101 replies to this topic

[medeni73]

Season hasn't started yet but the power games are already on !

According to Auto Motor Sport (http://www.auto-moto...ng-8014244.html)

Renault and Mercedes want to put protective shield around Turboloader (3-4 kg extra weight) and Ferrari thinks it isnt necessary...Next week meeting with FIA where Renault will show a film what happens when Turboloader explodes...

It will be intereseting what both 3 sides (Ferrari vs Renault/Mercedes vs FIA) have to say...

[Ferrari2183]

Season hasn't started yet but the power games are already on !

According to Auto Motor Sport (http://www.auto-moto...ng-8014244.html)

Renault and Mercedes want to put protective shield around Turboloader (3-4 kg extra weight) and Ferrari thinks it isnt necessary...Next week meeting with FIA where Renault will show a film what happens when Turboloader explodes...

It will be intereseting what both 3 sides (Ferrari vs Renault/Mercedes vs FIA) have to say...

More lobbying to increase weight...

[bonjon1979a]

More lobbying to increase weight...

Doesn't seem like it to me. Seems like a very specific part that two teams believe should be added, one team doesn't. If it gets the go ahead, all three would be adding weight in exactly the same place and so no penalty or gain for anyone. Interesting that Renault and Merc think that it is mandated by regulation. I've looked and there is this regulation.

 

5.18.5

Measures must be taken to ensure that in the event of failure of the turbine wheel any

resulting significant debris is contained within the car

 

Now, Ferrari may well have constructed a turbo that will definitely contain the turbine blades should a failure occur and the others haven't. More power to them if they have! However, I imagine it would put them on dicey ground should a failure occur and they don't manage to keep the debris contained in the car.

 

I suspect this is more about packaging. Ferrari would be penalised if they have to do this as their packaging with the exhausts going over the top of the engine is significantly different from others? Pure speculations but don't think it's just about weight per se.

[Ferrari2183]

 

Doesn't seem like it to me. Seems like a very specific part that two teams believe should be added, one team doesn't. If it gets the go ahead, all three would be adding weight in exactly the same place and so no penalty or gain for anyone. Interesting that Renault and Merc think that it is mandated by regulation. I've looked and there is this regulation.

 

5.18.5

Measures must be taken to ensure that in the event of failure of the turbine wheel any

resulting significant debris is contained within the car

 

Now, Ferrari may well have constructed a turbo that will definitely contain the turbine blades should a failure occur and the others haven't. More power to them if they have! However, I imagine it would put them on dicey ground should a failure occur and they don't manage to keep the debris contained in the car.

 

I suspect this is more about packaging. Ferrari would be penalised if they have to do this as their packaging with the exhausts going over the top of the engine is significantly different from others? Pure speculations but don't think it's just about weight per se.

 

It's just plain lobbying. Why has this only been brought up now?

 

I haven't read the technical regulations but it's likely that an increase in weight of this magnitude around the rear of the car will necessitate an increase in overall weight for weight distribution purposes.

 

Anyway, the engine cover can just be reinforced judging from the regulation you just posted. I doubt the debris will make it through the engine cover as is in any event.

Edited by Ferrari2183, 24 January 2014 - 11:36.

[bonjon1979a]

It's just plain lobbying. Why has this only been brought up now?

 

I haven't read the technical regulations but it's likely that an increase in weight of this magnitude around the rear of the car will necessitate an increase in overall weight for weight distribution purposes.

Yeah, but lobbying to what end? If Merc and Renault have included something they thought was mandated then they could be disadvantaged. As I said, the rules are quite clear. If Ferrari conform to the rules and the debris will be contained then that's great, move along, nothing to see here. The other teams will be told to be on their way and it's nothing for Ferrari to worry about. If it doesn't conform to the rules and measures aren't taken then of course teams will bring it up as it would be unfair that Ferrari haven't followed the rules as they have. I would suspect this has cropped up now because as teams are receiving their engines, word has spread about the particulars of each engine. If you're against lobbying and the FIA being asked to step in then I suggest you watch a different sport, especially this season when there is going to be so much of it going on because as we all know technical interpretations are massively disputed. I certainly remember you wishing that the FIA stepped in on a number of Red Bull 'innovations' over the last few seasons, it's the nature of the game.

