Topic: Ferrari Engine Woes

[MG]

You know it. I know it. Even Stefan Domenicali knows it. Ferrari has "reliability issues" with its powerplant this year, or The Lump", as Steve Matchett calls it. While things are not critical just yet, now that F1 is a 9 month long endurance challenge, the issues could reach up to bedevil Ferrari later in this season. Its hard to win races or the constructor's battle if you are starting 10 places back every race.

How will Ferrari cope?   


APRIL 9, 2010
Ferrari admits engine problems

Ferrari may lead both F1 championships after the first three races, but alarm bells are at full blast in Maranello, following a series of unexpected engine problems affecting the team's V8 motors. Fernando Alonso lost a certain 9th place two laps from the end of the Malaysian Grand Prix with a spectacular engine failure - the latest of the woes affecting the Ferrari V8 - but Felipe Massa and both Sauber drivers, Kamui Kobayashi and Pedro de la Rosa, experienced problems with the same unit. De la Rosa didn't even get to the grid in Sepang after his engine stopped three corners after he left the pitline, while the young Japanese driver retired after just eight laps with a problem in the pneumatic system of the Ferrari V8.

Ferrari's Team Principal Stefano Domenicali admitted his concerns at the end of the Malaysian Grand Prix: "When we have a problem with reliability, this is always a worry and we have to make sure we can solve it as soon as possible. We don't know what is exactly the nature of Fernando's engine problem at the moment, and we don't know what is the situation on Sauber's engines. But what I can say now, with the information I have, is that these problems are all from different natures. This is, in a way, something that will add another reason to make sure we are on top of the reliability problems on the engine side. More than that at the moment is difficult to say."

It has to be reminded that Ferrari took the unusual step of replacing Alonso and Massa's engines from the cars just hours before the start of the race in Bahrain, after discovering overnight that their V8 had run above the recommended maximum temperature in qualifying. This meant both drivers lost an engine for the rest of the season in terms of qualifying sessions and races, as those units can only be used in Free Practice from then on. Alonso's situation is the worse, because that first engine of the season has already covered 1,141 kilometres and should only be capable of covering three more races in Free Practice - China, Spain and Monaco. The engine used on the race in Bahrain has not been used again, and has covered 319 kilometres, while the unit that blew up in Sepang had covered only 743 kilometres, when all Formula One engines are expected to have a life of 2,000 kilometres.

This means that for the remaining 16 races of the season Alonso has only five new engines to use, with one unit still capable of doing around 1,680 kilometres and another one, available only for Free Practice, with close to 860 kilometres left.

According to Italian sources, it's quite likely Alonso's engine failure in Malaysia was due to the gearbox problems he had during the entire race. The Spanish driver lost the gearbox-clutch connector as soon as he left the pre-grid on Sunday afternoon and struggled with no clutch on downshifts during the entire race. As he explained shortly after retiring, "I had to brake all the time in a weird way. I first had to get the gears down and then push the throttle hard so it would engage in the gear I wanted for each corner."

It's highly likely that while learning how to drive the car in such an unusual way Alonso may have over-revved the engine a couple of times, and it certainly looked like he couldn't get any gear engaged when he overshot his braking points while trying to pass Button just seconds before his retirement. When he finally got a gear in, Alonso's engine started to smoke and blew up in the next couple of seconds, so it's expected that when the engine is analyzed in Maranello the Italians will find out there was nothing wrong with the unit as such, but that it was the clutch problem that caused it to fail.

In any case there's no shortage of work at Ferrari's engine department, as de la Rosa and Kobayashi's engines are also due to be analyzed in the next couple of days, giving very little time for the technicians to sort the problems up before sending a new batch of engines to Shanghai at the start of next week.

[mpatrizio]

Interesting.....  As a Tifoso, I'm actually not that concerned YET....  One more engine failure on Alonso's car and I'll be concerned for him.

Besides, let's see how fast Red Bull is now that the FIA has "warned" or rather "clarified" the rules regarding movable suspension heights thru damper temperatures between qualifying and the race.  I don't expect there to be much of a difference, but if it costs RBR .01 seconds, that's enough to drop them a grid position or two.

[MG]

or rather "clarified" the rules regarding movable suspension heights thru damper temperatures between qualifying and the race.

Haven't seen anything on this today, although I did e-mail you about this last week. What's the deal with this?   

[Ultra]

I read a bit about this concern for Ferrari on Autosport.  Premature but does give one pause.

Like Mike I am curious to see if the qualy pace of the Red Bull is altered by this clarification.

Boring racing but a tight points finish amongst at least 3 of the teams and 4 or 5 drivers this year.  Drama via points but not racing isn't my idea of the racing ideal.  Bernie must not have got the memo.

[Bezor]

It seems the problem is with the transmission as far as FA is concerned, but the focus is on the engines if only because they are counted, but the number of transmissions is free, no?  Probably a mute point however.

The temp adjustable shocks are an interesting twist of information.  Possibly accounting for better times over the controversial "blown wing" on the merc

[MG]

Bernie must not have got the memo.

 

Bezor, the trannies are required to last 4 races. If one is changed, the teams incur a 5 grid spot penalty.  I don't agree with the engine rule or the tranny rule. They were instituted to help lower the costs of competition, but that is pure bullshit. The COST is in designing and prototyping the lump and the gearbox. Once that part is done, making MORE units is more cost effective than making fewer of them. Plus, too and also, if you have a few extras laying about the shop, you can sell them to others and make a little money off the deal.  Its more stupid rule making left over from the Mosley Era.   

