Mercedes Power Unit Hardware & Software

[63l8qrrfy6]

The goal being not to ensure all PUs are compliant, but to assist with allocating said budget cap appropriately in the team based on a better understanding of where one team is strong or weak relative to another.

I don't understand, how would this work exactly ?

[nzjrs]

The goal being not to ensure all PUs are compliant, but to assist with allocating said budget cap appropriately in the team based on a better understanding of where one team is strong or weak relative to another.

I don't understand, how would this work exactly ?

You mean the budget allocation part or the testing part?

(gross simplification follows concerning the evaluation of differences, but trust that it will be done by the competent persons in the competitor team)

If the PU data shows the reason we are 0.6s behind XYZ is 98.4% explained (normalized to standard track) by aerodynamics then I will redirect my budget cap limited resources to non PU programmes.

If it shows that our PU is deficient in the -H then I will redirect PU resources into improving that part and not the K.

Etc etc

[63l8qrrfy6]

So then for example someone will have to tell Newey he doesn't get any more money to develop aero because most of the budget would have to go to Honda to catch up on the PU side ?

[nzjrs]

So then for example someone will have to tell Newey he doesn't get any more money to develop aero because most of the budget would have to go to Honda to catch up on the PU side ?

It's a simplification, but if that's what the data says, yeah

(there is a related discussion of how PU budget relates to the team budget in this formula under the proposed budget cap rules, but it's always about where you can get best performance under budget constraints)

[63l8qrrfy6]

I see your point but the problem with this is that the PU and chassis sides of the bussiness are often independent.
Imagine if Red Bull had to lay off 50% of workforce just because FIA deems their aero good enough. What happens in say 2 years when someone catches up with them on the chassis side ?

[nzjrs]

I see your point but the problem with this is that the PU and chassis sides of the bussiness are often independent.
Imagine if Red Bull had to lay off 50% of workforce just because FIA deems their aero good enough. What happens in say 2 years when someone catches up with them on the chassis side ?

They re-hire them from the same team that just dumped them because they were in the opposite position? Or they retrain them? This scheme only makes sense in a budget cap future where some degree of personnel movement is baked into the system and they know how to do forensic accounting across teams with complicated PU and chassis department splits.

Putting that aside however, personnel costs are only one type of cost, it's not to say that operational, subcontracting + manufacture costs etc are not significant. These are multiplied by for example how many times you might try to iterate on a widget or not because you believe it is an laptime/cost effective thing for you to spend money on.

[saviour stivala]

Re: the puffs of smoke, it could be a number of benign things, to be honest. Oil overfills are most commonly the cause of initial puffs of smoke, which would explain why they happen early in a session.

And this overfill situation could also be related to packaging, which is why it's also seen on the customer cars.

On a side note, Toto Wolff responding to Mattia's comments about the TDs impacting all teams:

• “Another complete bullshit story, technical directives.
  
  “There’s a clear regulation on power units, there have been clarifications in Austin what you are allowed to do or not which were important.
  
  “But nothing that was in any way surprising because if you comply to the regulations that was clear anyway.”

He goes on:

• "“I think the irony of the story is that we were pushed by some of our competitors to absolutely new levels,” said Wolff.
  
  “It brought us to almost burnout last year to develop and innovate in a way to be competitive on track.
  
  “And here we go. I think we made a substantial jump in performance from 2019 to 2020 because we needed to last year and that is a little bit ironic for me.”

https://the-race.com/formula-1/wolff-ex ... nic-gains/

‘Oil overfill!!!’. Mercedes mechanics should be more careful and not ‘overfill’ their engine crankcase ha ha ha.

[ENGINE TUNER]

Because with this data, rivals can calculate exactly the drag of their competitors.
Today, the calculations based on gps speed traces have the uncertainty of the drag vs power balance.

But what will they do with that information if for example SF1000 has more drag than W11 and Mercedes has more powerful engine?

