding. Then rolls back. Clearly we can see there is quite a lot of oil in such a short time frame whilst the car was stationary before rolling backwards. This would further confirm a theory of PU failure rather than turbo failure like we seen in Spain. The oil has more of a resemblance of the Baku failure.
Either way, this PU, turbo, exhaust, MGU-H is almost confirmed as being scrap, which isnt good for the team and the cost cap given the damage to the engine covers on the Ferrari.
Hopefully the media will release some close up photo's which might indicate more things that the video footage has missed.
Engine isn't part of cost cap.
Engines are considered a performance-related component by the rules therefore the construction and maintenance of the power units are required to be paid for by the teams as part of the cost cap. For customers, the total engine costs are capped to $15m (to prevent fleecing), but I don't believe there's that same cap for constructors of engines; the constructors have incentive due to costs of construction/maintenance to limit number of engines they use
Engine development is ofc outside of the cap
Last edited by organic on 11 Jul 2022, 11:38, edited 1 time in total.
