Ferrari F14T

[CBeck113]

AMuS has a story on Ferrari's turbo, but I'd like to avoid speculations, as Google translate isn't really good at this.
This is the link to the article - http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 40355.html

Would someone fluent or German native care to translate the interesting parts? That'll be great.

Ok, a quick summary:
- Turbine, MGU-H and compressor were placed too close to each other, causing heat issues, higher COG and engine bay volume issues
- Turbo too small, so the MGU-H can't send "extra" energy directly to the MGU-K (more power)
- Exhaust manifold not isolated, so more heat dissipates under the engine cover (causes overheating) and not through the exhaust. They also say that this is the reason that the new bodywork wasn't run in Canada, and with suspected less engine power in Austria.
They say that all these things are covered by the restrictions and can therefore not be changed until next year. I think that means that Ferrari will use the rest of the year for testing (at least I hope so!).

[Thunder]

Basically it says the Ferrari PU has 2 critical Design Flaws.

1: The Turbo is too small.
Ferrari thought that smaller Turbo would need less cooling and would be "gentler" to the ICE. Also of course it's smaller, so all on all Ferrari thought the deficits of the smaller turbo would be far outweighed by the aerodynamical Positives. Also through the smaller Turbo the MGU-H produces less Energym which is a killer because the MGU-H is not only allowed to store Energy in the Batteries, it also can deliver it directly to the MGU-K if needed, Power for no cost that Ferrari wasted.

2: The Exhaust Manifold isn't double-walled (sorry don't know how to say that in English) as the Renault and Merc one. Therfore wasting thermal Energy for the MGU-H and also heating up the Engine Bay more, which results an Aerodynamical disadvantage.

And as these Parts are homologated, they can't change it before 2015.

Edit: I didn't write the Split Turbo thing in because i don't believe it is that much of an disadvantage.

Edit 2: Too late....

[donskar]

Basically it says the Ferrari PU has 2 critical Design Flaws.

1: The Turbo is too small.
Ferrari thought that smaller Turbo would need less cooling and would be "gentler" to the ICE. Also of course it's smaller, so all on all Ferrari thought the deficits of the smaller turbo would be far outweighed by the aerodynamical Positives. Also through the smaller Turbo the MGU-H produces less Energym which is a killer because the MGU-H is not only allowed to store Energy in the Batteries, it also can deliver it directly to the MGU-K if needed, Power for no cost that Ferrari wasted.

2: The Exhaust Manifold isn't double-walled (sorry don't know how to say that in English) as the Renault and Merc one. Therfore wasting thermal Energy for the MGU-H and also heating up the Engine Bay more, which results an Aerodynamical disadvantage.

And as these Parts are homologated, they can't change it before 2015.

Edit: I didn't write the Split Turbo thing in because i don't believe it is that much of an disadvantage.

Edit 2: Too late....

Engine power sacrificed for aero benefits (bolded above)? Enzo is rolling in his grave. This is the team founded by the man who said (paraphrasing) that aero is for teams who can't build good engines. Incredibly ironic turn of events (if true).

[Arterius]

AMuS has a story on Ferrari's turbo, but I'd like to avoid speculations, as Google translate isn't really good at this.
This is the link to the article - http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 40355.html

Would someone fluent or German native care to translate the interesting parts? That'll be great.

The article states that Ferrari made a few critical errors that they cannot fix in season and have to wait till 2015. The ICE on its own is fine. The errors are on the electrical side of the Power Unit. The first error is the layout that was chosen for the Turbine, MGU-H, and the Compressor. The Mercedes layout has thermal advantages, saves space, and has a lower Center of Gravity.
Ferrari is also paying for two further conceptual errors. The first is the choice to use a turbine that is too small. The smaller Turbine was chosen as it requires less cooling, effects the ICE less, and is smaller in size. It was reasoned that the disadvantages on the Power Unit side would be overcome by the aerodynamic advantages, but it turned out the disadvantages were larger. The smaller turbine harvests less energy that can be sent directly to the MGU-K, which is not limited per lap like the ES to MGU-K is. Therefore the Ferrari Power Unit lacks Power.
The second error is the lack of insulation on the exhaust pipes. This looses energy that can be harvested by the MGU-H and this lost heat needs to be ejected by the side pods. This requires larger side pods which effects the aerodynamic performance. The exhausts are also a part that is Homologated and can only be changed for 2015.
In Canada Ferrari tested bodywork changes at the back that increases the effectiveness of the diffuser, but it wasn't raced as they feared cooling problems. In Austria the bodywork was raced and it showed in the corners where the car was faster but both drives reported a lack of Power. Ferrari didn't specify where the lack of power came from and one can just speculate that they ran on a lower power setting to prevent overheating.

[timbo]

On the subject of exhaust insulation -- I wonder if it is possible to place some on the bodywork panels?