[e34]

 

Doesn't seem like it to me. Seems like a very specific part that two teams believe should be added, one team doesn't. If it gets the go ahead, all three would be adding weight in exactly the same place and so no penalty or gain for anyone. Interesting that Renault and Merc think that it is mandated by regulation. I've looked and there is this regulation.

 

5.18.5

Measures must be taken to ensure that in the event of failure of the turbine wheel any

resulting significant debris is contained within the car

 

Now, Ferrari may well have constructed a turbo that will definitely contain the turbine blades should a failure occur and the others haven't. More power to them if they have! However, I imagine it would put them on dicey ground should a failure occur and they don't manage to keep the debris contained in the car.

 

I suspect this is more about packaging. Ferrari would be penalised if they have to do this as their packaging with the exhausts going over the top of the engine is significantly different from others? Pure speculations but don't think it's just about weight per se.

 

 

I suppose nothing impedes them from adding whatever shield they believe necessary. It is just a question of shaving weight from somewhere else. 

 

Now, if they are asking for the maximum weight to be increased, that's another thing.

 

On the other hand, if they are looking for that shield to be compulsorily added, and that disturbs Ferrari's design, that would be an intelligent coup, and a lesson for Ferrari and its bona fide approach to the hot and cold blowing of the last years. 

[Ferrari2183]

Yeah, but lobbying to what end? If Merc and Renault have included something they thought was mandated then they could be disadvantaged. As I said, the rules are quite clear. If Ferrari conform to the rules and the debris will be contained then that's great, move along, nothing to see here. The other teams will be told to be on their way and it's nothing for Ferrari to worry about. If it doesn't conform to the rules and measures aren't taken then of course teams will bring it up as it would be unfair that Ferrari haven't followed the rules as they have. I would suspect this has cropped up now because as teams are receiving their engines, word has spread about the particulars of each engine. If you're against lobbying and the FIA being asked to step in then I suggest you watch a different sport, especially this season when there is going to be so much of it going on because as we all know technical interpretations are massively disputed. I certainly remember you wishing that the FIA stepped in on a number of Red Bull 'innovations' over the last few seasons, it's the nature of the game.

I have never requested the FIA step in on any Red Bull innovations. I questioned their clever use of cylinder deactivation as a means of a traction control but that's about it. I kind of liked the idea of their flexible parts.

 

Anyway, it would seem Mercedes and Renault are clutching at straws because the regulation in question does not stipulate anything as specific as a turbo cover. It merely states meausres should be taken so that debris is contained within the car.

 

To what end? I believe an increase in weight at the rear will necessitate an overall increase as well to maintain weight distribution mandates, giving these very teams a hand out with regard to their earlier arguments about heavy drivers.

Edited by Ferrari2183, 24 January 2014 - 12:04.

[bonjon1979a]

I have never requested the FIA step in on any Red Bull innovations. I questioned their clever use of cylinder deactivation as a means of a traction control but that's about it. I kind of liked the idea of their flexible parts.

 

Anyway, it would seem Mercedes and Renault are clutching at straws because the regulation in question does not stipulate anything as specific as a turbo cover. It merely states meausres should be taken so that debris should be contained within the car.

 

To what end? I believe an increase in weight at the rear will necessitate an overall increase as well to maintain weight distribution mandates, giving these very teams a hand out with regard to their earlier arguments about heavy drivers.

As I said, Ferrari may well have already taken measures in their initial design. But IF they haven't, then they'll fall foul. Don't buy your weight distribution thoughts as seems like you've taken 1 + 1 and come up with 5. Anyway, I suspect not much will come of it, let's wait and see.

[Ferrari2183]

As I said, Ferrari may well have already taken measures in their initial design. But IF they haven't, then they'll fall foul. Don't buy your weight distribution thoughts as seems like you've taken 1 + 1 and come up with 5. Anyway, I suspect not much will come of it, let's wait and see.

