Ferrari Power Unit Hardware & Software

[pantherxxx]

"According to rumors filtering from Maranello the new unit of Seb will have a dozen more horsepower, but will not have the head with the merger more thrust that was expected in Canada for reasons of reliability. Better not to take risks.

The Ferrari 2 engine that will be fitted on Sebastian Vettel's SF71H in the Canadian GP will have a high engine part that has been lightened and will have some modifications in the combustion chamber, but it will not be the head in the more powerful fusion that had been planned in the 2018 season development plan.

The German driver will have, however, a dozen more horses, but can not rely on the most performance version that was expected in Montreal. The reason is simple: the technical director Mattia Binotto does not want surprises in terms of reliability"

This is from it.motorsport.com

So if I understand it well, the new Ferrari PU from Canada will bring 12 extra horsepowers, but later it will be even more? Maybe 20?

[PhillipM]

I think it's more likely they're actively switching rapidly between cells for H and K depending on state of charge and instantaneous demand, so the virtual battery size for each is constantly in flux and you may have a cell that is charging one millisecond from the H and the next discharging to the K, the next to the H.
You could have an engineered in phase lag in there then, so perhaps it's enough to add up to a brief power surge at the K on a corner exit that the sensor can't differentiate between.
Hence the need for extra software monitoring and more sensors later in the year.

Without the exact knowledge of the sensors used it's hard to work out what you could actually get though.
Technically you'd be within the rules if they're worded that the reading at the sensor must not exceed 'x kw at any time', I'd have to re-read them to check.

[turbof1]

I think it's more likely they're actively switching rapidly between cells for H and K depending on state of charge and instantaneous demand, so the virtual battery size for each is constantly in flux and you may have a cell that is charging one millisecond from the H and the next discharging to the K, the next to the H.
You could have an engineered in phase lag in there then, so perhaps it's enough to add up to a brief power surge at the K on a corner exit that the sensor can't differentiate between.
Hence the need for extra software monitoring and more sensors later in the year.

Without the exact knowledge of the sensors used it's hard to work out what you could actually get though.
Technically you'd be within the rules if they're worded that the reading at the sensor must not exceed 'x kw at any time', I'd have to re-read them to check.

Yeah same logic applies to the static load tests: even if your bodywork bends 10cm on camera, it will still be deemed legal if you pass the standard test.

I'm not sure if Ferrari is doing that, but if they are, they aren't cheating. Just going very extreme to follow the letter of the rule and nothing more.

What you seek might actually be written down in Technical Directives. Infact, there are other sensors in there for sure which are only mentioned by the FIA in 8.2.2 and in an appendix. This is stuff to which to public has no access to unfortunaly.

[djones]

I think it's more likely they're actively switching rapidly between cells for H and K depending on state of charge and instantaneous demand, so the virtual battery size for each is constantly in flux and you may have a cell that is charging one millisecond from the H and the next discharging to the K, the next to the H.
You could have an engineered in phase lag in there then, so perhaps it's enough to add up to a brief power surge at the K on a corner exit that the sensor can't differentiate between.
Hence the need for extra software monitoring and more sensors later in the year.

Without the exact knowledge of the sensors used it's hard to work out what you could actually get though.
Technically you'd be within the rules if they're worded that the reading at the sensor must not exceed 'x kw at any time', I'd have to re-read them to check.

Yeah same logic applies to the static load tests: even if your bodywork bends 10cm on camera, it will still be deemed legal if you pass the standard test.

I'm not sure if Ferrari is doing that, but if they are, they aren't cheating. Just going very extreme to follow the letter of the rule and nothing more.

What you seek might actually be written down in Technical Directives. Infact, there are other sensors in there for sure which are only mentioned by the FIA in 8.2.2 and in an appendix. This is stuff to which to public has no access to unfortunaly.

But would you also say the bodywork bending 10cm is not cheating?

