Mercedes Power Unit Hardware & Software

[zibby43]

I wonder why the "issue" has made a re-occurrence now?

Just go ahead and spit out whatever accusation you have. Would love to hear it.

Half of your posts are insinuating Merc are up to something, whether it be the shark fin or the PU.

Just observations. Interesting none the less. Do you disagree and not even wonder just a little bit?

Considering the amount of scrutiny these PUs are under from both rival teams and the FIA, and considering the fallout for Daimler if the team ever did anything untoward, no, I don’t think Merc would deliberately do something that skirts the rules (especially something with such an obvious “tell”).

If anything, I think it’s something on the completely opposite end of the spectrum - a benign design characteristic like Toto has pointed out. Could be ambient weather conditions or circuit characteristics (or a combination of both) that exacerbate the flaw.

I’ve said this before, but Merc go through painstaking efforts to make sure everything they do is legal, because of the Daimler affiliation.

[Marty_Y]

Just go ahead and spit out whatever accusation you have. Would love to hear it.

Half of your posts are insinuating Merc are up to something, whether it be the shark fin or the PU.

Just observations. Interesting none the less. Do you disagree and not even wonder just a little bit?

Considering the amount of scrutiny these PUs are under from both rival teams and the FIA, and considering the fallout for Daimler if the team ever did anything untoward, no, I don’t think Merc would deliberately do something that skirts the rules (especially something with such an obvious “tell”).

If anything, I think it’s something on the completely opposite end of the spectrum - a benign design characteristic like Toto has pointed out. Could be ambient weather conditions or circuit characteristics (or a combination of both) that exacerbate the flaw.

I’ve said this before, but Merc go through painstaking efforts to make sure everything they do is legal, because of the Daimler affiliation.

Interesting and good points, now Daimler no longer has a controlling interest and INEOS is now a equal partner, I hope that philosophy of fair play continues.

[PlatinumZealot]

Ferrari smokes too.
Daniels mclaren was also smoking a lot in silverstone.

[Jolle]

Just observations. Interesting none the less. Do you disagree and not even wonder just a little bit?

Considering the amount of scrutiny these PUs are under from both rival teams and the FIA, and considering the fallout for Daimler if the team ever did anything untoward, no, I don’t think Merc would deliberately do something that skirts the rules (especially something with such an obvious “tell”).

If anything, I think it’s something on the completely opposite end of the spectrum - a benign design characteristic like Toto has pointed out. Could be ambient weather conditions or circuit characteristics (or a combination of both) that exacerbate the flaw.

I’ve said this before, but Merc go through painstaking efforts to make sure everything they do is legal, because of the Daimler affiliation.

Interesting and good points, now Daimler no longer has a controlling interest and INEOS is now a equal partner, I hope that philosophy of fair play continues.

They are still a part of the official board of directors. They bumped their toe before with McLaren, they won’t let that happen again.

[Juzh]

Just go ahead and spit out whatever accusation you have. Would love to hear it.

Half of your posts are insinuating Merc are up to something, whether it be the shark fin or the PU.

Just observations. Interesting none the less. Do you disagree and not even wonder just a little bit?

Considering the amount of scrutiny these PUs are under from both rival teams and the FIA, and considering the fallout for Daimler if the team ever did anything untoward, no, I don’t think Merc would deliberately do something that skirts the rules (especially something with such an obvious “tell”).

If anything, I think it’s something on the completely opposite end of the spectrum - a benign design characteristic like Toto has pointed out. Could be ambient weather conditions or circuit characteristics (or a combination of both) that exacerbate the flaw.

I’ve said this before, but Merc go through painstaking efforts to make sure everything they do is legal, because of the Daimler affiliation.

This holier than thou attitude is appalling. You're acting like mercedes wasn't burning oil by the bucket loads as recently as 2017, going as far as introducing power units early to skirt (a word you used) around the incoming stricter limits. Any car excessively smoking will attract attention as a result of this and it's not gonna simply go away just because you want it to.

[hurril]

A ‘’turbo-supercharger/turbocharger’ is an exhaust power recovery device. In a ‘’turbo-supercharger/turbocharger’ installation cylinders exhaust into a common collector with ‘two’ paths, one through a variable opening waste-gate, and the other through a nozzle aimed at a turbine wheel. With waste-gate fully open, there is no restriction, and collector pressure is nearly atmospheric. No power recovery is possible in such a system unless the collector is above existing atmospheric pressure. The formula one turbocharger utilizes a pressure turbine. When the waste-gates are fully open, the compressor is operating in ‘’electric supercharging mode’’.

This is false and you have been explained this over 9000 times.