I haven't taken 1 + 1 and come up with 5... 4kgs in F1 terms is plenty and is bound upset balance ceteris paribus.

 

Mercedes and Renault, as per the AMuS article, aren't arguing that if Ferrari haven't taken measures. They seem to be arguing that it is mandatory and bringing it up this late in the game smells of desperation.

[bonjon1979a]

I haven't taken 1 + 1 and come up with 5... 4kgs in F1 terms is plenty and is bound upset balance ceteris paribus.

 

Mercedes and Renault, as per the AMuS article, aren't arguing that if Ferrari haven't taken measures. They seem to be arguing that it is mandatory and bringing it up this late in the game smells of desperation.

It is mandatory as per

 

5.18.5

Measures must be taken to ensure that in the event of failure of the turbine wheel any

resulting significant debris is contained within the car.

 

It's difficult to discern exactly what the AMUS article means because I'm not a German speaker but it appears to me that Ferrari are denying that they need a guard in place. Also, I don't understand why it would show desperation if they wanted the weight of the guard included in the weight of the motor unit.

 

I'm not being argumentative, I just don't quite understand the logic of what you're saying. Say Ferrari are at 145 for the motor and the guard (or whatever measures they've taken to comply with rule 5.18.5). Merc and Renault are at 145 without the guard, how would adding an extra 4-5 kg on to their engine help? They're not asking for an increase in the weight limit, just that the guard be counted as part of that weight. Maybe Renault and Merc engines are only 141 without the guard so want to add it to bring them up to 145? But this would be quite crazy wouldn't you think because they'd be adding weight up high?

[Ferrari2183]

 

It is mandatory as per

 

5.18.5

Measures must be taken to ensure that in the event of failure of the turbine wheel any

resulting significant debris is contained within the car.

 

It's difficult to discern exactly what the AMUS article means because I'm not a German speaker but it appears to me that Ferrari are denying that they need a guard in place. Also, I don't understand why it would show desperation if they wanted the weight of the guard included in the weight of the motor unit.

 

I'm not being argumentative, I just don't quite understand the logic of what you're saying. Say Ferrari are at 145 for the motor and the guard (or whatever measures they've taken to comply with rule 5.18.5). Merc and Renault are at 145 without the guard, how would adding an extra 4-5 kg on to their engine help? They're not asking for an increase in the weight limit, just that the guard be counted as part of that weight. Maybe Renault and Merc engines are only 141 without the guard so want to add it to bring them up to 145? But this would be quite crazy wouldn't you think because they'd be adding weight up high?

 

Firstly, this is not about Ferrari. Ferrari are arguing that such a device is not mandatory as Mercedes and Renault believe, also Ferrari believe that they're being excessive in terms of damage caused by debris.

 

Regarding your numbers... 145 kgs is only the minimum weight. If they get their engine units to that exact weight then they deserve to win the title.

 

It is highly likely that teams are well above the minimum 145 kgs already and adding an additional 5 kgs will force an increase in total weight to maintain the mandated weight distribution. 

[as65p]

As I said, Ferrari may well have already taken measures in their initial design. But IF they haven't, then they'll fall foul.

 

The FIA wording "measures" is unspecific as usual. Essentiallly it means "make sure nothing flies off your engine, how is up to you". Also what exactly is "significant debris", or IOW up to what amount will it be considered not significant?

 

As it is, that means nobody will fall foul up to the point when something will actually happen and the FIA will judge the amount of debris significant. Only then that team will "fall foul", not a second earlier.

 

Now Mercedes and Renault appear to argue their "measure" weighs a bit. Doesn't mean they can force the same kind of "measure" (and weight penalty) upon another manufacturer. And that's why they appear to bitch about it instead. Unfortunately a common, and often enough successful tactic in F1.

[bonjon1979a]

Firstly, this is not about Ferrari. Ferrari are arguing that such a device is not mandatory as Mercedes and Renault believe, also Ferrari believe that they're being excessive in terms of damage caused by debris.

 

Regarding your numbers... 145 kgs is only the minimum weight. If they get their engine units to that exact weight then they deserve to win the title.

