18 replies to this topic

[Petroltorque]

I have become exasperated by the mendacious briefings spread by Horner and Marko in a bid to denigrate the Renault Power unit. I don't know which planet Marko is inhabiting but on planet earth where Melton in physics applies the deficit is considerably less than the 80bhp being claimed. IIRC from an article I read on 2002 levels of down force every 40bhp gain was equivalent to a one second improvement in lap time assuming no increase in drag. Around Bahrein Riciardo was around 1 second down. But given Red Bull's tendency to run more down force at the expense of drag the actual power deficit is probably between 30-40bhp. Since the deficit is on ERS side there's no easy fix. But at least it puts into stark relief the propaganda sprouted by RBR and mindlessly aged by the news channels.

[FatHippo]

I have become exasperated by the mendacious briefings spread by Horner and Marko in a bid to denigrate the Renault Power unit. I don't know which planet Marko is inhabiting but on planet earth where Melton in physics applies the deficit is considerably less than the 80bhp being claimed. IIRC from an article I read on 2002 levels of down force every 40bhp gain was equivalent to a one second improvement in lap time assuming no increase in drag. Around Bahrein Riciardo was around 1 second down. But given Red Bull's tendency to run more down force at the expense of drag the actual power deficit is probably between 30-40bhp. Since the deficit is on ERS side there's no easy fix. But at least it puts into stark relief the propaganda sprouted by RBR and mindlessly aged by the news channels.

 

I think RB's numbers are not so far off. They were the fastest around the corners at the final winter tests even though they were running a badly lobotomized engine. If anything, the Red Bull chassis makes the Renault unit look much better than it really is. Nail a Merc unit in the back of an RB chassis and F1 is dead in an instance.

I think the comparison TR <-> Merc is more realistic.

Due to their ridiculous downforce the RB's could really slaughter the Mercs in Monaco.

[Petroltorque]

With all the spotlight that Renault have had shed on them Ferrari has been overlooked. Their power unit is the worst on the grid. Overweight and gruntless. When I had pointed out that Ferrari's record with Turbo technology was poor everyone on the Ferrari thread said you can't judge them on past performance. How wrong they were.

 I would bet any amount that Renault will solve their problems in season. Ferrari on the other hand requires a hardware redesign; that's a 2015 job.

[eronrules]

With all the spotlight that Renault have had shed on them Ferrari has been overlooked. Their power unit is the worst on the grid. Overweight and gruntless. When I had pointed out that Ferrari's record with Turbo technology was poor everyone on the Ferrari thread said you can't judge them on past performance. How wrong they were.

 I would bet any amount that Renault will solve their problems in season. Ferrari on the other hand requires a hardware redesign; that's a 2015 job.

this

 

although Renault may also need to change hardware and follow mercs solution of putting turbo and compressor at opposite ends. also they need to sort their cooling requirements and ERS out too. but i do expect Renault PUs to be at least 90% of mercs PU by mid season.

[KingTiger]

I think RB's numbers are not so far off. They were the fastest around the corners at the final winter tests even though they were running a badly lobotomized engine. If anything, the Red Bull chassis makes the Renault unit look much better than it really is. Nail a Merc unit in the back of an RB chassis and F1 is dead in an instance.

I think the comparison TR <-> Merc is more realistic.

Due to their ridiculous downforce the RB's could really slaughter the Mercs in Monaco.

 

Mercedes and RB are about equal in corner speed. 

[Exb]

I agree the Ferrari power unit now probably looks the weakest of the 3 - Ferrari and Sauber especially look very difficult to drive when putting the power down so it suggests they have driveability issues in how they feed the power to the wheels - not sure about the collection/storage of energy, which is what Renault seem to have (as well as driveability issues, although they don't look as extreme as Ferrari). I think it just shows what a great job Mercedes have done.

I think people are underestimating the Mercedes chassis - it is not all in the engine, Mercedes are still several seconds clear of the other Mercedes powered teams as well. Red Bull are ahead of other Renault teams but not by that much (especially if you take into account the issues Lotus have had) and Toro Rosso are not far behind them. It could be a great fight between Red Bull and Mercedes if Renault get their power unit working at 100%

Edited by Exb, 07 April 2014 - 07:38.

[EthanM]

I have become exasperated by the mendacious briefings spread by Horner and Marko in a bid to denigrate the Renault Power unit. I don't know which planet Marko is inhabiting but on planet earth where Melton in physics applies the deficit is considerably less than the 80bhp being claimed. IIRC from an article I read on 2002 levels of down force every 40bhp gain was equivalent to a one second improvement in lap time assuming no increase in drag. Around Bahrein Riciardo was around 1 second down. But given Red Bull's tendency to run more down force at the expense of drag the actual power deficit is probably between 30-40bhp. Since the deficit is on ERS side there's no easy fix. But at least it puts into stark relief the propaganda sprouted by RBR and mindlessly aged by the news channels.

