Ferrari Power Unit Hardware & Software

[CriXus]

I think this should make clear Ferrari were testing high downforce package in Austin.

https://twitter.com/Vetteleclerc/status ... 68256?s=19

[LM10]

I am locking down the topic for a moment to get some cleaning going on. I stated multiple times this is not moral thread. We had a very great, technical discussion going without any assumption, accusations, bias or emotional riffraff going towards Ferrari. I am seeing that now some people like to pull that focus away and towards a mud throwing contest.

Anything coming from the media going into this topic has to be TECHNICAL. It has to contain details about software, hardware, procedures, whatever. It cannot be baseless accusations quoted from F1 people.

EDIT: reopened. Please keep discussion down to hypotheses and conjecture based on the hardware and regulations (and how to possibly break and/or circumventthe regulations). Media spatouts from team personel are controversal juicy bits, but for any tech savvy out here, the juicy bits are the technical debates!

Thank you for cleaning up, including my post which was a reaction to a kind of provocative post. Quite annoying to hear and read the accusations even though nothing is clear.

Back to topic.

[dans79]

I think this should make clear Ferrari were testing high downforce package in Austin.

https://twitter.com/Vetteleclerc/status ... 68256?s=19

Photos like that can't be used as proof. First, they are all not of the same perspective Japan being different. Secondly we have no idea what the speeds are. Japan looks like part way through 130r, I'm not sure what Mexico is, and cota looks like a turn in the s's.

since we have no speed reference, we have no idea how much the rear wing is flexing under load, and that's something all of the teams have designed them to do.

[Sieper]

photo is clear to me dans79. Mexico and USA have the same (deepest) rear wing, Japan has a less deep rear wing (it also curves up a little bit next to the side plates, that is a good visual indicator).

Mexico at 2200m above sea level requires most DF, USA at sea level (like japan) does not so at least compared to Japan they were indeed running a deep rear wing. What would be more interesting then just the Ferrari wing would be the wings from Mercedes, Redbull and say McLaren for the same 3 tracks as well.

[63l8qrrfy6]

Yes, stabilizing the frequency and phase of the peaks per se is fairly unproblematic, at least in principle, but how would you propose (hypothetically, of course) to control the _relative_ phase of flow peaks vs FFM measurements? If your proposal involved a U/S detector, we would be back into the first reply of mine.

I suppose it can be done by having a device akin to a hydraulic cam phaser on the pump.

More elegantly it may be done by inducing a very brief speed fluctuation in the pump speed to alow the relative phase between FFM and pump to drift.

[PlatinumZealot]

.... all fuel flow through the injectors the final point of the flow system including the fuel pressure and temperature goes through the FIA data logger.
.... final fuel flow through the injectors can finally be logged and verified....

this is not true

the final fuel flow can be estimated this way
this isn't fuel flow unless the actual injectors actual flow in response to the actual signals is actually measured
measured with what ? ...
an FIA-calibrated ultrasonic fuel flow meter - every car should have one !!

or should the FIA own a stock of injectors and issue them to the teams for each event ?
and mandate the signals given to the injectors to assist control ?
(5 injection episodes per cylinder per cycle are currently allowed afaik)


and with thanks ...
timebase is the right word
the timebase must be at least 1 ICE cycle (2 revs)
within lesser timebases the fuel rate will exceed 100 kg/hr
so fuel accumulation is allowed - but only within this timebase ?

Pulsating flow is a pretty standard problem for fuel flow meters. There are different ways of handling it. Just increase the sampling rate. And yes as you rightly said, there will be some time base that the system is damped to. Teams still wouldn't get much time to use their new found power boost, Because Ferrari want this boost for a few seconds, not milliseconds.

Simple problem though. Put two flow meters. One after the low pressure pump and one for the return. And count injector rail pressure and injector pulse widths. Any discrepancies will be easily found out. For a higher fuel flow you have to use either A) higher fuel pressure, or B) longer injector pulse widths, or C) additional injection points.

If they accumulate fuel some where in the system, the data from injector pulse widths, fuel return flow, and line pressure should show it up.

[PlatinumZealot]

photo is clear to me dans79. Mexico and USA have the same (deepest) rear wing, Japan has a less deep rear wing (it also curves up a little bit next to the side plates, that is a good visual indicator).

Mexico at 2200m above sea level requires most DF, USA at sea level (like japan) does not so at least compared to Japan they were indeed running a deep rear wing. What would be more interesting then just the Ferrari wing would be the wings from Mercedes, Redbull and say McLaren for the same 3 tracks as well.