 

It is highly likely that teams are well above the minimum 145 kgs already and adding an additional 5 kgs will force an increase in total weight to maintain the mandated weight distribution.

 

1. The wording is unspecific and if Ferrari comply then there's no problem, is there? They don't have to do anything else and Merc and Renault can go stuff it because Ferrari have done what they needed to and don't have to put a big heavy guard up high. I get that, and kudos for Ferrari and it would be wrong for them to have to put something on the car that they don't need.

 

2. Nothing you've said explains why Merc and Renault want that shroud included as part of the minimum weight of the engine. Unless I'm mistaken, they're not asking for an increase in the weight allowance, so nothing you're saying about increase of weight and distribution applies. If their engines already weighed, say 150kg, what would be the point in asking for the extra weight to be included in the minimum weight of the drive train? They already meet the minimum so why would they want more parts included in the definition. It makes no sense. Now, IF they're asking for an increase in the overall weight then i'd agree with you but I don't see that anywhere and think that it's a conclusion you're leaping to.

 

3. More likely, Renault and Merc have included a heavy shield of some sort up high in the engine because they wanted to make sure they comply with 5.18.5. On finding out that Ferrari have added no such device (or have a clever way of doing it for much less weight penalty), Merc and Renault are lobbying to try to make sure that Ferrari have to put in the same thing as them so all things are even. (Their version of even at any rate!)

Edited by bonjon1979a, 24 January 2014 - 13:14.

[Ferrari2183]

1. The wording is unspecific and if Ferrari comply then there's no problem, is there? They don't have to do anything else and Merc and Renault can go stuff it because Ferrari have done what they needed to and don't have to put a big heavy guard up high. I get that, and kudos for Ferrari and it would be wrong for them to have to put something on the car that they don't need.

 

2. Nothing you've said explains why Merc and Renault want that shroud included as part of the minimum weight of the engine. Unless I'm mistaken, they're not asking for an increase in the weight allowance, so nothing you're saying about increase of weight and distribution applies. If their engines already weighed, say 150kg, what would be the point in asking for the extra weight to be included in the minimum weight of the drive train? They already meet the minimum so why would they want more parts included in the definition. It makes no sense. Now, IF they're asking for an increase in the overall weight then i'd agree with you but I don't see that anywhere and think that it's a conclusion you're leaping to.

 

3. More likely, Renault and Merc have included a heavy shield of some sort up high in the engine because they wanted to make sure they comply with 5.18.5. On finding out that Ferrari have added no such device (or have a clever way of doing it for much less weight penalty), Merc and Renault are lobbying to try to make sure that Ferrari have to put in the same thing as them so all things are even. (Their version of even at any rate!)

Again, as per the AMuS piece, Merecedes and Renault are not arguing that Ferrari are foul of any regulation even if they have some clever way of keeping debris in place. They're arguing that the turbo cover is "mandatory" as per the regulations.

 

I don't have time to explain my weight distribution argument but will do so when I have time. I think it is clearly a veiled attempt at getting Ferrari on board for a total weight increase.

[bonjon1979a]

Again, as per the AMuS piece, Merecedes and Renault are not arguing that Ferrari are foul of any regulation even if they have some clever way of keeping debris in place. They're arguing that the turbo cover is "mandatory" as per the regulations.

 

I don't have time to explain my weight distribution argument but will do so when I have time. I think it is clearly a veiled attempt at getting Ferrari on board for a total weight increase.

 

This is the translation i'm working from:

 

The turbocharger is one of the most critical components in the new powertrain. In the development phase, all three manufacturers had problems with it. If the charge air is not cooled properly, or the interaction of the wastegate valve and the thermal electric machine ( MGU -H) is not correct, so that the boost pressure rises too high , then the sparks fly .

Mercedes and Renault interpret the rules so that one must attach a protective casing around the turbocharger for security , which then counts the weight of the drive unit. The power unit must weigh with all components at least 145 kilograms.
Renault wants to show film about turbo damage

Said guard is between three and four kilograms. The mass is like the turbo near the top , which is unfavorable for the center of gravity. Whoever saves , has an advantage. Ferrari sees in the regulations no passage that calls this protective device and the motor weight attributes . Maranello holds the forecast from the competition consequences in case of damage to be excessive .

