Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

All that has to do with the power train, gearbox, clutch, fuels and lubricants, etc. Generally the mechanical side of Formula One.
User avatar
Blackout
1563
Joined: 09 Feb 2010, 04:12

Re: Renault V6 Power Unit

Post

So why does Taffin and Abiteboul say it's not split like the Merc?
Anyways I know a guy who says he knows a guy who works in Viry and who says T and C are split but not like the Merc...

And in those AMuS articles, Merc engineers say the Renault PU has "really good performances" when its not detuned and that Merc predicts a 0.5 gain for the Renault teams when at maximum effort
Image
So I hope Viry will soon retrieve its 2016 reliability level.

ReoPTy
-34
Joined: 15 Aug 2015, 10:44

Re: Renault V6 Power Unit

Post

Mercedes Pierre Godof has splited turbo in a way and now renault has it in their own way !

User avatar
lio007
314
Joined: 28 Jan 2013, 23:03
Location: Austria

Re: Renault V6 Power Unit

Post

hm...that's interesting.

Quite different to this recent interview:
http://en.f1i.com/magazine/262338-renau ... top.html/2
Cyril Abiteboul wrote:We chose not to separate the turbine from the compressor.

User avatar
PlatinumZealot
551
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 03:45

Re: Renault V6 Power Unit

Post

Take anything Andrew Benson or Mark Hughes say with pinch of salt until there are actual photos there to back it up.
🖐️✌️☝️👀👌✍️🐎🏆🙏

epo
epo
-6
Joined: 25 Nov 2012, 19:57

Re: Renault V6 Power Unit

Post

Seems everyone on this forum is to focussed on McLaren Honda..
De Renault teams seem to have fall back to the 2016 MGU-K to prevent the issues they had during testing :

http://www.eurosport.com/formula-1/aust ... tory.shtml

User avatar
Mattchu
49
Joined: 07 Jul 2014, 19:37

Re: Renault V6 Power Unit

Post

epo wrote:
25 Mar 2017, 14:53
Seems everyone on this forum is to focussed on McLaren Honda..
De Renault teams seem to have fall back to the 2016 MGU-K to prevent the issues they had during testing :

http://www.eurosport.com/formula-1/aust ... tory.shtml
Thanks for this info epo, i reckon that`s going to be quite a handicap to the Renault powered cars until the new 2017 spec MGU-K is fitted. Just like Honda, Renault can`t foresee everything and failures do happen (insulation in this case) even when the stuff has probably spent hours on the test beds.
That`s also why it amazes me the reliability of the Merc and Ferrari units most of the time...

H2H
H2H
4
Joined: 24 Apr 2013, 21:24

Re: Renault V6 Power Unit

Post

Good catch, I missed it like most it seems.

"I guess that will be where we will look at that. It's added some weight, so it's a few kilograms on top of what we thought we would be running."

That means the Renault teams will likely have to persevere with the old MGU-K, understood to be around 5kg heavier and less powerful than the new unit, until at least May's Spanish GP at Barcelona.
A few kg, maybe 5*, more and "less powerful" then the new MGU-K for five races and hardly any headline about it? After the last long three years full of talk about the importance of power pack integration and the interdependence with ERS? :?


To be frank I expected much more noise about this. In any case this is highly interesting. First a few kg less for the MGU-K is impressive, even if it is less then five. More powerful has to be understood in the context of that article written in mid 2016:

Taffin admits that power delivery has greatly progressed since the early days of the Power Unit back in 2014.

“Power delivery of the stored energy is now performed around almost the entire lap,” Taffin confessed. “We have reached outstanding levels of overall efficiency. Today, the MGU-K is capable of producing 120kW, which is the equivalent of 160bhp, around almost the entire lap. The moment the driver steps on the gas pedal and we are no longer grip limited, it applies full power. It’s no longer if the driver wants to use it or not. The power is available. It’s all controlled automatically.

For 2017 the energy efficiency of the patrol engine has been increased and 5kg more fuel has been added. This means more electric energy to be harvested by the MGU-H and it's increasingly likely that only the FIA rules are restricting MGU-K output and no longer the available electric energy as has been the case in the earlier days of this engine formula. :wink:


Electric motorgenerators are very efficient indeed but operating close to the max MJ output and harvesting allowed or on it will mean more heat output which in turn forces better insulation and cooling. A considerably reduced MGU-K mass should result additionally in higher heat peaks as there is less material to sink the heat in which compounds the insulation problem.

In short they might have been too aggressive with their 2017 MGU-K unit.


H2H

*Remember all the talk about the Force India drivers having to drop 2kg.

