Scuderia Ferrari SF16-H Development thread.

[WS6TransAm01]

We built a supercar exotic v-12 engine for a customer rated at around 600 horsepower. In comparison the CAT c16 is a 15.8 litre beast found in large heavy equipment. Its horsepower is also around 600 horsepower. Which one is more powerful? They are the same. They both have the capacity to do the same amount of work. Its just that the power in the diesel is made at a whole lot less rpms and so its more suitable and dependable.

Yes the calculates hp is the same, but that is not a function of how much work an engine can do.

Once again, it's simple math (and physics). If we want to calculate the amount of Work that can be done or the distance an object can be moved, we need to know the force, mass of the object and angle of the force when applied to the object. Other forces like friction would act opposite to the applied force. Horsepower is not a force. So, you would have to multiply the HP number by 5252 and divide by the rpm, to get the actual Force. Oh crap. That's torque. You see your problem? In order to know how much work an engine can do, you need to know its torque.

That v12 won't pull any a trailer full of goods. Regardless of what rpm u slip the clutch at. The C16 makes 2,050 ft lb or torque at 1,300rpm, which is why it's used in heavy equipment. It's low rpm is a function of air supply limitations. The torque curve calls off after 1,700r or so, there is no need to keep revving.

The engine in my car can physically rev to 8,000 or so but the torque curve falls off at 7200 because of lack of air due to the intake design the intake port on the cylinder and being naturally aspirated. So I shift at 7400, no point in revving higher because I won't make any more "power" it has nothing to do with longevity as the components will live at 8k just fine.

Once again, I'm not saying one is more important than another (Hp vs Torque) I'm just saying and engine's output is torque and the HP is a calculation. An engines a ability to move things is governed by how much torque it can produce.

When starting from a dead stop, you need torque to move you. Gears and transitions multiply torque, that's why automatic transmissions have Torque Converters and not Horsepower converters. If your engine can produce more torque at any given rpm, it will calculate to have more HP.

[phsyklone]

Any news about what upgrades we are bringing next race ?

[Rallyrob]

Yes the calculates hp is the same, but that is not a function of how much work an engine can do.

Once again, it's simple math (and physics). If we want to calculate the amount of Work that can be done or the distance an object can be moved, we need to know the force, mass of the object and angle of the force when applied to the object. Other forces like friction would act opposite to the applied force. Horsepower is not a force. So, you would have to multiply the HP number by 5252 and divide by the rpm, to get the actual Force. Oh crap. That's torque. You see your problem? In order to know how much work an engine can do, you need to know its torque.

That v12 won't pull any a trailer full of goods. Regardless of what rpm u slip the clutch at. The C16 makes 2,050 ft lb or torque at 1,300rpm, which is why it's used in heavy equipment. It's low rpm is a function of air supply limitations. The torque curve calls off after 1,700r or so, there is no need to keep revving.

The engine in my car can physically rev to 8,000 or so but the torque curve falls off at 7200 because of lack of air due to the intake design the intake port on the cylinder and being naturally aspirated. So I shift at 7400, no point in revving higher because I won't make any more "power" it has nothing to do with longevity as the components will live at 8k just fine.

Once again, I'm not saying one is more important than another (Hp vs Torque) I'm just saying and engine's output is torque and the HP is a calculation. An engines a ability to move things is governed by how much torque it can produce.

When starting from a dead stop, you need torque to move you. Gears and transitions multiply torque, that's why automatic transmissions have Torque Converters and not Horsepower converters. If your engine can produce more torque at any given rpm, it will calculate to have more HP.

I agree with much of what you say. Its important to note however that horsepower is the measurement of the torque to do work over time. How fast you can accelerate tells how much torque wad applied over time which we call work. The amount of work done over a set amount of time and distance(what we feel) is how we define how much power it has. You can have torque present and do no work and thus have something producing torque but no power. Because we want to know therefore how powerful something is we need to measure how much work the force of torque produces over distance and time. We call that "horsepower" which is another way of saying "torque applied over time and distance"- thats how powerful an engine is- how we define how much work is done. The v-12 in my scenerio is just as powerful as the CAT engine, they just provide that power at different rpms

[SS454]

The v-12 in my scenerio is just as powerful as the CAT engine, they just provide that power at different rpms

Except it's already been shown that what you say here is not true. Since horsepower is derived from a math equation, the measured power, and by definition the ability to do work comes from torque. The CAT C16 has about 5x as much torque as the V12 you talked about. Then there is the whole other discussion of AVERAGE power which is far more important than peak power.

