2018 Scuderia Ferrari F1 Team

[Wynters]

No, the scrutineers deemed them legal by current rules. Period.

Plenty of things in the past have been rubber stamped by scrutineering and yet been declared illegal after that. Several teams have suffered retrospective penalties (see Sauber in 2011 for the most brutal example of this and Red Bull's fuel flow issues for something more recent).

[Zynerji]

...or Renaults tuned mass damper.

I know the history of politics overcoming engineering and published rules. Thats why its disgusting to continue to watch it happen.

Everything is aero optimized. The continued delusion that things cannot (or should not) be designed for maximum aero benefit is beyond mentally defective.

[Big Mangalhit]

No, the scrutineers deemed them legal by current rules. Period.

Plenty of things in the past have been rubber stamped by scrutineering and yet been declared illegal after that. Several teams have suffered retrospective penalties (see Sauber in 2011 for the most brutal example of this and Red Bull's fuel flow issues for something more recent).

RB fuel flow was decided illegal before the homologation of the race results and thus doesn't count as retroactive penalty

[Wynters]

No, the scrutineers deemed them legal by current rules. Period.

Plenty of things in the past have been rubber stamped by scrutineering and yet been declared illegal after that. Several teams have suffered retrospective penalties (see Sauber in 2011 for the most brutal example of this and Red Bull's fuel flow issues for something more recent).

RB fuel flow was decided illegal before the homologation of the race results and thus doesn't count as retroactive penalty

Good point, well made.

[Phil]

I really hate to state the obvious, but the only reason to allow the mirrors being attached to the Halo was to allow for better visibility and give the Halo a sense of purpose other than simply being ugly. At no point was it meant to add wings for aerodynamic purposes.

The FIA closed it again, not because it was Ferrari who came up with it, but to avoid just about every team up and down the grid copying it and competing in something that will look obtrusive, fugly and will cost money in areas that is not really wanted. Think T-Wings. These things are not wanted anymore.

Ferrari knew full well that these winglets will cause a stirr before bolting it on to their car. At least they got to keep it on their car for this race. It’s hardly a big deal anyway, so i dont quite get why people are going on about it. Ferrari arent.

[MtthsMlw]

Kimi's second PU - the one which he used in the race - is still usable. It was only a problem with the wiring.
Source (german)

[Phil]

I know some of this is bound to be discussed in more detail in the Ferrari engine thread, but I thought I'd post it here with my own translation as well, as the topic will surely expand beyond just the technical discussion.

From the article AMuS / Protest gegen Ferrari in Monaco?

Ferrari steht im Verdacht, beim Antrieb in Grauzonen zu wildern oder sogar einen Schritt weiter gegangen zu sein. Ein Trick im Bereich der Batterie soll kurzfristig 20 PS extra bringen. Die Konkurrenz fordert bis zum GP Monaco Klarheit. Sonst droht sie mit einem Protest.

Translated: Ferrari is under suspicion of using grey-zones or even going too far with its power-train. A trick with the battery is said to bring a short 20hp boost. Other teams are demanding clarification until the Monaco GP or will threaten to protest [against Ferari].

Ferrari entwickelt am Limit und bewegt sich in den Grauzonen des Reglements. Manchmal sogar darüber, unterstellen die Gegner. Die FIA hat in den letzten zwei Wochen mehrere Punkte am Auto beanstandet, die nicht den Regeln entsprechen oder technische Direktiven zu großzügig interpretieren. So musste Ferrari am vorderen Ende des Unterbodens überstehende vertikale Strömungsausrichter abschneiden. Das Kundenteam HaasF1 auch, was bei der Konkurrenz wieder den Verdacht aufkommen ließ, Ferrari und HaasF1 arbeiten in der Aerodynamik enger zusammen als erlaubt.

Translated: Teams are suspecting that Ferrari is developing at the limit and within certain grey areas of the technical regulations. The FIA has objected to various areas of the car that are either outside the rules or take some of the technical regulations interpretations too liberal. For example Ferrari apparently had to make adjustments to its floor where certain protruding vertical veins (?) needed to be shortened. This also impacted Ferrari's customer team HaasF1, which led to further suspicions from other teams that Ferrari and HaasF1 may be working closer together / sharing data on aerodynamics than what is allowed.

