Red Bull RB8 Renault

A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter does not belong here.

Post Sat Jun 16, 2012 11:24 am

The article in the AutoMotorundSport mag issue 14 /2012 on page 161 says: Red Bull runs this construction (the illegal flow through hub) since beginning of the season. Michael Schmidt (author and Germany's best F1 journalist) then goes on: The FIA did notice it only now.

I don't know if this is true.

http://www.formula1.com/news/technical/ ... 0/969.html
yeah they knew it was there since spain?, but the purpose was maybe not clear to them.
"Double points is Tyranny!"
FrukostScones
 
Joined: 25 May 2010
Location: Bonnie's Ranch

Post Sat Jun 16, 2012 5:58 pm

FrukostScones wrote:
bhallg2k wrote:One would think that if the splitter has enough contact with the ground to hinder top speed and require additional cooling for friction that the plank would likely lose through wear more than the maximum 1mm allowed during a race. That's not to say that there isn't anything "tricky" going on with RB8's tea tray, but I think the car's lack of top speed is simply a reflection of the downforce it makes, because downforce always equals drag. Such a trade-off is easy to make with class-leading downforce levels that don't put the car at an especially significant disadvantage in terms of top speed.


Is this correct? I thought floor/diffuser downforce is for free and also can reduce drag.

Maybe the car is just not very efficient. In the aero/downforce-part of Barcelona it was not the fastest.

I think the rake of the RB car may have a part to play, a diffuser which produces a certain pressure drop with zero rake gives lots of DF with little drag, while a raked floor will produce low pressure below the floor and also slightly behind it.
Owen.C93
 
Joined: 24 Jul 2010

Post Sun Jun 17, 2012 9:04 pm

about red bull shutting down 4 cylinders in slow corners: is the fuel from those 4 cylinders pushed in the exhaust pipes and burned there providing some sort of exhaust blowing?
i think that with the different combination of 4 cylinders being shut down you can achieve constant exhaust gas blow.
radosav
 
Joined: 5 Feb 2012

Post Sun Jun 17, 2012 9:28 pm

radosav wrote:about red bull shutting down 4 cylinders in slow corners: is the fuel from those 4 cylinders pushed in the exhaust pipes and burned there providing some sort of exhaust blowing?
i think that with the different combination of 4 cylinders being shut down you can achieve constant exhaust gas blow.



missfire?
THE F2012!
THE CAR THAN WON 2012 WORLD F1 CHAMPIONSHIP WHIT A TILTED ENGINE!
alogoc
 
Joined: 13 Feb 2012

Post Sun Jun 17, 2012 10:09 pm

alogoc wrote:
radosav wrote:about red bull shutting down 4 cylinders in slow corners: is the fuel from those 4 cylinders pushed in the exhaust pipes and burned there providing some sort of exhaust blowing?
i think that with the different combination of 4 cylinders being shut down you can achieve constant exhaust gas blow.



missfire?

well i don't know, i posted it to hear thoughts of members if it is possible.
radosav
 
Joined: 5 Feb 2012

Post Sun Jun 17, 2012 11:12 pm

They use the reduction in cylinders for torque control in low traction events, for example accelerating out of a hairpin.
Aswell as reducing thermal loading and fuel consumption, it mainly allows the driver greater control of the amount of energy he puts through the rears to stop them spinning up!
Yes the non used cylinders will have a mass flow through them, however the volume flow contributed to the exhaust stream will be insignificant compared to the volume flow from the utilized cylinders.

therefore their will be no added benefit to the exhaust flow stream from the shutdown cylinders.
"I continuously go further and further learning about my own limitations, my body limitations, psychological limitations. It's a way of life for me." - Ayrton Senna
Robbobnob
 
Joined: 21 May 2010
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Post Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:00 am

Does anyone remember if they tried their V2 tunnel in Canada? I know they tested it in Barcelona and Monaco free practice.

I wonder if Newey will still stay fixated on the tunnel, or if he will abandon that and look for other avenues of performance.
失败者找理由,成功者找方法
raymondu999
 
Joined: 4 Feb 2010

Post Mon Jun 18, 2012 4:19 am

Running on for cylinders..... If they want less power in the turn, the driver must do it with the throttle. Why would you want the engine to drop cylinders when you can simply close the throttle?

What am I missing?

Brian
hardingfv32
 
Joined: 3 Apr 2011

Post Mon Jun 18, 2012 4:40 am

Are you asking about whether the regs should be changed to disallow this, or what benefits this 4-cylinder trick actually brings?
失败者找理由,成功者找方法
raymondu999
 
Joined: 4 Feb 2010

Post Mon Jun 18, 2012 4:51 am

i wonder if cutting 4 cylinders, with the other 4 having larger throttle openings and more fuel, is more fuel efficient, or smoother in power delivery. im under the impression that fuel injectors are most precise in the middle range of their duty cycle? does the engine run slightly cooler, allowing a smaller radiator package?
thisisatest
 
Joined: 16 Oct 2010

Post Mon Jun 18, 2012 6:36 am

raymondu999 wrote:Are you asking about whether the regs should be changed to disallow this, or what benefits this 4-cylinder trick actually brings?


You can have an engine map that calls for cylinder cutting at a set rpm, but it is going to be controlled by the throttle position. So then what is the point of cylinder cutting? You want less power, just lift off the throttle.

Brian
hardingfv32
 
Joined: 3 Apr 2011

Post Mon Jun 18, 2012 6:48 am

Perhaps it is speed related? With the 4 dormant cylinders only "waking up" at a set speed, above the traction-limited threshold?
失败者找理由,成功者找方法
raymondu999
 
Joined: 4 Feb 2010

Post Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:43 am

It might be difficult to drive that way specially when trying to balance the car on the throttle. Drivers may be expecting X amount of power going through and end up getting Y. I agree with Brian that lifting/throttle modulation would work better in this scenario.
e30ernest
 
Joined: 29 Feb 2012

Post Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:46 am

I think it's to allow for a more responsive throttle map at higher speeds, but to allow for more drivable torque on slow corner exit. The two aren't necessarily mutually exclusive, but with pedal travel so minimal in F1 anyways, it wouldn't hurt to help the drivers.
失败者找理由,成功者找方法
raymondu999
 
Joined: 4 Feb 2010

Post Mon Jun 18, 2012 4:42 pm

raymondu999 wrote:Perhaps it is speed related? With the 4 dormant cylinders only "waking up" at a set speed, above the traction-limited threshold?


Of coarse the engine has no way to know where the traction limit is.

Remember the throttle map does not have to be linear. There can be spots with very little slop.

Brian
hardingfv32
 
Joined: 3 Apr 2011

PreviousNext

Return to F1 Car Hardware & Development

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AddThis [Crawler], CCBot [Bot], George-Jung, GrizzleBoy, Jef Patat, pastaracing, scarbs, supertweet and 46 guests