If an athlete uses a performance enhancing drug that is new and cannot be tested for - is that cheating?

In my mind both examples are 'cheating' despite a play on words in the rules.

[turbof1]

I think it's more likely they're actively switching rapidly between cells for H and K depending on state of charge and instantaneous demand, so the virtual battery size for each is constantly in flux and you may have a cell that is charging one millisecond from the H and the next discharging to the K, the next to the H.
You could have an engineered in phase lag in there then, so perhaps it's enough to add up to a brief power surge at the K on a corner exit that the sensor can't differentiate between.
Hence the need for extra software monitoring and more sensors later in the year.

Without the exact knowledge of the sensors used it's hard to work out what you could actually get though.
Technically you'd be within the rules if they're worded that the reading at the sensor must not exceed 'x kw at any time', I'd have to re-read them to check.

Yeah same logic applies to the static load tests: even if your bodywork bends 10cm on camera, it will still be deemed legal if you pass the standard test.

I'm not sure if Ferrari is doing that, but if they are, they aren't cheating. Just going very extreme to follow the letter of the rule and nothing more.

What you seek might actually be written down in Technical Directives. Infact, there are other sensors in there for sure which are only mentioned by the FIA in 8.2.2 and in an appendix. This is stuff to which to public has no access to unfortunaly.

But would you also say the bodywork bending 10cm is not cheating?

If an athlete uses a performance enhancing drug that is new and cannot be tested for - is that cheating?

In my mind both examples are 'cheating' despite a play on words in the rules.

That's a moral question which isn't suited to be asked here. Formula 1's modus operandi generally is "if it follows the letter of the rule, it is legal". Anyway, we haven't even established what Ferrari is doing anyway. Any notion of "cheating" is still a long way off. Let's leave it at that before we get off topic philosophical chatter around here.

[hurril]

Yeah same logic applies to the static load tests: even if your bodywork bends 10cm on camera, it will still be deemed legal if you pass the standard test.

I'm not sure if Ferrari is doing that, but if they are, they aren't cheating. Just going very extreme to follow the letter of the rule and nothing more.

What you seek might actually be written down in Technical Directives. Infact, there are other sensors in there for sure which are only mentioned by the FIA in 8.2.2 and in an appendix. This is stuff to which to public has no access to unfortunaly.

But would you also say the bodywork bending 10cm is not cheating?

If an athlete uses a performance enhancing drug that is new and cannot be tested for - is that cheating?

In my mind both examples are 'cheating' despite a play on words in the rules.

That's a moral question which isn't suited to be asked here. Formula 1's modus operandi generally is "if it follows the letter of the rule, it is legal". Anyway, we haven't even established what Ferrari is doing anyway. Any notion of "cheating" is still a long way off. Let's leave it at that before we get off topic philosophical chatter around here.

That actually is not Formula 1's modus operandi, rather it's following the spirit of the rules.

[Big Tea]

But would you also say the bodywork bending 10cm is not cheating?

If an athlete uses a performance enhancing drug that is new and cannot be tested for - is that cheating?

In my mind both examples are 'cheating' despite a play on words in the rules.

That's a moral question which isn't suited to be asked here. Formula 1's modus operandi generally is "if it follows the letter of the rule, it is legal". Anyway, we haven't even established what Ferrari is doing anyway. Any notion of "cheating" is still a long way off. Let's leave it at that before we get off topic philosophical chatter around here.

That actually is not Formula 1's modus operandi, rather it's following the spirit of the rules.

But in most cases it is black and white where it will be enforced. Statements like 'must withstand a force of xxx' mean just that. 'At no time shall exceed' also means just that.

Other rules are left unspecific to allow wiggle room. It is not cheating if it does not fall foul of the letter.
This is done to allow some 'license' and allow development of unspecified or unconsidered tracks of thought.

[turbof1]

Let's get back to the actual hardware.

[PlatinumZealot]

Nope. One set of connections where the voltage is taken from. Unlikely two voltage outputs doing there own thing are considered one battery.