As far as the dampers are concerned, Steve Matchett made reference to it in the pre-race show at Malaysia. The thinking is that Red Bull is using a super-cooled gas in their dampers at the start of qualifying. Because of its temperature, it takes up less volume, thereby decreasing ride height.  By race day, the gas has returned to normal temperature and normal volume, raising ride height by about 3/8 of an inch. While that difference may seem inconsequential to us, according to Matchett it can make all the difference in the world on a Formula One car.

I expect we will hear more about this as we head toward China. Whatever the legality of it, the idea is damn smart!   

[mpatrizio]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/82763

FIA: Ride height devices would be illegal

By Simon Strang    Wednesday, April 7th 2010, 15:24 GMT

The FIA has told Formula 1's teams that any self-levelling damper system used to regulate the ride height of a car between qualifying and the race during a grand prix weekend would be deemed illegal.

An FIA spokesman confirmed to AUTOSPORT that the sport's governing body made its position on the matter clear by faxing the teams last Sunday night with a clarification on the use of suspension in Formula 1.

"Any system device or procedure, the purpose and/or effect of which is to change the set-up of the suspension, while the car is under parc ferme conditions will be deemed to contravene art 34.5* of the sporting regulations," read the communication.

The move follows Red Bull Racing's stringent denial during the Malaysian Grand Prix weekend that it was using a clever system that lowered its cars in order to maxmise their potential during qualifying - with team boss Christian Horner insisting that not only did Red Bull not have such a device, but that it would protest any team that ran one.

The FIA gave the RB6 the all-clear after a thorough inspection during the weekend, but rival teams have suggested that Red Bull may have found a way to achieve the affect without the use of a mechanical system.

But another line in the communication suggests that any such solution may also be outlawed: "Furthermore we believe that any self levelling damper system is likely to contravene 3.15** of the technical regulations."

McLaren indicated last weekend that it intends to develop a system of its own that would allow it to exploit its car's low-fuel potential, while Mercedes' Ross Brawn has called for a clarification of the rules.

*Article 34.5 states: If a competitor modifies any part on the car or makes changes to the set up of the suspension whilst the car is being held under parc fermé conditions the relevant driver must start the race from the pit lane and follow the procedures laid out in Article 38.2.

** Article 3.15 states: Aerodynamic influence :

With the exception of the cover described in Article 6.5.2 (when used in the pit lane), the driver adjustable bodywork described in Article 3.18 and the ducts described in Article 11.4, any specific part of the car influencing its aerodynamic performance:

- must comply with the rules relating to bodywork

- must be rigidly secured to the entirely sprung part of the car (rigidly secured means not having any degree of freedom) ;

- must remain immobile in relation to the sprung part of the car.

Any device or construction that is designed to bridge the gap between the sprung part of the car and the ground is prohibited under all circumstances.

No part having an aerodynamic influence and no part of the bodywork, with the exception of the skid block in 3.13 above, may under any circumstances be located below the reference plane.

[mpatrizio]

And this is Red Bull's predictable response:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/82784

Horner: No impact from FIA ruling

By Steven English and Edd Straw    Friday, April 9th 2010, 12:29 GMT

Red Bull Racing team boss Christian Horner says the FIA's clarification that any system altering the suspension set-up of a car during parc ferme conditions is illegal "has no impact" on its RB6.

The team has been suspected by its rivals of being able to change the ride height of its car between qualifying and the race, but the FIA has declared the RB6 perfectly legal and on Sunday faxed all the F1 teams to confirm that anyone who implements such a system will be contravening the regulations.

Horner is adamant that it does not affect Red Bull. When asked by AUTOSPORT whether any changes would have to be made to the RB6, he replied: "No. The car that we will take to China will be exactly the same mechanically as it was in the first three races. It has absolutely no impact on the specification of our car."

And when asked whether he expected rivals to have to make changes, he said: "I don't know what they have on their cars, so all I know is that it has no impact on Red Bull, despite suggestions to the contrary."

He added that the accusations levelled at Red Bull are nothing more than a reflection on the team's early season pace.

"Fundamentally, we've got a fast car. The guys have done a good job and it's inevitably one of those things that people perhaps make accusations when you are running competitively," he said. "But I take it as a compliment. I'm sure if we were running 14th, similar accusations wouldn't be made."

Still, Horner welcomed the clarification from the FIA, which said: "Any system device or procedure, the purpose and/or effect of which is to change the set-up of the suspension, while the car is under parc ferme conditions will be deemed to contravene art 34.5* of the sporting regulations."

"Obviously the FIA has felt the necessity to clarify, and I think they've done exactly the right and the responsible thing, as it avoids a development rush in this area that inevitably wouldn't be cheap," Horner told AUTOSPORT.

"It's a sensible ruling. It inevitably saves teams spending a huge amount of money on R&D to create such systems and obviously if anybody does run one, it would be in clear breach of the technical regulations. We're more than happy with the FIA's verdict, which we fully support.

"With these things, sometimes the wording and the spirit of the regulations leaves different interpretations and it's great to see that on this occasion it has been clarified and that any form of active ride is therefore illegal."

[MG]

Well, you certainly seem to have all the bases well covered, MP. Thank you for that. Horner is right. If the Red Bulls were back battling with the Lotuses and HRT's, nobody would give a damn.     

By Steven English and Edd Straw

How veddy British. Even their names are so, so British!