The do not want to accept Mercedes and Renault. Next week there is to be a clarifying conversation with the FIA. Renault will reportedly show a movie that shows what happens when a turbocharger exploded there. Should the three engine manufacturers do not come to an agreement , threatens in Melbourne , the first process.

 

You're right about Renault and Merc arguing that a cover is mandatory. I guess Ferrari are arguing that their turbo meets the regulation without the guard in place. This will be one that needs to be ruled upon. It could be Ferrari are fine or it could be that the FIA thinks that they need to include a shroud to be allowed to run. I don't see anything underhand here, just usual clarifying of rules as happens EVERY SINGLE YEAR!

 

I've put in red the part about the shroud counting towards the weight of the drive unit so you can see it clearly. There is no question of increasing weight limit, just that it's part of the minimum weight so your weight distribution concerns are not really valid at all.

[Timothy]

Again, as per the AMuS piece, Merecedes and Renault are not arguing that Ferrari are foul of any regulation even if they have some clever way of keeping debris in place. They're arguing that the turbo cover is "mandatory" as per the regulations.

 

I don't have time to explain my weight distribution argument but will do so when I have time. I think it is clearly a veiled attempt at getting Ferrari on board for a total weight increase.

 

I get where you going with this weight distribution argument. The rear's of the Mercedes and Renault powered cars will probably weigh an extra 4-5kg's necessitating them to add more up front to meet the set weight distribution.

[bonjon1979a]

I get where you going with this weight distribution argument. The rear's of the Mercedes and Renault powered cars will probably weigh an extra 4-5kg's necessitating them to add more up front to meet the set weight distribution.

 

But no one is asking for a change in the weight distribution! Merc and Renault have designed their cars with this cover in mind, they have it on their engines already and are saying that Ferrari should have it too. It's really very simple.

 

They are not suddenly saying, 'we need to add this shroud can we have an extra 5kg on the weight limit'. It is already designed into their power train and they're just a bit miffed to have that extra heavy weight up high when Ferrari don't. That is all. Nothing is going to change their weight distribution because the shroud is factored in. You're concluding that Merc and Renault have only just discovered that they need to add this shroud and will need to offset the weight which doesn't appear to be the case at all.

Edited by bonjon1979a, 24 January 2014 - 13:54.

[Timothy]

But no one is asking for a change in the weight distribution! Merc and Renault have designed their cars with this cover in mind, they have it on their engines already and are saying that Ferrari should have it too. It's really very simple.

 

I'm not saying they are, but there is a target to be met and if you're to heavy at the rear you need to balance out by adding  unnecessary ballast up front.

Edited by Timothy, 24 January 2014 - 13:57.

[bonjon1979a]

I'm not saying they are, but there is a target to be met and if you're to heavy at the rear you need to balance out by adding up front.

 

Of course, but that's a complete non-sequitur in relation to this discussion. It'd be like saying, 'if you have too much downforce at the rear, you have to balance it out at the front'. All true but bears no relation to this discussion.

 

There is no discussion of weight needing to be balanced out or added or limits changed. Merc and Renault have this casing on their cars already. The cars will be balanced with this 3-4kg in place ALREADY. This isn't about them trying to push something through to help with their weight distribution. It's about them not wanting Ferrari to have an advantage with regards to COG by not having the protective casing. That is all this is, nothing more.

Edited by bonjon1979a, 24 January 2014 - 14:01.

[Rinehart]

 

It will be intereseting what both 3 sides (Ferrari vs Renault/Mercedes vs FIA) have to say...

Perhaps 2 sides - Ren/Merc v FIA/Ferrari...

[bonjon1979a]

Perhaps 2 sides - Ren/Merc v FIA/Ferrari...

Wouldn't say it's as clear cut as that, remember Red Bull are renault!

[FirstWatt]

[...]
It is highly likely that teams are well above the minimum 145 kgs already and adding an additional 5 kgs will force an increase in total weight to maintain the mandated weight distribution.

