whats wrong with the renault engines?

[321apex]

yep, just that.
I believe they are all equally motivated and have their reasons to build the best package...Mercedes want to be the best (premium car manufacturer)... Ferrari , well Ferrari is Ferrari ...Renault being the turbo pioneer (heritage) etc.
There's just too much at stake and too much money involved to cut corners and for money saving, escpecially since Renault is "just a parts supplier" - they won't have huge running costs in Formula1 compared to Mercedes and Ferrari (well except for updates to the power unit and building it), and they will get back the money they spent on R&D by supplying it to four teams for some years.

If we agree that resulting performance is an objective measure of "motivation" to succeed, then the situation in Jerez may suggest that money may have been a factor. Technical problems afflicting all Renault teams shows, that some fundamentals were not considered and/or altogether missed. Complacency from prior successes?

Surely, with time we will gain knowledge of each engine producer's respective budgets going in to 2014.

[RZS10]

yep, just that.
I believe they are all equally motivated and have their reasons to build the best package...Mercedes want to be the best (premium car manufacturer)... Ferrari , well Ferrari is Ferrari ...Renault being the turbo pioneer (heritage) etc.
There's just too much at stake and too much money involved to cut corners and for money saving, escpecially since Renault is "just a parts supplier" - they won't have huge running costs in Formula1 compared to Mercedes and Ferrari (well except for updates to the power unit and building it), and they will get back the money they spent on R&D by supplying it to four teams for some years.

If we agree that resulting performance is an objective measure of "motivation" to succeed, then the situation in Jerez may suggest that money may have been a factor. Technical problems afflicting all Renault teams shows, that some fundamentals were not considered and/or altogether missed. Complacency from prior successes?

Surely, with time we will gain knowledge of each engine producer's respective budgets going in to 2014.

Yeah, at least some estimates ... time will tell if it were money/time issues or just inability - or they'll surprise us and there won't be any problems at all in Melbourne or others will have some as well - but currently all those possible reasons are still on the table.

[marcush.]

One would rather think the powertrain suppliers came from similar backgrounds and should have a very clear Picture of what the others are spending (you know how many People they are hiring (you lost People to them and you know the Quality of those losses and you have hired People from them and know the Quality of those..)
I think Renault is simply not ready yet . either their Chassis Partners have demanded big changes of specification too late in the Project or the original layout of the powertrain had a weakness detected too late or too Elaborate to be erased or resolved until now.It may well be a combination of both .
Maybe Newey came up with something outrageous and Renault has to accept now they are not ready to bring it into Service so soon.so maybe they suffer now but are able to harvest the fruits later on.I would not fall into the trap of thinking Renault was less qualified than Ferrari or DAI to develop such a powertrain.

[Lorenzo_Bandini]

Still the basics are simple; ferrari and mercedes also dyno run their products, and somehow their differences are less between that and reality?

Mercedes did a test run before the actual test as a "filming session", I guess Renault should have arranged something similar because their current situation makes them look quite incompetent.

If the FIA will cut them some slack again, just like with the previous engine freeze I would understand some protests from Mercedes and Ferrari. It would be unfair if they are not allowed to improve their engines while Renault is. That would penalize them for being ready on time.

But not allowing Renault to fix their engine would ruin the whole F1 season, since four teams (of which at least two were serious title contenders) would probably drop out of the championship.

So basically the FIA cannot make a good choice either way...

FIA can make a good choice. It's not allowing Renault to fix their engine. If Renault have made a bad job, they have to pay the price. It's the only good choice, all engine manufacturer had equally chance to make a great engine, it look like Renault failed, sorry for them and kudos to Ferrari and Mercedes.

[321apex]

But not allowing Renault to fix their engine would ruin the whole F1 season, since four teams (of which at least two were serious title contenders) would probably drop out of the championship.

So basically the FIA cannot make a good choice either way...

FIA can make a good choice. It's not allowing Renault to fix their engine. If Renault have made a bad job, they have to pay the price. It's the only good choice, all engine manufacturer had equally chance to make a great engine, it look like Renault failed, sorry for them and kudos to Ferrari and Mercedes.

I feel that Renault has a strong FIA political supporter in Mr. Todt, who was along with Renault a strong advocate for turbo engines in the first place. Having said that, if necessary FIA will bend the rules to help Renault save their season.

[321apex]

One would rather think the powertrain suppliers....

Let's be clear - there are no dumb people at Renault. In fact I rate them as highly as engine people at MB or Ferrari. But if you have less money to spend, you have less of all needed resources and then you simply create less of the technology:
- you simply have fewer people to do the work
- you opt for lower cost solutions of supplier supplied "new technology" sub-systems (especially ERS, AC/DC controllers, drives)
- you build fewer and less advanced rigs for sub-system or component testing
- you develop fewer alternative back-up plans to plan A
- you opt for less sophisticated (cheaper) solutions

When I read Rob White's 2nd interview it is clear that the situation is quite serious and only now they have realized how behind they have gotten. Realizing that Rob White is one of the top people in F1 engine business, I can surmise that money may have been the key factor getting them into trouble.

