Ferrari Power Unit Hardware & Software

[Phil]

On the missed apex broadcast, they are talking about that a button has gone missing on the Ferrari steering wheel since two races. Is this true? It's the first I've heard it being mentioned.

[Dr. Acula]

Maybe its just as simple as they had the ability to run both batteries in series on demand.

If they put the original sensor one of the batteries, then it would only ever show the voltage/output from that one. Presumably they now have a sensor on both batteries and they add it together and divide by two to see if they were breaking the rules.

I wrote that before but...What Ferrari is using is simply 2 piles of battery cells. It's no problem at all to connect both piles to a single output connector so you can see the whole energy flow with only one sensor. Which cells are in use at which time is purely managed by software. Just putting the cells into two smaller piles instead of one big one doesn't tell us anything about how they are used and i don't understand why some people think this could circumvent the rules. It's not 1 battery against 2 batteries. It's several hundred cells in one pile against several hundred cells in two piles.

And anyway i don't understand why everyone is lamenting over this minor difference in batterydesing. Because even if Ferrari would cheat in this area, the more intresting question should be where they get the energy from to do this in the first place. Because the ES is only a temporary energy buffer, it doesn't create any energy which means Ferrari would have found a way to recover more electric energy than everybody else apparently.

[turbof1]

Maybe its just as simple as they had the ability to run both batteries in series on demand.

If they put the original sensor one of the batteries, then it would only ever show the voltage/output from that one. Presumably they now have a sensor on both batteries and they add it together and divide by two to see if they were breaking the rules.

I wrote that before but...What Ferrari is using is simply 2 piles of battery cells. It's no problem at all to connect both piles to a single output connector so you can see the whole energy flow with only one sensor. Which cells are in use at which time is purely managed by software. Just putting the cells into two smaller piles instead of one big one doesn't tell us anything about how they are used and i don't understand why some people think this could circumvent the rules. It's not 1 battery against 2 batteries. It's several hundred cells in one pile against several hundred cells in two piles.

And anyway i don't understand why everyone is lamenting over this minor difference in batterydesing. Because even if Ferrari would cheat in this area, the more intresting question should be where they get the energy from to do this in the first place. Because the ES is only a temporary energy buffer, it doesn't create any energy which means Ferrari would have found a way to recover more electric energy than everybody else apparently.

Exactly. We are dealing with a huge lot of battery cells, not a case of "1 battery vs 2 batteries". Each cell can be controlled individually. This is all very, very complex because you are dealing with cells charging, with cell decharging, with active cells, with spare capacity cells, etc.

... Now to think of it, is there any way to optimise battery cells for the MGU-K and MGU-H respectively? Can the source of the energy have an impact on the design, structure, chemical makeup, etc of a battery cell?

[godlameroso]

Maybe heat management?

[dans79]

Now to think of it, is there any way to optimise battery cells for the MGU-K and MGU-H respectively? Can the source of the energy have an impact on the design, structure, chemical makeup, etc of a battery cell?

Yes, cells can be optimized.

It's not a great area of expertise for mine, but i can give you a very common example.

Panasonic sells Ni-MH batteries under its Eneloop brand (common in photography and videography circles), and has 2 main models.

Regular: 1900mAh capacity, 2100 charging cycles.
Pro: 2550mAh capacity, only 500 charging cycles.


I was taught pretty much all the major rechargeable technologies have a design/performance triangle. The 3 corners are charge/discharge rate, capacity, charging cycles (life expectancy). A design can be optimized to maximize one or two parameters, at the cause of the other.

I mentioned this maybe a month ago, but i think this is the reasoning for the 2 separate packs. The MGU-K, and MGU-H are two completely different animals, and thus would benefit from different cell optimizations.

[subcritical71]

Now to think of it, is there any way to optimise battery cells for the MGU-K and MGU-H respectively? Can the source of the energy have an impact on the design, structure, chemical makeup, etc of a battery cell?

Yes, cells can be optimized.

It's not a great area of expertise for mine, but i can give you a very common example.

