Red Bull RB7 Renault

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
HampusA
0
Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 14:49

Re: Red Bull RB7 Renault

Post

hardingfv32 wrote:"My commentator said that RBR has chosen to split the KERS package on either side of the car and put it on the floor near the exhausts."

Does it sound like Newey to make such an intelligent choice when there was another option?

Brian
You´ll have to ask Newey about that.
The truth will come out...

User avatar
Tozza Mazza
1
Joined: 13 Jan 2011, 12:00
Location: UK

Re: Red Bull RB7 Renault

Post

hardingfv32 wrote:"My commentator said that RBR has chosen to split the KERS package on either side of the car and put it on the floor near the exhausts."

Does it sound like Newey to make such an intelligent choice when there was another option?

Brian
Brian, Why is the choice so 'unintelligent'. His cars are miles ahead in the constructors and driver's championship, due to the brilliance of his car design. He has found a compromise.

hardingfv32
hardingfv32
35
Joined: 03 Apr 2011, 19:42

Re: Red Bull RB7 Renault

Post

Yes, Newey has made a successful compromise. BUT are ALL of the elements of this compromise?

I am ASSUMING for this question that the RB KERS system is less the ideal and that it is PROBABLY the batteries causing the issue. These assumptions are made to narrow the scope of the variables.

So that said:

WHY... if you want to reduce your cooling requirement do you put the batteries in the hottest part of the car? If you are concern with packaging, why do you place the batteries in one of the most critical areas of your design?

Why would Newey not use the area behind the driver/fuel cell? What makes this area behind the driver off limits to Newey?

Brian

beelsebob
beelsebob
85
Joined: 23 Mar 2011, 15:49
Location: Cupertino, California

Re: Red Bull RB7 Renault

Post

hardingfv32 wrote:Yes, Newey has made a successful compromise. BUT are ALL of the elements of this compromise?

I am ASSUMING for this question that the RB KERS system is less the ideal and that it is PROBABLY the batteries causing the issue. These assumptions are made to narrow the scope of the variables.

So that said:

WHY... if you want to reduce your cooling requirement do you put the batteries in the hottest part of the car? If you are concern with packaging, why do you place the batteries in one of the most critical areas of your design?

Why would Newey not use the area behind the driver/fuel cell? What makes this area behind the driver off limits to Newey?
It's not a case of reducing cooling requirement, it's a case of making an optimal aero shape. Newey designed an optimal aero shape to fit the car inards as he saw them in. He then said "if you can get KERS in there too, go for it". In his consideration, the RB7 is better with that aero shape and no KERS than it is with good KERS and not that aero shape. The fact that they fitted a half-assed KERS into that shape is an added bonus, even when it didn't work every time.

bill shoe
bill shoe
151
Joined: 19 Nov 2008, 08:18
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA

Re: Red Bull RB7 Renault

Post

Red Bull has done 7 races and 14 starts, with 14 points finishes to show for it. Despite the small Vettel mistakes, the KERS fiasco, etc., every time RB starts a car it brings home points. Every time. Wow.

I am not really a RB or Vettel fan but I hope they appreciate what they are accomplishing. The 2011/RedBull/Vettel combo is shaping up to be more dominant than 2004/Schumacher/Ferrari.

The big difference was that Schumacher seemed to really enjoy and appreciate the success. The little imperfections didn’t bother him. In contrast Vettel seems grim over every last pole, race position, etc. He can’t laugh off a small mistake on the last lap during an otherwise dominant season.

Also, I remember Ross Brawn could break out into a huge grin once in a while. In contrast the RB leadership seems too focused on the paternalistic power/control thing. Christian Horner only smiles to show dominance, and I think Helmut Marko’s face would break if he tried to smile.

AbbaleRacing77
AbbaleRacing77
0
Joined: 23 Mar 2010, 23:05

Re: Red Bull RB7 Renault

Post

Every driver would be upset and or embarassed with themself if they lost a race that they dominated up until the last lap due to sandbagging for too long and then making a mistake. If Vettel laughed it off i would say that he's unfocused and not serious enough. Yes the team is serious and thats why theyre winning the world championship... Its not all because of newey that theyre winning. Did you notice that during the red flag while every other drivers were resting in the garage sebastian vettel was trackside going over data with his engineers... thats the mentality of a winner. FYI im a ferrari fan

hardingfv32
hardingfv32
35
Joined: 03 Apr 2011, 19:42

Re: Red Bull RB7 Renault

Post

...He then said "if you can get KERS in THE HOTEST SPOT too, go for it"...

