Ferrari Power Unit Hardware & Software

[Juzh]

I always thought the theories surrounding whatever smart thing Ferrari is doing is related to energy as opposed to it being ICU, is because there is a clear pattern when it is being used and when it isnt.

E.g. during a hot lap in qualifying. At race starts (first lap). Restarts. It points to it being confined for one lap only. Simply a better ICU would IMO not show this pattern.

So what you're saying is ferrari is pumping more than allowed limit of 124 kw (accounting for "loses") trough their mgu-k? I don't think so, this would be too easy to spot. I agree with PlatinumZealot, their advantage is purely down to ICE.

There might be some tricks to sustain electrical power for longer, but even that comes down to ICE in the end. More power means less full throttle over the straights since you're going faster, means less mgu-k on that straight, means more mgu-k on other straights.. and so on. It's been debated to death.

[mzso]

One is great for one thing and the other is good for an other. Capacitors can handle power spikes (such as recharging heavily with the mgu-k on a brake distance) more easily and efficiently, and without damage.
Meanwhile batteries can store a lot of energy.

I am aware of advantages and disadvantages of Li-bat and SC.

If we had big and short power demands fallowed by low or no demand for long period of time, then combining Li and SC would make sense.
But, IMHO, this is not the case in F1.

I believe ES has practically 100% duty cycle at 60kw or more.
This means that, for Li - SC combination to be viable, either SC has to be able to store significant amount of energy(otherwise is useless) or Li battery has to be able to dish out significant current, otherwise it's again useless.

So, if SC can store significant amount of energy, why not make ES with only SC!?

And vice versa, is Li battery is powerful, there is no need for SC.

I also believed hybrid ES is viable, but then I tried to do some numbers, and I simply couldn't find a working model.

I think your reasoning is flawed. Batteries power output is limited by capacity and the capacity in F1 cars is very limited. Using it at the power levels allowed (120kW max) can over-strain the battery, causing inefficiency an quick loss of capacity. Even road cars with several times larger batteries are often battery limited when it comes to power, And can't work on peak power for a long time. and they produce similar power levels as the ERS.


Super capacitors don't need to hold a lot of energy. Only absorb or output the greatest power peaks.

[63l8qrrfy6]

One is great for one thing and the other is good for an other. Capacitors can handle power spikes (such as recharging heavily with the mgu-k on a brake distance) more easily and efficiently, and without damage.
Meanwhile batteries can store a lot of energy.

I am aware of advantages and disadvantages of Li-bat and SC.

If we had big and short power demands fallowed by low or no demand for long period of time, then combining Li and SC would make sense.
But, IMHO, this is not the case in F1.

I believe ES has practically 100% duty cycle at 60kw or more.
This means that, for Li - SC combination to be viable, either SC has to be able to store significant amount of energy(otherwise is useless) or Li battery has to be able to dish out significant current, otherwise it's again useless.

So, if SC can store significant amount of energy, why not make ES with only SC!?

And vice versa, is Li battery is powerful, there is no need for SC.

I also believed hybrid ES is viable, but then I tried to do some numbers, and I simply couldn't find a working model.

I think your reasoning is flawed. Batteries power output is limited by capacity and the capacity in F1 cars is very limited. Using it at the power levels allowed (120kW max) can over-strain the battery, causing inefficiency an quick loss of capacity. Even road cars with several times larger batteries are often battery limited when it comes to power, And can't work on peak power for a long time. and they produce similar power levels as the ERS.


Super capacitors don't need to hold a lot of energy. Only absorb or output the greatest power peaks.

The battery can feed both the K and H at the same time which means the power can be well in excess of 200 kW.

These are high power density cells specifically optimized for low internal resistance and as such have relatively low heat rejection at peak power and low thermal degradation.

