whats wrong with the renault engines?

[iotar__]

• 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.

Truly remarkable. First one is the only person outside of Renault that knows "root cause of a problem" based on one line about reality not matching tests, the cause is cooperation with customers - mostly Red Bull. OK. If you think about it it can be said about any unexpected technical problem, if reality would match tests there would be no problems assuming there were no problems during tests... Then since RB is the closest F1 team etc. At best it's a description of situation not "root cause".

Second added blanket nationality bias based on anecdotal personal experience. So let me get this straight, which nationality is Newey and cooperation with which company caused series of engine problems in let's say 2005? For the latter depending on whether it was success or failure you can choose between two.

So is Renault paying for and will they be testing some fixes in rumoured Jerez Lotus test while even more rumoured other teams are watching?

[Richard]

FIA and F1 Innovation discussion now has its own thread http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... =1&t=17880

[autogyro]

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?

We used to have the ideal kit to eliminate such problems.
It was a mobile wheels free hub driven dyno that allowed full load testing of the power train in the car anywhere.
We proved its worth at a number of circuits.
I suggested to the FIA that it should be made available in the paddock for testing.
They said it would cost too much and in any case the engine manufacturers could do all the testing needed in house.

[Pup]

Rumors of an informal summit meeting of engineers from all the Renault teams at the Lotus filming day...

TJ13:

Lotus will hit the track on Friday and Saturday with their E22 challenger.

According to reports from several media outfits the team booked the track at Jerez for two days to stage their allotted filming days, including a maximum of 100 kilometres of track running.

“We plan a few PR activities, but there is nothing more to say about the topic,” the team acknowledged after an inquiry of Motorsport-Total.

There are unsourced rumours that Renault has invited selected engineers from its other customers to be present in Jerez as “spectators”. This is would enable them to observe the activities of Lotus and start an exchange of information to help with solving the current problems with the Renault power train.

[JimClarkFan]

The Renault engines are reported to have 600bhp in race, Mercedes are claiming 700bhp... these are values without factoring in ERS I believe.

Hard to be sure of absolute values, because it seems that Renault might be reporting race bhp whereas Mercedes could be reported max bhp fuel unrestricted.

http://grandprix247.com/2013/02/27/rena ... r-600-bhp/
https://twitter.com/andrewbensonf1/stat ... 3946540034

[beelsebob]

Mercedes also said that they have a flat torque curve after 10500rpm, and that 10500rpm is the 100km/h point, so then we can figure that they have 490bhp at 10500rpm.

The question then is, what does the fuel consumption curve after 10500rpm look like, and what can they achieve when we make assumptions about being on the throttle for only 60% of the lap.

[RZS10]

check the last two posts here: viewtopic.php?f=4&t=9259&start=5235 he just confirmed a hypothetical calculation, never actually said the engine had 700bhp

[rscsr]

....
The question then is, what does the fuel consumption curve after 10500rpm look like, and what can they achieve when we make assumptions about being on the throttle for only 60% of the lap.

flat, as the fuel flow limit is constant in that rev range.

[henra]

Second added blanket nationality bias based on anecdotal personal experience. So let me get this straight, which nationality is Newey and cooperation with which company caused series of engine problems in let's say 2005? For the latter depending on whether it was success or failure you can choose between two.

Ahh, come on, take it easy.
Was just some banter but indeed a tiny bit based on what I noticed when dealing with some French students and engineers. They tended to have somewhat of a soft spot for rather complex Solutions and liked to approach problems from a theoretical perspective. (Lived and worked there for 1,5 years).
Might be totally unrelated to what's happened here.
But now back to Topic. I just wanted to take away a bit of any harsh impression of Nationalism which was definitely not my intent (bit of Banter must be allowed, though).
Sorry for going completely Off Topic.

[Stivala]

Re the output attributed to the Mercedes IC engine, these calculations belongs entirely to the interviewer and not to Andy Cowel.

[marcush.]

let´s see if all Renault Teams face the same issues this time -a clear hint who was on the wrong with his layouts. But why should all RedBull and the customer Teams be completely wrong with their calcs ? It is more than likely Renault has a very different understanding of demand and requirements compared to how the Teams are planning to run the powertrains.