I haven't found anything in the technical regulations that would require them to have only one battery (or only one set of connections). It just says there is one ES. The only limit would be that the chart says that there is one sensor, that monitors all energy flowing from and to the ES. But that is easily solvable by using a common ground, where the sensor is connected to and have 2 terminals for the MGU-K and MGU-H.

More than one set of terminals That means you have two batteries there that you can charge one and discharge the other at the same time. That is more than one energy store! Not legal.

[PlatinumZealot]

"According to rumors filtering from Maranello the new unit of Seb will have a dozen more horsepower, but will not have the head with the merger more thrust that was expected in Canada for reasons of reliability. Better not to take risks.

The Ferrari 2 engine that will be fitted on Sebastian Vettel's SF71H in the Canadian GP will have a high engine part that has been lightened and will have some modifications in the combustion chamber, but it will not be the head in the more powerful fusion that had been planned in the 2018 season development plan.

The German driver will have, however, a dozen more horses, but can not rely on the most performance version that was expected in Montreal. The reason is simple: the technical director Mattia Binotto does not want surprises in terms of reliability"

This is from it.motorsport.com

So if I understand it well, the new Ferrari PU from Canada will bring 12 extra horsepowers, but later it will be even more? Maybe 20?

I take it he will have 12 more horses but they wony be " unlocked" for reliability fears.

[kalinka]

No too much additional info in there, but it's just interesting that Scarbs too supports some ideas stated here.

[outsid3r]

"According to rumors filtering from Maranello the new unit of Seb will have a dozen more horsepower, but will not have the head with the merger more thrust that was expected in Canada for reasons of reliability. Better not to take risks.

The Ferrari 2 engine that will be fitted on Sebastian Vettel's SF71H in the Canadian GP will have a high engine part that has been lightened and will have some modifications in the combustion chamber, but it will not be the head in the more powerful fusion that had been planned in the 2018 season development plan.

The German driver will have, however, a dozen more horses, but can not rely on the most performance version that was expected in Montreal. The reason is simple: the technical director Mattia Binotto does not want surprises in terms of reliability"

This is from it.motorsport.com

So if I understand it well, the new Ferrari PU from Canada will bring 12 extra horsepowers, but later it will be even more? Maybe 20?

I take it he will have 12 more horses but they wony be " unlocked" for reliability fears.

Just read the original article and this is what it is saying:

- There is around 10-ish hp gained on the new engine with updates in the combustion chamber and another part from the "top part" of the engine which was lightened
- The plan was to have a more aggressive approach for this GP and thus a bigger increase in hp from the newer "top part" of the engine but for now it was put on hold for reliability reasons.
- The team is playing it safe due to RAI's valve failure but they should be OK overall as SEB's engine is still in great shape. It will be used for the rest of the practice sessions and might also be used for Hungary's GP so that the rest of the PUs could be pushed more to the limit and have a greater performance increase.

Side note - the article also mentioned other updates on the car not PU related so these will go in the car thread

[djones]

Did anybody notice if the Ferrari was doing its usual smoking in Monaco?

I did not see it, but then I did not see the FP sessions or qualifying.

For me that is one of the interesting things because if it still smokes, I think the whole oil burning thing via the turbo is false and nothing more than a rumor.

[LM10]

Did anybody notice if the Ferrari was doing its usual smoking in Monaco?

I did not see it, but then I did not see the FP sessions or qualifying.

For me that is one of the interesting things because if it still smokes, I think the whole oil burning thing via the turbo is false and nothing more than a rumor.

Yes, it was smoking as usual.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-AytoaxCQ0#t=0m17s

[dans79]

Yes, it was smoking as usual.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-AytoaxCQ0#t=0m17s

I'm pretty sure that's not what he was referring to.

I think he meant the start-up smoke that can bee seen in this video.
http://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sp ... y-reporter