[zibby43]

Just observations. Interesting none the less. Do you disagree and not even wonder just a little bit?

Considering the amount of scrutiny these PUs are under from both rival teams and the FIA, and considering the fallout for Daimler if the team ever did anything untoward, no, I don’t think Merc would deliberately do something that skirts the rules (especially something with such an obvious “tell”).

If anything, I think it’s something on the completely opposite end of the spectrum - a benign design characteristic like Toto has pointed out. Could be ambient weather conditions or circuit characteristics (or a combination of both) that exacerbate the flaw.

I’ve said this before, but Merc go through painstaking efforts to make sure everything they do is legal, because of the Daimler affiliation.

This holier than thou attitude is appalling. You're acting like mercedes wasn't burning oil by the bucket loads as recently as 2017, going as far as introducing power units early to skirt (a word you used) around the incoming stricter limits. Any car excessively smoking will attract attention as a result of this and it's not gonna simply go away just because you want it to.

Hyperbole much?

Not only have you lost your composure, now you can’t even get your facts straight anymore.

1) Oil burning was never illegal. Nothing in the rules specifically prohibited it when the hybrid era kicked off in 2014. Every team did it. When teams that weren’t as good at it complained, gradual limits were imposed (which Mercedes always complied with, to the letter of the law).

2) If Mercedes introduced those PUs early for that purpose (they didn’t, but you just can’t remember and wanted to fire off this emotional post before researching), guess what? That ALSO was done with the letter of the law for the restrictions that season.

3) Mercedes complied with the OLD 0.9L burn rate limitations with those PUs introduced at Spa.

“Mercedes has since suggested that its data confirms it stayed within the lower 0.9L/100km consumption level for the Belgian GP, although that doesn't rule out the possibility that it can or indeed will run up to the higher level if needed in future races.”

Here’s a good refresher course on the history of oil burning that corroborates everything I set out above.

https://us.motorsport.com/f1/news/tech- ... 4/3043308/

[Juzh]

Considering the amount of scrutiny these PUs are under from both rival teams and the FIA, and considering the fallout for Daimler if the team ever did anything untoward, no, I don’t think Merc would deliberately do something that skirts the rules (especially something with such an obvious “tell”).

If anything, I think it’s something on the completely opposite end of the spectrum - a benign design characteristic like Toto has pointed out. Could be ambient weather conditions or circuit characteristics (or a combination of both) that exacerbate the flaw.

I’ve said this before, but Merc go through painstaking efforts to make sure everything they do is legal, because of the Daimler affiliation.

This holier than thou attitude is appalling. You're acting like mercedes wasn't burning oil by the bucket loads as recently as 2017, going as far as introducing power units early to skirt (a word you used) around the incoming stricter limits. Any car excessively smoking will attract attention as a result of this and it's not gonna simply go away just because you want it to.

Hyperbole much?

Not only have you lost your composure, now you can’t even get your facts straight anymore.

1) Oil burning was never illegal. Nothing in the rules specifically prohibited it when the hybrid era kicked off in 2014. Every team did it. When teams that weren’t as good at it complained, gradual limits were imposed (which Mercedes always complied with, to the letter of the law).

2) If Mercedes introduced those PUs early for that purpose (they didn’t, but you just can’t remember and wanted to fire off this emotional post before researching), guess what? That ALSO was done with the letter of the law for the restrictions that season.

3) Mercedes complied with the OLD 0.9L burn rate limitations with those PUs introduced at Spa.

“Mercedes has since suggested that its data confirms it stayed within the lower 0.9L/100km consumption level for the Belgian GP, although that doesn't rule out the possibility that it can or indeed will run up to the higher level if needed in future races.”

Here’s a good refresher course on the history of oil burning that corroborates everything I set out above.

https://us.motorsport.com/f1/news/tech- ... 4/3043308/

I see you're just making stuff up now. I never said burning oil was illegal, nor that mercedes cheated in that respect, but they did skirt the rules by going above and beyond of what the rules intended in regards to oil burning. They did it from the start and with full awareness it was outside of spirit of the rules and even against whole premise of new and efficient engines, something they were very keen to promote over and over again. It was obviously an incompetent FIA that allowed such obvious practices go on for so long that's to blame the most. Funny how engines needed next to zero modifications with new restrictions and even in 2020 when they lowered it down to 0.3l/100 km it was hardly any fuss about it, making the whole fiasco even more obvious.

Also, I knew about the whole "we're sticking with 0.9l" even when we don't have to, I just don't believe every single word mercedes tells to public as they're so obviously not true 95% of the time and they're just trying to shift and deflect attention elsewhere. Only most gullible person would believe mercedes introduced new PU just in time to go around new limits only to then not use it. Pretty much everyone at the time knew those were fairy tales.

