Red Bull RB7 Renault

[marcush.]

In the the FIA press meeting Newey admitted RED bull being aero and suspension specialists not KERS.Ouch!He also admits their system is based on a older Marelli system and was adapted to their packaging requirements...and their KERS department is too small and too slow to get things turned around in time...Well speaks volumes about the priorities at RedBull.They clearly did not expect to need it really and made a start only small contribution KERS .Now with the car showing not superior on race speed and the pirellis giving strategy options KERS is more important as Newey had imagined possible.

[Richard]

Now with the car showing not superior on race speed and the pirellis giving strartegy options KERS is more important as Neweay had imagined possible.

I'd say Newey's decision is still valid. The car is still massively outpacing the others to get to the front row of the grid in quali, and then it is able to hold that position during the race. Seems like he's hit the optimum KERS performance..

[bonjon1979]

Now with the car showing not superior on race speed and the pirellis giving strartegy options KERS is more important as Neweay had imagined possible.

I'd say Newey's decision is still valid. The car is still massively outpacing the others to get to the front row of the grid in quali, and then it is able to hold that position during the race. Seems like he's hit the optimum KERS performance..

I'd agree with you at the moment. We'll see what happens come the end of the season. It does seem that they're going to be compromised on KERS throughout the year. If the banning of the off throttle EBD has a bigger detrimental effect on their qualifying than others then they could find themselves in trouble.

[Richard]

Their performance suggests that the KERS compromise seems to allow greater benefits elsewhere. The other teams are compromised in trying to accommodate a full spec KERS package that can run for the whole race.

The more I think about, the cleverer it seems. Optimise KERS for 2 lap use so it gets you to the front of the grid, and is also just enough to defend during the race. Meanwhile the competitors are lugging a KERS radiator around with them, complete with aero and weight penalties.

[BreezyRacer]

Now with the car showing not superior on race speed and the pirellis giving strartegy options KERS is more important as Neweay had imagined possible.

I'd say Newey's decision is still valid. The car is still massively outpacing the others to get to the front row of the grid in quali, and then it is able to hold that position during the race. Seems like he's hit the optimum KERS performance..

IMO it could be a bad decision for them as the only defense you have in the DRS zones is KERS. They have lucked out so far. In Barcelona it was because the zone was already at a max speed area and McLaren didn't gear the car high enough to take advantage of the DRS zone. They won't make that mistake again. When Canada rolls around they better have KERS working 100%. That will have two DRS zones.

Also KERS is required for a good run to the first corner these days and RB have been very bad about starts, probably because of KERS. webber in particular has had numerous KERS problems. You cannot win races when you lose spots at the start.

[marcush.]

And it´s only Vettel who is taking advantage of it right now .Webber already feels the built in weakness.
I think the REDBULL Kers will not be even close to what Mercedes ,Mclaren,Ferrari and Renault have at their disposal.It is even worse than williams..williams being at least a competence for Hybrid but in RB there are those 3or 4 guys or how many they dare to employ and really they have no access bare infinity into current development ...would Marelli support them building a system based on theirs but different?

[speedsense]

You have wear and degradation. How do you guys define and classify degradation?

Wear would be what the driver/car/track have caused to the tire whether used well or abused.
Degradation could be natural (as designed by the manufacturer, for instance a qualifying tire that only lasts 2-3 laps) or unintentional degradation due to instances outside of the manufacturers control (storage time, shipping, care of the tire-,mountings,sunlight,over/under inflation, etc.) iMHO

My understanding was quite the contrary. Wear is what happens when you race on the tyre for a long time – the rubber wears away. Degradation on the other hand is what produces all the marbles – the structure of the tyre starts to degrade and throw chunks of rubber off.

Not all racing tires throw marbles (at least ones that can be visually seen), depends on the tire. Obviously, unlike the Bridgestones, Pirelli's DO marble and can be visually seen.
All tires wear and start wearing on first use, it's a matter of the rate of wear which would have "controlling" aspects... the "condition" of the forces put through the tire from the driver's input, car's handling/DF, and the track's abrasiveness,temp and layout.