Viel ernster ist der Verdacht, Ferrari könnte im Bereich des Antriebs jenseits des Erlaubten tricksen. Da ist von einem separaten Ölkreislauf für den Turbolader die Rede. Das dort verbrauchte Öl soll nicht zu den 0,6 Litern pro 100 Kilometer zählen, weil der Turbolader kein Motor ist. In diesem Fall könnte man von einer Grauzone oder Spitzfindigkeit bei der Definition sprechen. Hier kommt es wie in der Spiegelaffäre darauf an, wie die FIA das Reglement interpretiert. Weil es dann Mercedes, Renault und Honda genauso machen würden. Sämtliche Untersuchungen bei Ferrari in Bezug auf den Ölverbrauch liefen allerdings bislang ins Leere. Die FIA entdeckte weder einen zweiten Ölkreislauf, noch Unregelmäßigkeit beim Ölkonsum.

Viel komplizierter sind Verdachtsmomente, dass Ferrari beim Energiemanagement mogeln könnte. Demnach sollen aus der Batterie mehr als die erlaubten vier Megajoule Energie pro Runde in das System eingespeist werden. Das soll über eine Umgehung des Messsensors, eine Manipulation des elektrischen Widerstandes in den Leitungen und zwei Ausgänge aus der Batterie bewerkstelligt werden. Wäre dies der Fall, würde das nach Meinung von Experten in den Qualifikationsrunden kurzfristig 20 PS mehr bringen. Erlaubt ist eine Abgabe von maximal 120 Kilowatt (163 PS) aus dem Energiespeicher.

Die mutmaßliche Trickserei ist so kompliziert, dass sich die FIA-Techniker schwer tun, sie zu verstehen. Womit es auch schwierig wird, ein Vergehen nachzuweisen. Nach Kontrollen in Baku wurde ein Report erstellt, der vorerst noch geheim ist. Stichproben in Barcelona ergaben nichts Auffälliges. Kann Ferrari zwischen Baku und Barcelona etwas verändert haben? Eher unwahrscheinlich. Die komplette Leistungselektronik ist versiegelt. In Sebastian Vettels Auto ist zwar bereits die zweite Einheit eingebaut, doch das passierte bereits in Bahrain.

Translation: There's a more serious suspicion (allegation) that Ferrari could be going beyond certain regulations within the powertrain. Allegedly, there's a second oil circuit that is feeding the turbo that is not limited by the FIA mandatory 0.6l/100km limit, because the turbo isn't a motor. This could be a greyzone of the written rule and it will be interesting to see how the FIA will decide on it (as they did with the Halo-mirror-winglets) and would force Mercedes, Renault and Honda to follow suit if this loop isn't clarified. It has to be said however that all inspections so far have yielded no definitive answers in regards to Ferrari's oil consumption. The FIA didn't find a second oil circuit nor make any discovery of irregularities with the oil consumption.

A lot more complicated is the suspicion that Ferrari has found a way to use more than the allowed four megajoules from the battery. They apparently achieve this by bypassing the measuring sensor, manipulating the electrical resistance in the wires and with two outputs from the battery. If this is true, experts believe that over a qualifying lap, this could result in a 20hp boost. Allowed would only be 120KW (163hp).

The trickery is so complicated, that FIA technicians are having trouble understanding it. Because of that, it's also difficult to prove/say either way if it is illegal or not. After examinations in Baku there was a report, but that is still confidential. Random inspections at Barcelona didn't show anything suspicious. It raises the question if Ferrari changed anything between Baku and Barcelona? This may be less unlikely though, as this is all part of the electronics that is sealed. Vettel is already on the second unit, but that was changed in Bahrain.


The article goes on to suggest that Ferrari has been very cooperative as of late in regards to varies suggested rule changes for 2019, even changes that would not benefit them. Officially, they are stating "for the benefit of the sport and the show". Some teams are apparently worried that if Ferrari is found guilty of going too far with some of the alleged trickery, that they could be let off easily.

Meanwhile, Mercedes wants clarification until the Monaco GP. If there isn't any, it is suggested there will be a formal protest.


