Skip to main content
HOME   |   ABOUT   |   NEWS   |   TECH ARTICLES   |   AT THE TRACK   |   REVIEWS   |   VIDEOS   |   CONTACT ME

Ferrari Patents New Hybrid Turbo to Control Noise


F1 cars. BMW M3/M4. BMW M5. McLaren. Audi RS5. Those are just a few examples of cars whose noises lay victims in the path of turbocharging. But, they say the future is turbocharging. Or the present, really, if you look at how many cars already are turbo, some even base and optional engines. There are a lot of technical pros and cons to turbocharging, which I won't get into here. but one of the biggest subjective downsides is the noise. Some dismiss it, if the specs and the numbers are good. Some prefer all the whine, whooshing, and hissing. Some, however, mourn the death of N/A noise. Everyone who is even slightly familiar with what I like in cars knows I'm in the last group, and it turns out to be a special group because Ferrari engineers and/or their customers are in the group as well, because Ferrari is patenting a technology that makes turbo engines sound better.

The system is a hybrid (no pun intended) between an electric supercharger and a traditional turbo. An electric supercharger uses an electric motor driven compressor wheel to make boost on demand. Traditional turbos use a turbine wheel in the exhaust connected by a shaft to a compressor wheel in the intake, where the turbine wheel extracts energy from the exhaust stream and uses it to compress the intake charge. Ferrari's system uses a turbine wheel like a traditional turbo to extract energy from the exhaust, but instead of a direct mechanical connection (i.e. shaft) to the compressor wheel, it is connected to an electric motor that is used to charge a battery. Essentially, it turns the exhaust side of a traditional turbo into a small electric generator. The intake side is basically identical to an electric (centrifugal) supercharger, where there is an electric motor that is used to power a compressor wheel to generate boost when needed. 

There are obvious benefits to this system compared to both of an electric supercharger and a traditional turbo. A pure electric supercharger does not capture any energy in the exhaust, letting it all go to waste through the tailpipe(s). If used with an electric/ICE hybrid powertrain, it can run more efficiently on energy captured through a regenerative braking system instead of power from the engine, but there is still no exhaust energy recovery. Here, the turbine wheel can capture exhaust energy and store it in a battery or a battery pack for later use. Compared to a traditional turbo, the main benefit is independent operation of turbine and compressor wheel. Energy can be captured from the exhaust whenever needed and boost can be made on demand as soon as required, so lag could be eliminated instead of having to wait for the engine to rev up, exhaust flow to build, and overcome compressor wheel mass (inertia).


The only downside? A little extra weight compared to both systems, but that's a (likely, small) penalty I'll happily take. The system may also be a little more complex, but we are into turbocharging and hybrid powertrains, so simplicity is thrown out the window. Adding a couple of electric motors (or one compared to electric superchargers) is a small added complexity that's worth the gains in my opinion, especially considering that electric motors are hugely reliable devices. So how, you might ask, is Ferrari changing the noise? This is where it gets even more creative.

Since the turbine and compressor wheel are independent, the speed of the turbine wheel and how much energy is extracted from the exhaust - both are factors directly related to noise - could be varied to control the exhaust noise without affecting the intake side. In other words, you could control the turbine wheel on the exhaust side to give you the noise you want while using energy from the battery to drive the compressor wheel and make the exact amount of boost you need. Of course, there should be an expected efficiency loss if you're not wasting exhaust energy to control noise. However,
Ferrari says in its filing that the “control method can only be used when desired,” so it "has no relevant negative effect on the overall energy efficiency.” Read that last bit again in an Italian accent and you'll believe it.

Joking aside, I do think that, overall, the system will definitely be more efficient than electric superchargers and perhaps even a little more efficient than traditional turbos. The noise? That alone is worth any downsides. The elimination of lag is icing on the cake. Just don't tell AMG's that they can make their engines sound even better, because they seem to rely on magic right now to continue to make their new V8's that are (twin) turbocharged sound as glorious as ever.. 

Source: US Patent & Trademark Office


Comments







Does An Aftermarket Grille Really Increase Airflow?
I put a Saleen S281 grille to the test to answer that question.

Stock Suspension S197 Mustang With Square 305/30/19's
What you need to fit a proper size square tire setup.

