Red Bull RB18

A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter do not belong here.
User avatar
etusch
131
Joined: 22 Feb 2009, 23:09
Location: Turkey

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

Wouter wrote:
18 Apr 2022, 12:56
SSScoffee wrote:
18 Apr 2022, 11:19
From his source:

Helmut Marko : "The problems we had in Bahrain were different from the problems we had in Australia and also different from the problems we had in winter testing. But according to Honda, we can count on the problems to be resolved before the next race."

And what about Verstappen's engine with which he retired in Melbourne? After all, there seemed to be flames coming from under the hood? That is the second good news for Verstappen:
"Everything is fine with that. The problem was not in the engine itself, but in the fuel line, which burst under high pressure. And we think that had to do with the problem of porpoising."

Porpoising??

"We do have good control of porpoising, but there are still small movements, mainly due to the way the car 'landed' again. We believe this was the main cause of the damage to the fuel line."
So they have to make sure that the car lands in a different way??? What does that mean and how will they do that?

A few days ago, Marko talked about a "complex" problem. I don't follow it anymore.
From 3 dnf from mainly same reason, that means that they have an issue with fuel line which starts from inside the fuel tank, and goes until to the engine. So he maybe right when he is saying cause of the issue and it looks like in this fuel system there are more issue than one or one area. So if it needs to be redesigned completely then it can be a bit complex too.

Henk_v
Henk_v
86
Joined: 24 Feb 2022, 13:41

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

Lines bursting from pressure is extremely unlikely. The pump head is inherently limited and designing a 10 bar line that would fail at a slightly higher pressure is next to impossible. At my job we have 0,3mm stainless pipes of 11mm diameter, designed for 30 bars. They fail @ approximately 230 bars from pressure alone.

Your milkshake straw can likely have around 20 bars before it fails.

Fatigue and chafe are the suspects, if the case is such that a rigid-flexible line failed. Might be resonance, might be something else. Cavitation is possible, but also unlikely in a line.

If chafe from bodywork were the case, than what would be the point sending the engine to Honda (unless you are looking for an excuse to do so)

Somehow it seems RB went adventurous in the design of the fuel system. Maybe they found something beneficial, maybe they have been trying to save some weight. Either the gain is substantial or the weight-saving pressure is enormous. You need a good reason befor you decide to take risks in critical systems that are firmly rule-bound aimed to prevent you from gaining an advantage.

The complexity in a technicus problem may not be the technical side at all. Very often the complexity is finding the root cause. If you are not alle to reproduce circumstances of failure in your laboratory, you are blind to any solution, as you can not test any effectiveness. Anybody werking in dynamica pressurized systems with a big thermal component can tell you that strengthening often makes the issue worse. So if you cant simulate the issue, you are looking at a complex problem.

User avatar
vorticism
323
Joined: 01 Mar 2022, 20:20

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

pierrre wrote:
19 Apr 2022, 09:33
vorticism wrote:
18 Apr 2022, 18:09
pierrre wrote:
18 Apr 2022, 14:33
Craig is making the same assessment as Stu. However, if the torsion bars terminate as a pivot, they no longer act as corner springs, but as a component of the heave device. No anchor to chassis. We'd have to consider why. F.e. corner spring rate vs proposed function of this linking device. It also has a miniscule amount of travel as evidenced by the displacement sensor. Otherwise it's just an extension of the rocker without flexibilty.
my suspicion is that the sensor is for data log in into their computer when an adjusment is made to the ride height. the kinematics would immediately be synchronized into their computer system with every adjustments...it makes it so much easier too. data gathering for heave may be done in more sensitive areas within the suspension especially on the heave damper. they usually have one there
In which case, the central element is just a more easily adjustable shim setting the ride height (via spring tension) by adjusting the torsion spring anchor angle.. Rather than relying on known thickness shims which would not require a displacement sensor, but which might be more time consuming to adjust. F.e. they might be able to adjust that central element without taking off the gearbox. It looks relatively simplistic compared to other suspension pistons we see, although I'm not sure what the adjustible internal mechanism would be.