[zibby43]

This holier than thou attitude is appalling. You're acting like mercedes wasn't burning oil by the bucket loads as recently as 2017, going as far as introducing power units early to skirt (a word you used) around the incoming stricter limits. Any car excessively smoking will attract attention as a result of this and it's not gonna simply go away just because you want it to.

Hyperbole much?

Not only have you lost your composure, now you can’t even get your facts straight anymore.

1) Oil burning was never illegal. Nothing in the rules specifically prohibited it when the hybrid era kicked off in 2014. Every team did it. When teams that weren’t as good at it complained, gradual limits were imposed (which Mercedes always complied with, to the letter of the law).

2) If Mercedes introduced those PUs early for that purpose (they didn’t, but you just can’t remember and wanted to fire off this emotional post before researching), guess what? That ALSO was done with the letter of the law for the restrictions that season.

3) Mercedes complied with the OLD 0.9L burn rate limitations with those PUs introduced at Spa.

“Mercedes has since suggested that its data confirms it stayed within the lower 0.9L/100km consumption level for the Belgian GP, although that doesn't rule out the possibility that it can or indeed will run up to the higher level if needed in future races.”

Here’s a good refresher course on the history of oil burning that corroborates everything I set out above.

https://us.motorsport.com/f1/news/tech- ... 4/3043308/

I see you're just making stuff up now. I never said burning oil was illegal, nor that mercedes cheated in that respect, but they did skirt the rules by going above and beyond of what the rules intended in regards to oil burning. They did it from the start and with full awareness it was outside of spirit of the rules and even against whole premise of new and efficient engines, something they were very keen to promote over and over again. It was obviously an incompetent FIA that allowed such obvious practices go on for so long that's to blame the most. Funny how engines needed next to zero modifications with new restrictions and even in 2020 when they lowered it down to 0.3l/100 km it was hardly any fuss about it, making the whole fiasco even more obvious.

Also, I knew about the whole "we're sticking with 0.9l" even when we don't have to, I just don't believe every single word mercedes tells to public as they're so obviously not true 95% of the time and they're just trying to shift and deflect attention elsewhere. Only most gullible person would believe mercedes introduced new PU just in time to go around new limits only to then not use it. Pretty much everyone at the time knew those were fairy tales.

The definition of skirting the rules is to try to avoid the rules without breaking them. Basically, cheating.

They never did any such thing. I’m just taking your words at face value. But, you just contradicted yourself and said they went “above and beyond” what the rules intended.

Doesn’t Mercedes historically introduce their new PUs around Spa/Monza, anyway?

That may be your opinion, but they’re arguably the most transparent team on the grid that provides the most access and content. Have they ever been caught in an outright lie?

I’d actually flip what you said and suggest only the most paranoid people think every thing Mercedes do or say is a part of some kind of Pepe Silvia master plan.

[Tommy Cookers]

A ‘’turbo-supercharger/turbocharger’ is an exhaust power recovery device. In a ‘’turbo-supercharger/turbocharger’ installation cylinders exhaust into a common collector with ‘two’ paths, one through a variable opening waste-gate, and the other through a nozzle aimed at a turbine wheel. With waste-gate fully open, there is no restriction, and collector pressure is nearly atmospheric. No power recovery is possible in such a system unless the collector is above existing atmospheric pressure. The formula one turbocharger utilizes a pressure turbine. When the waste-gates are fully open, the compressor is operating in ‘’electric supercharging mode’’.

This is false and you have been explained this over 9000 times.

afaik and otoh ....
one concept of how it's false ......
(in addition to Wright's explanation of those 15000 Wright Turbo-Compound engines) ......

with the waste-gate fully open (WGO) .... because ....
exhaust STATIC pressure (not total pressure) is what's balanced to atmospheric pressure by the open waste-gate ....

EXHAUST DYNAMIC PRESSURE DRIVES THE TURBINE - for all exhaust pressures

ie WGO the turbine speed tends to be a measure of the exhaust gas speed for any exhaust pressure

yes of course at raised exhaust pressures dynamic pressure isn't the only way to drive a turbine

[PhillipM]

And frankly nobody has wastegates capable of reducing exhaust pressure to ambient. Not even close.

[Polite]

Considering the amount of scrutiny these PUs are under from both rival teams and the FIA, and considering the fallout for Daimler if the team ever did anything untoward, no, I don’t think Merc would deliberately do something that skirts the rules (especially something with such an obvious “tell”).

If anything, I think it’s something on the completely opposite end of the spectrum - a benign design characteristic like Toto has pointed out. Could be ambient weather conditions or circuit characteristics (or a combination of both) that exacerbate the flaw.