Panasonic sells Ni-MH batteries under its Eneloop brand (common in photography and videography circles), and has 2 main models.

Regular: 1900mAh capacity, 2100 charging cycles.
Pro: 2550mAh capacity, only 500 charging cycles.


I was taught pretty much all the major rechargeable technologies have a design/performance triangle. The 3 corners are charge/discharge rate, capacity, charging cycles (life expectancy). A design can be optimized to maximize one or two parameters, at the cause of the other.

I mentioned this maybe a month ago, but i think this is the reasoning for the 2 separate packs. The MGU-K, and MGU-H are two completely different animals, and thus would benefit from different cell optimizations.

And are we sure these are two separate physical packs, or are they just a bunch of dynamically allocated cells. As well as having installed spares for cell failures along the way, would there be any benefit/loss by being able to have changing voltages for different strategies or subsystems (ie. charge/discharge rates, motor efficiency, generator efficiency, temperature management, etc)? I'm thinking that running the H<>ES and the K<>ES as two separate subsystems, with different operating conditions, may be advantageous.

[turbof1]

Now to think of it, is there any way to optimise battery cells for the MGU-K and MGU-H respectively? Can the source of the energy have an impact on the design, structure, chemical makeup, etc of a battery cell?

Yes, cells can be optimized.

It's not a great area of expertise for mine, but i can give you a very common example.

Panasonic sells Ni-MH batteries under its Eneloop brand (common in photography and videography circles), and has 2 main models.

Regular: 1900mAh capacity, 2100 charging cycles.
Pro: 2550mAh capacity, only 500 charging cycles.


I was taught pretty much all the major rechargeable technologies have a design/performance triangle. The 3 corners are charge/discharge rate, capacity, charging cycles (life expectancy). A design can be optimized to maximize one or two parameters, at the cause of the other.

I mentioned this maybe a month ago, but i think this is the reasoning for the 2 separate packs. The MGU-K, and MGU-H are two completely different animals, and thus would benefit from different cell optimizations.

Interesting. You could than still optimize their positioning for optimal cooling in the battery packaging. So instead of separate, they are together, but with a specific pattern for weight, heat, volume, etc. Since the cells are all driven individually anyway through the control unit, it really does not matter how they are aranged from a perspective of receiving and delivering from and to their respective mgu. Should that be the case; we don't know for sure if they use different cells. They could just as well use the same type of extremely high performance cell. I'm far from being an expert myself.

[dans79]

Now to think of it, is there any way to optimise battery cells for the MGU-K and MGU-H respectively? Can the source of the energy have an impact on the design, structure, chemical makeup, etc of a battery cell?

Yes, cells can be optimized.

It's not a great area of expertise for mine, but i can give you a very common example.

Panasonic sells Ni-MH batteries under its Eneloop brand (common in photography and videography circles), and has 2 main models.

Regular: 1900mAh capacity, 2100 charging cycles.
Pro: 2550mAh capacity, only 500 charging cycles.


I was taught pretty much all the major rechargeable technologies have a design/performance triangle. The 3 corners are charge/discharge rate, capacity, charging cycles (life expectancy). A design can be optimized to maximize one or two parameters, at the cause of the other.

I mentioned this maybe a month ago, but i think this is the reasoning for the 2 separate packs. The MGU-K, and MGU-H are two completely different animals, and thus would benefit from different cell optimizations.

Interesting. You could than still optimize their positioning for optimal cooling in the battery packaging. So instead of separate, they are together, but with a specific pattern for weight, heat, volume, etc. Since the cells are all driven individually anyway through the control unit, it really does not matter how they are aranged from a perspective of receiving and delivering from and to their respective mgu. Should that be the case; we don't know for sure if they use different cells. They could just as well use the same type of extremely high performance cell. I'm far from being an expert myself.

My assumption, is that the optimization is for charge/discharge rate, and cycles.

The MGU-K is recovering energy in big gulps at discrete points during a lap (Breaking zones). MGU-H can be recovering energy almost continuously, but at a lower rate.