[Tommy Cookers]

Do we know if any teams use the turbine as an engine brake during deceleration? (i.e. MGU-H to ES)
Opposite essentially of the vaccuum that would get pulled in a typical otto cycle engine when you take your foot off the gas and the throttle plate closes, bringing the vehicle into noticeable deceleration.
I understand they can use the MGU-K to decelerate at a rate of 120 kW. But has anyone taken into account also using the MGU-H to capture this energy through compressing combustion chamber products on the exhaust stroke of the engine (compressing it against the turbine)?
Looking at some rough numbers for it, it looks like it's possible...........

I think that this is trying to mix operations that can't usefully be mixed as ...
during braking the ICE gets repeated downshifts to maintain crankshaft rpm c 10000 - 12000
so that the K can generate steadily and in favourable conditions (high rpm and not-to-high torque/current)
also as it's not needed the H rpm is promptly bled down pre-corner via H generation

throttle open w/o fuel the ICE would act as some kind of air pump (brake) against some H generation loading the turbine
fuelled + heavily retarded ignition the ICE can run as a gas generator - maximally driving the H but zero crankshaft torque
though the fixed valve timing would be very sensitive to exhaust pressure driving severe underscavenge (internal hot EGR)
this would reduce the possible massflow of hot gas (and conveniently the fuel flow of course)

can of worms anybody ?

[Phil]

So what you're saying is ferrari is pumping more than allowed limit of 124 kw (accounting for "loses") trough their mgu-k? I don't think so, this would be too easy to spot. I agree with PlatinumZealot, their advantage is purely down to ICE.

I was referring to there seemingly being a correlation between having to “charge” it first before you can use it.

If it was simply down to being a more efficient ICU, i think the advantage would be more lasting and the difference between “on” and “normal” wouldn’t be there or as big.

A better ICU i.e. would be overall better and not only for a very small window. The battery and the recovery aspect is IMHO the only thing that fits with the symptoms we are seeing (very limited usage, limited duration, has to be likely charged first etc).

[sosic2121]

Super capacitors don't need to hold a lot of energy. Only absorb or output the greatest power peaks.

How many kilograms of SC would you integrate in 20kgs battery pack?

Also, what is the amplitude and duration of the peaks SC should absorb or produce?

[kalinka]

SC would absorb power peaks during fast charge events and help with power delivery during high powe demand, but only for a short period...it's a bit like putting a big capacitor in to help your badass car audio
I know that it's not that simple, just not something very new or unknown idea.

[Xwang]

Here is a video of next Ferrari V12 (as asked by Vettel)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HND4x22jXM

[PlatinumZealot]

You guys are overthinking!

It CANNOT be an E-boost strategy that give Ferrari the advantage. This is simply too easy for Mercedes to sniff out and copy - even if to simulate it in one sector.

What is something that Mercedes cannot copy easily or simulate within the rules?

The power from the ICE.

Ferrari simply have a more powerful ICE. Yeah you know its there - but can you copy it within the bounds of the regulated fuel limit? Not easy to do. Even with E-boost.

As we had discussed before, a more powerful ICE is benefit upon benefit. More turbine power, more MGUH power, less compressor boost needed, Less MGUK needed. The ICE is the core of any big power boost. Be it fuel, lubricant or new pistons, new combustion method etc... The ICE hardware is still the great un-locker.

It may be as simple as better combustion. However, I believe Ferrari deploy a different charging strategy from Mercedes and that places higher demands on the ES and CE. it’s a difference and maybe Mercedes don’t know how they do that. I very much doubt that it is just one thing that makes the overall difference.

I don’t understand what you mean by “Less MGU-K needed”, or why they would need less compressor boost. Care to explain?

The more efficient your engine is the less fuel and air you have to use. So it follows that you need less boost to make the same power as the other guy. Also if your engine is inherently more powerful, you need less MGUK power to meet your torque demand.

[PlatinumZealot]

So what you're saying is ferrari is pumping more than allowed limit of 124 kw (accounting for "loses") trough their mgu-k? I don't think so, this would be too easy to spot. I agree with PlatinumZealot, their advantage is purely down to ICE.