----

I am posting this in here, hopefully not to provoke any of the usual bickering, but because the article is in German (and some of you don't speak it) and if any of this happens to be accurate, could lead to perhaps a shift in performance, perhaps similar to last year after Canada when the second oil tank within the Ferrari was discovered and suddenly Ferrari lost some of its edge. It will surely be interesting to see how this develops and perhaps some of the above may also be part of the reason why Ferrari was quite a bit off pace in Barcelona during the race, compared to the previous 3 races?

[strad]

I saw an article on this battery thing as well..

After pushing the boundaries of the regulations with its creative halo-mounted mirrors, Ferrari could once again come under the scrutiny of the FIA following allegations linked to the battery system of its 2018 SF71-H.

According to Auto Motor und Sport, a formal protest against Ferrari could be lodged at next week's Monaco Grand Prix, the Scuderia's rivals targeting a complex ploy by which Ferrari is able to extract more than the allowed four megajoules of energy from its battery system.
The scheme allegedly involves modifying the electrical currents in the system and the battery output, allowing for a bypass of the all-important sensor that measures the electrical usage, a ruse reportedly worth an extra 20bhp.

"The alleged trickery is so complicated that FIA engineers are struggling to understand it," said AMS reporter Michael Schmidt.

Whether the allegations have merit or not remains to be seen, but arch-rival Mercedes has urged the FIA to act more quickly in the future regarding potential cases of illegality.

"Any race in which grey areas remain grey can be a lost race," said Mercedes non-executive chairman Niki Lauda.

"The FIA has to clarify these unanswered questions by the race in Monte Carlo," he added.

Since it is so complicated that the FIA doesn't understand it,I thought that maybe one of our more knowledgeable members could explain what they mean by the part I put in bold.
""modifying the electrical currents"" ??

[Big Tea]

I saw an article on this battery thing as well..

After pushing the boundaries of the regulations with its creative halo-mounted mirrors, Ferrari could once again come under the scrutiny of the FIA following allegations linked to the battery system of its 2018 SF71-H.

According to Auto Motor und Sport, a formal protest against Ferrari could be lodged at next week's Monaco Grand Prix, the Scuderia's rivals targeting a complex ploy by which Ferrari is able to extract more than the allowed four megajoules of energy from its battery system.
The scheme allegedly involves modifying the electrical currents in the system and the battery output, allowing for a bypass of the all-important sensor that measures the electrical usage, a ruse reportedly worth an extra 20bhp.

"The alleged trickery is so complicated that FIA engineers are struggling to understand it," said AMS reporter Michael Schmidt.

Whether the allegations have merit or not remains to be seen, but arch-rival Mercedes has urged the FIA to act more quickly in the future regarding potential cases of illegality.

"Any race in which grey areas remain grey can be a lost race," said Mercedes non-executive chairman Niki Lauda.

"The FIA has to clarify these unanswered questions by the race in Monte Carlo," he added.

Since it is so complicated that the FIA doesn't understand it,I thought that maybe one of our more knowledgeable members could explain what they mean by the part I put in bold.
""modifying the electrical currents"" ??

But then, as long as the gray area remains gray, it is not illegal. It only becomes illegal once a rule states it.
This is of course as long as it does not infringe an overarching rule, in which case it is not a grey area.

[NathanOlder]

I'd like to know how the other teams think /know this is going on ? Its so complicated that the Fia are struggling to understand it even when they have full access to the car.

[FrukostScones]

I'd like to know how the other teams think /know this is going on ? Its so complicated that the Fia are struggling to understand it even when they have full access to the car.

Lorenzo Sassi started working for Merc in April acc. to AMUS.

[erikejw]

I know some of this is bound to be discussed in more detail in the Ferrari engine thread, but I thought I'd post it here with my own translation as well, as the topic will surely expand beyond just the technical discussion.

From the article AMuS / Protest gegen Ferrari in Monaco?

Ferrari steht im Verdacht, beim Antrieb in Grauzonen zu wildern oder sogar einen Schritt weiter gegangen zu sein. Ein Trick im Bereich der Batterie soll kurzfristig 20 PS extra bringen. Die Konkurrenz fordert bis zum GP Monaco Klarheit. Sonst droht sie mit einem Protest.