There are minimum weight requirements for front and rear wheels, but not a weight distribution rule:
 

For 2014 only, the weight applied on the front and rear wheels must not be less than 314kg and 369kg respectively at all times during the qualifying practice session.

Its a good read btw:
http://www.fia.com/s... 2013-12-09.pdf

Edited by FirstWatt, 24 January 2014 - 14:41.

[study]

Wonder why they make it qualifying only

 

could you have movable ballast for the race

[Treads]

Whatever the situation as regards Ferrari / Merc / Renault meeting the weight minimum, or breaching it, it would be advantageous to Renault and Mercedes to have to force Ferrari to add another 4kg high up in their car. 

We can assume they believe such a device is required to comply with the rules. Maybe Ferrari have a different viewpoint or another solution. 

We can also assume Renault and Ferrari Merc have tested other solutions and believe some kind of armour plating weighing in at that amount is the only solution. 

If a Ferrari turbo goes pop and debris are showered into the crowd, and it emerges Ferrari were in contravention of a rule which would have prevented this, then the Scuderia will be in some hot soup. So I would then further assume they have a solution that they are happy with. 

 

Corrected in edit

Edited by Treads, 24 January 2014 - 14:49.

[bonjon1979a]

Wonder why they make it qualifying only

 

could you have movable ballast for the race

 

In the race the cars have a hugely varying fuel weight. In qualifying you'd expect them to be running on fumes at some point so you'd get the 'true' weight distribution of the car.

[bonjon1979a]

Whatever the situation as regards Ferrari / Merc / Renault meeting the weight minimum, or breaching it, it would be advantageous to Renault and Mercedes to have to force Ferrari to add another 4kg high up in their car. 

We can assume they believe such a device is required to comply with the rules. Maybe Ferrari have a different viewpoint or another solution. 

We can also assume Renault and Ferrari have tested other solutions and believe some kind of armour plating weighing in at that amount is the only solution. 

If a Ferrari turbo goes pop and debris are showered into the crowd, and it emerges Ferrari were in contravention of a rule which would have prevented this, then the Scuderia will be in some hot soup. So I would then further assume they have a solution that they are happy with. 

spot on.

[Ferrari2183]

Of course, but that's a complete non-sequitur in relation to this discussion. It'd be like saying, 'if you have too much downforce at the rear, you have to balance it out at the front'. All true but bears no relation to this discussion.

 

There is no discussion of weight needing to be balanced out or added or limits changed. Merc and Renault have this casing on their cars already. The cars will be balanced with this 3-4kg in place ALREADY. This isn't about them trying to push something through to help with their weight distribution. It's about them not wanting Ferrari to have an advantage with regards to COG by not having the protective casing. That is all this is, nothing more.

But this is exactly the point. The teams using these engines have been rumoured to be struggling with weight, so whether they've factored this into their design is irrelevant. It is my suspicion that by getting this mandated it would force Ferrari into falling in line with their initial argument for a total weight increase.

 

A mandated 5 kg increase in weight at the rear could throw Ferrari's well calculated balance off should total weight remain unchanged.

[Timstr11]

I believe this is not simple debris.

This is about a Turbo spinning at a whopping maximum of 125000 RPM!!!

If that becomes unseated it could cause quite a bit more damage.

 

I remember reading about the high RPM Williams flywheel needing a special casing to avoid this type of problem.

[bonjon1979a]

But this is exactly the point. The teams using these engines have been rumoured to be struggling with weight, so whether they've factored this into their design is irrelevant. It is my suspicion that by getting this mandated it would force Ferrari into falling in line with their initial argument for a total weight increase.

 

A mandated 5 kg increase in weight at the rear could throw Ferrari's well calculated balance off should total weight remain unchanged.

 

You're a bit obsessed with the notion that the other teams want the minimum weight lifted as per your first post in response to this 'More lobbying to increase weight...'

 

There is no lobbying for weight to be increased. The limit won't be changed. No one is asking for that. Read what Treads wrote. It sums it all up perfectly and succinctly. Incidentally, I really enjoy this time of year when you seem to get something fixed in your head and no amount of logic, evidence or reasoning will shift it.