Engineering targets are very important.
If you know exactly were your rivals are, you have clear development targets for your team.

Highly overestimated, and especially at this point in the development. They are now scratching for every minuscule amount of extra power they can squeeze out of the systems, trying to maximize everything. They may have goals, but they are just taking what they can get at this point.

[PlatinumZealot]

The oil blows out from the breather... Crank case pressure spikes.. Likely the ERS boost control working. Closing the inlest vanes, slowing the turbine speed... Something like that I would guess.

[casper]

I came across a table used in Detailed Hydrocarbon Analysis method for quantifying the organic homologues: paraffins, isoparaffins, olefins, naphthene, olefins, aromatics, and oxygenates. The table lists organic compound with their Octane numbers, with some higher than MTBE's (the first additive that replaced tetra ethyl lead, but subsequently banned too). Can I post it here?

I posted the table in the Red Bull thread but here it is:
Compound no. of C I RRF BP, C MW MON RON VP Density HC

iso-butene 4 382.4 0.842 -6.9 56.1 139 170 64.58 0.6013 iO
1-buytyne 4 386.9 0.8431 8.1 54.1 130 180 41.05 0.6959 nO
1,3-butadiene 4 394.4 0.8431 -4.4 54.1 140 190 59.29 0.6273 dO
t-2-butene 4 406.9 0.8742 1 56.1 130 153 49.88 0.6112 nO
c-2-butene 4 418 0.8742 3.7 56.1 130 153 45.75 0.6286 nO
ethanol 2 434.32 1.862 78.3 46.07 102 126 2.31 0.7967 Ox
1,2-butadiene 4 436.6 0.8431 10.9 54.1 135 185 36.77 0.6576 dO
2-butyne 4 482 0.8431 27 54.1 150 200 41.05 0.6959 nO
iso-propanol 3 487.4 1.95 82.2 60.11 100 120 1.84 0.7925 Ox
2-m-1-butene 5 493.76 0.8739 31 70.1 133 146 18.41 0.6563 iO
t-2-pentene 5 505.9 0.8739 37 70.1 134 150 15.44 0.6524 nO
c-2-pentene 5 512.4 0.8739 37.5 70.1 137 154 15.13 0.6598 nO
2-m-2-butene 5 516.6 0.8739 36.5 70.1 141 176 14.31 0.6683 iO
t-1,3-pentadiene 5 518.8 0.849 42 68.1 160 180 12.71 0.676 dO
3-m-1,2-butadiene 5 529 0.849 40.8 68.1 160 180 13.2 0.6916 dO
cyclopentadiene 5 529.83 0.824 41.5 66.1 200 220 0 0.8041 cO
c-1,3-pentadiene 5 534.9 0.849 44.1 68.1 160 180 11.82 0.6964 dO
1,2-pentadiene 5 536.7 0.849 44.9 68.1 160 180 11.49 0.6976 dO
cyclopentene 5 548.2 0.849 44.2 68.1 160 180 11.78 0.7773 cO
2,3-pentadiene 5 557 0.849 48.3 68.1 160 180 10.14 0.7001 dO
cyclopentane 5 560 0.8727 49.3 70 141 141 9.92 0.7603 N
MTBE 6 563.6 1.4067 55.2 88.148 104 148 7.97 0.7458 Ox
2-m-2-pentene 6 607.3 0.8747 67 84.2 148 159 6.3 0.6909 iO
3-methylcyclopentene 6 612.35 0.8529 64.9 82.1 160 180 0 0.7854 cO
4,4-dimethyl-1-pentene 7 628.2 0.8744 72.5 98.2 136 144 1.39 0.6872 iO
2,3-dimethyl-2-butene 6 634 0.8747 73 84.2 144 185 4.16 0.713 iO
3-methyl-1,5-hexadiene 7 644.1 0.8566 88.1 96.2 160 180 0 0.7234 dO
1,4-hexadiene 6 649 0.8322 65 82 160 180 7.09 0.7198 iO
1-methylcyclopentene 6 649.55 0.8529 75.5 82.1 160 180 0 0.7854 cO
benzene 6 650.4 0.8103 80.1 78 91 99 3.21 0.8829 A
3,3-dimethyl-1,4-pentadiene 7 665.2 0.8566 88.1 96.2 160 180 0 0.7712 dO
2-m-1,5-hexadiene 7 675.5 0.8566 88.1 96.2 160 180 0 0.7234 dO
2,3-dimethyl-1,3-pentadiene 7 693.3 0.8566 93.2 96.2 160 180 0 0.7712 dO
Toluene 7 757.68 0.8192 110.6 92 112 124 10.03 0.8743 A
3,4-dimethylhexane 8 772.5 0.8586 114.3 114.2 160 180 0.66 0.7015 I
ethylbenzene 8 852 0.8259 136.1 106 107 124 0.37 0.8744 A
m-Xylene 8 858.3 0.8259 139.1 106 124 145 0.33 0.8694 A
p-Xylene 8 860.7 0.8259 138.4 106 127 146 0.35 0.8666 A