Yeah. This confirms what Binnotto was saying. Ferrari wanted to simulate what it is like to have the same conerning speeds as Mercedes/RedBull and ran a setup to suit that. Apparently work for 2020. Brazil and Abu Dhabi don't offer the sort of high speed turns that COTA has, so I would say it makes sense. 2019 is done and dusted anyway.

[Sieper]

photo is clear to me dans79. Mexico and USA have the same (deepest) rear wing, Japan has a less deep rear wing (it also curves up a little bit next to the side plates, that is a good visual indicator).

Mexico at 2200m above sea level requires most DF, USA at sea level (like japan) does not so at least compared to Japan they were indeed running a deep rear wing. What would be more interesting then just the Ferrari wing would be the wings from Mercedes, Redbull and say McLaren for the same 3 tracks as well.

Yeah. This confirms what Binnotto was saying. Ferrari wanted to simulate what it is like to have the same conerning speeds as Mercedes/RedBull and ran a setup to suit that. Apparently work for 2020. Brazil and Abu Dhabi don't offer the sort of high speed turns that COTA has, so I would say it makes sense. 2019 is done and dusted anyway.

It does confirm that, but, I see with my own eyes that even the less deep rear wing is quite deep (and that confirms what I have heared as well, that Ferrari always runs most DF of the top teams). What we really need is the same pictures from the other teams before we can make real statements on who increased (at least only rear wing DF) most/more. Otherwise we simply have no reference frame.

[ncx]

Further to “the part of the fuel system called all in the fuel tank”,

Do you think there is no way to modulate significantly the fuel flow into the FFM by means of devices that are inconspicuous enough to pass scrutiny?

"The part of the fuel system called all in the fuel tank" explains how that part of the fuel system works. "The part of the fuel system called all on the engine" explains how that part of that fuel system works. As to what I think, which of course will only be my personal opinion. If a formula one team of the caliber, capability and experience of RBR says that the fuel flow sensor/meter can be made to show a false reading other than the actual fuel flow that passes through it. Only a fool will not believe RBR. I also 'think', which of course is only my personal opinion. that if the fuel flow sensor/meter is made to show a false reading other than the actual fuel flow that passes through it. only a fool will believe that the FIA will not be able to notice that with all the controlling means they have.

I got your explanations (which are strikingly similar to some I found in an article on another website), but they and this comment of yours don't really satisfy my request for an educated technical opinion on the feasibility of a pulsed fuel inflow to the FFM in the assumption that, as you said, there is no pulse-generating pump. Concerning the fuel injection sensors, to my (surely incomplete) knowledge, the way the fuel flow is measured in the injection system, if anything, opens more avenues to speculation than it closes.

[Jvr]

.... all fuel flow through the injectors the final point of the flow system including the fuel pressure and temperature goes through the FIA data logger.
.... final fuel flow through the injectors can finally be logged and verified....

this is not true

the final fuel flow can be estimated this way
this isn't fuel flow unless the actual injectors actual flow in response to the actual signals is actually measured
measured with what ? ...
an FIA-calibrated ultrasonic fuel flow meter - every car should have one !!

or should the FIA own a stock of injectors and issue them to the teams for each event ?
and mandate the signals given to the injectors to assist control ?
(5 injection episodes per cylinder per cycle are currently allowed afaik)


and with thanks ...
timebase is the right word
the timebase must be at least 1 ICE cycle (2 revs)
within lesser timebases the fuel rate will exceed 100 kg/hr
so fuel accumulation is allowed - but only within this timebase ?

Pulsating flow is a pretty standard problem for fuel flow meters. There are different ways of handling it. Just increase the sampling rate. And yes as you rightly said, there will be some time base that the system is damped to. Teams still wouldn't get much time to use their new found power boost, Because Ferrari want this boost for a few seconds, not milliseconds.

Simple problem though. Put two flow meters. One after the low pressure pump and one for the return. And count injector rail pressure and injector pulse widths. Any discrepancies will be easily found out. For a higher fuel flow you have to use either A) higher fuel pressure, or B) longer injector pulse widths, or C) additional injection points.

If they accumulate fuel some where in the system, the data from injector pulse widths, fuel return flow, and line pressure should show it up.

http://carbiketech.com/wp-content/uploa ... kit-02.jpg

Errr... I have understood the F1 fuel systems are returnless so there is no return line to put a second meter on.