I was referring to there seemingly being a correlation between having to “charge” it first before you can use it.

If it was simply down to being a more efficient ICU, i think the advantage would be more lasting and the difference between “on” and “normal” wouldn’t be there or as big.

A better ICU i.e. would be overall better and not only for a very small window. The battery and the recovery aspect is IMHO the only thing that fits with the symptoms we are seeing (very limited usage, limited duration, has to be likely charged first etc).

Remember the engines wear rate limit high power modes to only qualifying or emergency race situations. And Ferrari's big advantage is said to be more prevalent in qualifying..

If it was an ERS trick it could easily be copied by other teams even it is only for one lap, or one sector. There is nothing stopping them from pumping out full MGUK power and electrically driving the compressor. There is no special charging / discharging tricks when you going full blast down the straights and this is what we see Ferrari doing. Full blast drag race they are leagues ahead even accounting for drag.

[Phil]

That is assuming they know what the trick is. I assume it must be something very clever, as there have been a few inquiries by teams as to the legality of certain things, but without an impact to Ferraris performance.

One of the unique set ups Ferrari has is the split battery...

[rscsr]

You guys are overthinking!

It CANNOT be an E-boost strategy that give Ferrari the advantage. This is simply too easy for Mercedes to sniff out and copy - even if to simulate it in one sector.

What is something that Mercedes cannot copy easily or simulate within the rules?

The power from the ICE.

Ferrari simply have a more powerful ICE. Yeah you know its there - but can you copy it within the bounds of the regulated fuel limit? Not easy to do. Even with E-boost.

As we had discussed before, a more powerful ICE is benefit upon benefit. More turbine power, more MGUH power, less compressor boost needed, Less MGUK needed. The ICE is the core of any big power boost. Be it fuel, lubricant or new pistons, new combustion method etc... The ICE hardware is still the great un-locker.

It may be as simple as better combustion. However, I believe Ferrari deploy a different charging strategy from Mercedes and that places higher demands on the ES and CE. it’s a difference and maybe Mercedes don’t know how they do that. I very much doubt that it is just one thing that makes the overall difference.

I don’t understand what you mean by “Less MGU-K needed”, or why they would need less compressor boost. Care to explain?

The more efficient your engine is the less fuel and air you have to use. So it follows that you need less boost to make the same power as the other guy. Also if your engine is inherently more powerful, you need less MGUK power to meet your torque demand.

I think a more efficient engine doesn't necessarily use less air. Why would it?

[chaoticflounder]

Do we know if any teams use the turbine as an engine brake during deceleration? (i.e. MGU-H to ES)
Opposite essentially of the vaccuum that would get pulled in a typical otto cycle engine when you take your foot off the gas and the throttle plate closes, bringing the vehicle into noticeable deceleration.
I understand they can use the MGU-K to decelerate at a rate of 120 kW. But has anyone taken into account also using the MGU-H to capture this energy through compressing combustion chamber products on the exhaust stroke of the engine (compressing it against the turbine)?
Looking at some rough numbers for it, it looks like it's possible...........

I think that this is trying to mix operations that can't usefully be mixed as ...
during braking the ICE gets repeated downshifts to maintain crankshaft rpm c 10000 - 12000
so that the K can generate steadily and in favourable conditions (high rpm and not-to-high torque/current)
also as it's not needed the H rpm is promptly bled down pre-corner via H generation

throttle open w/o fuel the ICE would act as some kind of air pump (brake) against some H generation loading the turbine
fuelled + heavily retarded ignition the ICE can run as a gas generator - maximally driving the H but zero crankshaft torque
though the fixed valve timing would be very sensitive to exhaust pressure driving severe underscavenge (internal hot EGR)
this would reduce the possible massflow of hot gas (and conveniently the fuel flow of course)

can of worms anybody ?

