More controversy surrounding 2014 engines

[mikuni]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

If irc, I don't think Renault were that hot either, despite being the constructor's who brought the turbo into F1.

It's not so much a matter of not being "that hot", but more so experience in things going wrong. Remember, this was relatively early in the development of the turbo and associated components and they were pushing 1.5l engines to over 1000bhp. Things were going to break, it's just minimising the damage and keeping the breakages to a minimum where the true engineering comes in.


I'm getting increasingly nervous about the engines from the testing videos I've seen so far. I'm really hoping that the engines are still wound right down and that they will open up a lot once they are let loose.

[Richard C]

A few thoughts...

First, unless a team still has a "Bob" or "Frank" who was there "back in the day" and actually knows the details, I don't believe that secret sauce level of institutional knowledge survives within a large corporation. Especially if it is not used frequently. For example if Renault was a turbo expert decades ago, it doesn't automatically make them an expert today. I take the thought that any of the current engine suppliers might have a leg up on one of the others from a "turbo experience" history with a grain of salt. If anyone, I might give a slight edge to a Honda given thier much more recent motorsports turbo experience. But they are not a player for 2014 and by the time they do join everyone else will have their 2014 "year of hard knocks" as a good foundation for 2015.

Regarding the turbo failure protection regulation, it sounds like there is no FIA testing procedure (such as with crash tests). I think that is the flaw. I suspect that until we see a significant number of turbo failures blowing big holes in the tops of the cars and spreading bits of turbines, etc. all over the track nothing is going to become of this within this season.

Richard

[321Go]

Remember Ferrari testing the F1 V6T in a mule? Well HERE is the test mule, and HERE is the real thing.

They sound nothing like each other. Not at all.

[Armco Bender]

Useless factoid:Renault aero engines were used in turbo charging development during WW1.

[Marbot]

I think it should be noted that Ferrari, Renault, Mercedes and Honda, do not actually make their own turbos, and that companies like Garrett will know precisely what is required with regard to the new regulations, and are much more likely to source turbo technology than having it designed and built 'in house'. It should also be noted that the new turbo cars are not being run on 'rocket fuel' as was the case back in the eighties, so turbo fires and failures are less likely to happen now than they did back then.

[Marcus666]

Lets have a comparison:

1.6L V6T:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9OYmVw2QjA

and 2.2L V6T:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7NMZ9o9HNI


F1 needs to catch up, lol!

[Marbot]

Superleague 4.5 litre, 12,000 rpm, V12's

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJqQ1sxhOhs

Surprisingly unpopular race series.

[Pingguest]

Although I have to get used to the sound, it is far from bad. In fact, the new engines produce a better sound than the normally aspirated V8's!

[JeremySmith]

They sound a lot throatier which I prefer...

I also really like the whine as the driver lifts of the throttle..

[miatanut]

The in-car video might actually sound like an internal combustion engine again, instead of the sewing machine sound of the last few years.

[321Go]

Originally Posted by 321Go

The bickering has already begun among the three engine suppliers, and they haven't even hit the track as yet!

Mercedes and Renault are disputing that the turbo charger needs a protective cover for safety reasons in case of a major failure. Both Renault and Mercedes have a cover fitted. Ferrari doesn't, and doesn't want one fitted. The protective covers weigh about 3 to 4 kilograms, and Ferrari is saying it's unnecessary.

A little update on this situation. The FIA have said they feel the Ferrari turbo cover (or the lack of it) is safe enough. Ferrari apparently has a fail safe system for the turbo where by it shuts down even at the slightest sign of a failure.

Mercedes and Renault are still disputing the decision, and there's a strong chance of a protest in Melbourne against the Ferrari powered cars by Renault and Mercedes.

With just seven more days to go before engine homologation, maybe Renault and Mercedes should try to come up with a similar system to Ferrari and save them some weight.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by 321Go

A little update on this situation. The FIA have said they feel the Ferrari turbo cover (or the lack of it) is safe enough. Ferrari apparently has a fail safe system for the turbo where by it shuts down even at the slightest sign of a failure.

Mercedes and Renault are still disputing the decision, and there's a strong chance of a protest in Melbourne against the Ferrari powered cars by Renault and Mercedes.

With just seven more days to go before engine homologation, maybe Renault and Mercedes should try to come up with a similar system to Ferrari and save them some weight.

On this topic, I have never ever seen a turbo escape from its housing!

There is one Youtube clip with a bit of turbo lying on the road at a drag strip following an "explosion"! I have my doubts, the housing will contain the pieces, even in Cart when they were running + 50 lbs of boost and dragsters running way more than that.
The bearings are mounted solidly, the turbine and compressor wheels are securely mounted, and anything that will fly off has the momentum of a speeding ant - when it has got through the housing ...well it just plain won't! Ferrari have got it right, the whole idea is just romantic sensationalism about the dangers of F1 racing, pull something else!

Put a screen on the exhaust opening, that's the only place the bits usually come out!

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by wnut

On this topic, I have never ever seen a turbo escape from its housing!

There is one Youtube clip with a bit of turbo lying on the road at a drag strip following an "explosion"! I have my doubts, the housing will contain the pieces, even in Cart when they were running + 50 lbs of boost and dragsters running way more than that.
The bearings are mounted solidly, the turbine and compressor wheels are securely mounted, and anything that will fly off has the momentum of a speeding ant - when it has got through the housing ...well it just plain won't! Ferrari have got it right, the whole idea is just romantic sensationalism about the dangers of F1 racing, pull something else!