[Kevinkirk]

Is the best reason to have 2 battery packs that you could discharge one pack while charging the other. I know it's possible to quickly swap from charge to discharge at very high frequency but surely it's better not to.

[timbo]

Is the best reason to have 2 battery packs that you could discharge one pack while charging the other. I know it's possible to quickly swap from charge to discharge at very high frequency but surely it's better not to.

This makes sense. What would be the situation which requires charging and discharging at the same time? Deploying K while using H to charge? Would that explain medium speed acceleration surges?

[hardingfv32]

Where does the required second (Ferrari only) sensor fit into the above discussion?

Brian

[MtthsMlw]

On the missed apex broadcast, they are talking about that a button has gone missing on the Ferrari steering wheel since two races. Is this true? It's the first I've heard it being mentioned.

Maybe they were talking about the mysterious button under the silicon on the steering wheel that the drivers use at the start? I recently saw a photo posted here of it missing on one of the steering wheels. Gonna check some onboards to see if they're still using it.
Edit:
Judging from the onboards it's still there. Also they use it on the start of the formation lap and on race start so is it even a performance thing?

[subcritical71]

On the missed apex broadcast, they are talking about that a button has gone missing on the Ferrari steering wheel since two races. Is this true? It's the first I've heard it being mentioned.

Maybe they were talking about the mysterious button under the silicon on the steering wheel that the drivers use at the start? I recently saw a photo posted here of it missing on one of the steering wheels. Gonna check some onboards to see if they're still using it.
Edit:
Judging from the onboards it's still there. Also they use it on the start of the formation lap and on race start so is it even a performance thing?

I don't think they need more performance at the start. Don't they already have more than enough power on hand to remain traction limited to >100kph? By getting more engine performance wouldn't that just make it even harder to control (for example, it would be easier to modulate 75% of available engine power vs. 100% of available engine power)? I could see the reasoning of having a more consistent power output vs slamming 1000hp to the clutch and having to modulate that power delivery from a dead stop.

[Dr. Acula]

On the missed apex broadcast, they are talking about that a button has gone missing on the Ferrari steering wheel since two races. Is this true? It's the first I've heard it being mentioned.

Maybe they were talking about the mysterious button under the silicon on the steering wheel that the drivers use at the start? I recently saw a photo posted here of it missing on one of the steering wheels. Gonna check some onboards to see if they're still using it.
Edit:
Judging from the onboards it's still there. Also they use it on the start of the formation lap and on race start so is it even a performance thing?

Well, it can't have to do much with the ERS because the rules say that they can't use the MGU-K at the start until they reached 100kph.
The button is probably just a special rev limiter for the start.

[Brake Horse Power]

Now to think of it, is there any way to optimise battery cells for the MGU-K and MGU-H respectively? Can the source of the energy have an impact on the design, structure, chemical makeup, etc of a battery cell?

Yes, cells can be optimized.

It's not a great area of expertise for mine, but i can give you a very common example.

Panasonic sells Ni-MH batteries under its Eneloop brand (common in photography and videography circles), and has 2 main models.

Regular: 1900mAh capacity, 2100 charging cycles.
Pro: 2550mAh capacity, only 500 charging cycles.


I was taught pretty much all the major rechargeable technologies have a design/performance triangle. The 3 corners are charge/discharge rate, capacity, charging cycles (life expectancy). A design can be optimized to maximize one or two parameters, at the cause of the other.

I mentioned this maybe a month ago, but i think this is the reasoning for the 2 separate packs. The MGU-K, and MGU-H are two completely different animals, and thus would benefit from different cell optimizations.

Interesting. You could than still optimize their positioning for optimal cooling in the battery packaging. So instead of separate, they are together, but with a specific pattern for weight, heat, volume, etc. Since the cells are all driven individually anyway through the control unit, it really does not matter how they are aranged from a perspective of receiving and delivering from and to their respective mgu. Should that be the case; we don't know for sure if they use different cells. They could just as well use the same type of extremely high performance cell. I'm far from being an expert myself.

Is it known what kind of batteries they use, and are it even batteries? Supercapacitors would function far better and have a superb efficiency..