Ferrari F2012

[joeyg02]

Ok, I'm no expert I just put that information out there partly to ask the question if Ferrari has EVER tried a similar system, or have they ever blown exhaust gases off throttle?? I remember McClaren doing it, and Renault is notorious for it. I just can't remember if Ferrari had a similar package before the "off-throttle blown exhaust" was partly banned.

[jaba.hut]

Yes they had off throttle exhaust blowing, but not as good as Merc or Renault. Just remind you of last year Silverstone, when FIA banned it for that race, suddenly Ferrari became very competitive compared to McL and RBR.

[alogoc]

The only thing that can CLEARLY be determined from that video is that the Red Bull's Renault has a different off-throttle exhaust note. That's all. Given the following regulation...

5.6.6 Except when anti-stall or idle speed control are active, ignition base offsets may only be applied above 80% throttle and 15,000rpm and for the sole purpose of reducing cylinder pressure for reliability.

...I'm not so sure about off-throttle exhaust blowing.

I'm more inclined to believe that Red Bull is deactivating cylinders under deceleration to increase fuel efficiency.

i here a lot of talk about deactivating cylinders and using only four of them but how you do that?
it makes more sense to me to deactivate 4 pistons not cylinders but than again how you do that if they are on the same crankshaft?
or how do you stop or reduce pistons gait to cause misfire?
or how you slow down only four pistons not other four if they are on the same crankshaft?

[bhall]

That's essentially what it means. The piston within a deactivated cylinder still moves according to the rotation of the crankshaft; there's just no combustion in that cylinder.

[alogoc]

That's essentially what it means. The piston within a deactivated cylinder still moves according to the rotation of the crankshaft; there's just no combustion in that cylinder.

and they stop the combustion by cutting the fuel from it?

[bhall]

Indeed. Hence the increased fuel efficiency.

Anyone know how much fuel that saves in terms of weight?

[alogoc]

Indeed. Hence the increased fuel efficiency.

Anyone know how much fuel that saves in terms of weight?

thanks for that it's much clearer now!

[.poz]

The only thing that can CLEARLY be determined from that video is that the Red Bull's Renault has a different off-throttle exhaust note. That's all. Given the following regulation...

5.6.6 Except when anti-stall or idle speed control are active, ignition base offsets may only be applied above 80% throttle and 15,000rpm and for the sole purpose of reducing cylinder pressure for reliability.

...I'm not so sure about off-throttle exhaust blowing.

I'm more inclined to believe that Red Bull is deactivating cylinders under deceleration to increase fuel efficiency.

What if instead of cutting ignition they use a small amount of fuel and ignite it not at maximum compression but at (or near to) maximum expansion ? In that way you can get no torque but a lot of exhaust...

[Matt Somers]

I talked about this briefly in the Valencia GP #TechF1 show, in my opinion they are using Cylinder deactivation in order to get better traction. With cylinders deactivated they can still have some throttle engaged where as with all 8 cylinders active that wouldn't be the case. Be interesting to see the telemetry for RBR and say Ferrari to overlay their throttle input for the corners. Obviously the net result of being on part throttle will give the blow effect.

[Nando]

Ok, I'm no expert I just put that information out there partly to ask the question if Ferrari has EVER tried a similar system, or have they ever blown exhaust gases off throttle?? I remember McClaren doing it, and Renault is notorious for it. I just can't remember if Ferrari had a similar package before the "off-throttle blown exhaust" was partly banned.

I think they did as far back as 2008 in Singapore Free Practice. They ran an engine map that sounded like the world was about to end. RB7 was nothing in comparison to the sound.

[Matt Somers]

I thought I'd get my thoughts on the subject down in a blog post which is here: http://somersf1.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/ ... g-via.html

[hardingfv32]

Absolutely no need for 'cylinder deactivation in order to get better traction'.

If you want less power at a certain throttle position, you simply re-program the engine map. If your want more sensitivity you can modify the throttle map. Reduction of pumping losses is the only possible benefit, and I do not see when this would be relevant in F1.

Brian

[bhall]

It should be noted that cars are only allowed two engine maps: one for wet tires and one for dry tires.

5.5.4 The accelerator pedal shaping map in the ECU may only be linked to the type of the tyres fitted to the car : one map for use with dry-weather tyres and one map for use with intermediate or wet-weather tyres.

It should also be noted that the only allowable time to deactivate cylinders is when the engine is at "idle" or above 80% throttle/15,000 RPM. (Doing so would guarantee a last-place finish every time.)

5.5.3 The maximum accelerator pedal travel position must correspond to an engine torque demand equal to or greater than the maximum engine torque at the measured engine speed.

The minimum accelerator pedal travel position must correspond to an engine torque demand equal to or lower than 0Nm.

5.5.5 At any given engine speed the driver torque demand map must be monotonically increasing for an increase in accelerator pedal position.

5.5.6 At any given accelerator pedal position and above 5,000rpm, the driver torque demand map must not have a gradient of less than – (minus) 0.030Nm / rpm.

5.6.6 Except when anti-stall or idle speed control are active, ignition base offsets may only be applied above 80% throttle and 15,000rpm and for the sole purpose of reducing cylinder pressure for reliability.

These are all new regulations this year, and they leave a miniscule amount of room for interpretation.

[Spankyham]

How much impact does KERS, and harvesting in particular, have on tire temps/wear?

[Lycoming]

From the perspective of the tyres, KERS harvest is the exact same as applying the brakes; both apply the force through the hub to the rim to the tyre. The brake disc works less though, and less energy is put into them. Unless this is accounted for in the design of the brakes or ducts, they will radiate less heat into the rim. In discharge, you will get additional wear if you apply it prematurely and generate wheelspin.

Other than that, I can't think of any way that KERS affects the tyres.