However note that this link is floating between the two pivots i.e. not anchored to chassis, which means that the corner springs aren't traditional corner springs, since they act directly on one another. The only counter force for them, rather than the chassis, is the ARB.

And, again, all of the above assuming that we're not looking at rocker arm extensions.
Last edited by vorticism on 19 Apr 2022, 17:20, edited 1 time in total.
𓄀

matteosc
matteosc
30
Joined: 11 Sep 2012, 17:07

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

Henk_v wrote:
19 Apr 2022, 15:29
Lines bursting from pressure is extremely unlikely. The pump head is inherently limited and designing a 10 bar line that would fail at a slightly higher pressure is next to impossible. At my job we have 0,3mm stainless pipes of 11mm diameter, designed for 30 bars. They fail @ approximately 230 bars from pressure alone.

Your milkshake straw can likely have around 20 bars before it fails.

Fatigue and chafe are the suspects, if the case is such that a rigid-flexible line failed. Might be resonance, might be something else. Cavitation is possible, but also unlikely in a line.

If chafe from bodywork were the case, than what would be the point sending the engine to Honda (unless you are looking for an excuse to do so)

Somehow it seems RB went adventurous in the design of the fuel system. Maybe they found something beneficial, maybe they have been trying to save some weight. Either the gain is substantial or the weight-saving pressure is enormous. You need a good reason befor you decide to take risks in critical systems that are firmly rule-bound aimed to prevent you from gaining an advantage.

The complexity in a technicus problem may not be the technical side at all. Very often the complexity is finding the root cause. If you are not alle to reproduce circumstances of failure in your laboratory, you are blind to any solution, as you can not test any effectiveness. Anybody werking in dynamica pressurized systems with a big thermal component can tell you that strengthening often makes the issue worse. So if you cant simulate the issue, you are looking at a complex problem.
Completely agree. It may easily be some resonance that is difficult to replicate/simulate because of the influence of temperature and the effect of porpoising, both very difficult to simulate.

AR3-GP
AR3-GP
365
Joined: 06 Jul 2021, 01:22

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

Henk_v wrote:
19 Apr 2022, 15:29

Somehow it seems RB went adventurous in the design of the fuel system.
Fuel systems are pretty bang on standard these days. There is very little you can do. Minimum temperature and flow rate are tightly regulated. There is nothing interesting development wise in this area although I have heard claims about mixing of fuel at two different temperatures (probably to support some kind of atomization process).
A lion must kill its prey.

User avatar
Big Tea
99
Joined: 24 Dec 2017, 20:57

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

AR3-GP wrote:
20 Apr 2022, 01:03
Henk_v wrote:
19 Apr 2022, 15:29

Somehow it seems RB went adventurous in the design of the fuel system.
Fuel systems are pretty bang on standard these days. There is very little you can do. Minimum temperature and flow rate are tightly regulated. There is nothing interesting development wise in this area although I have heard claims about mixing of fuel at two different temperatures (probably to support some kind of atomization process).
Unless there is some way to get a little more fuel past the flow measure, like an expanding pipe :twisted:
When arguing with a fool, be sure the other person is not doing the same thing.

AR3-GP
AR3-GP
365
Joined: 06 Jul 2021, 01:22

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

Big Tea wrote:
20 Apr 2022, 01:36
AR3-GP wrote:
20 Apr 2022, 01:03
Henk_v wrote:
19 Apr 2022, 15:29

Somehow it seems RB went adventurous in the design of the fuel system.
Fuel systems are pretty bang on standard these days. There is very little you can do. Minimum temperature and flow rate are tightly regulated. There is nothing interesting development wise in this area although I have heard claims about mixing of fuel at two different temperatures (probably to support some kind of atomization process).
Unless there is some way to get a little more fuel past the flow measure, like an expanding pipe :twisted:
That would be outright cheating and I just don't think anyone is flying in this space of illegal fuel accumulation. The problem becomes once you start doing it, if you are gaining anything from it, then everyone else notices. If you aren't gaining much from it, then the risk of being caught isn't worth the reward.
A lion must kill its prey.