[604gtir]

i disagree a bit with the article regarding turbo sizing

choosing a smaller turbo for cooling is not the case at least with my turbo experience.

a small turbo is chosen for transient response , low lag, generally means a stronger low/mid range to the power curve
a large turbo is chosen for more power at the expense of lag, generally means a stronger top end at the expense of low end power (which now the mgu/mguk should take care of)

as an example, say we need to produce 600hp

a small turbo needs more boost than a larger turbo to put out 600 hp.. say theorectically it needs 3 bar
a large turbo needs less boost than a smaller turbo to put out 600hp .. say theorectically it needs 2 bar

the small turbo requires more cooling as it may be out of its efficiency range on the top end when running so much boost. the air is hotter requiring more cooling.
the larger turbo requires less cooling as it can run lower boost but flow just as much air required to make 600hp

i think the issue really with the turbo being too small is, they're requiring to run much higher levels of boost and generating too much heat thus requiring higher levels of cooling, via less efficient body work, larger intercoolers/radiators.

in my opinion, they could have run a much larger turbo and used the mguk/mgu to keep the turbo spooled and have much reduced cooling requirements leading to tighter body work, smaller cooling hardware, and improved fuel consumption.

[Lycoming]

On the subject of exhaust insulation -- I wonder if it is possible to place some on the bodywork panels?

Not unless you have the sidepods touching the exhaust. You want to keep the heat in the exhaust gas, which means insulating the exhaust pipe. Once the heat leaves the exhaust pipe, it needs to be rejected to free stream. Bodywork typically has some insulation to protect it from exhaust heat, but that still needs to be rejected to free stream via sidepod airflow; it's already left the exhaust gas. In order for bodywork insulation to keep the heat in the gas, it needs to be touching the pipe, in which case you're better off wrapping the pipe. That's assuming you even have space for that.

[timbo]

On the subject of exhaust insulation -- I wonder if it is possible to place some on the bodywork panels?

Not unless you have the sidepods touching the exhaust. You want to keep the heat in the exhaust gas, which means insulating the exhaust pipe. Once the heat leaves the exhaust pipe, it needs to be rejected to free stream. Bodywork typically has some insulation to protect it from exhaust heat, but that still needs to be rejected to free stream via sidepod airflow; it's already left the exhaust gas. In order for bodywork insulation to keep the heat in the gas, it needs to be touching the pipe, in which case you're better off wrapping the pipe. That's assuming you even have space for that.

Yes, I meant trying to get bodywork to touch the exhausts. Would not be much effective, but maybe just a little better?
Also, didn't Lotus change the wrap of exhaust, maybe Ferrari can do it too?

[flyboy2160]

I moved the speculation about next year's turbo to the Team thread. The posts about the problems with this years' car are still here. Please post speculation about next year in the Team thread.

[.poz]

a small turbo needs more boost than a larger turbo to put out 600 hp.. say theorectically it needs 3 bar
a large turbo needs less boost than a smaller turbo to put out 600hp .. say theorectically it needs 2 bar

a small turbo just need to spool faster.

[Pierce89]

AMuS has a story on Ferrari's turbo, but I'd like to avoid speculations, as Google translate isn't really good at this.
This is the link to the article - http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 40355.html

Would someone fluent or German native care to translate the interesting parts? That'll be great.

The article states that Ferrari made a few critical errors that they cannot fix in season and have to wait till 2015. The ICE on its own is fine. The errors are on the electrical side of the Power Unit. The first error is the layout that was chosen for the Turbine, MGU-H, and the Compressor. The Mercedes layout has thermal advantages, saves space, and has a lower Center of Gravity.
Ferrari is also paying for two further conceptual errors. The first is the choice to use a turbine that is too small. The smaller Turbine was chosen as it requires less cooling, effects the ICE less, and is smaller in size. It was reasoned that the disadvantages on the Power Unit side would be overcome by the aerodynamic advantages, but it turned out the disadvantages were larger. The smaller turbine harvests less energy that can be sent directly to the MGU-K, which is not limited per lap like the ES to MGU-K is. Therefore the Ferrari Power Unit lacks Power.
The second error is the lack of insulation on the exhaust pipes. This looses energy that can be harvested by the MGU-H and this lost heat needs to be ejected by the side pods. This requires larger side pods which effects the aerodynamic performance. The exhausts are also a part that is Homologated and can only be changed for 2015.
In Canada Ferrari tested bodywork changes at the back that increases the effectiveness of the diffuser, but it wasn't raced as they feared cooling problems. In Austria the bodywork was raced and it showed in the corners where the car was faster but both drives reported a lack of Power. Ferrari didn't specify where the lack of power came from and one can just speculate that they ran on a lower power setting to prevent overheating.

Well, at least the article said Ferrari's latest aero package worked well.

[heidenreich27]

No surprise, aero updates comes from allison.

If pat fry would have designed the updates, instant fail.