[Pup]

All of that may be true, but there is another potential reason for Renault's design not coming together properly, and that's the fact that they are the only supplier without a true works team. Sure, Red Bull call themselves the works team, but it seems pretty clear that they didn't work together too well on this project. I think Merc and Ferrari having their own team was a tremendous advantage to them.

[Manoah2u]

All of that may be true, but there is another potential reason for Renault's design not coming together properly, and that's the fact that they are the only supplier without a true works team. Sure, Red Bull call themselves the works team, but it seems pretty clear that they didn't work together too well on this project. I think Merc and Ferrari having their own team was a tremendous advantage to them.

i think you can take a grain of salt with that since adrian newey has been involved with the new renault powersource, so plenty of redbull interference there. then we have alain prost mingling in, not too unattached with lotus.

the works thing doesn't really matter for initial engine design, rather looking at benefits a workst team gets for the 'same' engine for vs non-works team.

[321apex]

the works thing doesn't really matter for initial engine design, rather looking at benefits a workst team gets for the 'same' engine for vs non-works team.

In my view the problem IS NOT with the V6 engine as pistons and rods, etc. but with the rest of power unit which all works and non-works teams get of equal specification but flavored differently for packaging reasons in each car.

The problem lies with the remaining supporting hardware of NEW technology era. Namely ERS, it's controls, shielding, its integration with the engine. I mentioned earlier somewhere on this site, that it seems to me that Renault have boost control problems thru the MGU-H, which may cause everyone to blame the engine itself. MGU-H regulates engine boost while generating electricity, an absolutely key function in the package. If boost is poorly regulated usually on the high side, fail safe systems intervene preventing the engine from running altogether.

Second key issue. Batteries store electricity as DC current, while ERS generates and consumes AC current. With that you have a massive electronics to support 120kW of power getting converted from AC to DC and back to AC. For anyone who has ever seen an inverter for industrial electric motor speed control application will have an idea of the size and electric complexity needed in such a system.
For visialisation take a look at the example below
http://www.solren.com/products-and-serv ... inverters/

[adrianjordan]

...adrian newey has been involved with the new renault powersource...

Maybe he's pushed a little too hard on that one then...

[Pup]

You will soon see Mercedes and Ferrari having similar problems.

Citation needed.

[henra]

• Since Renault themselves say that the problem is that their test environment did not match the real world environment, it seems fair to say that the root of their problem lies in the way they're communicating and working with their partner teams especially their 'works' team, who are having the most trouble of all.

Knowing a couple of engineers from France I know that they can get carried away on fancy solutions from time to time.
Somehow I got the feeling that may be what has happened here. While trying to find the silver bullet stumbled over a stupid rock.
Wouldn't be a first in History.
Although I do understand Ferrari or Mercedes fans being gleefull seeing Renault struggle I don't think it would be a good idea to let them sink. Having enough competitive engine suppliers in the field is a good thing for F1. In that regard the (re-) entry of Honda is good News for F1. Letting another supplier go Tango Uniform isn't an encouraging sign for manufacturers willing to get involved or to stay in, knowing that if you make a mistake you will have to write off a whole year and hundreds of millions of Dollar.
So I don't agree with those who hope to see Renault disappear. It's the wrong Signal in the longer term.

[raymondu999]

An excerpt from the latest Autosport

It would be all too easy to jump to the conclusion that a packaging problem and lack of cooling must lay at the door of Newey. He is, after all, a man not known for compromise when it comes to creating the fastest possible racing car.

Drivers and engines are viewed as an inconvenience to the weight and aerodynamic characteristics of his creations. You can be sure that everything will be packaged as tight and low as possible, in and around the engine bay.

Yet the Red Bull issues that appeared at Jerez were not a case of Newey going too far in defiance of Renault. Instead, they were the result of miscalculations from both engine maker and team.

A source close to the French car manufacturer emphasised that it had worked in close harmony with with Red Bull on the creation of the car, and there was 'full support' for the cooling demands and packaging ideas that were put together.

The issue is that they both got it wrong. The cooling and heat-rejection figures that Renault had given out, based on information garnered in high-tech air-cooled dyno rooms, had clearly been too optimistic. Both parties had simply been caught on the hop.

No matter how much work was done on the engine and gearbox dyno, there's nothing like running an engine in an actual car - with real heat and real airflow in and around the engine - for delivering the true answer to what's needed.

If that is true - I guess RBR are right to be displeased with Renault? Compensating for environmental conditions between their dyno and on-track should be an issue that exists in any and all engines, no? How could they have failed to compensate for those differences?

[Lycoming]

If that is true - I guess RBR are right to be displeased with Renault? Compensating for environmental conditions between their dyno and on-track should be an issue that exists in any and all engines, no? How could they have failed to compensate for those differences?

Eh, could have been RBR who screwed up. Or quite possibly both. Can't tell from out here. Either way, being displeased with renault doesn't really help their situation.

As for Newey... I see him as the kind of guy who's willing to risk one or two DNF's a season if it means having a faster car. I don't think any of his creations have been known for reliability. But then, no car really is, except for the BMW Sauber.

[tuj]

all of the Renault power units were restricted to only 250km running by Renault. Granted RBR didn't get close to that before going aflame, but the other Renault's are in trouble too.