User avatar
Big Tea
99
Joined: 24 Dec 2017, 20:57

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

AR3-GP wrote:
20 Apr 2022, 01:44
Big Tea wrote:
20 Apr 2022, 01:36
AR3-GP wrote:
20 Apr 2022, 01:03


Fuel systems are pretty bang on standard these days. There is very little you can do. Minimum temperature and flow rate are tightly regulated. There is nothing interesting development wise in this area although I have heard claims about mixing of fuel at two different temperatures (probably to support some kind of atomization process).
Unless there is some way to get a little more fuel past the flow measure, like an expanding pipe :twisted:
That would be outright cheating and I just don't think anyone is flying in this space of illegal fuel accumulation. The problem becomes once you start doing it, if you are gaining anything from it, then everyone else notices. If you aren't gaining much from it, then the risk of being caught isn't worth the reward.
I agree, but I had to say it
When arguing with a fool, be sure the other person is not doing the same thing.

User avatar
ringo
230
Joined: 29 Mar 2009, 10:57

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

Henk_v wrote:
19 Apr 2022, 15:29
Lines bursting from pressure is extremely unlikely. The pump head is inherently limited and designing a 10 bar line that would fail at a slightly higher pressure is next to impossible. At my job we have 0,3mm stainless pipes of 11mm diameter, designed for 30 bars. They fail @ approximately 230 bars from pressure alone.

Your milkshake straw can likely have around 20 bars before it fails.

Fatigue and chafe are the suspects, if the case is such that a rigid-flexible line failed. Might be resonance, might be something else. Cavitation is possible, but also unlikely in a line.

If chafe from bodywork were the case, than what would be the point sending the engine to Honda (unless you are looking for an excuse to do so)

Somehow it seems RB went adventurous in the design of the fuel system. Maybe they found something beneficial, maybe they have been trying to save some weight. Either the gain is substantial or the weight-saving pressure is enormous. You need a good reason befor you decide to take risks in critical systems that are firmly rule-bound aimed to prevent you from gaining an advantage.

The complexity in a technicus problem may not be the technical side at all. Very often the complexity is finding the root cause. If you are not alle to reproduce circumstances of failure in your laboratory, you are blind to any solution, as you can not test any effectiveness. Anybody werking in dynamica pressurized systems with a big thermal component can tell you that strengthening often makes the issue worse. So if you cant simulate the issue, you are looking at a complex problem.
I think it's likely the coupling that failed and not the line itself.
I can see the line itself failing if these guys were being silly about saving weight and use aluminum tubing.
But with steel tube as you say not a chance that's going to fail.
Some of these joints can come loose from vibration and that's my suspicion.
Whoever designed the fuel system really made a mess of it. But from i saw these new sidepods i knew this car would have reliability issues. Everything that's normally stored below the radiator duct is now repackaged elseehere and crammed and competing for space with other parts. So we have more stuff in less space, more bends to snake through the cramped space, more heat, less room for relative motion etc. It sounds like a big packaging mess under this RB18.
For Sure!!

User avatar
vorticism
323
Joined: 01 Mar 2022, 20:20

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

Couplings should all be supplier parts, for both hoses and tubes.

"blame porpoising" might be the go-to response by team personnel this season. So you get to answer the journalists without telling them anything, because few in the press fully understands porpoising yet.
matteosc wrote:
19 Apr 2022, 17:19

Completely agree. It may easily be some resonance that is difficult to replicate/simulate because of the influence of temperature and the effect of porpoising, both very difficult to simulate.
Yet, at most the porpoising can only make the driver's head bob. If it affects a fuel lines, surely it would be on the low pressure side, or something in the tank (vertical sloshing). I can't see it having much influence on the contents of a 300 bar (or whatever pressure they're running now) pipe. Shaking an engine at low frequency seems like a non issue compare to all the other vibrations and impacts it sees.

AR3-GP wrote:
20 Apr 2022, 01:03
Henk_v wrote:
19 Apr 2022, 15:29

Somehow it seems RB went adventurous in the design of the fuel system.
Fuel systems are pretty bang on standard these days. There is very little you can do.

