Team: Adrian Newey (CTO), Petr Prodromou (CA), Rob Marshall (CD), Christian Horner (TP)
Drivers: Sebastian Vettel (1), Mark Webber (2), Sebastian Buemi (reserve)
I'm not sure but it may be in regards to alternator cooling issues?raymondu999 wrote:What does this have to do with the RB8?McMrocks wrote:fortunately the Brazilian track has not as much slow corners as the CotA
sorry. in slow corners some drivers are driving a higher gear to have more controll over the power. And some post from the last side said this:raymondu999 wrote:What does this have to do with the RB8?McMrocks wrote:fortunately the Brazilian track has not as much slow corners as the CotA
ziggy wrote:Hi. It was mentioned by Renault that the alternators suffered in low RPM corners
here:
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/102454
Ok, its logical, in the low RPM range less current is produced by the alternator.
http://www.mclarenelectronics.com/Produ ... e%20100Amp
Just look on the graph.
As I'm understanding the article, the alternator suffered because of overcurrent. Either Renault went over the limit with the new alternators or the car is simply demanding more current than the ALT produces. There were some talkings about Red bull using separate tanks for cooling fluids and oil, so they can pump the fluids all over the car, just where they want the additional weight. Those pumps could draw too much current in low RPM.
Cheers
As far as I am aware, Red Bull were using up stocks of the old alternator as they felt that there had not been enough testing on the new one. Webbers was an old spec.McMrocks wrote:Speculation: RB gave Webber the new alternators earlier. So they saved the old-spec alternators for Vettel. At least I would have done this.
It's a two way street there. You can say that Alonso already lost it due to circumstances that he could not control.gilgen wrote:As far as I am aware, Red Bull were using up stocks of the old alternator as they felt that there had not been enough testing on the new one. Webbers was an old spec.McMrocks wrote:Speculation: RB gave Webber the new alternators earlier. So they saved the old-spec alternators for Vettel. At least I would have done this.
Renault have pretty well guaranteed Red Bull, that the new one is reliable. Lets hope that they are right. It would not be nice to see Vettel lose the WDC due to something outside his control.
...It appears that you misunderstand me. Lots has happened during the year, but I am talking about the situation for Brazil. I would like to see a clean fight, devoid of mechanical disasters for either Alonso or Vettel. But we are talking about a possible alternator problem for Vettel, a problem which has happened twice befor for him. Alonsos car has been reliable.stefan_ wrote:It's a two way street there. You can say that Alonso already lost it due to circumstances that he could not control.gilgen wrote:As far as I am aware, Red Bull were using up stocks of the old alternator as they felt that there had not been enough testing on the new one. Webbers was an old spec.McMrocks wrote:Speculation: RB gave Webber the new alternators earlier. So they saved the old-spec alternators for Vettel. At least I would have done this.
Renault have pretty well guaranteed Red Bull, that the new one is reliable. Lets hope that they are right. It would not be nice to see Vettel lose the WDC due to something outside his control.
Adrian Newey wrote:"It's not a new component (the Magneti Marelli alternator). It's been on the Renault engine since 2005 -- and it's been failing since 2005..."
So now we are in a position where the reliability of a components of the RB8 supplied by an Italian sub supplier may decide the 2012 FiA F1 driver world championship, which is contested by Red Bull's Vettel against Ferrari's Alonso.Didi Mateschitz wrote:I want Renault to separate from its supplier Magneti Marelli and use someone else.
Alonso car has been reliably crushed two times. We are talking about 30 points or more.gilgen wrote: I would like to see a clean fight, devoid of mechanical disasters for either Alonso or Vettel. But we are talking about a possible alternator problem for Vettel, a problem which has happened twice befor for him. Alonsos car has been reliable.
I disagree 100% with that claim. Only suspension and DRS are allowed be live movement. I am going out on a limb and claim that it's adjusted in the pits.Crucial_Xtreme wrote:Giorgio Piola has broke news in the latest AutoSprint edition that Red Bull introduced it's own thermal management system for tyres & brakes similar to McLaren. Cue the Technical Directive that was issued a few races back about forbidden materials, all stemmed from Red Bull "seeking clarification on what's legal & what isn't. Here's a breakdown of their system.
The Innovative Red Bull RB8 Ducts
Red Bull has refrained from deploying in official tests these new brake grips allowing a variable geometry adjusted longitudinal forces. When braking the door opened slightly a hole that closed when accelerating. Red Bull first tested the system at Monza and stopped in Korea. Do you see in the small picture detail was carefully masked with duct tape
The article(PM me if you want it) goes on and says RB asked Whiting for clarification on materials that can be used and that the system is very simple & lightweight. Based on the forces acting in the longitudinal direction on the car to open the small pipe under braking and acceleration close in a sort of cap with longitudinal movement. Given the confirmation to red bull, whiting has also pointed out that the variable adjustment developed by McLaren with activation by a mechanic in stopping in the pits and allowed. Basically uses the same principle that allows to change the incidence of the front wing flap.
Well Gary Anderson said in his analysis I posted that the FIA refused to sanction the device. So they can't be using it.n smikle wrote:
I disagree 100% with that claim. Only suspension and DRS are allowed be live movement. I am going out on a limb and claim that it's adjusted in the pits.