[WS6TransAm01]

Correct. Average power is the area under the curve

If Ferrari can use this new combustion technology to increase torque at low RPM it will benefit at the launch and at exit to slow corners.

When launching a car from a dead stop, if you can do it at a lower rpm, if you have more low end torque you will be less proned to a bog. If your car lacks low end torque you will have to lunch at a higher rpm for several reasons. First, you will make more "power" at higher rpm. Second, once the clutch engages you will always suffer a loss of rpm, if u have more power down low, it's not as big an issue. If you don't launching higher will keep you in the power band but it's more whear on the clutch and it's a harder hit to the tires which causes a loss of traction.

I noticed this on my car. If I launch too low I don't spin at the start but I bog the motor and fall out of my power band, if I launch too high the added engine rpm translates to higher chance of wheel spin and broken parts.

If Ferrari came up with a trick to make more power down low, their launches should improve all other things being equal.

[Rallyrob]

Correct. Average power is the area under the curve

If Ferrari can use this new combustion technology to increase torque at low RPM it will benefit at the launch and at exit to slow corners.

When launching a car from a dead stop, if you can do it at a lower rpm, if you have more low end torque you will be less proned to a bog. If your car lacks low end torque you will have to lunch at a higher rpm for several reasons. First, you will make more "power" at higher rpm. Second, once the clutch engages you will always suffer a loss of rpm, if u have more power down low, it's not as big an issue. If you don't launching higher will keep you in the power band but it's more whear on the clutch and it's a harder hit to the tires which causes a loss of traction.

I noticed this on my car. If I launch too low I don't spin at the start but I bog the motor and fall out of my power band, if I launch too high the added engine rpm translates to higher chance of wheel spin and broken parts.

If Ferrari came up with a trick to make more power down low, their launches should improve all other things being equal.

Thats what I think Ferrari have achieved or have had achieved for quite some time. I believe they have found extra low end or found a way to translate it faster to the pavement.

[Rallyrob]

Except it's already been shown that what you say here is not true. Since horsepower is derived from a math equation, the measured power, and by definition the ability to do work comes from torque. The CAT C16 has about 5x as much torque as the V12 you talked about. Then there is the whole other discussion of AVERAGE power which is far more important than peak power.

Regardless that the CAT has roughly 4 times the torque more than the v-12 (a 7.4 litre naturally aspirated engine) they both generate the same peak power, or said another way- they both have the ability to move the same amount of weight over a set distance in a set amount of time.

[SS454]

Regardless that the CAT has roughly 4 times the torque more than the v-12 (a 7.4 litre naturally aspirated engine) they both generate the same peak power, or said another way- they both have the ability to move the same amount of weight over a set distance in a set amount of time.

What exotic V12 are you doing that's 7.4L?

Moving a given weight a set distance is torque. You then say at a given time, which would turn the torque to hp via math. However, the CAT makes 600 hp at 1300 rpm, and the V12 makes it at a much higher rpm, thus the do not both have the ability to the same amount of work.

As stated a 600 hp @ 8000 rpm engine will not pull the same weight as a 600 hp @ 1300 rpm engine because the torque figures are completely different. And torque is the only actual unit of measurable power, since HP is just a math equation derived from torque.

[cokata]

Big, high torque engines with low redline have flatter torque curve than a high revving engines. That has to do with the valve timing and lift, it is much more difficult to get good flow of air in the engine with a wide range of RPM than it's with narrow RPM.

A Ferrari V12 has much less torque than a diesel truck engine, but as long as it has proper gearing it will not be doing worse at towing a full trailer than the diesel engine. Anyone who was driven a car knows how big the difference is in acceleration even from 1st to 2nd gear.

[mark p]

What exotic V12 are you doing that's 7.4L?

Moving a given weight a set distance is torque. You then say at a given time, which would turn the torque to hp via math. However, the CAT makes 600 hp at 1300 rpm, and the V12 makes it at a much higher rpm, thus the do not both have the ability to the same amount of work.

As stated a 600 hp @ 8000 rpm engine will not pull the same weight as a 600 hp @ 1300 rpm engine because the torque figures are completely different. And torque is the only actual unit of measurable power, since HP is just a math equation derived from torque.

