Ferrari Power Unit Hardware & Software

[saviour stivala]

Word that was doing the round in Silverstone paddock by people in the know was that FERRARI progress with their power unit was due to combustion development progress made possible by SHELL updated fuel development (progress in octane rating numbers, numbers which are not restricted by the rules). This development was being refined and test bench validated as far back as the last quarter of last year, it was designated as 062-2. Anyhow, Ferrari started the 2018 season with power unit 062-1. On car number 5 it was replaced by 062-2 in Canada, but on car number 7 power unit 062-1 was replaced by 062-2 after 5 races in Spain. FERRARI went into Silverstone with number 7 car power unit 5 races old and car number 5 power unit 3 races old. Both FERRARI cars are still using power unit number 1 (062-1) in FP1 and 2.

Is there any way to confirm that Kimi has spec 2 ICE and not spec 1?

I was under impression that Hass and Sauber used new 062-2 PU in Monte Carlo(and not in Canada) in order to test it on race track.

Although during the race number 5 was controlling race pace from the front, number 7 on a 5 race old PU was actually the fastest car on track. Many believed, including me that when he took PU number 2 another 062-1 was forced on him, but Silverstone proved that was not the case. It looks like the spares they were carrying with them were all to O62-2 updated specification. This update consisted of ICE, TURBO and H combination. Another thing, when they replaced 062-1 on number 7 car in FP, the car did not finish the race, 062-2 lost power during the race and car was retired, ended up with only one cylinder bank able to fire. Kimi was told to switch-off on track, but he managed to drive back to the pits and the race was over for him. But it was found that the problem was caused by wiring and nothing was wrong with the engine, in the next race, Monaco he got pole with it. Yes both Haas cars took 062-2 in Monaco also before schedule.

A correction, my bad, Kimi Riakkonen did not take pole in Monaco (2018).

[wuzak]

Ferrari powered cars are running a bigger structural air intake for the turbo this year. Since the turbo itself is limited to 125k rpm, it should indicate more power generated by the mgu-h.

Small correction:

The turbo is not limited to 125k rpm, but rather the MGUH.

If the MGUH is direct drive from the turbo then, yes, the turbo is limited to 125k. But it could be geared to allow higher turbo rpm.

[Big Mangalhit]

Ferrari powered cars are running a bigger structural air intake for the turbo this year. Since the turbo itself is limited to 125k rpm, it should indicate more power generated by the mgu-h.

Small correction:

The turbo is not limited to 125k rpm, but rather the MGUH.

If the MGUH is direct drive from the turbo then, yes, the turbo is limited to 125k. But it could be geared to allow higher turbo rpm.

TurboF1 getting schooled over F1 turbo (sorry)

[wuzak]

As far as I am aware, Kimi is still using spec #1. His first PU is not being used, as it was salvageable.

Both should get spec 3 after the summer break (either Spa or Monza), which may feature a new head design.

[turbof1]

Ferrari powered cars are running a bigger structural air intake for the turbo this year. Since the turbo itself is limited to 125k rpm, it should indicate more power generated by the mgu-h.

Small correction:

The turbo is not limited to 125k rpm, but rather the MGUH.

If the MGUH is direct drive from the turbo then, yes, the turbo is limited to 125k. But it could be geared to allow higher turbo rpm.

Thanks for the correction .

[LM10]

As far as I am aware, Kimi is still using spec #1. His first PU is not being used, as it was salvageable.

Both should get spec 3 after the summer break (either Spa or Monza), which may feature a new head design.

In pre-season I read an article about Ferrari working on a new cylinder head concept which they wanted to bring any time in season. Obviously it's gonna be on spec 3 then.

[henry]

2. Running "electric supercharger" is a less efficient use of ES energy than sending it to the K - therefore:

Whilst I agree driving the K from the ES is more efficient at converting energy to Tractive effort I don’t think it is necessarily more lap time or track position efficient.

In an earlier post I showed a simple per lap energy balance that suggested that with the MGU-K at 60kW it was not possible to run the K for consecutive full laps at Silverstone.

In my opinion if the MGU-H is generating at around 70kW they would, at Silverstone, be able to run the K all the time they are at WOT using less than energy from the ES than they can harvest. They would then have a choice, burn less fuel and harvest less or use electric supercharger at the beginning of straights. Or some mix of both.

So if the leading teams, Ferrari and Mercedes, have got to this level, or beyond, they would if they carried 105kg at the start, have enough fuel to deploy electric supercharger at the beginning of straights for the whole race.

I guess the question is, and you posted this in another thread, where have Ferrari and Mercedes got to with MGU-H power?

Running in electric supercharging mode is different from turbo electric assist and control (spooling-up and boost control) unning in electric supercharging mode is only done with waste gates open and ICE at full fuel flow, running in this mode the "H" consumes 60KW and is always sharing ES power with K. running in this mode (free load mode) produces the most possible power output, but it is also the most ineffecient mode.

Agreed.

Your estimate that the MGU-H must motor at 60kW to drive the compressor brings forward another area where quite small changes in the detail design of the system would result in on track differences. In this mode the compressor is driven both by the H and the turbine. If the turbine can be made to produce a little more power without affecting the ICE the H will take a little less from the ES and so there will be a little longer deployment.

It’s not surprising that Andy Cowell says there are still lots of gains to be discovered and implemented with these PUs.

[henry]

So do you think the teams are also using MGU-K harvest in the end of the straights to harvest by motoring the crankshaft to gain power for the early next straight?