Put a screen on the exhaust opening, that's the only place the bits usually come out!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Za0DieZHMKc
Go to 3:15.

That said, I don't think it would be difficult for an F1 team to design it so it didn't blow up and was still reasonably light weight. Adding another layer over it doesn't accomplish anything you couldn't do with making the scroll a bit sturdier.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by miatanut

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Za0DieZHMKc
Go to 3:15.

That said, I don't think it would be difficult for an F1 team to design it so it didn't blow up and was still reasonably light weight. Adding another layer over it doesn't accomplish anything you couldn't do with making the scroll a bit sturdier.

Hi Miatanut

The compressor housing on that video certainly looks very thin!

The authors of this video; Cummins and Holset; wouldn't exactly qualify as impartial evaluators of the dangers of using other peoples product. They are probably just pursuing their Asian manufacturers for selling Holset products manufactured on their behalf in different boxes in the USA!

Reckon that is a setup!

How concerned have the boys at WEC been over this problem?

Time to start worrying about the flywheel escaping from the bell housing I reckon.

Dodgy French engine builders!

[Oldtony]

Originally Posted by wnut

Dodgy French engine builders!

Talking dodgy French engine builders Renault seem to have some decisions to make.
While the natural thinking at this stage may be to see if you could make the package reliable the "homologation freeze" is now just over a week away. After that any change must be for "reliability or safety" reasons.
In theory then the system is best now integrated for maximum power even if it keeps failing because you can keep modifying it to stop failures but not
to chase power.
The problem seems to be system integration and/or energy storage rather than a straight out electrical or mechanical design problem.
I would assume that Red Bull and Lotus would rather start the season with power unit failures on occasion with the prospect of getting them fixed rather than starting 50hp down and being stuck with it for the whole season.
Of course, blow too many at the start and the penalties for extra replacements tend to hurt at the tail end of the year.
Newey and Horner are in for an interesting year.

[321Go]

Originally Posted by wnut

On this topic, I have never ever seen a turbo escape from its housing!

Well all should be just fine then. If you haven't seen a turbo escape from it's housing, I really don't know what Renault and Mercedes are carrying on about. Have you put this to Renault and Mercedes? Maybe you should.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

If irc, I don't think Renault were that hot either, despite being the constructor's who brought the turbo into F1.

I think that most turbo's of the 70's and 80's cars would have been out-sourced (Garrett, IHI, etc). Most of the 'know how' will belong to these people.

Currently not too sure who is supplying which make of turbo to which team.

[Oldtony]

Going back to my question about Renault a couple of posts ago, how much controversy is there going to be about what constitutes "safety and reliability" upgrades and what are "performance" upgrades?
It is now only 4 days until the homologation deadline.
The real question is can system integration be carried out as part of the teams allowable software changes as the season develops?

[Flavio Galtieri]

Originally Posted by Oldtony

Going back to my question about Renault a couple of posts ago, how much controversy is there going to be about what constitutes "safety and reliability" upgrades and what are "performance" upgrades?
It is now only 4 days until the homologation deadline.
The real question is can system integration be carried out as part of the teams allowable software changes as the season develops?

I'm quite interested in who or how the FIA can monitor these complex software upgrades? There must be many thousands of lines of code for each control function.

I can't see it being an easy task at all?

[Tony Vandervell]

I'm similarly confused as to how the software side is handled. The 2014 technical regulations for power unit homologation state that: "Any subsequent changes will be reviewed by the FIA after requesting feedback from the other engine manufacturers regarding their opinion of the changes. Any engine changes post homologation should be for reliability or cost reduction purposes."

Now I can understand the other engine manufacturers giving the okay (or not) for hardware changes, but surely their competitors' code can only be evaluated by the FIA? Isn't that what happened with the Red Bull engine-mapping dispute a couple of years back?

[321Go]

Even though the regulations state that the other manufacturers and/or teams have to approve any changes, the FIA can avoid involvement of other teams in approving any changes. They can also ignore the other teams if they refuse any changes. Pointless putting it on paper. The FIA can do whatever they want either way.

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by wnut

Hi Miatanut

The compressor housing on that video certainly looks very thin!

The authors of this video; Cummins and Holset; wouldn't exactly qualify as impartial evaluators of the dangers of using other peoples product. They are probably just pursuing their Asian manufacturers for selling Holset products manufactured on their behalf in different boxes in the USA!

Reckon that is a setup!

I think they are counterfeit turbos with nothing in common with the American product but labeling that claims to be the American product.

With F1 they will make that housing as thin as they can, but I would expect them to also conduct tests to make sure the pieces are contained in event of failure, so I agree, this should be a non-issue.

[Richard C]

Back in late October 2013 we talked about reports that the FIA spec ultrasonic fuel flow sensors were apparently not working at the required accuracy level. Particularly in dynamic situations. I just happened to think about that today. Has anyone heard any updates on that?

Richard

[321Go]

Gill Sensors announced on January 9th 2014 that their flow meter had been approved by the FIA for use in F1 and WEC.

Data Sheet.

About.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by 321Go

Gill Sensors announced on January 9th 2014 that their flow meter had been approved by the FIA for use in F1 and WEC.

Data Sheet.

About.

(5) “Multiple Fit” is a congigurable feature

Say What?

This company has to be a member of the McLaren group!


(8) "Cavitation and entrained gas can cause meter damage and spurious measurement
results, this must be avoided by appropriate system design and flow meter operation."

Not ideal for an F1 meter, can see the arguments coming thick and fast!