iO Iso Olefin
nO normal Olefin
dO di-Olefin
Ox Oxygenate
cO cyclo Olefin
N Naphthene
I isoParaffin
A Aromatics

[Tommy Cookers]

I came across a table used in Detailed Hydrocarbon Analysis method for quantifying the organic homologues: paraffins, isoparaffins, olefins, naphthene, olefins, aromatics, and oxygenates. The table lists organic compound with their Octane numbers, with some higher than MTBE's (the first additive that replaced tetra ethyl lead, but subsequently banned too). Can I post it here?

I posted the table in the Red Bull thread but here it is:
Compound no. of C I RRF BP, C MW MON RON VP Density HC

iso-butene 4 382.4 0.842 -6.9 56.1 139 170 64.58 0.6013 iO
1-buytyne 4 386.9 0.8431 8.1 54.1 130 180 41.05 0.6959 nO
1,3-butadiene 4 394.4 0.8431 -4.4 54.1 140 190 59.29 0.6273 dO
t-2-butene 4 406.9 0.8742 1 56.1 130 153 49.88 0.6112 nO
c-2-butene 4 418 0.8742 3.7 56.1 130 153 45.75 0.6286 nO
ethanol 2 434.32 1.862 78.3 46.07 102 126 2.31 0.7967 Ox
1,2-butadiene 4 436.6 0.8431 10.9 54.1 135 185 36.77 0.6576 dO
2-butyne 4 482 0.8431 27 54.1 150 200 41.05 0.6959 nO
iso-propanol 3 487.4 1.95 82.2 60.11 100 120 1.84 0.7925 Ox
2-m-1-butene 5 493.76 0.8739 31 70.1 133 146 18.41 0.6563 iO
t-2-pentene 5 505.9 0.8739 37 70.1 134 150 15.44 0.6524 nO
c-2-pentene 5 512.4 0.8739 37.5 70.1 137 154 15.13 0.6598 nO
2-m-2-butene 5 516.6 0.8739 36.5 70.1 141 176 14.31 0.6683 iO
t-1,3-pentadiene 5 518.8 0.849 42 68.1 160 180 12.71 0.676 dO
3-m-1,2-butadiene 5 529 0.849 40.8 68.1 160 180 13.2 0.6916 dO
cyclopentadiene 5 529.83 0.824 41.5 66.1 200 220 0 0.8041 cO
c-1,3-pentadiene 5 534.9 0.849 44.1 68.1 160 180 11.82 0.6964 dO
1,2-pentadiene 5 536.7 0.849 44.9 68.1 160 180 11.49 0.6976 dO
cyclopentene 5 548.2 0.849 44.2 68.1 160 180 11.78 0.7773 cO
2,3-pentadiene 5 557 0.849 48.3 68.1 160 180 10.14 0.7001 dO
cyclopentane 5 560 0.8727 49.3 70 141 141 9.92 0.7603 N
MTBE 6 563.6 1.4067 55.2 88.148 104 148 7.97 0.7458 Ox
2-m-2-pentene 6 607.3 0.8747 67 84.2 148 159 6.3 0.6909 iO
3-methylcyclopentene 6 612.35 0.8529 64.9 82.1 160 180 0 0.7854 cO
4,4-dimethyl-1-pentene 7 628.2 0.8744 72.5 98.2 136 144 1.39 0.6872 iO
2,3-dimethyl-2-butene 6 634 0.8747 73 84.2 144 185 4.16 0.713 iO
3-methyl-1,5-hexadiene 7 644.1 0.8566 88.1 96.2 160 180 0 0.7234 dO
1,4-hexadiene 6 649 0.8322 65 82 160 180 7.09 0.7198 iO
1-methylcyclopentene 6 649.55 0.8529 75.5 82.1 160 180 0 0.7854 cO
benzene 6 650.4 0.8103 80.1 78 91 99 3.21 0.8829 A
3,3-dimethyl-1,4-pentadiene 7 665.2 0.8566 88.1 96.2 160 180 0 0.7712 dO
2-m-1,5-hexadiene 7 675.5 0.8566 88.1 96.2 160 180 0 0.7234 dO
2,3-dimethyl-1,3-pentadiene 7 693.3 0.8566 93.2 96.2 160 180 0 0.7712 dO
Toluene 7 757.68 0.8192 110.6 92 112 124 10.03 0.8743 A
3,4-dimethylhexane 8 772.5 0.8586 114.3 114.2 160 180 0.66 0.7015 I
ethylbenzene 8 852 0.8259 136.1 106 107 124 0.37 0.8744 A
m-Xylene 8 858.3 0.8259 139.1 106 124 145 0.33 0.8694 A
p-Xylene 8 860.7 0.8259 138.4 106 127 146 0.35 0.8666 A