 

Newey quoted the exact same 80bhp figure, repeatedly. Go teach him some engineering with that article you read last year about 2002 levels of downforce.

[Petroltorque]

Just because Newey says the deficit is 80bhp does not make it so. The least level of evidence for a study is expert opinion. Let him quote the Harmonic analysis of the engines on full throttle to back up his statement.

[EthanM]

Just because Newey says the deficit is 80bhp does not make it so. The least level of evidence for a study is expert opinion. Let him quote the Harmonic analysis of the engines on full throttle to back up his statement.

 

Of course not, you and that article you read are far better at understanding what the Renault engine does

[Petroltorque]

I quoted the Autosport article to give any forummers who were interested a background to the basics of drag aero and power output. While I no design engineer I do know from extensive studies on Nuclear Magnetic Resonance that Fourier waveform analysis will give a clear indication of power units relative outputs based on engine harmonics. But as you kindly pointed out what on earth would I know?

[EthanM]

I quoted the Autosport article to give any forummers who were interested a background to the basics of drag aero and power output. While I no design engineer I do know from extensive studies on Nuclear Magnetic Resonance that Fourier waveform analysis will give a clear indication of power units relative outputs based on engine harmonics. But as you kindly pointed out what on earth would I know?

 

it would tell you what the ICE puts out. Won't tell you how much of the 160bhp they should be getting out of the electric motor they are actually getting. Which Newey actually has in numerical form on his desk. But again, who can argue with forumers that think they know better that the designer of the car what power his car is capable of delivering.

[Petroltorque]

As I understand it, The MGU-K, MGU-U are tightly integrated into the ICE such that they work in a sustain mode to augment the power output. At maximum engine mode the energy store contributes a further 60-70bhp. Since the take off point is the engine crank, it's that engine note that can be analysed as an energy wave to determine the output.

 I think one has  to be very careful accepting what any team says at face value. Red Bull have a history of mendacious briefing in order to get rules amended. We saw it in 2008 with the Renault power plant. Criticism of Pirelli in 2011 and 2013.  Briefings against the fuel flow meters. No one denies the Renault unit is down on power. By exaggerating  the deficit has a greater political effect. IIRC D'Israeli coned the term say an untruth often enough and it will be accepted as fact.

Edited by Petroltorque, 07 April 2014 - 14:44.

[Petroltorque]

So we now have it from the Horses mouth ( Taffin) that the Renault PU is 40bhp not 80bhp down on the Merc. I'm sure the latter was the case in preseason, but Red Bull started the season with the unit Lotus have just received for China.

[balmybaldwin]

So we now have it from the Horses mouth ( Taffin) that the Renault PU is 40bhp not 80bhp down on the Merc. I'm sure the latter was the case in preseason, but Red Bull started the season with the unit Lotus have just received for China.

Seriously? No wonder lotus are so far down on reliability. (4ce's used per car)

[Zava]

So we now have it from the Horses mouth ( Taffin) that the Renault PU is 40bhp not 80bhp down on the Merc. I'm sure the latter was the case in preseason, but Red Bull started the season with the unit Lotus have just received for China.

nope, red bull put their 2nd ICE in at bahrain, that was the upgraded ""only" 40 bhp down" version, before that they were down by 70 bhp.

[Petroltorque]

My information is that Red Bull Technologies had embedded software analysts at Viry in an effort to solve the ERS issues. Both Red Bull and STR received units that were upgraded in the first 3 races and distinct to the units being delivered to Lotus and Caterham.

[Gorma]

Mercedes and RB are about equal in corner speed.

Both Mercedes and Red Bull have said that Red Bull is faster.

[chipmcdonald]

I quoted the Autosport article to give any forummers who were interested a background to the basics of drag aero and power output. While I no design engineer I do know from extensive studies on Nuclear Magnetic Resonance that Fourier waveform analysis will give a clear indication of power units relative outputs based on engine harmonics. But as you kindly pointed out what on earth would I know?

 

With the engines assisted by the turbo depending on software, and in conjunctions *sometimes* with the battery, AND the engine over running to charge the battery AND the teams not being able to optimize the gearing per race track, AND not knowing how well their ERS is working, AND each team running their own fuel strategy - you can't know anything by the sound anymore. 

[Petroltorque]

I'm not sure about that assertion. Harmonic analysis software is now extremely powerful. Of course like any parameter one needs accurate baseline calibration.