Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

[FoxHound]

So how many Renault PU's have gone up in smoke now?

I saw on the news (havent watched the race yet) Daniel's blow up just as he crossed the finish line!

My conspiracy hat is on tonight.

What are the odds that these blow ups lead to a reliability change, as permitted in the rules if parts can be demonstrated unreliable?

I think, and I may be alone, that this request has already been lodged with the FIA.

[langwadt]

I wonder how "political" Ricardo's blow-up on the finish line was... Listening to RedBullRacing for the last few months, they are a bit nasty.

It just feels a bit too perfect to be a coincidence

No doubt Horner was pissed after the race, all he had to say was "there's nothing wrong with our drivers performance "
but blowing an engine that you'd need later on purpose just to make a point would be utterly stupid, unless RB considers
the season a write-off and have a different engine manufacturer ready for next year

[Jolle]

I wonder how "political" Ricardo's blow-up on the finish line was... Listening to RedBullRacing for the last few months, they are a bit nasty.

It just feels a bit too perfect to be a coincidence

No doubt Horner was pissed after the race, all he had to say was "there's nothing wrong with our drivers performance "
but blowing an engine that you'd need later on purpose just to make a point would be utterly stupid, unless RB considers
the season a write-off and have a different engine manufacturer ready for next year

I think it's safe to say that they have written off the season a few races ago.
And for doing more then 1 race per engine, it's also safe to say, if it doesn't blow in race one, it will so during race two

[Wayne DR]

It is better to use all the energy the mgu-h to the mgu-k and then to use less power from the ICE hence reducing fuel consumption. This can be managed by the software in the control unit

Good in theory... If you are trying to do a big stop (at the end of a straight), the brakes will generate around -700kW (negative as it is generated/wasted power from braking) to slow down the car. The MGUK produces 120kW. Powering the MGUK would increase the required braking power by 17% (to around -820kW).

[Blackout]

FIA is submerged by reliability mods requests these days according to AMuS.
Why not. These reliability porblems should help them make big changes to the PU without spending a single token... and gain some power in the same time because, according to Marko, the PU produces 40hp more on the dyno compared to the track, so the FIA can't say anything and Renault can argue the dyno max power is the real PU's power

[FW17]

When you say FIA it means Charlie

How many staff does FIA have to clear these reliability requests?

Are they qualified to inspect and rule on these reliability requests or just a grease monkey like Charlie who probably gives a ruling looking at the wallet

[turbof1]

When you say FIA it means Charlie

How many staff does FIA have to clear these reliability requests?

Are they qualified to inspect and rule on these reliability requests or just a grease monkey like Charlie who probably gives a ruling looking at the wallet

I am not making comments on who in the FIA clears the request. Could be Charlie, could be a different team of persons.

However, the FIA is not the only one inspecting this. Reliability requests get passed around to the other teams (manufacturers?), who can actually veto the request if they feel it's a hidden performance upgrade.

Mostly they don't though. Facts Only explained to me a while ago that generally let things pas since if they veto something, chances are they'll be vetoed on their turn when they have a request. It is a shark sport, but fortunaly on that level they leave each other at relative ease. Of course there boundaries, and an obvious performance upgrade described as a reliability upgrade will be vetoed.

[turbof1]

Djos...

Guys, I'll only allow such a topic on the base that it's not abused for more ranting on the issues it has. Strictly technical please. I'll remove the parts not comforming later on.

The risk of loosing points has nothing to do in a technical way with the PU. I removed those parts.

[djos]

Djos...

Guys, I'll only allow such a topic on the base that it's not abused for more ranting on the issues it has. Strictly technical please. I'll remove the parts not comforming later on.

The risk of loosing points has nothing to do in a technical way with the PU. I removed those parts.

Sorry, short memory....

[turbof1]

Foxhound, you too btw. This topic is not another bound of lamenting the budgetary/sportive consequences. Discussion about the technical rules allowing/dissallowing changes are however perfectly fine.

[FoxHound]

Foxhound, you too btw. This topic is not another bound of lamenting the budgetary/sportive consequences. Discussion about the technical rules allowing/dissallowing changes are however perfectly fine.

Granted it doesn't take much to confuse me, but isn't this splitting and then side splitting again just a bit too much?
I want Renault to be competitive, better for the show that way.
And I advocate the necessity of them utilising whatever means to do so within the rules, of which using the reliability clause is one.

Is this view compatible with this thread? [-o<

[santos]

This is a question about the power units, and came to my mind again after the last race. Is it possible to rebuild an engine that was already used, replacing only some parts?

[turbof1]

Foxhound, you too btw. This topic is not another bound of lamenting the budgetary/sportive consequences. Discussion about the technical rules allowing/dissallowing changes are however perfectly fine.

Granted it doesn't take much to confuse me, but isn't this splitting and then side splitting again just a bit too much?
I want Renault to be competitive, better for the show that way.
And I advocate the necessity of them utilising whatever means to do so within the rules, of which using the reliability clause is one.

Is this view compatible with this thread? [-o<

The sportive side is and always has been in the team threads. You can actually compare this thread very much to a car thread, with the only difference being specified to a PU instead of a car.

It's not about splitting the whole deal; it's about setting parameters for a specific thread.

I'd actually like to take the fine example of an other PU topic:
http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... &start=705

If one scrolls through the last few pages, you barely will see any discussion not being on topic of the technical side of the PU, even though that PU is struggling as much as the Renault PU.

However again, and I never had any issues with this in the first, referring to the technical rule book is perfectly fine. The application of tokens/reliability upgrades in a jurdicial frame, has always been considered a technical matter.

Scoring points however is part of the sportive side of the sport. The money coming from those points is a financial matter. None have any place in this topic, and again that's what the team threads are for.

[FoxHound]

Ok, that's all well.

But my memory has elapsed now to the point where I cannot recall mentioning finance.
This may be due to ghastly lifestyle choice, or plain bad genetics, or were you just preemptivley warning us not to go down this path?

[turbof1]

This is a question about the power units, and came to my mind again after the last race. Is it possible to rebuild an engine that was already used, replacing only some parts?

Depends on what you are really asking.

As you know, each PU is split up in 6 components:
-ICE
-MGU-K
-MGU-H
-Turbo Charger (TC)
-Battery (ES)
- Control Electronics (CE)

As you also know, you can only use 4 of each component, 4 allocations, during the season before receiving penalties. What you can is mix up allocations of different components. For instance 2d allocation ICE with 4th allocation MGU-K.

However, if specific parts of a component breaks down, I'd like to call these "core parts", turning that component inoperable, you are out of luck and have to replace that allocation with a different one. So unless it's not a core part, you are not allowed to repair it. Things that are not considered a core part, and thus are allowed to be repaired at any time, can be found here;
http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... 83#p565783

Neither can you remove a working part of a specific component allocation to replace a damaged part of the same component but different allocation. And neither are you allowed to use upgrades as repairs.

Note that as long as you haven't fired up a PU component for the first time during the official time of a race weekend, you are allowed to make changes to it, being either token upgrades, reliability upgrades or simply repairs. But the moment you fire it up during an official sesssion, then from that point on you are not allowed to make any change to the core parts; you are only allowed to swap allocations.