Obvious answer, I don’t know. It is a mode that they are likely to have but whether the would use it is dependant on so many variables. At the simplest it would vary from circuit to circuit. But I’m sure they have many more variables in their simulations.

I remember the Ferrari “clipping” and put it down to reduced power, but I didn’t see evidence whether it was K off, or K and H off or H off plus K dragging. If they have increased H power it would seem to reduce the need for the extreme versions.

[dfegan358]

Are we expecting spec 3 engine in Monza then?

Will be interesting to see how it shapes up compared to Mercedes for the rest of the season!

[saviour stivala]

Whilst I agree driving the K from the ES is more efficient at converting energy to Tractive effort I don’t think it is necessarily more lap time or track position efficient.

In an earlier post I showed a simple per lap energy balance that suggested that with the MGU-K at 60kW it was not possible to run the K for consecutive full laps at Silverstone.

In my opinion if the MGU-H is generating at around 70kW they would, at Silverstone, be able to run the K all the time they are at WOT using less than energy from the ES than they can harvest. They would then have a choice, burn less fuel and harvest less or use electric supercharger at the beginning of straights. Or some mix of both.

So if the leading teams, Ferrari and Mercedes, have got to this level, or beyond, they would if they carried 105kg at the start, have enough fuel to deploy electric supercharger at the beginning of straights for the whole race.

I guess the question is, and you posted this in another thread, where have Ferrari and Mercedes got to with MGU-H power?

Running in electric supercharging mode is different from turbo electric assist and control (spooling-up and boost control) unning in electric supercharging mode is only done with waste gates open and ICE at full fuel flow, running in this mode the "H" consumes 60KW and is always sharing ES power with K. running in this mode (free load mode) produces the most possible power output, but it is also the most ineffecient mode.

Agreed.

Your estimate that the MGU-H must motor at 60kW to drive the compressor brings forward another area where quite small changes in the detail design of the system would result in on track differences. In this mode the compressor is driven both by the H and the turbine. If the turbine can be made to produce a little more power without affecting the ICE the H will take a little less from the ES and so there will be a little longer deployment.

It’s not surprising that Andy Cowell says there are still lots of gains to be discovered and implemented with these PUs.

In electric supercharging mode/free load mode the exhaust is byoassing the turbine and that is exactly why technically it is termed free load mode.

[saviour stivala]

Ferrari powered cars are running a bigger structural air intake for the turbo this year. Since the turbo itself is limited to 125k rpm, it should indicate more power generated by the mgu-h.

Small correction:

The turbo is not limited to 125k rpm, but rather the MGUH.

If the MGUH is direct drive from the turbo then, yes, the turbo is limited to 125k. But it could be geared to allow higher turbo rpm.

Thanks for the correction .

MGU-H direct drive from turbo shaft, no gearing allowed, but can be coupled. the maximum speed of the unit is 125 k rpm.

[roon]

5.2.4 The MGU-H must be solely mechanically linked to the pressure charging system. This mechanical link must be of fixed speed ratio to the exhaust turbine and may be clutched. The rotational speed of the MGU-H may not exceed 125,000rpm. The weight of the MGU-H (as defined in line 13 of Appendix 2 to these regulations) may not be less than 4kg.

Gearing not precluded.

[Muniix]

As far as I am aware, Kimi is still using spec #1. His first PU is not being used, as it was salvageable.

Both should get spec 3 after the summer break (either Spa or Monza), which may feature a new head design.

In pre-season I read an article about Ferrari working on a new cylinder head concept which they wanted to bring any time in season. Obviously it's gonna be on spec 3 then.

Additive Manufacturing used in head, direct AM of the head. This was mentioned in the AM industry news recently with gains in cooling efficiency and weight reduction, honeycomb structuring used to improve cooling galleries with constant diameter reducing coolant volume and improving flow.
As for fuel chemistry with TJI Ferrari now likely have greater knowledge than Mercedes with Bill Attard it's inventor working at FCA while Elisa Toulson, his wife has been performing model development and experimental validation on TJI as associate professor at Michigan State University the two Australians who developed TJI such that it worked with liquid gasoline in prechamber. Bill also worked in the Bishop rotary valve development team for a few years. Now there's two Innovations who's features are screaming to be put together, so complimentary and symbiotic, the next engine regulations should encourage it.
The greater knowledge combined with new fuel chemistry the split battery could allow greater use of energy paths especially MGU-h, maybe different valve timing, turbine bypass.
Reducing the negative effects of the ES deployment being limited by the test
ES.stateOfCharge
Enforcing the 4MJ low to high window limit during race.

[henry]

In electric supercharging mode/free load mode the exhaust is byoassing the turbine and that is exactly why technically it is termed free load mode.

Once again you are not correct.

There are images showing wastegates venting the turbine on the periphery of the impeller housing, not before it. I won’t bother to show you any because I have learned that you have immutable opinions. No further discussion required. I only responded in case someone trips over your post and thinks it might be correct.

[saviour stivala]

5.2.4 The MGU-H must be solely mechanically linked to the pressure charging system. This mechanical link must be of fixed speed ratio to the exhaust turbine and may be clutched. The rotational speed of the MGU-H may not exceed 125,000rpm. The weight of the MGU-H (as defined in line 13 of Appendix 2 to these regulations) may not be less than 4kg.

Gearing not precluded.

And niether possible.