- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
enotsne, on 02 Mar 2014 - 15:42, said:
Hello again.
Like to say it was a great test and we now go to Melbourne full of enthusiasm, but alas - not the case.
To be fair. Many of the problems were not Renault/PU related, but most of the problems we faced involved fire/heat damage which is time consuming to rectify and in our case damaged components we wouldn't normally carry in numbers to a test.
We used a new exhaust system for this test and it failed at the collector on the first day and caused some damage to the bodywork and the cooling system. We fitted the existing exhaust design that had been trouble free and that failed in the same spot causing a bit more damage.
During the break between tests, the internal side pod ducting was changed to duct ambient airflow around the ICE (it was previously 'post radiator' airflow). It appears that by ducting lower temperature air over the engine (and the exhaust), it altered the expansion of the first runner, causing weld failure.
We borrowed Red Bulls vast collection of power tools and hammers and modified the radiator surround and partially blocked the ambient air duct and it seems to have solved that issue. A more elegant solution should be sorted by Melbourne.
Todays running ended early and saw our first ICE failure but we are yet to find out what failed. Its definitely internal and terminal but may be related to fire damage on Friday that damaged the oil cooler resulting in the computer killing the ICE.
On a more positive note, it appears from our limited running that the ERS driveability issues have been improved substantially and other teams have clocked up a few miles without any ERS hardware failures. Our simulations and calculations show we should be in the game as far as pace and fuel efficiency is concerned...
I believe a new coffee machine was ordered back home for the long nights ahead but apparently it caught fire. Go figure.
It sounds like Red Bull are still running without the ERS.Marko criticises Renault’s approach to testing the engine. He claims the engine, gearbox and ERS components weren’t tested as a whole unit prior to the car hitting the track in Jerez, hence why the vibrations only became noticeable then.
“There is the conventional turbo engine, supplemented by the two energy recovery systems . The interaction of these as a single unit is making it difficult to deliver harmonious driving characteristics,“ Marko explains.
“We are currently struggling with the turbo lag. This is enhanced when the electric power is supplied. So, you step on the gas and only nothing happens. Then suddenly in comes the power and spins up the wheels”.
sums up marko for me ...over the last 4 years how often did he say ..our success isn't just due to the best designer and the best driver but to the fact that renault has worked with us to produce the car with downforce which allowed us to be the class of the field , and a large part of our success is down to themPup wrote:via TJ13...
It sounds like Red Bull are still running without the ERS.Marko criticises Renault’s approach to testing the engine. He claims the engine, gearbox and ERS components weren’t tested as a whole unit prior to the car hitting the track in Jerez, hence why the vibrations only became noticeable then.
“There is the conventional turbo engine, supplemented by the two energy recovery systems . The interaction of these as a single unit is making it difficult to deliver harmonious driving characteristics,“ Marko explains.
“We are currently struggling with the turbo lag. This is enhanced when the electric power is supplied. So, you step on the gas and only nothing happens. Then suddenly in comes the power and spins up the wheels”.
On the contrary he's describing what happens when they do use ERSPup wrote:via TJ13...
It sounds like Red Bull are still running without the ERS.Marko criticises Renault’s approach to testing the engine. He claims the engine, gearbox and ERS components weren’t tested as a whole unit prior to the car hitting the track in Jerez, hence why the vibrations only became noticeable then.
“There is the conventional turbo engine, supplemented by the two energy recovery systems . The interaction of these as a single unit is making it difficult to deliver harmonious driving characteristics,“ Marko explains.
“We are currently struggling with the turbo lag. This is enhanced when the electric power is supplied. So, you step on the gas and only nothing happens. Then suddenly in comes the power and spins up the wheels”.
, they encounter difficulties already described earlier connected to ERS-turbo interaction, not fully charging batteries, not-optimized software or whatever else can casue "delay" or uneven power delivery. Lotus reported similar problems and it's the same area (not problems) where Ferrari are supposedly behind.
How was the second Bahrain test from a Renault perspective?
The aim of the last test session before Australia was to recover some of the lost ground from the previous test sessions and to rehearse the Grand Prix. We wanted each of our four teams to be able to approach a normal race weekend without having to improvise any of the procedures or operations needed. We can’t escape the fact that we did not complete the entire programme with all the teams and that some Melbourne preparations are incomplete. On the up-side, we have done some of everything, with simulations of qualifying sessions, starts, race distances and long stints and it is fair to say that once again we have made some real progress.
We have cured or found workarounds for some of the problems we had previously identified. New problems revealed as we ran more have added to the unsolved items, and have disrupted running, which is disappointing for our teams.
