Fulcrum wrote: ↑28 Oct 2018, 17:44
Alonso split the Force India's so I think my question warrants more than a throwaway 1-liner.
Pointing at McLaren is to point at the outlier, not the trend. As a cohort, the Renault powered cars are significantly faster than normal.
I'm not saying there has to be some attribute of their engine influencing performance.
My question is, what part of the architecture of the current F1 engines would be most impacted by altitude, what component the least, and could it be the case that the Renault is least influenced by these factors (relative to Ferrari and Mercedes) as a result of their particularly architectural strengths?
Well with altitude the air is thinner and the turbos must spin faster to make similar boost to what is made at sea level. (the pressure ratio must be increased). There is probably a reliability limit the teams set on the turbine speed. And thus a boost limit.
On the flip side..
The turbine also will extract more energy from the exhaust because the ambient pressure is lower even though the exiting cylinder pressure does not drop by the same ratio. (? Need to confirm)
So there is an "excess" of energy available to the turbine but you still have your turbine rpm limit. So in reaction you load the turbine more with the ERS. This means the ERS makes a bigger contribution in the power unit now... So one might ask so wouldn't Ferrari and Mercedes get this extra ERS benefit too? Yes.. But they are traction limited with the layout of this track...
So in my view the high altitude allows the ERS a larger fraction of the power output, making the Renault engines a little closer but this "extra available" turbine shaft energy is limited by the track layout and turbine reliability.
This is my guess.