Red Bull RB15

[GhostF1]

Curious about the engine, not a Honda expert. what makes you say it has the lowest CoG? I would also say the engine cover actually looks taller than the Merc..

high engine cover is due to radiators installed above the engine and not the engine itself.

That! That`s the reason they have so small sidepods air intakes! And that leads obviously to a higher CoG of the car not the engine, which is far worse, btw ...

And that`s not the weakest point in Honda`s PU armour. Maybe this year they reached almost the same max. power output both in the race and in qualy but certainly they are behind Ferrari and Merc in combustion efficiency hence requires more fuel than both ICE`s above mentioned.

With 2 tenths per lap gain for every 5kg of fuel - as Andy Cowell said - this means Merc acknowledged that the gain Ferrari`s ICE was doing last year was mainly due to a better fuel combustion process (coming out from an exclusive technology provided by Mahle and a renowned scientist, had I`m not wrong) and acted this year accordingly ...

The unfortunate thing here is, everything you mention regarding Honda's PU is completely devoid of genuine fact and is totally baseless. Actually sounds like Cyril is talking here.

This high fuel consumption statement... where are you getting this from? And wherever it was, I'm hoping you confirmed it was fact.. I don't recall this being a particular issue at all last year? Not comparatively to Renault anyway.
Honda have also only ever run a cooling package that relies on sidepod radiators since they re-entered F1, IF the radiators are 100% stacked above the PU this year as we are theorising, it is an entirely new design that was decided on with RBR, so I would only assume they have found some benefit in doing it this way, so not sure why that's indicative of a "chink in Honda's armour"? Maybe we should cross examine with the STR14, as last year they used a twin rad setup in both sidepods.

[ENGINE TUNER]

Weight and CoG of the PU'S is standardized by the regulations. The Honda pu is no lighter or heavier than it's competition(they are ballasted). The weight of the carbon fiber airboxes above the PU is negligible, it's volume is of much more importance, although less so since the rear wing has been raised. Please stop arguing about nonsense.

The RB15 looks good, but will only go as far as Honda pu reliability(combined with Newey's uncompromising packaging) will allow. They are already planning on taking at least 4 pus this season, if not 5.

[turbof1]

No it's a 5 element one ran on track. The 2 connected to the neutral section appear to be one, but there is a slot through and through. Unless they tested out a 4 element aside the normal, it doesn't sacrifice an element (and why should they anyhow, they can decrease downforce through either a different flap angles, or through a different arrangement and different chord lengths.

Front wing already differing drastically from the release pictures

https://abload.de/img/14c0jtf.jpg

No it is the same one, just the upperflaps having a different angle.

@turbo f1: seem they are running a 4 element FW for trying to have a better balance with their RW AoA setup, which as usually they run it in a low DF configuration even at Silverstone ...

It would be interesting to see the RW AoA from both RB15 and W10 at this filming day in order to prove my theory ...

[Godius]

The outermost rear view mirror support also acts as a vortex generator. It's also one piece connected to both the side impact crash structure and the midwing:

[tez]

Complete Video of the shakedown/filming Day

https://youtu.be/OeckjlGCz8k

Listen to the upshifts and downshifts starting from 2:43 to 4:00

[jagunx51]

Complete Video of the shakedown/filming Day

https://youtu.be/OeckjlGCz8k

Listen to the upshifts and downshifts starting from 2:43 to 4:00

[Tzk]

I don‘t see an issue with the radiator placement. There‘s always a tradeoff when placing them above the engine instead of the sidepods. But (and i guess that is what rb thought) they seem to sacrifice a bit of cog for better feeding of the diffusor because the sidepods are smaller.

I also suspect that placing the radiators inwards leads to smaller moment of inertia and thus turning the car becomes easier.

Als the weight of the engine is fixed by regulations. Not sure this also applies for the radiators (so, if this includes auxillary components or only the engine block+mgu-h+mgu-k).

[f1316]

Just occurred to me that every time a team designs the shape and size of their rollhoop and sidepod cooling inlets, they have to design new attachments for those leaf blower type coolers.

Not a big thing in F1 terms but interesting and just another thing they have to think about (clearly from the pic RB haven’t got to that yet).