Hp is hp and is the power so torque x engine speed. One lot of 600 hp is no different to another irrespective of torque. The v12 example is not used to lug objects round as you have to rev too high to achieve the HP which wastes fuel and can lead to reliability issues hence the diesel engine is used. Torque is theoretical and can never be felt only extrapolated by taking the power figure and dividing by the engine speed. Even when torque starts to dip power can still increase if the engine can rev fast enough there is a point of equalibrium hence most cars produce max power after the torque figures start to drop. Whrn for example a Ferrari F12 produces full power it is not producing its peak torque that has already started to fall away. Basically if you have low down torque you do not need as many revs to produce the same power.

[tpe]

Can we return to development news? HP vs torque is interesting, but we are here to read news about the SF 16H

[Rallyrob]

What exotic V12 are you doing that's 7.4L?

Moving a given weight a set distance is torque. You then say at a given time, which would turn the torque to hp via math. However, the CAT makes 600 hp at 1300 rpm, and the V12 makes it at a much higher rpm, thus the do not both have the ability to the same amount of work.

As stated a 600 hp @ 8000 rpm engine will not pull the same weight as a 600 hp @ 1300 rpm engine because the torque figures are completely different. And torque is the only actual unit of measurable power, since HP is just a math equation derived from torque.

It was Jaguar v-12 that was bored and stroked.
Torque is a force. But to define how much work that force can do, such as lifting something, pulling something or accelerating an object, it tells us nothing until we know how slow or fast that weight was moved in a set distance in a set amount of time. That is power. For instance, I can apply 75 lbs of torque to my torque wrench on a bolt and do no actual work such as applying the force of 75 lbs to a bolt that has already been tightened to 75 lbs of torque. Its therefore just a reference to the amount of force applied. Now, another example- lets say I was to move that same torque wrench one revolution and it took a minute to do. I was exerting force of 75 lbs and we could therefore calculate how much power was made/used by the speed of my hand times the distance divided in the amount of time. If It took less time then it would be said to be more powerful and if it took a longer time it would be less powerful. Now, I can take that same wrench but make the handle twice as long and do the same work with half the force applied as long as I move twice as fast. At the bolt it feels the exact same force and turns at the same exact rate in the same amount of time even though I am now only exerting half the force in my arm but moving it twice as fast. This thus proves that force by itself doesnt mean anything without a reference to time and distance. Thats why we have "horsepower" because it states how much work can be moved in a set time over a set distance. As proved above in my analogy, something that produces half the torque can do the same exact amount of work if I just move or rotate twice as fast. This is why the v-12 has the same power as the CAT engine. They could both move a semi truck and trailer at the same rate up a mountain. Its just that they both do it with engine parts rotating at different speeds but the force felt at the wheel is the exact same.

[mardyrt]

The diesel engines are efficient not because they are working at lower RPM, but because of the diesel cycle and how the fuel is burned.
Also, diesel has a higher energy density than petrol, so you make more power from the same L of diesel compared to same L of petrol.
Torque is twisting force. Hp is a force x length x time. (In simple way of looking at it, petrol burns faster, so in a sense, you make more power per given time compared to diesel, so you get more Hp.)
You can make the same work from diesel or petrol engines. Only thing that makes diesel more efficient is the cycle and how it burn the diesel fuel. I can explain that if you guys want me to later.
Its my 2 cents as a mechanical engineer and a automotive engineer.

[phsyklone]

This is starting to be a bore

[WS6TransAm01]

This is starting to be a bore

Agreed, Im done with it.

Bring in Bahrain and hopefully some changes to the SF16-H

[Rallyrob]

I hope they bring an aero upgrade and a more dependable turbo unit. I know we have the power now but there are a lot of straights where speed is a premium. Mercedes is in trouble if they dont do something about their brakes this year.

[PURE PASSION]

MA said that we will bring our 1st upgrades in Bahrain but what it will be no one knows.