Translated: Ferrari is under suspicion of using grey-zones or even going too far with its power-train. A trick with the battery is said to bring a short 20hp boost. Other teams are demanding clarification until the Monaco GP or will threaten to protest [against Ferari].

Ferrari entwickelt am Limit und bewegt sich in den Grauzonen des Reglements. Manchmal sogar darüber, unterstellen die Gegner. Die FIA hat in den letzten zwei Wochen mehrere Punkte am Auto beanstandet, die nicht den Regeln entsprechen oder technische Direktiven zu großzügig interpretieren. So musste Ferrari am vorderen Ende des Unterbodens überstehende vertikale Strömungsausrichter abschneiden. Das Kundenteam HaasF1 auch, was bei der Konkurrenz wieder den Verdacht aufkommen ließ, Ferrari und HaasF1 arbeiten in der Aerodynamik enger zusammen als erlaubt.

Translated: Teams are suspecting that Ferrari is developing at the limit and within certain grey areas of the technical regulations. The FIA has objected to various areas of the car that are either outside the rules or take some of the technical regulations interpretations too liberal. For example Ferrari apparently had to make adjustments to its floor where certain protruding vertical veins (?) needed to be shortened. This also impacted Ferrari's customer team HaasF1, which led to further suspicions from other teams that Ferrari and HaasF1 may be working closer together / sharing data on aerodynamics than what is allowed.

Viel ernster ist der Verdacht, Ferrari könnte im Bereich des Antriebs jenseits des Erlaubten tricksen. Da ist von einem separaten Ölkreislauf für den Turbolader die Rede. Das dort verbrauchte Öl soll nicht zu den 0,6 Litern pro 100 Kilometer zählen, weil der Turbolader kein Motor ist. In diesem Fall könnte man von einer Grauzone oder Spitzfindigkeit bei der Definition sprechen. Hier kommt es wie in der Spiegelaffäre darauf an, wie die FIA das Reglement interpretiert. Weil es dann Mercedes, Renault und Honda genauso machen würden. Sämtliche Untersuchungen bei Ferrari in Bezug auf den Ölverbrauch liefen allerdings bislang ins Leere. Die FIA entdeckte weder einen zweiten Ölkreislauf, noch Unregelmäßigkeit beim Ölkonsum.

Viel komplizierter sind Verdachtsmomente, dass Ferrari beim Energiemanagement mogeln könnte. Demnach sollen aus der Batterie mehr als die erlaubten vier Megajoule Energie pro Runde in das System eingespeist werden. Das soll über eine Umgehung des Messsensors, eine Manipulation des elektrischen Widerstandes in den Leitungen und zwei Ausgänge aus der Batterie bewerkstelligt werden. Wäre dies der Fall, würde das nach Meinung von Experten in den Qualifikationsrunden kurzfristig 20 PS mehr bringen. Erlaubt ist eine Abgabe von maximal 120 Kilowatt (163 PS) aus dem Energiespeicher.

Die mutmaßliche Trickserei ist so kompliziert, dass sich die FIA-Techniker schwer tun, sie zu verstehen. Womit es auch schwierig wird, ein Vergehen nachzuweisen. Nach Kontrollen in Baku wurde ein Report erstellt, der vorerst noch geheim ist. Stichproben in Barcelona ergaben nichts Auffälliges. Kann Ferrari zwischen Baku und Barcelona etwas verändert haben? Eher unwahrscheinlich. Die komplette Leistungselektronik ist versiegelt. In Sebastian Vettels Auto ist zwar bereits die zweite Einheit eingebaut, doch das passierte bereits in Bahrain.

Translation: There's a more serious suspicion (allegation) that Ferrari could be going beyond certain regulations within the powertrain. Allegedly, there's a second oil circuit that is feeding the turbo that is not limited by the FIA mandatory 0.6l/100km limit, because the turbo isn't a motor. This could be a greyzone of the written rule and it will be interesting to see how the FIA will decide on it (as they did with the Halo-mirror-winglets) and would force Mercedes, Renault and Honda to follow suit if this loop isn't clarified. It has to be said however that all inspections so far have yielded no definitive answers in regards to Ferrari's oil consumption. The FIA didn't find a second oil circuit nor make any discovery of irregularities with the oil consumption.