User avatar
godlameroso
309
Joined: 16 Jan 2010, 21:27
Location: Miami FL

Re: Renault V6 Power Unit

Post

That refers to the Mercedes engine which is heavier and has a bigger transmission, which is partly why the Force Pinky is overweight at the moment. Maybe that's a compromise Mercedes did to avoid Honda like problems.
Saishū kōnā

User avatar
FW17
168
Joined: 06 Jan 2010, 10:56

Re: Renault V6 Power Unit

Post

It is amazing that parts are interchangeable between the 17 and 16 units.


Guess this is confirmation that they gave retained the turbo behind the engine layout.

User avatar
ME4ME
79
Joined: 19 Dec 2014, 16:37

Re: Renault V6 Power Unit

Post

FW17 wrote:
26 Mar 2017, 06:08
It is amazing that parts are interchangeable between the 17 and 16 units.


Guess this is confirmation that they gave retained the turbo behind the engine layout.
Motorsport.com understands Red Bull produced some extra components to allow the three Renault-engined teams to retro-fit the 2016 MGU-K to their cars.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/rena ... ty-886148/

H2H
H2H
4
Joined: 24 Apr 2013, 21:24

Re: Renault V6 Power Unit

Post

Yes, Red Bull manufactured extra components to fit the 16' MGU-K to the 17' car.

Overall this is one of the indications that Renault was (too) aggressive with their new K design and weight target. The success of Haas F1 in Qualy is another piece that with the old one Renault is still behind Ferrari and Mercedes.

The Renault-powered team should get a boost from the new units another four-five races in.

User avatar
carisi2k
28
Joined: 15 Oct 2014, 23:26

Re: Renault V6 Power Unit

Post

I wonder if this kers upgrade will be available for Daniel's second engine in China.

User avatar
ME4ME
79
Joined: 19 Dec 2014, 16:37

Re: Renault V6 Power Unit

Post

carisi2k wrote:
29 Mar 2017, 08:55
I wonder if this kers upgrade will be available for Daniel's second engine in China.
What second engine? Horner said Ricciardo's car had a fuel cell problem.

User avatar
dren
226
Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 14:14

Re: Renault V6 Power Unit

Post

I'd guess the bigger gain from the new MGUK is in weight savings, not power generation, even though they state it is more powerful.
Honda!

User avatar
Blackout
1563
Joined: 09 Feb 2010, 04:12

Re: Renault V6 Power Unit

Post

Exactly. It's meant to be much lighter and:
"We took advantage of this challenge to go beyond our previous approach and rethink the integration of mechanics into the chassis. The way the organs, subsets of the energy recovery system, battery, Cooling elements are connected to one another, intertwined, for obvious performance reasons, because this is not only achieved by horses of pure power, but rather radical choices have been adopted to reduce the mass and We have also tried to homogenize the temperatures, the temperature and the temperature of the heat exchangers, To obtain the least "hot" sources possible. So far, we had a system of recovery of energy rather low temperature and a thermal V6 rather High temperature, we made a leveling from the top. Wider car? Yes, it helps, but again, engine manufacturers always fantasize about a complete compact, lightest, best integrated and centered powertrain possible with a loss of heat, so horses, as low as possible. All the energy that one can avoid to pass through the radiators turns into power to the wheels."
Taffin-Autohebdo-google translation

According to Marko, there was no engine nor fuel consumption problems and they could have pushed till the end if they wanted. (Palmer had brake problems, Ric had a gearbox and a fuel tank problem and Kvy had an air leak in his pneumatic valves system?)
But Helmut also says they dont have Merc/Ferrari qualy system and that costs them 0.5s in Q... :-k
http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 50196.html

Qualy top speeds: (qualy = same conditions for everybody + empty tanks + fresh ultra soft tires + DRS + no windchatting during the bast lap etc)
Q 2017
Williams STROLL 328.6 MASSA 324.3
Force India PEREZ 328.1 OCON 324.4
Renault HULKENBERG 326.2 PALMER 325.4
Mercedes HAMILTON 325.5 BOTTAS 321.1
Ferrari RAIKKONEN 322.8 VETTEL 322.0
STR KVYAT 322.3 SAINZ 322.0
RBR VERSTAPPEN 321.8 RICCIARDO 318.0
Haas GROSJEAN 321.6 MAGNUSSEN 320.5
Sauber ERICSSON 317.4 GIOVINAZZI 315.9
Mclaren ALONSO 316.6 VANDOORNE 314.4

Q 2016
Force India Hulkenberg 330.3
Williams Bottas 329.8
Mercedes Hamilton 328.4
Ferrari Vettel 325.9
Manor Wehrlein 325.8
Haas Gutierrez 325.3
Sauber Ericsson 322.7
Renault Magnussen 321.4
Toro Rosso Sainz Jr. 320.9
Red Bull Ricciardo 320.8
Button 320.4

Post Reply