[FerrariF60]

I hope they bring an aero upgrade and a more dependable turbo unit. I know we have the power now but there are a lot of straights where speed is a premium. Mercedes is in trouble if they dont do something about their brakes this year.

i hope they actually DON"T, and that thye'll be hindered by brake problems more often...but in actuality they are a BIG team just like FERRARI is and i'm sure they'll have that fixed sooner rather then later...:(

[phsyklone]

Christian Horner seems to think Redbull will match ferrari come business end of the season with their update. The way he's saying its like Ferrari will just stand still and wait for others to catch up. I think he's been smoking teabags for the past few weeks

[vetalo]

Christian Horner seems to think Redbull will match ferrari come business end of the season with their update. The way he's saying its like Ferrari will just stand still and wait for others to catch up. I think he's been smoking teabags for the past few weeks

He is just a Ferrari hater

[FerrariF60]

He is just a Ferrari hater

specially since Seb showed him the rear end and switched to Ferrari....LMAO

[PURE PASSION]

Christian Horner seems to think Redbull will match ferrari come business end of the season with their update. The way he's saying its like Ferrari will just stand still and wait for others to catch up. I think he's been smoking teabags for the past few weeks

He saw that in Australia they where not to far away in the stints with the same rubber and he thinks that since they consider themselves to have the very best chassis(not say the opposite but i think/hope that we will almost a match this year) and that they have the most tokens to upgreade the PU so he conclude that they will catch us.BUT he misjudge that it was not our true pace,the stints was on different time and on different strategy so not completelly comparible and that was not byfar the true potencial of our PU capability.so i think he will be surprised by our pace in the next paces when we manage to put everything in place and race on our true capability!!

[phsyklone]

It also could be that Ferrari's set up for Australia wasnt 100% as the drivers wanted it or could also be the varying temparatures of the track. Other so called experts that were analysing Ferraris pace during the race keep saying Merc is far ahead and could lap the entire field if they wanted to , that is just crap from my side. Ferrari hasnt unleashed the cracken as yet and they are there with merc. Like seb said we are not there yet theres way mo to come I think

[PURE PASSION]

It also could be that Ferrari's set up for Australia wasnt 100% as the drivers wanted it or could also be the varying temparatures of the track. Other so called experts that were analysing Ferraris pace during the race keep saying Merc is far ahead and could lap the entire field if they wanted to , that is just crap from my side. Ferrari hasnt unleashed the cracken as yet and they are there with merc. Like seb said we are not there yet theres way mo to come I think

This is also a RedBull opinion (Marco)

[Rallyrob]

The only real comparisons of race pace from Australia were the lap times in the first stint. All the rest is all conjecture. The thing that popped out to me the most was how fast the ss lost pace after initially being super fast. I honestly thought overall that the ss was the worst race pace tire out there over a minimum of 10 laps. Perhaps it was the conditions but it just didn't seem like the ss tires were of much use.

[mark p]

The only real comparisons of race pace from Australia were the lap times in the first stint. All the rest is all conjecture. The thing that popped out to me the most was how fast the ss lost pace after initially being super fast. I honestly thought overall that the ss was the worst race pace tire out there over a minimum of 10 laps. Perhaps it was the conditions but it just didn't seem like the ss tires were of much use.

Picking the right tyres were always going to be hard last race. Ferrari were running great but then throw in the red flag and it was so hard it was a pure gamble as to what was correct. Next 2 races should be dry so good chance to get a better handlecon things. I am expecting the updates this week to be small detail changes not huge visible differences.

[Rallyrob]

Picking the right tyres were always going to be hard last race. Ferrari were running great but then throw in the red flag and it was so hard it was a pure gamble as to what was correct. Next 2 races should be dry so good chance to get a better handlecon things. I am expecting the updates this week to be small detail changes not huge visible differences.

You are right, it was a gamble and if it hadnt of been for the red flag, we would have won on outright pace. So yes, small changes at this time are most logical.

[phsyklone]

All Ferrari power units including the 2015 spec for TR were reportedly turned down and this gives me hope as hamilton couldnt get pass Max V even with DRS. I know Aus is a difficult track to pass on but the pace showed by TR gives hope that once the PU is turned up maybe 0.1 tenth can be found on the 2015 unit I dont know about 2016 unit but I dont think we can get more than 0.3 tenths can be found there maybe 0.2 tenths but that would be enough for now to be a serious itch on mercs backside

[NyX]

All Ferrari power units including the 2015 spec for TR were reportedly turned down and this gives me hope as hamilton couldnt get pass Max V even with DRS. I know Aus is a difficult track to pass on but the pace showed by TR gives hope that once the PU is turned up maybe 0.1 tenth can be found on the 2015 unit I dont know about 2016 unit but I dont think we can get more than 0.3 tenths can be found there maybe 0.2 tenths but that would be enough for now to be a serious itch on mercs backside

sorry for this, but you should either write 1 tenth or 0.1 second.

[Jax]

sorry for this, but you should either write 1 tenth or 0.1 second.