Have there been any major issues this time round?
In terms of down-time, we see that minor incidents can veer off into major ones and cause significant downtime. This is an example of the immaturity of our PU; we do not have all of the fail-safe and limp-home modes we would consider normal in this stage. This contributes to the loss of track time when a small issue does occur. As we go forward we expect to be able to take these things in our stride rather than have a major failure as a result of minor problem.
* Translation: We basically overlooked the different failure modes of these complex PU's
When running, this immaturity makes itself known as shortcomings in torque delivery or ‘drivability’, which make it tricky for the drivers to find the performance limit of the car.
And what have been the key learnings over the testing period?
We have started to converge on a configuration of car that is more like when we have run the engine back on the dynos in Viry. We’ve increased the level of performance at which the PU can be operated, and we’ve made strides in terms of how energy is managed round the circuit. Additionally we have made some headway on troubleshooting our control systems.
What is the plan now pre Melbourne?
Between now and Melbourne we have a number of items to cover. We need to consolidate all of the lessons learned across all the teams. We need to review all the accumulated data and compare and contrast to get the best out of it so the starting point for all of the Renault-powered cars is as good as it can be. Second, we must progress further on the torque delivery of the PU felt by the drivers. This will include software and calibration work, with simulator and dyno and validation. Thirdly there is the logistical challenge of getting the race Power Units built and shipped to Australia. That process is well under way and will be finished next week.
Translation: we have to redesign the turbo and ERS system of the engine to solve our problems and we sure can't do that before Australia!! We are basically screwed for 2014!!
Has the Renault Energy F1-2014 Power Unit undergone the necessary homologation process?
Yes, the relevant documents and a reference Power Unit have been submitted to the FIA within the deadlines in the Sporting Rules.
What are your hopes for Melbourne?
Melbourne will be an anxious weekend! Conducting a normal race weekend, in which both cars run well during each session for every team, would be a great relief. I hope we can support our teams and drivers to explore the performance of the car and allow the race to deliver its sporting verdict.
Would imagine what they are getting at is that their PU is not yet clever enough to isolate components at the early stages of failure and instead they are causing significant damage before being cut off.This is an example of the immaturity of our PU; we do not have all of the fail-safe and limp-home modes we would consider normal in this stage
Again all they are saying is that they need to review all of the data they have received so far as different teams have completed different parts of the programme. They then need to analyse this to see how to make the most out of their current PU. Finally they need to optimise their "torque delivery" i.e. lots of software work to control the turbo / regeneration better.We need to consolidate all of the lessons learned across all the teams. We need to review all the accumulated data and compare and contrast to get the best out of it so the starting point for all of the Renault-powered cars is as good as it can be. Second, we must progress further on the torque delivery of the PU felt by the drivers. This will include software and calibration work, with simulator and dyno and validation.
Read and learn:theTTshark wrote:Torque is a meaningless term? Even doing a simple Wikipedia search you get the definition of what it is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torque Not only that if torque is meaningless than horsepower is even more meaningless considering you get horsepower by HP=(ft-lbf*RPM)/5252. Or if you're a metric kind of guy kW=(Nm*RPM)/9549.296. Try to tighten the lugnuts on your car without using torque, then tell me how useless it is.
Take a look at the X axis on those graphs. The Y axis is completely meaningless by itself, isn't it?WilliamsF1 wrote:http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g288/ ... ph_134.png
if the mgu-h was working properly then turbo lag would be a non issue. The mgu-h is an anti lag system (amongst other things).n smikle wrote:Yes reading between the lines. I perceive that there are software issues and more importantly hardware issues with their Battery (switching between panasonic and a123 etc) and their turbocharger.
Helmut reported that Renault teams are experiencing some massive Turbo-lag with their engine. Just straight up turbo-lag (excluding the use of the KERS-HERS) and massive torque surges mid rpm. remember ALL the teams at one point will run the car with only the ICE as a worst case scanario test; so at some points the performance of the ICE was evaluated on its own and the Renault ICE though very power full at peak was lacking drive ability at lower rpms. I am simply saying that their opposed scroll turbine design is slightly bigger than it needs to be, maybe the scroll design, maybe the blade design, maybe even the central cartridge!! needs to be redone and it is going to take a few months to redesign and build enough of them to give to all of the Teams.
I won't be surprised if we see a two category championship till Silverstone.
Hmm, it must have a large compressor, wonder what they need all that air for?R_Redding wrote:The mgu-h must be working at some level... Rob White has been quoted as saying that with no mgu-h the lag is in the 10s of seconds...which would make the car undrivable.
Rob
