Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

[lio007]

A turbo that large almost confirms that their problem is detonation.

But it's the 2014-PU,
But IIRC, the 2015 Brazil-spec would have had an even bigger turbo.

[wuzak]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ca7xoDvUAAA36Qp.jpg

What surprises me is the space between compressor and turbine.

[noname]

What surprises me is the space between compressor and turbine.

What is surprising there?

[Facts Only]

What surprises me is not how large it is (seems to be the assumed wisdom on size) but actually how conventional the Turbo looks. It looks like a pretty standard build of a large road vehicle turbocharger, whereas the other manufacturers turbos I have seen are far removed from road, innovative and much more intricately packaged.

Less we forget though that this was a multiple race winning engine. And perhaps in the early days a safer design was the best way forward to pick up the scraps left by Mercedes but in the long term not the best solution, we have already seen Ferraris troubled 2014 layout massively leap frog them in just one year and the general expectation is that Honda could do the same next year.

Its easier to make a fast Power Unit reliable (see Mercedes and Ferrari) than it is to make a reliable Power Unit fast (Renault just seemed to make it less reliable). At least Honda are following the Mercedes/Ferrari route

[gruntguru]

What surprises me is not how large it is (seems to be the assumed wisdom on size) . . .

Concur on the assumed wisdom. The same size turbo can look very much larger or smaller from the outside depending on the scroll design chosen. Outside diameter can be dramatically reduced by "folding" the diffuser and moving the volute to a plane nearer the inducer (compressor) or exducer (turbine). I posted some illustrative images on one of these threads somewhere.

[Frank_]

I posted some illustrative images on one of these threads somewhere.

http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... te#p613533

[Blackout]

One of the things that puzzle me in the Renault PU, is that big ass disk shaped air box before the compressor. It makes the turbo even more cumbersome and distant from the exhaust/addmission/intercooler. Looks like some sort of pre-chamber and I never saw such a thing in other cars before... so how does it work? and why Renault doesnt channel the air directly in the compressor intlet with a direct pipelike every other engine does and make the turbo closer to the engine?

[hurril]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ca7xoDvUAAA36Qp.jpg

One of the things that puzzle me in the Renault PU, is that big ass disk shaped air box before the compressor. It makes the turbo even more cumbersome and distant from the exhaust/addmission/intercooler. Looks like some sort of pre-chamber and I never saw such a thing in other cars before... so how does it work? and why Renault doesnt channel the air directly in the compressor intlet with a direct pipelike every other engine does and make the turbo closer to the engine?

How do you suppose the get the air into the compressor otherwise?

[Chene_Mostert]

I can understand Adrian and the rest of RB management's frustrations. How do you build a aero efficient car around that monstrosity? Also no power or reliability to make up for the excessive bulk.

[hurril]

I find it interesting that the opted to switch to a single-entry turbine solution. Why do you guys think that is?

[wuzak]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ca7xoDvUAAA36Qp.jpg

One of the things that puzzle me in the Renault PU, is that big ass disk shaped air box before the compressor. It makes the turbo even more cumbersome and distant from the exhaust/addmission/intercooler. Looks like some sort of pre-chamber and I never saw such a thing in other cars before... so how does it work? and why Renault doesnt channel the air directly in the compressor intlet with a direct pipelike every other engine does and make the turbo closer to the engine?

The normal entry route is blocked by the MGUH.

[Abarth]

I find it interesting that the opted to switch to a single-entry turbine solution. Why do you guys think that is?

Are we sure we are talking about a design that made it even to the first intallation in a car?

[djos]

I find it interesting that the opted to switch to a single-entry turbine solution. Why do you guys think that is?

Are we sure we are talking about a design that made it even to the first intallation in a car?

Indeed, that PU in the pic is ancient isn't it? Surely Even Renault wouldn't leave all those options on the table for 2015 let alone 2016?

[Blackout]

As we said before, it looks like the 2014 PU. It has the 2014 intake plenum (but unraced exhausts)

by hurril » Sun Feb 14, 2016 11:19 pm

I find it interesting that the opted to switch to a single-entry turbine solution. Why do you guys think that is?

IMO they never raced that twin entry turbine. It was just a 'showengine'

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ca7xoDvUAAA36Qp.jpg

One of the things that puzzle me in the Renault PU, is that big ass disk shaped air box before the compressor. It makes the turbo even more cumbersome and distant from the exhaust/addmission/intercooler. Looks like some sort of pre-chamber and I never saw such a thing in other cars before... so how does it work? and why Renault doesnt channel the air directly in the compressor intlet with a direct pipelike every other engine does and make the turbo closer to the engine?

The normal entry route is blocked by the MGUH.

I know I should have reformulated the last question, the answer is obvious, Renault cant because of the MGUH and the intake plenum. Mercedes can for obvious reasons, Ferrari too (afaik their compressor inlet duct runs a bit through the V after entering the V from the top) because their plenum is smaller....

[Blackout]

2015 turbo looks more compacts (below)
http://i38.servimg.com/u/f38/14/79/55/26/sebast10.jpg
Edit