This is kind of the route I was going down in terms of what options it seems to open up. I was thinking they may be using this during qualifying to circumvent the 100 kg/h by simply converting this chemical potential energy to electrical potential energy as they slow down in a corner. Over a race we already know they use more fuel, but they may not be able to exploit a loophole like this as much because of the max fuel limit.

Thoughts?

[henry]

Do we know if any teams use the turbine as an engine brake during deceleration? (i.e. MGU-H to ES)
Opposite essentially of the vaccuum that would get pulled in a typical otto cycle engine when you take your foot off the gas and the throttle plate closes, bringing the vehicle into noticeable deceleration.
I understand they can use the MGU-K to decelerate at a rate of 120 kW. But has anyone taken into account also using the MGU-H to capture this energy through compressing combustion chamber products on the exhaust stroke of the engine (compressing it against the turbine)?
Looking at some rough numbers for it, it looks like it's possible...........

I think that this is trying to mix operations that can't usefully be mixed as ...
during braking the ICE gets repeated downshifts to maintain crankshaft rpm c 10000 - 12000
so that the K can generate steadily and in favourable conditions (high rpm and not-to-high torque/current)
also as it's not needed the H rpm is promptly bled down pre-corner via H generation

throttle open w/o fuel the ICE would act as some kind of air pump (brake) against some H generation loading the turbine
fuelled + heavily retarded ignition the ICE can run as a gas generator - maximally driving the H but zero crankshaft torque
though the fixed valve timing would be very sensitive to exhaust pressure driving severe underscavenge (internal hot EGR)
this would reduce the possible massflow of hot gas (and conveniently the fuel flow of course)

can of worms anybody ?

This is kind of the route I was going down in terms of what options it seems to open up. I was thinking they may be using this during qualifying to circumvent the 100 kg/h by simply converting this chemical potential energy to electrical potential energy as they slow down in a corner. Over a race we already know they use more fuel, but they may not be able to exploit a loophole like this as much because of the max fuel limit.

Thoughts?

If this were feasible it would again place a very high demand on the CE and ES. It would be a similar charging load to that I suggested may happen at the end of straight if the ICE drives against the MGU-K. 180+ Kw, for perhaps periods of a couple of seconds.

[henry]

You guys are overthinking!

It CANNOT be an E-boost strategy that give Ferrari the advantage. This is simply too easy for Mercedes to sniff out and copy - even if to simulate it in one sector.

What is something that Mercedes cannot copy easily or simulate within the rules?

The power from the ICE.

Ferrari simply have a more powerful ICE. Yeah you know its there - but can you copy it within the bounds of the regulated fuel limit? Not easy to do. Even with E-boost.

As we had discussed before, a more powerful ICE is benefit upon benefit. More turbine power, more MGUH power, less compressor boost needed, Less MGUK needed. The ICE is the core of any big power boost. Be it fuel, lubricant or new pistons, new combustion method etc... The ICE hardware is still the great un-locker.

It may be as simple as better combustion. However, I believe Ferrari deploy a different charging strategy from Mercedes and that places higher demands on the ES and CE. it’s a difference and maybe Mercedes don’t know how they do that. I very much doubt that it is just one thing that makes the overall difference.

I don’t understand what you mean by “Less MGU-K needed”, or why they would need less compressor boost. Care to explain?

The more efficient your engine is the less fuel and air you have to use. So it follows that you need less boost to make the same power as the other guy. Also if your engine is inherently more powerful, you need less MGUK power to meet your torque demand.

I think we’re talking about two different things. I was talking about qualifying where they use every drop of fuel and match air supply to achieve max power. No doubt in race, if the ICE is more efficient, you could use less fuel for the same power, the boost they would use is up for grabs, it might be more or less. I have to admit I find quali modes much easier to think about.

I don’t think they use MGU-K to balance torque demand. I think they use it all at as low a speed as they can for as long as they have electric energy and then switch it off. The more electric energy is available the longer it can be deployed. Once past traction restricted using less than 120kW from the MGU-K is not lap time efficient.