And what is so upsetting to the aero about the battery location behind the fuel cell?

Brian

marcush.
marcush.
159
Joined: 09 Mar 2004, 16:55

Re: Red Bull RB7 Renault

Post

to me the RBR kers looks like a retrofit and low priority.And that´s exactly how Newey is talking about it.
I´m sure if Newey had the last word we would not see kers on the RBR7.Marko and the board have forced this on him and rightly so.
For whatever reason he was sure his concept was not going to work with the standard Marelli Kers...I´m quite sure this would have been a lot cheaper and working better than what they have now but at the expense of packaging.

Putting the battery pack in front of the engine would have been a serious weight shift to the front with the mandatory weight distribution my logic is the car would have needed extra ballast in the rear to counter this so another compromise there.

beelsebob
beelsebob
85
Joined: 23 Mar 2011, 15:49
Location: Cupertino, California

Re: Red Bull RB7 Renault

Post

hardingfv32 wrote:...He then said "if you can get KERS in THE HOTEST SPOT too, go for it"...

And what is so upsetting to the aero about the battery location behind the fuel cell?
Presumably, there's something else there – which would get shifted back, or outwards ;)

User avatar
HampusA
0
Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 14:49

Re: Red Bull RB7 Renault

Post

hardingfv32 wrote:...He then said "if you can get KERS in THE HOTEST SPOT too, go for it"...

And what is so upsetting to the aero about the battery location behind the fuel cell?

Brian
You don´t think he would put it in that place if it was possible? Seeing as he is a genius as you mentioned..

KERS was not part of the equation so they probably put it where they had room, and now pays the price for it even though that price is minuscule considering how dominant they are.
The truth will come out...

Caito
Caito
13
Joined: 16 Jun 2009, 05:30
Location: Switzerland

Re: Red Bull RB7 Renault

Post

The car is already bigger than it should be due to Mark's size. Vettel sits a couple cm more to the front than mark.

When newey was asked the ideal driver he said 1.5m and 50kg so at least I believe that the car was not thought with kers in mind, it rather fall off where there was a bit of place.


But the real and funny thing is... we don't know why the KERS fail. Probably it has nothing to do with temp and maybe is jus a bad KERS for the little money they're putting there.
Come back 747, we miss you!!

marcush.
marcush.
159
Joined: 09 Mar 2004, 16:55

Re: Red Bull RB7 Renault

Post

to me the answer is they have quality issues.
how else would one unit perform without a glitch and the other is not working at all.
Temperature and vibration do their do ,no question but only if your spread of parts or processes is significant it is possible to have zero mile or early failures.

Then it seems the units are either few of them or some parts of it cannot be easily changed .How else would the team be unable to bring the unit back into life on saturday?
You would not expect them to have no spares available of everything? maybe you cannot change the MGU very quick but even that should be possible in a few hours?

AbbaleRacing77
AbbaleRacing77
0
Joined: 23 Mar 2010, 23:05

Re: Red Bull RB7 Renault

Post

Seeing that the new rules banning off throttle diffuser blowing are set to take effect in Silverstone what changes do you think redbull will have to make ?

I think that the advantage of there high rake design will now become less effective. The only way i see the high rake design being effective is if the sides of the diffuser are blown in some way. Without the blown sides i think that they will lose alot of stability in the corners.

On top of this im not sure that they will continue with there current exhaust layout. If you can recall when other teams started playing with exhaust blowing without fancy engine mapping there cars became incredibly unstable and almost uncontrollable.

Renault is really screwed.... there gonna have to come up with the most radical changes...

hardingfv32
hardingfv32
35
Joined: 03 Apr 2011, 19:42

Re: Red Bull RB7 Renault

Post

Is this such a big deal for performance in the corners? The cars are off throttle during braking and I know there is some breaking into the turns, but once off the brakes they are back on the throttle. Maybe not 100%, but certainly out of the off throttle mapping regime.

Has RB been the best braking car up to this point?

Brian

hardingfv32
hardingfv32
35
Joined: 03 Apr 2011, 19:42

Re: Red Bull RB7 Renault

Post

When RB committed to this car design some months before testing started, they had no idea if their aero design would be 100% right, but they did know the performance that would be available from a correctly functioning KERS system. It is hard to believe you pass on what is a sure thing for all the other top teams.

Brian