Yoda McFly

Ferrari's Magic Gas!

18 posts in this topic

First of, this is not a "bash Ferrari" post; I'm asking honest questions, that I believe deserve honest answers, from someone ...

So, can one of you engineering or physicist types explain why Ferrari's Magic Gas (I won't name it, in case that's revealing IP, but pretty much everyone knows what it is or how to find what it is ...) is superior to the pure Nitrogen that's been used for however long ...?

Tangential question: How could this choice of gas possibly be a "secret"? It would absolutely require the knowledge of, if not the outright assistance of Bridgestone to pull off using a different gas to inflate the tyres.

If the tyres are supposed to be "spec" ... Then how is inflating them with a different gas than everyone else, and not having the B'stone engineers tell everyone else ... ("Hey, teh horsey-dudes are using something diff'r'nt than everyone else!") ... keeping with the letter (let alone the spirit) of the "spec tyre" rule?

So, two questions: What's superior about the specific gas Ferrari uses (used?) v. good ol' N? And, how is one team inflating their tyres differently than everyone else in keeping with the concept of spec tyres?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of, this is not a "bash Ferrari" post; I'm asking honest questions, that I believe deserve honest answers, from someone ...

So, can one of you engineering or physicist types explain why Ferrari's Magic Gas (I won't name it, in case that's revealing IP, but pretty much everyone knows what it is or how to find what it is ...) is superior to the pure Nitrogen that's been used for however long ...?

Tangential question: How could this choice of gas possibly be a "secret"? It would absolutely require the knowledge of, if not the outright assistance of Bridgestone to pull off using a different gas to inflate the tyres.

If the tyres are supposed to be "spec" ... Then how is inflating them with a different gas than everyone else, and not having the B'stone engineers tell everyone else ... ("Hey, teh horsey-dudes are using something diff'r'nt than everyone else!") ... keeping with the letter (let alone the spirit) of the "spec tyre" rule?

So, two questions: What's superior about the specific gas Ferrari uses (used?) v. good ol' N? And, how is one team inflating their tyres differently than everyone else in keeping with the concept of spec tyres?

Well aparently CO2 is better concerning the tires degradation vs. Nitrogen.

Spec tires means just spec tires not spec/standard utilisation. How you inflate them, how the chassis brings them into optimal temperature, how it manages them, how it makes them bite the ground is the non-spec part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As i once read -- some things might look so trivial, but it takes a genious to figure out to use them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well aparently CO2 is better concerning the tires degradation vs. Nitrogen.

Spec tires means just spec tires not spec/standard utilisation. How you inflate them, how the chassis brings them into optimal temperature, how it manages them, how it makes them bite the ground is the non-spec part.

Sounds right to me, good answers DOF!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spec tires means just spec tires not spec/standard utilisation. How you inflate them, how the chassis brings them into optimal temperature, how it manages them, how it makes them bite the ground is the non-spec part.

A little more clarification on DOF's input:

This is from the F1 UnSporting Regulations:

Article 25.1.b:

"each tyre supplier must undertake to provide no more than two specifications of dry-weather tyre at each Event, each of which must be of one homogenous compound Uand visibly distinguishable from one another when a car is on the trackU. Any modification or treatment, other than heating, carried out to a tyre or tyres will be considered a change of specification ;"

So adding a gas to the tyres is legal, but presumably that makes it a certain 'spec' and it now becomes one of the two specifications called out in the UnSporting Regulations. If they add the gas to both hard and soft then they must run the gas for the whole weekend. That same rule applies to testing and practice but, of course, those are governed by their own requirements for the number of 'specs' allowed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
First of, this is not a "bash Ferrari" post; I'm asking honest questions, that I believe deserve honest answers, from someone ...

So, can one of you engineering or physicist types explain why Ferrari's Magic Gas (I won't name it, in case that's revealing IP, but pretty much everyone knows what it is or how to find what it is ...) is superior to the pure Nitrogen that's been used for however long ...?

Tangential question: How could this choice of gas possibly be a "secret"? It would absolutely require the knowledge of, if not the outright assistance of Bridgestone to pull off using a different gas to inflate the tyres.

If the tyres are supposed to be "spec" ... Then how is inflating them with a different gas than everyone else, and not having the B'stone engineers tell everyone else ... ("Hey, teh horsey-dudes are using something diff'r'nt than everyone else!") ... keeping with the letter (let alone the spirit) of the "spec tyre" rule?

So, two questions: What's superior about the specific gas Ferrari uses (used?) v. good ol' N? And, how is one team inflating their tyres differently than everyone else in keeping with the concept of spec tyres?

I think choosing ceratain gas is matter of tradeoffs and it will be considered in the same "bag" with weight distribution, suspension work, engine specs, etc.

regarding if the teams are allowed to use different gas, is not clear to me. Maybe we can aske the FIA a rule clarification.... NO, Noohhh... TF1 will be at risk: they will think we are in possesion of some classified info and we haven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think choosing ceratain gas is matter of tradeoffs and it will be considered in the same "bag" with weight distribution, suspension work, engine specs, etc.

regarding if the teams are allowed to use different gas, is not clear to me. Maybe we can aske the FIA a rule clarification.... NO, Noohhh... TF1 will be at risk: they will think we are in possesion of some classified info and we haven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've quoted the rule and it clearly states that you may make modifications, but those would constitute a new 'spec'. Perhaps you have me on 'ignore'...?

Is a new skill I

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think choosing ceratain gas is matter of tradeoffs and it will be considered in the same "bag" with weight distribution, suspension work, engine specs, etc.

regarding if the teams are allowed to use different gas, is not clear to me. Maybe we can aske the FIA a rule clarification.... NO, Noohhh... TF1 will be at risk: they will think we are in possesion of some classified info and we haven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To my question about why CO2 ... Obviously, they wouldn't try it if there weren't some superiority. I want to know from a physics or engineering standpoint, what would make it superior?

DOF said above, that it would lead to lower degradation of the tires on the car....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm thinking about suspension. A gas is compressible. Think Hydragas suspension. What influences the choice of gas? Different gases have different characteristics. Maybe more to do with bump absorption than degradation of carcass. I have no idea what I'm talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To my question about why CO2 ... Obviously, they wouldn't try it if there weren't some superiority. I want to know from a physics or engineering standpoint, what would make it superior?

It

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do you think I was circumspect about naming the gas? :blush:

On different teams using different gas: I could accept that it was the teams' right to experiment with inflation gas if the teams purchased the tyres from the supplier and were responsible for mounting, etc. However, as I understand it, F1 works similarly to ChampCar in this respect. The teams provide their wheels to Bridgestone, B'stone employees take care of mounting, balancing, inflating, etc... Then, when the tyres come off the wheel, they go back to Bridgestone ... Effectively, they are under manufacturer control or observation the entire time; they are not the property of the team.

That's why I say that it takes involvement from Bridgestone to "try something different", and if tyres are meant to be 'spec', and 'a great equalizer', then how does one team doing something different with their tyres that could gain them an advantage, and that was certainly considered "intellectual property" by the FIA, fit within the 'specification'?

To my question about why CO2 ... Obviously, they wouldn't try it if there weren't some superiority. I want to know from a physics or engineering standpoint, what would make it superior?

I remember reading an article about Brawn inquiring certain things from Bridgestone in an F1 racing mag, working with them, pushing the envelope, what could and could'nt be done, trying different methods to GET AN ADVANTAGE. Maybe team principals do that and achieve certain research "specifications" that they claim as their own(IP).

I don't know, I'm not so good with the tech business... :mellow: I'll have a look at that article again....

Edited by BradSpeedMan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now