How Limited Slip Diffs Make You Faster on Track
What you need to know about how they put power down and pros and cons.

Can Telemetry Explain Schumacher's Talent?
A comparison between Schumacher's and then team mate Herbert's data.






Cayman GT4 Track Review
The first Cayman with proper (911-challenging) power.

Is an EcoBoost Mustang any good on Track?
Two days at the track in a Mustang short 4 cylinders.

2016 BMW M4 DCT Track Review
It's quick (properly quick). But is it fun?

Can a stock Golf Diesel handle a Track Day?
Not your every day track beater.




🔥 Most Visited This Week

Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2's vs Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R's

I never thought I'd ever run Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2's on my 2012 Boss 302. The cost is astronomical and they are supposed to last the least of anything comparable. So how did I end up with (nearly) fresh Sport Cup 2's? A complete fluke. I came across a lightly used set with only a few hundred miles and no track time; 305/30/19 takeoffs from a GT Performance Pack Level 2 (GT PPL2). I knew my 71R's were getting very worn before the season started and likely wouldn't last the whole season, even this short one. The price was far better than a new set of RE-71R's, a little more than half, and local Time Attack rules (Canadian Automobile Sport Clubs) recently made 180 and 200 TW tires equivalent, meaning no PAX or PIP point penalty for going with 180 TW tire like the Pilot Sport Cup 2's. I have been very curious about how PSC2's compare to RE 71R's but I stayed away due to their being painfully expensive and, up to last year, their 180 TW rating would

GTR vs Evo X vs STI: which has the best AWD system?

A few weeks ago, I made a post explaining  mainstream AWD system types and how they compare , pros and cons, etc. including some simple diagrams to show where the power goes and how much. As promised, this post will focus on specific cars and what AWD systems they use, especially ones that that have more or less been defined by their AWD systems, and the best place to start may be with a bombshell; the Nissan GT-R. Nissan GT-R (R35) The GT-R has built a reputation around having monster traction and very approachable performance, thanks to its AWD system - Advanced Total Traction Engineering System for All-Terrain (ATTESA) - and what it can do for you. But the GT-R doesn't actually use the most mechanically sophisticated type of AWD systems discussed in the previous article, namely a "true" AWD with a centre differential. Instead, it uses a clutch pack to transfer power. RWD-based clutch-type AWD schematic - Rams Eye The Track Guy © The R32, R33, and R34 Sky

Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R Track Review

2012 Boss 302 on square 305/30/19 RE-71R's at AMP - Graham MacNeil © For better or for worse, I have heard and read so much about RE-71R's. Everyone swears by the grip but complains about the wear. Generally speaking, the pros are: 1. They grip as well or better than most R comps. 2. They don't wear as quickly as R comps if driven occasionally on the street. 3. They work better in the rain than R comps. The cons were limited to overheating quickly when used on track (being an autocross tire) and wearing too fast on heavy cars like mine. In the popular 200 TW category, they are faster than the popular Hankook RS-4's and BFGoodrich Rival S's according to published Tire Rack Tests. According to plenty of reviews, they are also faster than well established R comps like R888R's (which don't seem to work too well on heavy cars anyway) and the venerable NT01's. But I was still hesitant for a while until I talked to a tire tech support gentleman

How would a Mustang 3.5L EcoBoost compare to the 5.0L V8?

Ever wonder how a 3.5 litre EcoBoost might fair against the 5.0 litre V8 in the Mustang? Of course you have. Ever since Ford dropped it in the F150 (and perhaps well before), everyone has been wondering how it would perform. There are basically two camps; those who think it would be awesome because of tuneability and power potential and those who think it means the death of the V8 in the Mustang. If you are in the latter group, we seem to be good so far with continuous upgrades to the 5.0 litre Coyote and the brand new Shelby GT500 which still uses a supercharged V8 as it has been for over a decade and multiple iterations. But what if... Well, it seems we are closer than ever to finding out the answer to that question. American Trucks recently got together two crew cab, short box, 4x4 F150's but one has the 5.0 litre V8 and the other has the 3.5 litre EcoBoost V6. There has been a few comparisons between 5.0 litre and 3.5 litre EB F150's, but this seems to be the most di