Mind you the Simulation of heat exchanger Performance is far from trivial and Needs real world testing to factor in "fudge" factors At least that´s what I experienced.
I very much doubt formula 1 is doing thermal investigations in instationary conditions in their simulations of the whole car -but by Definition formula 1 is only instationary ,dynamic.
anyone ever taking a fully validated robust oem car to the race track knows how much harder reality is vs actual approval testing .(the load cases are not the same and some Parameters are simply left out by definition)
Also bench Validation (rolling road/climate windtunnel) is not on any of the formula 1 Teams agenda - but this is the place to make validations of temperature behaviour of the whole vehicle.On track testing lacks controlled invironment conditions and is giving blotchy verification at best .
All we see is some temperature detection strips and sometimes heat sensitive paint (tempilstik) which is fine to determine Maximums achieved but does not give a clue how your actual heat exposure profiles look like .It´s beyoond me how you can validate your Systems with These rudimentary equipment.At the very least i would Augment the testing with IR cameras or finger cameras recording when and where the temperature is soaring ..Of course it is interesting to see if your temp Levels exceed certain Levels -but knowing when and how Long the exposure is taking place is the key to optimise heat protection and build reliability -the max temps will only Show if the part will even survive a Minute -but not how many !

[autogyro]

Mind you the Simulation of heat exchanger Performance is far from trivial and Needs real world testing to factor in "fudge" factors At least that´s what I experienced.
I very much doubt formula 1 is doing thermal investigations in instationary conditions -but by Definition formula 1 is only instationary ,dynamic.
anyone ever taking a fully validated robust oem car to the race track knows how much harder reality is vs actual approval testing .(the load cases are not the same and some Parameters are simply left out by Definition)
Also bench Validation (rolling road/climate windtunnel) is not on any of Formula 1 Teams Agenda -this is the place to make validations of temperature behaviour of the whole vehicle.On track testing lacks controlled environment conditions and is giving blotchy verification at best .

We had the ideal piece of kit for this, a fully mobile hub dyno.
We offered it to the teams ten years ago.
They responded by saying the power trains were all fully tested when they received them from the manufacturers.
The latest mess up with the Renault units IMO serves them right.
Of course the regulations that limited testing and reduced it to next to none sealed the fate of our developments in real world testing for F1.
Just one more step closer to virtual reality racing.
I am still trying to work out the exact date they all lost the plot.

[marcush.]

I think you cannot build the real deal out of the box with These regulations-as there are so many ways you can use the powertrain ,but in effect you can´t ,as you are restricted by the total consumption.
so more than ever the game is compromise for a better overall Performance- you will lay out the cooling Systems not for Maximum cooling capacity for each System but for Maximum cooling capacity for your intended drive Profile.
this will in effect narrow the envelope of possible usage of the cars Systems -but you Need to save weight and reduce drag .
Now ...if your Subsystems do not work as efficiently as calculated , you cannot simply divert energy flows differently as you restricted your envelope Long before in anticipation of where you wanted to go ...and this will bite you now.

Those who narrowed the envelope more now have the biggest Problems -RED Bull .Those who did not know what to do or went for a test mule Approach narrowing the envelope later are in better shape for the moment.Newey can only realise the cars potential if Renault can deliver the Systems as promised which seems to be impossible as they had some major factors wrong.

[henra]

Those who narrowed the envelope more now have the biggest Problems -RED Bull .Those who did not know what to do or went for a test mule Approach narrowing the envelope later are in better shape for the moment.

Having read that Lotus was also only able to do one lap during their Filming/PR/Whatever event, I have the strong suspicion that it was almost impossible to create a surrounding where the Renault PU was feeling well.
Indeed it is probably possible but the result might be incompetitive. Therefore I think it is foremost Renault who will have to do some homework. Otherwise 4 Teams might be facing a rather uninspiring season only differing in the minute detail of the troubles.

[jmy]

Renault on course to provide F1 teams with Bahrain test updates
[...] the French car manufacturer has been working hard at its base to get on top of its problems.
Its efforts now appear to have paid off, with upgrades trialled on the dyno at Viry-Chatillon allowing Lotus to complete the maximum 100km mileage allowance during its shakedown at Jerez last weekend.
[...]
Renault has confirmed that the updates on the Lotus power unit included minor hardware changes, software bug fixes and calibration improvements.
The lessons learned from the Lotus shakedown will be applied for the final specification of power unit that will be given to its teams for the next test in Bahrain.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/112473