As I said, Treads has summed it all up perfectly and I shall withdraw from all this now!

[SealTheDiffuser]

I think it is not about the minimum weight, it is about only about COG advantage Ferrari has by not using protection.

[bonjon1979a]

I think it is not about the minimum weight, it is about only about COG advantage Ferrari has by not using protection.

Exactly.

[mlsnoopy]

So it begins.

 

I think it is not about the minimum weight, it is about only about COG advantage Ferrari has by not using protection.

 

What advantage are you talking about? It's about safety not mass. 

[P123]

Newey previously stated that the only team who voted against an increase in the minimum weight was Mercedes, so I doubt that is the motivation behind this.  Nor will it necessarily mean 'more' weight in terms of going over the limit- it depends on what, if any, ballast the teams have to play with.

[bonjon1979a]

So it begins.

 

 

What advantage are you talking about? It's about safety not mass. 

Merc and Renault have a shroud for safety which is high up in the engine and weighs 3-4kg. Ferrari don't have a shroud as they don't believe it's necessary and therefore have a COG advantage as they don't have that extra 3-4kg that high up on the engine.

[Seanspeed]

4 days before testing for the new testing season starts.

 

That's actually quite nice of Mercedes and Renault to pull this kind of thing so early.  I'd have thought they'd wait til 4 days prior to the 1st GP, as is typically F1 cutthroat etiquette.  

[bonjon1979a]

4 days before testing for the new testing season starts.

 

That's actually quite nice of Mercedes and Renault to pull this kind of thing so early.  I'd have thought they'd wait til 4 days prior to the 1st GP, as is typically F1 cutthroat etiquette.  

I'm sure it's just the start - by the time Australia comes around it'll be a bloodbath!

[mlsnoopy]

Merc and Renault have a shroud for safety which is high up in the engine and weighs 3-4kg. Ferrari don't have a shroud as they don't believe it's necessary and therefore have a COG advantage as they don't have that extra 3-4kg that high up on the engine.

 

The problem is that nobody knows how the weight of individual engines is distributed. That is why I think that is wrong to talk about some kind of advantage. But if Ferrari will be forced to add a protective shroud to the engine, than we can say they will be disadvantaged. 

[bonjon1979a]

The problem is that nobody knows how the weight of individual engines is distributed. That is why I think that is wrong to talk about some kind of advantage. But if Ferrari will be forced to add a protective shroud to the engine, than we can say they will be disadvantaged. 

if you like

[Ferrari2183]

Newey previously stated that the only team who voted against an increase in the minimum weight was Mercedes, so I doubt that is the motivation behind this.  Nor will it necessarily mean 'more' weight in terms of going over the limit- it depends on what, if any, ballast the teams have to play with.

Ferrari were against the weight increase.

 

http://grandprix247....limit-increase/

[Ferrari2183]

You're a bit obsessed with the notion that the other teams want the minimum weight lifted as per your first post in response to this 'More lobbying to increase weight...'

 

There is no lobbying for weight to be increased. The limit won't be changed. No one is asking for that. Read what Treads wrote. It sums it all up perfectly and succinctly. Incidentally, I really enjoy this time of year when you seem to get something fixed in your head and no amount of logic, evidence or reasoning will shift it.

As I said, Treads has summed it all up perfectly and I shall withdraw from all this now!

I'm not obsessed with anything... It is well known that every team in the paddock, bar one, wants the weight increased immediately and not in 2015.

 

Autosport were under the impression that Mercedes was the one team blocking the move when it has been Ferrari all along.

 

http://www.autosport...t.php/id/111713

Edited by Ferrari2183, 24 January 2014 - 15:49.

[Crossmax]

Not only will it increase the Ferrari engine's COG, but if Ferrari have just about managed to produce a PU at 145 Kg and are then forced to add a shield at 3-4 Kg, they will have 3-4 Kg less to play with in ballast.

[alfa1]

5.18.5

Measures must be taken to ensure that in the event of failure of the turbine wheel any

resulting significant debris is contained within the car.

 

 

Not at all clear to me how the scrutineers at the track are going to be able to determine whether a team complies with this rule.