I’ve said this before, but Merc go through painstaking efforts to make sure everything they do is legal, because of the Daimler affiliation.

This holier than thou attitude is appalling. You're acting like mercedes wasn't burning oil by the bucket loads as recently as 2017, going as far as introducing power units early to skirt (a word you used) around the incoming stricter limits. Any car excessively smoking will attract attention as a result of this and it's not gonna simply go away just because you want it to.

Hyperbole much?

Not only have you lost your composure, now you can’t even get your facts straight anymore.

1) Oil burning was never illegal. Nothing in the rules specifically prohibited it when the hybrid era kicked off in 2014. Every team did it. When teams that weren’t as good at it complained, gradual limits were imposed (which Mercedes always complied with, to the letter of the law).

2) If Mercedes introduced those PUs early for that purpose (they didn’t, but you just can’t remember and wanted to fire off this emotional post before researching), guess what? That ALSO was done with the letter of the law for the restrictions that season.

3) Mercedes complied with the OLD 0.9L burn rate limitations with those PUs introduced at Spa.

“Mercedes has since suggested that its data confirms it stayed within the lower 0.9L/100km consumption level for the Belgian GP, although that doesn't rule out the possibility that it can or indeed will run up to the higher level if needed in future races.”

Here’s a good refresher course on the history of oil burning that corroborates everything I set out above.

https://us.motorsport.com/f1/news/tech- ... 4/3043308/

your story fails..
https://azertag.az/en/xeber/FIA_confirm ... it-1089458

[SiLo]

This holier than thou attitude is appalling. You're acting like mercedes wasn't burning oil by the bucket loads as recently as 2017, going as far as introducing power units early to skirt (a word you used) around the incoming stricter limits. Any car excessively smoking will attract attention as a result of this and it's not gonna simply go away just because you want it to.

Hyperbole much?

Not only have you lost your composure, now you can’t even get your facts straight anymore.

1) Oil burning was never illegal. Nothing in the rules specifically prohibited it when the hybrid era kicked off in 2014. Every team did it. When teams that weren’t as good at it complained, gradual limits were imposed (which Mercedes always complied with, to the letter of the law).

2) If Mercedes introduced those PUs early for that purpose (they didn’t, but you just can’t remember and wanted to fire off this emotional post before researching), guess what? That ALSO was done with the letter of the law for the restrictions that season.

3) Mercedes complied with the OLD 0.9L burn rate limitations with those PUs introduced at Spa.

“Mercedes has since suggested that its data confirms it stayed within the lower 0.9L/100km consumption level for the Belgian GP, although that doesn't rule out the possibility that it can or indeed will run up to the higher level if needed in future races.”

Here’s a good refresher course on the history of oil burning that corroborates everything I set out above.

https://us.motorsport.com/f1/news/tech- ... 4/3043308/

your story fails..
https://azertag.az/en/xeber/FIA_confirm ... it-1089458

pretty certain Mercedes said it kept to the new 0.9L regs anyway after introducing the new power unit.

[Polite]

Hyperbole much?

Not only have you lost your composure, now you can’t even get your facts straight anymore.

1) Oil burning was never illegal. Nothing in the rules specifically prohibited it when the hybrid era kicked off in 2014. Every team did it. When teams that weren’t as good at it complained, gradual limits were imposed (which Mercedes always complied with, to the letter of the law).

2) If Mercedes introduced those PUs early for that purpose (they didn’t, but you just can’t remember and wanted to fire off this emotional post before researching), guess what? That ALSO was done with the letter of the law for the restrictions that season.

3) Mercedes complied with the OLD 0.9L burn rate limitations with those PUs introduced at Spa.

“Mercedes has since suggested that its data confirms it stayed within the lower 0.9L/100km consumption level for the Belgian GP, although that doesn't rule out the possibility that it can or indeed will run up to the higher level if needed in future races.”

Here’s a good refresher course on the history of oil burning that corroborates everything I set out above.

https://us.motorsport.com/f1/news/tech- ... 4/3043308/

your story fails..
https://azertag.az/en/xeber/FIA_confirm ... it-1089458

pretty certain Mercedes said it kept to the new 0.9L regs anyway after introducing the new power unit.

OFC Mercedes said that.. but
Mercedes did a gentlmen agreement about oil burning with other manufacturer but was the only one non respecting hat commitment

[SiLo]

Tbh it doesn't matter is it's all in the past. I think Mercedes will do what they can within the rules to gain an advantage like the oil burning, but I couldn't see them doing what Ferrari did with the fuel flow tricks.