[f1316]

I don‘t see an issue with the radiator placement. There‘s always a tradeoff when placing them above the engine instead of the sidepods. But (and i guess that is what rb thought) they seem to sacrifice a bit of cog for better feeding of the diffusor because the sidepods are smaller.

I also suspect that placing the radiators inwards leads to smaller moment of inertia and thus turning the car becomes easier.

Als the weight of the engine is fixed by regulations. Not sure this also applies for the radiators (so, if this includes auxillary components or only the engine block+mgu-h+mgu-k).

The weight of the engine is fixed by the regs but if you build a lighter engine you can use ballast to help optimise distribution (e.g. CoG).

Someone said CoG is controlled by the regs too - I don’t think that’s correct (how could it be with different engine configs - e.g. split turbo etc.?), only the weight is mandated and, as I say, that can include ballast.

[dren]

5.4.1 The overall weight of the power unit must be a minimum of 145kg.
5.4.2 The centre of gravity of the power unit may not lie less than 200mm above the reference plane.
5.4.4 The weight of a piston (with piston-pin, piston-pin retainers and piston rings) may not be less than 300g.
5.4.5 The weight of a connecting rod (with fasteners, small and big end bearings) may not be less than 300g.
5.4.6 The weight of the complete crankshaft assembly between the mid positions of the front and rear main bearing journals (including balance masses, bolts, bungs, O-rings between the boundaries), may not be less than 5300g. See drawing 8.

So assuming you meet all these stipulations, and you're still under weight, you could use ballast to get to the lowest allowed CoG if not already there.

[godlameroso]

Weight and CoG of the PU'S is standardized by the regulations. The Honda pu is no lighter or heavier than it's competition(they are ballasted). The weight of the carbon fiber airboxes above the PU is negligible, it's volume is of much more importance, although less so since the rear wing has been raised. Please stop arguing about nonsense.

The RB15 looks good, but will only go as far as Honda pu reliability(combined with Newey's uncompromising packaging) will allow. They are already planning on taking at least 4 pus this season, if not 5.

There is a lower weight and COG limit, and getting there is stupidly difficult. So difficult, that all 4 manufacturers are overweight, and over COG limit.

[Tzk]

As pointed out by @dren the CoG of the engine IS regulated. So you can't build a light engine and put ballast to the bottom of the engine.

And as i pointed out, i'm not sure what the weight and ultimately the CoG includes... So only PU (i refer to this as combustion unit) or PU+MGU-K+MGU-H+whatever. Also not sure if radiators, oiltank, auxillary pumps (fuelpump, oilpump) cound towards this...

[JesperA]

As pointed out by @dren the CoG of the engine IS regulated. So you can't build a light engine and put ballast to the bottom of the engine.

No, but you can build a light PU so you can put ballast at the exact spot that results in the PU having its CG exactly at the minimum reference plane, which is hugely beneficial for a team that achieve that target while other heavier PU might not.

As i can see there is no regulated reference plane for balance point of the PU? So in that case one could build a light PU an put the ballast at the front of the PU to offset its weight more to the center of the car?

[CLKGTR]

MAXF1 Technical analysis - How Red Bull pushed the limits with their new 2019 F1 car RB15

[SectorOne]

Weight and CoG of the PU'S is standardized by the regulations. The Honda pu is no lighter or heavier than it's competition(they are ballasted). The weight of the carbon fiber airboxes above the PU is negligible, it's volume is of much more importance, although less so since the rear wing has been raised. Please stop arguing about nonsense.

The RB15 looks good, but will only go as far as Honda pu reliability(combined with Newey's uncompromising packaging) will allow. They are already planning on taking at least 4 pus this season, if not 5.

There is a lower weight and COG limit, and getting there is stupidly difficult. So difficult, that all 4 manufacturers are overweight, and over COG limit.

Sources on that?

I know back in the V8 days getting to the weight limit was very easy.
So easy BMW claimed they could make the engine weigh as little as 69kg as opposed to the mandated minimum 95kg.

http://sd-2.archive-host.com/membres/up ... BMW_F1.pdf