A lot more complicated is the suspicion that Ferrari has found a way to use more than the allowed four megajoules from the battery. They apparently achieve this by bypassing the measuring sensor, manipulating the electrical resistance in the wires and with two outputs from the battery. If this is true, experts believe that over a qualifying lap, this could result in a 20hp boost. Allowed would only be 120KW (163hp).

The trickery is so complicated, that FIA technicians are having trouble understanding it. Because of that, it's also difficult to prove/say either way if it is illegal or not. After examinations in Baku there was a report, but that is still confidential. Random inspections at Barcelona didn't show anything suspicious. It raises the question if Ferrari changed anything between Baku and Barcelona? This may be less unlikely though, as this is all part of the electronics that is sealed. Vettel is already on the second unit, but that was changed in Bahrain.


The article goes on to suggest that Ferrari has been very cooperative as of late in regards to varies suggested rule changes for 2019, even changes that would not benefit them. Officially, they are stating "for the benefit of the sport and the show". Some teams are apparently worried that if Ferrari is found guilty of going too far with some of the alleged trickery, that they could be let off easily.

Meanwhile, Mercedes wants clarification until the Monaco GP. If there isn't any, it is suggested there will be a formal protest.


----

I am posting this in here, hopefully not to provoke any of the usual bickering, but because the article is in German (and some of you don't speak it) and if any of this happens to be accurate, could lead to perhaps a shift in performance, perhaps similar to last year after Canada when the second oil tank within the Ferrari was discovered and suddenly Ferrari lost some of its edge. It will surely be interesting to see how this develops and perhaps some of the above may also be part of the reason why Ferrari was quite a bit off pace in Barcelona during the race, compared to the previous 3 races?

This all very confusing Phil, is this translation true or are you mixing up things?

First you state Ferrari might break the 4MJ limit, and then you state the benefit in kW that is something completely different and everything has to do with bypassing the sensor and at the same time the currents and resistence are manipulated. Even FIA experts does not understand it.

If you want to make any sense stop namedropping electrical units and state very clear what the problem is with Ferraris battery.

Whats is the exact mechanism and which rule does it violate and in what way?

[henry]

Thanks @phil for the translation it confirms and amplified some of my assumptions

I have posted on this in the Ferrari PU thread but the conversation seems more developed here.

The regs identify two measuring points:

Control of Energy Management:
- One sensor is connected to measure all electrical energy into and out of the Energy Store
- One sensor is connected to measure all electrical energy into and out of the MGU-K
- The DC-DC converter may only consume power. This will be verified by inspection.

Both sensors have to deal with energy flowing to and from TWO sources, and so there has to be some process/method that allows unlimited flows to/from the MGU-H whilst measuring the constrained flows between ES and MGU-K. One way of doing this would be to measure any flows that are synchronised between energy leaving the ES and arriving at the MGU-K, or vice versa. If it were possible to modify the phasing of the current flows, it might be possible to trick the sensors into thinking that less energy arrives at the K than left the ES. in which case the K could be run a little longer, and if the wastegates are open and the H driven from the ES the PU could develop more power, 20 or 30 hp is consistent with predicted gains in this mode.

I am a very long way off being an electrical expert, but I do know that in an AC system changing the resistance, capacitance and inductance in the current path can affect the phasing of current entering and exiting the system. Perhaps with suitable knowledge the phase change can be such that the measuring equipment, which is expecting no phase change, or a specific one , can be tricked into thinking that a proportion of current that left the ES didn’t arrive at the ES. It doesn’t have to account for energy flowing elsewhere and so could ignore it.

I can imagine that untangling an implementation of such a scheme would be a nightmare since it would require the development of an exact replica of the system and system values. And even if uncovered who’s to say the system wasn’t just a happy coincidence?

[MtthsMlw]

There goes the Ice cream budget..

[LM10]

There goes the Ice cream budget..
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dd-ou1LWsAEe8vM.jpg:large

Would have not expected them to be that intolerant.