[PlatinumZealot]

i disagree a bit with the article regarding turbo sizing

choosing a smaller turbo for cooling is not the case at least with my turbo experience.

a small turbo is chosen for transient response , low lag, generally means a stronger low/mid range to the power curve
a large turbo is chosen for more power at the expense of lag, generally means a stronger top end at the expense of low end power (which now the mgu/mguk should take care of)

as an example, say we need to produce 600hp

a small turbo needs more boost than a larger turbo to put out 600 hp.. say theorectically it needs 3 bar
a large turbo needs less boost than a smaller turbo to put out 600hp .. say theorectically it needs 2 bar

the small turbo requires more cooling as it may be out of its efficiency range on the top end when running so much boost. the air is hotter requiring more cooling.
the larger turbo requires less cooling as it can run lower boost but flow just as much air required to make 600hp

i think the issue really with the turbo being too small is, they're requiring to run much higher levels of boost and generating too much heat thus requiring higher levels of cooling, via less efficient body work, larger intercoolers/radiators.

in my opinion, they could have run a much larger turbo and used the mguk/mgu to keep the turbo spooled and have much reduced cooling requirements leading to tighter body work, smaller cooling hardware, and improved fuel consumption.

100% agreed. I thought the AMus logic was off as well. But alas, they are only journalists.

Larger turbos also have more efficient compressor and turbine wheels. This is true for pumps and engines as well, the largest pumps and engines tend to be more efficient due to the smaller impact turbulent flow irregularities has on the overall system (Lower Renault numbers).

I really cannot believe that Ferrari didn't use double walled manifolds? Have the exhaust designers been hiding under a rock for the last decade? Double walled manifolds are almost standard on most european cars like BMW, mercedes and Audis. I wonder why Ferrari didn't use such a simple solution? Weight?

[trinidefender]

i disagree a bit with the article regarding turbo sizing

choosing a smaller turbo for cooling is not the case at least with my turbo experience.

a small turbo is chosen for transient response , low lag, generally means a stronger low/mid range to the power curve
a large turbo is chosen for more power at the expense of lag, generally means a stronger top end at the expense of low end power (which now the mgu/mguk should take care of)

as an example, say we need to produce 600hp

a small turbo needs more boost than a larger turbo to put out 600 hp.. say theorectically it needs 3 bar
a large turbo needs less boost than a smaller turbo to put out 600hp .. say theorectically it needs 2 bar

the small turbo requires more cooling as it may be out of its efficiency range on the top end when running so much boost. the air is hotter requiring more cooling.
the larger turbo requires less cooling as it can run lower boost but flow just as much air required to make 600hp

i think the issue really with the turbo being too small is, they're requiring to run much higher levels of boost and generating too much heat thus requiring higher levels of cooling, via less efficient body work, larger intercoolers/radiators.

in my opinion, they could have run a much larger turbo and used the mguk/mgu to keep the turbo spooled and have much reduced cooling requirements leading to tighter body work, smaller cooling hardware, and improved fuel consumption.

100% agreed. I thought the AMus logic was off as well. But alas, they are only journalists.

Larger turbos also have more efficient compressor and turbine wheels. This is true for pumps and engines as well, the largest pumps and engines tend to be more efficient due to the smaller impact turbulent flow irregularities has on the overall system (Lower Renault numbers).

I really cannot believe that Ferrari didn't use double walled manifolds? Have the exhaust designers been hiding under a rock for the last decade? Double walled manifolds are almost standard on most european cars like BMW, mercedes and Audis. I wonder why Ferrari didn't use such a simple solution? Weight?

Saying a smaller turbo needs more boost to produce the same amount of power is nonsensical. It is all about the mass-flow of air. If for some reason (better design or whatever) the smaller turbo can provide the same mass flow as the larger one at the same efficiency then the smaller would be the better choice as it would be smaller and lighter. However that discussion is slightly irrelevant as it is talking about the compressor side.

These journalists are saying that the turbocharger TURBINE is to small for the application. This means more generally more back pressure at high mass flows. More back pressure means more energy is taken out of the crankshaft to force the gasses out of the cylinder.

Also at its peak efficiency range is closer matched to turning the MGU-H at higher mass flows hence when under high power, the mercedes mgu-h can recover more power to send directly to the MGU-K

[PlatinumZealot]

All thing being the same, a smaller turbine will cause you more back pressure. It has a smaller cross sectional area and smaller nozzles. It cannot be escaped, it is simple mathematics.

The static flow characteristic is dictated by the compressor wheel. What flows you get for what compressor speed and pressure ratio.
While the dynamic response is affected by the turbine and the rotating mass.

I think by using a small turbine you have two problems...
You have more back pressure due to smaller flow area.
Your shaft Rpms will be much higher...so you have to use a small compressor wheel to prevent over-boosting the engine. (Compressor and turbine matching must be correct).
Your MGUH is spinning ever so faster, increasing heat and reducing bearing life.

In Ferrari's case they have to go back to the drawing board and slap on a bigger turbine and then they can use a larger more efficient compressor and other benefits as mentioned above.