The degradation is one of the aspects/considerations in the production/engineering of the construction (belts,sidewalls etc.) compound (rubber mix) construction (controlled by the maker) is intentional and designed to a purpose and a concise outcome.
I was told once that making a tire is like making a cake. You can make the cake the same way over and over but if the environment it's made in changes from day to day even hour to hour (if the environment it's made in isn't tightly controlled) the cake will turn out different (though made by the exact same process).
Tire Manufacturers tightly control the environment the tire is made in,stored in, and even how it is shipped IE-room/container temperature, humidity, storage time. One manufacturer I've worked with, sends a sensor with the tires to record shipping temps and humidity levels, as another example.
While another manfacturer doesn't track the tire beyond leaving the tire company. Those tires might end up sitting in a storage container in Bahrain in a 110F degree heat (inside container temp 130F) and completely change the compound construction to something else other than engineered (an unintended baking process).
This would be an unintended degradation. Two sets of tires that started out exactly the same, are now entirely different in their compound and will degrade differently. Marked the same, made the same date...but one set had a baking cycle(due to shipping) that wasn't engineered into to it. IMHO.

***sorry for hijacking the thread and making it about tires, but in my opinion will become/has become a major difference in the chassis' especially between Red Bull and Mclaren. The outcome of the races and the eventual WDC,WCC will be more about tire use, wear and degradation rates than ever before.

[hardingfv32]

"Their performance suggests that the KERS compromise seems to allow greater benefits elsewhere."

Why put the batteries in one of the hottest areas of the car? This is certainly going to require a larger cooling system to keep the batteries alive. So they are not saving on cooling aero.

Why did they not place the batteries near the fuel cells? What is the significance of this choice?

Brian

[speedsense]

"Their performance suggests that the KERS compromise seems to allow greater benefits elsewhere."

Why put the batteries in one of the hottest areas of the car? This is certainly going to require a larger cooling system to keep the batteries alive. So they are not saving on cooling aero.

Why did they not place the batteries near the fuel cells? What is the significance of this choice?

Brian

IMHO, probably to help meet the axle weight percentage rule and still maintain the rake angle. Moving the batteries forward might cause too much weight percentage on the front axles, thus causing the rake to have to be reduced.

[PlatinumZealot]

In the the FIA press meeting Newey admitted RED bull being aero and suspension specialists not KERS.Ouch!He also admits their system is based on a older Marelli system and was adapted to their packaging requirements...and their KERS department is too small and too slow to get things turned around in time...Well speaks volumes about the priorities at RedBull.They clearly did not expect to need it really and made a start only small contribution KERS .Now with the car showing not superior on race speed and the pirellis giving strategy options KERS is more important as Newey had imagined possible.

Marcush, lets not currupt things here; though the KERS is not the best, they use it in the race too.

[marcush.]

I believe the intention was to only use it for the starts and later on they realised they need the contribution in the race as well..
KERS implementation is a huge task even for a fully fledged Grand Prix operation and the bang for buck is really maxed with a start only system /system with very limited use .To have it integrated as Mercedes and Mclaren is really another level of effort.
I did not mean to ignore/deny the fact they use it in the race at times as well

[hardingfv32]

The hybrid car makers are leading the development in KERS type systems. The are plenty of source of technology available to the F1 teams. This is not a big challenge if you interface with the right companies.

RB has implemented a marginal KERS installation for some reason. They knew what the operating characteristics of the batteries were before they decided on their placement. They knew the risks they were accepting.

It seems odd that RB would be so arrogant as to assume they would never need a KERS system that function though out the a complete race. They had no idea what the competition would be like when they lock in some of these design decisions.

Brian

[SiLo]

All it will need is for one overtake which could of been defended by using KERS, and then it will start to look very important to them. I think they were lucky in Spain because Hamilton couldn't get close enough AND save KERS to use it all down the straight, otherwise I think he would of gotten by.

It will come back and kick them in the nuts at some point, lets just hope they get it fixed before they turn into sitting ducks! Although with their inherent speed, it's unlikely for a while.

[hardingfv32]

Why was it the RB was so much faster through that last turn than McLaren? I would have thought earlier use of the KERS. Are we sure RB was without KERS?

Brian

[SiLo]

Why was it the RB was so much faster through that last turn than McLaren? I would have thought earlier use of the KERS. Are we sure RB was without KERS?

Brian

Vettel seemed to only be using it just before the corner and throughout the corner then along the straight, but I thought the corner was easily flat so Hamilton should of been able to do the same thing.