iO Iso Olefin
nO normal Olefin
dO di-Olefin
Ox Oxygenate
cO cyclo Olefin
N Naphthene
I isoParaffin
A Aromatics

brilliant !!
(I feel vindicated)

though with some there's evidence of sensitivity to temperature that F1 would find important
(RON tests at a far lower temperature than MON)

2,2,3-trimethyl butane ?
(and someone had here recommended the Xylenes - anyway used in Avgas)

[casper]

2,2,3-trimethylbutane 7 636.2 0.8923 80.9 100.202 113 113 3.37 0.6954 I

[Tommy Cookers]

2,2,3-trimethylbutane 7 636.2 0.8923 80.9 100.202 113 113 3.37 0.6954 I

thanks casper ...

the above stuff (known as Triptane) was the 'next big thing' for aircraft late in WW2
(then it could be produced only by disrupting other production - but better production methods now exist)
the beauty of Triptane is that ....
its detonation resistance is rather unaffected by gas temperature (ie MON and RON are identical) ...
(and afaik it is strongly responsive to organometallic octane boosters eg TEL/other OBs to the extent allowed in F1 fuel)


I guess 'casper's list' exists because ....
some naturally high ON ingredients are naturally in gasoline anyway .... and ....
some naturally high heat energy value/kg ingredients are naturally in gasoline anyway

the rules don't prevent the use of higher amounts of such 'natural' ingredients
eg 'cyclos' and pentenes (as I suggested in the past for high HV) also seem to have outstanding ON

[hardingfv32]

Please expand on the advantage of these ON ingredients if the Octane Rating range is set by the rules.

Obviously missing some background, I do not understand the point of your statements.

Brian

[Tommy Cookers]

the F1 rules since 2014 do not limit the maximum ON
(they limit the minimum ON to 75 - presumably to prevent any movement to CI or SACI etc)

unless some recent change has escaped my notice