Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

[Blackout]

Mclaren's installation looks to be significantly different to the Red bull and Renault installation.

Have we seen the 2ß18 Renault and Red Bull Installation? Seriously Interested, since i seemed to have missed it.

RB

https://drivetribe.com/p/f1-what-update ... Au7jZcfs5Q

[Pany]

Please somebody help me understand why renault air inlets and sidepods are in total twice the section area of mclaren ones? Are supposed to run the same engine but i cant explain such a big difference. Maybe only renault are running latest version?

[wuzak]

Please somebody help me understand why renault air inlets and sidepods are in total twice the section area of mclaren ones? Are supposed to run the same engine but i cant explain such a big difference. Maybe only renault are running latest version?

Because McLaren's intake only supplies the engine, while Red Bull and Renault's supply coolers as well.

[galien]

Please somebody help me understand why renault air inlets and sidepods are in total twice the section area of mclaren ones? Are supposed to run the same engine but i cant explain such a big difference. Maybe only renault are running latest version?

It seems Renault RB and McLaren use different layout for packaging the PU peripherals.
Renault says they work a lot on that area, in terms of flexibility, to fit customer specific needs.

[Blackout]

Please somebody help me understand why renault air inlets and sidepods are in total twice the section area of mclaren ones? Are supposed to run the same engine but i cant explain such a big difference. Maybe only renault are running latest version?

Because McLaren's intake only supplies the engine, while Red Bull and Renault's supply coolers as well.

Yes.
RB's roll hoop intake supplies everything but the engine's water rad(s) and the air-air intercoolers which are in the sidepods AFAIK.
Renault's roll hoop intake supplies the compressor, the ERS and gearbox rads placed behind the PU and an oil rad (engine?) placed in front of the PU according to AMuS... so it's not very different from RB.
But according to Scrabs "This lower inlet is for the engine’s airbox, being a turbo, the engine literally sucks air in, so the lower position is less affected by the airflow disrupted by the halo. The upper inlets being used to feed coolers mounted behind the engine."

So if Scarbs is right, that texture inside the lower intake is an air filter not a rad

[Pany]

Thank tou guys for clarification. You all explained different use of topo air inlet. But..... If mclaren put all coolers connected to sidepods (good to lower cog) I expect them to be much lqrger then renault. But they are small too, leading to think they are again going with risky design under "size zero" mighty concept. I hope they did calculate well because would be 4th year of too extreme solutions. According to me the RB size zero interpretation looks perfect and safe in the same time.

[Bisonas]

Please somebody help me understand why renault air inlets and sidepods are in total twice the section area of mclaren ones? Are supposed to run the same engine but i cant explain such a big difference. Maybe only renault are running latest version?

The larger Roll hoop inlets we are seeing this year are for making possible "to raise part of the cooling system, to permit narrower sidepods for greater rear end performance"
This will result to Higher CoG but better rear end performance.

Mclaren is staying loyal to its philosophy to Keeping most of the cooling parts as low as possible for better CoG thus relying mostly to side air inlets for coolling and not on the roll hoop inlet.

Source : https://formulaone21.wordpress.com/2018 ... -analysis/

As many said before, each team packaging whats under the hood differently depending on what aero Philosophy they are following.

[Pany]

So mclaren decided to go alone with this concept, whilst all other top teams are using the top air inlets more. Could be an advantageous strategy for 2018 so that in some circuits mclaren has the win possibility ( City like tracks)

[godlameroso]

Thank tou guys for clarification. You all explained different use of topo air inlet. But..... If mclaren put all coolers connected to sidepods (good to lower cog) I expect them to be much lqrger then renault. But they are small too, leading to think they are again going with risky design under "size zero" mighty concept. I hope they did calculate well because would be 4th year of too extreme solutions. According to me the RB size zero interpretation looks perfect and safe in the same time.

It's a double edge sword, you move the weight lower but you spread it out, granted it's not going to affect weight distribution like a boxer engine would, but it's still there, and it forces you to run wider side pods and engine cover. Or you go the Renault Red Bull route, you move more mass to the center but COG goes up a bit, however you have more space in the side pod area.

[PlatinumZealot]

Theoritacally McLaren's rear wing should get cleaner air flow from having the samllest top air inlet. Their side pod drag however, may be much high than the other teams. Possible that have found a way to alleviate this.

[Sieper]

With their great new upper wishbone (also tucking in the pullrod) clearing room for airflow. It is very important to counter the added drag of the wider sidepod I think.

[godlameroso]

Could it be that they're willing to live with the drag, the body curves upward, so perhaps the through aero although draggy, also aids in creating downforce.

[Postmoe]

Could it be that they're willing to live with the drag, the body curves upward, so perhaps the through aero although draggy, also aids in creating downforce.

Perhaps they had a high CoG car last two years and have decided that it doesn't fit their aero philosophy. I mean, Honda package as I remember it was way bulkier at the top and it was commented that it would unbalance the car in a way. Even the airbox was shaped weirdly, accomodating the variable trumpets and all barely.

Now, the engine is seemingly sitting very low and forward, si it effectively "disapears" while the turbo area is apparent at the back. That is exactly what the guy Goss(?) said at a certian point of the pre-season, right? It's like they going back to basics.

[PlatinumZealot]

With their great new upper wishbone (also tucking in the pullrod) clearing room for airflow. It is very important to counter the added drag of the wider sidepod I think.

Because the wishbone is behind the side pods and not directly facing the incoming air it's effect on drag is not as large as you think. That design is just the usual finding the last crumb F1 philosophy.

[FW17]

http://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/43246098
Renault's big shortfall - both in terms of performance and reliability - is in the hybrid element of their engine. Last year, they ended up being forced to revert to their 2016-specification energy recovery system (Ers) because the new one they were developing could not be made reliable enough.

This year, they have another updated hybrid system in development, but it is not ready for the start of the season - so they will again be using what is now a two-year-old design. They plan to introduce the upgraded Ers later in the season but are not able to say when that might be.