Scrutineer: Do you have such measures in place?

Team: Of course we do. Its really strong, mate.

 

Furthermore its not clear to me what happens if we get half way through the season and a bit of debris escapes after a blowup.

Is it just a DQ from that weekend?   The FIA have historically not liked to go back and change previous race results.

 

A "standard debris shield" would solve these issues.

[fabr68]

If the Mercedes and Renault engine design are prone to "exploding" I would think they need to change their design rather than forcing Ferrari non-exploding engine to hurt their car design

[Ferrari2183]

Not at all clear to me how the scrutineers at the track are going to be able to determine whether a team complies with this rule.
Scrutineer: Do you have such measures in place?
Team: Of course we do. Its really strong, mate.

Furthermore its not clear to me what happens if we get half way through the season and a bit of debris escapes after a blowup.
Is it just a DQ from that weekend? The FIA have historically not liked to go back and change previous race results.

A "standard debris shield" would solve these issues.

All good and well if discussed or brought to attention earlier. Days before testing starts is quite disgusting.

[MLC]

Not at all clear to me how the scrutineers at the track are going to be able to determine whether a team complies with this rule.

Scrutineer: Do you have such measures in place?

Team: Of course we do. Its really strong, mate.

 

Furthermore its not clear to me what happens if we get half way through the season and a bit of debris escapes after a blowup.

Is it just a DQ from that weekend?   The FIA have historically not liked to go back and change previous race results.

 

A "standard debris shield" would solve these issues.

 

 

Typically, a destructive test called a 'burst test' is performed. The blade roots on the turbine wheel are weakened and then the unit is sped up until it fails. The outer casing is then inspected to make sure that it has contained the liberated pieces if the wheel. This is done for many forms of rotating equipment in various industries.

 

This wouldn't be done at the track. It would be similar to the crash test homologating the monocoque. Whether such a thing is actually done, I don't know. But this is how Ferrari can show a redundant guard is not necessary.

[ray b]

a bullet proof vest type material shouldn't mass 3-4 K on a 1.6L turbo

 

btw if the exploding bits hit the driver or fuel/oil tank is that contained within the car ?

[Timstr11]

People, I don't think it's about exploding but much more about a mass spinning at 125000 rpm (that's the max allowed speed of the turbine).

Sounds like a very dangerous thing if it becomes unseated in full flight.

[OneAndOnly]

Merc and Renault have been bitching about power unit min weight for some time. This is just another try to force FIA to change rules because it suits them. "Safety concerns" is the way to go.

Or we shall all believe that they realized turbo charger can explode now!? If that's the case then they should be banned from grid for real safety reasons. 

[bonjon1979a]

Merc and Renault have been bitching about power unit min weight for some time. This is just another try to force FIA to change rules because it suits them. "Safety concerns" is the way to go.

Or we shall all believe that they realized turbo charger can explode now!? If that's the case then they should be banned from grid for real safety reasons. 

You really need to read what's going on instead of this hysterical reaction 'it's disgusting' merc and renault are bitching etc how they're trying to change the rules. No one is trying to change the rules. No one is asking for a weight increase. Ferrari won't have to do or add anything to their car if the FIA deem their system safe enough. In fact, Merc and Renault might end up taking theirs off as well. They've quite rightly asked for clarification because both Merc and Renault found it necessary to add this shield to meet the ruling. If Ferrari have managed to do it without adding the shield then, great for them, they have nothing to worry about. So everyone take a deep breath and wait to see what happens...

Edited by bonjon1979a, 24 January 2014 - 18:39.

[rodlamas]

It's just plain lobbying. Why has this only been brought up now?

 

I haven't read the technical regulations but it's likely that an increase in weight of this magnitude around the rear of the car will necessitate an increase in overall weight for weight distribution purposes.

 

Anyway, the engine cover can just be reinforced judging from the regulation you just posted. I doubt the debris will make it through the engine cover as is in any event.

This is called Rotor Non-Containement.

 

There's a classic Dc-10 aircraft failure that claimed the life os some 100 people after they tried to land the plane with asymmetric thrust.