[saviour stivala]

@NCX. There is no fuel pulses in the fuel passing through the fuel flow meter by the low pressure electrically driven fuel lift pumps as the fuel that passes through the fuel flow meter is fuel at a constant low pressured in the fuel pot. Pot capacity approx 2.5kg/3.0-3.5l.
The following might not concern you, but it might concern others. All fuel that passes through the fuel flow meter must end-up being combusted, which means that regardless of fuel system diagrams shown the F1 system have no excess fuel return to fuel tank (return-less fuel system). The fuel flow meter only measures fuel flow passing through it, it does not control the flow mass passing through it. The flow mass control is controlled by the fuel injection system. Regardless of “it is not true” what goes through the injectors (flow mass) regardless of the mille or Nano seconds and number of injections, including fuel pressure and temperature is logged in data logger.
The ability/capability of the FIA/race control to police the fuel flow as well as the race fuel weight used with the means and tools at their disposal is as near foolproof as could be.
There have been 4 fuel rules infringements that I know of since the start of the new power unit formula. 3 of these fuel flow infringements happened only once on just ‘one part’ of a lap of the whole race, yet they did not escape the FIA/race control monitoring of the fuel rules.
2014 RBR notified several times during the race that they were exceeding the fuel flow limits. RBR argued that according to their data logger their fuel flow through their injectors were within the rules and that they preferred to go by their data logger instead of the fuel flow meter reading. They ended disqualified.
2018 Force India disqualified from eight place in US GP, car was found to have breached fuel flow limit during one part of the opening lap.
2018 Haas disqualified from US GP, car was found to have used more fuel than that allowed (fuel load). The rule breach happened ‘only on the last lap’.
2019 RBR car exceed fuel flow limit in Baku qualifying 1 (over one lap) car was disqualified from qualifying.

[wuzak]

so fuel accumulation is allowed - but only within this timebase ?

Fuel accumulation is not allowed, beyond what is contained in the fuel lines.

I believe a couple of seasons ago there was a directive limiting the size of the fuel lines and/or the flexibility of the fuel lines (to act as an accumulator).

[wuzak]

Further to “the part of the fuel system called all in the fuel tank”,

Do you think there is no way to modulate significantly the fuel flow into the FFM by means of devices that are inconspicuous enough to pass scrutiny?

"The part of the fuel system called all in the fuel tank" explains how that part of the fuel system works. "The part of the fuel system called all on the engine" explains how that part of that fuel system works. As to what I think, which of course will only be my personal opinion. If a formula one team of the caliber, capability and experience of RBR says that the fuel flow sensor/meter can be made to show a false reading other than the actual fuel flow that passes through it. Only a fool will not believe RBR. I also 'think', which of course is only my personal opinion. that if the fuel flow sensor/meter is made to show a false reading other than the actual fuel flow that passes through it. only a fool will believe that the FIA will not be able to notice that with all the controlling means they have.

If it is true, that proves that Red Bull and Honda have been experimenting with cheating the fuel flow meter, which has no bearing on whether or not Ferrari have been doing the same.

If Honda has been experimenting with cheating the fuel flow meter I think the FIA would be within their rights to ask Red Bull/Honda for an explanation.

[saviour stivala]

Most of the parts of the fuel system and that includes injector parts and pipes/hoses must be approved by the FIA.
Any fuel between the fuel flow sensor/meter which is situated within the fuel tank and the injectors had of course been passed through the fuel flow sensor/meter. until that fuel mass had been passed through the injectors (injected) it can rightly be said that said fuel mass is in storage/stored/accumulated. The condition of that mass of fuel is under, (one part of it under low pressure and the other part of it under high pressure). is part of the fuel system and the same for everybody.
Re Honda/RBR and what they have been doing/experimenting with or not. no comment is best way.

[zibby43]

photo is clear to me dans79. Mexico and USA have the same (deepest) rear wing, Japan has a less deep rear wing (it also curves up a little bit next to the side plates, that is a good visual indicator).

Mexico at 2200m above sea level requires most DF, USA at sea level (like japan) does not so at least compared to Japan they were indeed running a deep rear wing. What would be more interesting then just the Ferrari wing would be the wings from Mercedes, Redbull and say McLaren for the same 3 tracks as well.

Yeah. This confirms what Binnotto was saying. Ferrari wanted to simulate what it is like to have the same conerning speeds as Mercedes/RedBull and ran a setup to suit that. Apparently work for 2020. Brazil and Abu Dhabi don't offer the sort of high speed turns that COTA has, so I would say it makes sense. 2019 is done and dusted anyway.

It does confirm that, but, I see with my own eyes that even the less deep rear wing is quite deep (and that confirms what I have heared as well, that Ferrari always runs most DF of the top teams). What we really need is the same pictures from the other teams before we can make real statements on who increased (at least only rear wing DF) most/more. Otherwise we simply have no reference frame.

Both Red Bull and Mercedes have more peak downforce than Ferrari.

Unless you were trying to say that Ferrari attempts to run the most inefficient downforce (e.g., barn door rear wings) of any of the top teams, in an endeavor to make up for their deficit to those teams on more downforce-dependent circuits.