There's the whole fuel tank though, that no one gets to look inside of. That's where my suspicion lay. Some flexible parts, baffles, who knows. An unusual gas used to pressurize the fuel tank having some ill effect. A moveable mass of fuel used to absorb porpoise acceleration. Or simply vertical sloshing starving a low pressure pump (although wouldn't this be a problem for other teams as well?) Then of course there's also the sabotage option. Maybe Helmut is speaking in code. "We have porpoises in our midst."
𓄀

warpomex
warpomex
3
Joined: 13 May 2018, 05:15

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

ringo wrote:
20 Apr 2022, 02:37

I think it's likely the coupling that failed and not the line itself.
This. Most of the time this is the case. It could be a bad sealing element, incorrect torque, a crossthreaded fitting, human error, etc.

User avatar
Vanja #66
1581
Joined: 19 Mar 2012, 16:38

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

This article mentions car weights, including RB18, being around 810 kg. This is the number most often mentioned, which doesn't have to mean its accurate, but reading about 815-820 kg always felt a bit too much to me. With lighter floor, they are aiming at 805kg, supposedly.

https://www-formulapassion-it.translate ... r_pto=wapp
AeroGimli.x

And they call it a stall. A STALL!

#DwarvesAreNaturalSprinters
#BlessYouLaddie

User avatar
Ashwinv16
60
Joined: 15 Jul 2017, 12:04

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

Vanja #66 wrote:
20 Apr 2022, 09:38
This article mentions car weights, including RB18, being around 810 kg. This is the number most often mentioned, which doesn't have to mean its accurate, but reading about 815-820 kg always felt a bit too much to me. With lighter floor, they are aiming at 805kg, supposedly.

https://www-formulapassion-it.translate ... r_pto=wapp
The did mention they will be going for a 10kg drop. So 800kg is the target.
Halo not as bad as we thought

matteosc
matteosc
30
Joined: 11 Sep 2012, 17:07

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

vorticism wrote:
20 Apr 2022, 02:50
[...]
matteosc wrote:
19 Apr 2022, 17:19

Completely agree. It may easily be some resonance that is difficult to replicate/simulate because of the influence of temperature and the effect of porpoising, both very difficult to simulate.
Yet, at most the porpoising can only make the driver's head bob. If it affects a fuel lines, surely it would be on the low pressure side, or something in the tank (vertical sloshing). I can't see it having much influence on the contents of a 300 bar (or whatever pressure they're running now) pipe. Shaking an engine at low frequency seems like a non issue compare to all the other vibrations and impacts it sees.
[...]
If there is a fuel line, connecting two component, with a frequency close to the porpoising one, it could resonate and create the issue, regardless of the pressure inside it. Higher pressure just means that it will have higher frequencies than an identical one with lower pressure, but it does not imply that its frequency (especially the first one) is far from the porpoising one.

Not saying that it is necessarily the case, but it is definitely possible. When designing that specific pipe, since porpoising and its frequency are not easy to simulate, its natural frequencies may have not been selected properly.

User avatar
Wouter
111
Joined: 16 Dec 2017, 13:02

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

Updates despite little training: Red Bull and Verstappen are already taking full risks in Imola
- - - - - -
The Easter Bunny has put the "bulls" on a "massive" diet since Australia, said Marko with a smile. One was "of good hope" that the Imola changes would bring "some savings in terms of weight". Losing weight in Formula 1 is "like people do. It doesn't happen overnight, it's a lengthy process because we're a lot overweight, at least a lot more than Ferrari. If we get to Barcelona (May 20-22 , ed.) come close to Ferrari level, we are actually already satisfied."
https://www.rtl.de/cms/formel-1-in-imol ... 56255.html



ORF: Sport-am-Sonntag. Gespräch-mit-Helmut-Marko.

"We're going to attack, we're taking risks [in Imola]," Marko told ORF. "If it turns out that the update is only half what we want,
we will implement it. We want to bring the car to the right weight in the next three races."

Long interview with Marko, video:
https://tvthek.orf.at/profile/Sport-am- ... o/15147970
The Power of Dreams!