Red Bull KERS strategy

[feynman]

OK, so what's the thinking on the lack of KERS for q3.

Reliability, they did have an issue with charging/regulation in FP1 requiring some fairly urgent sounding radio messages. Maybe figured they had more than enough time in hand didn't need the risk of a sudden issue spoiling a pole-lap.

Charging, shouldn't be a problem (although some tracks in 09 were quite tricky to charge on), but maybe they felt they lost more from the soft tyres in a hard charging outlap than they gained from KERS over a lap. (Can't remember if they are allowed to charge the cells in the garage, if I had to guess I'd doubt it).

Braking stability, maybe there is a special q3 engine map in use, hyper-blown diffuser off-throttle retarded burn. At the same time, off throttle, on the brakes, KERS is monkeying with rear balance. One or other the drivers can live with, but maybe not both at once.

Or maybe both units just broke.


What else ya got?

[Just_a_fan]

Are we sure that the RB7 has a KERS package? Apparently it wasn't used today and neither driver would comment on it. I wonder if Red Bull have taken the decision that tight bodywork packaging for the aero benefit outweighs the performance boost of KERS.

If they're not running it, then they might find themselves open to attack by a good KERS/DRS combo car...

[raymondu999]

I know, but this thread should be discussing upgrades rather than the rule compliance of the car. I'm reading reports on Twitter that apparently Red Bull have a "start only" KERS designed to be extra small and light. Could this be true?

Very clever See @jamesallenonF1 #RedBull 'start only' KERS. Weight saving small battery for boost to Turn 1. #F1

[myurr]

@raymondu999 - If that's the case it would at least be easy for the others to copy, however I'd be surprised if they went that route. With the weight increase in the cars this year there's less reason to not have full KERS, and McLaren showed in 2009 how effective it can be when the whole package is hooked up.

It would fit with their limited KERS running throughout practice though.

[raymondu999]

But again. It's impossible to accurately measure from photos about the measurements of these things.

Start only KERS article: http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2011/03/r ... only-kers/

[WhiteBlue]

Start only KERS article: http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2011/03/r ... only-kers/

Makes a lot of sense to me.

[thestig84]

Start only KERS article: http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2011/03/r ... only-kers/

Makes a lot of sense to me.

Im not convinced about this. If you believe what your hear on the car radio then it does charge/harvest out on the track. In FP1 Vettel was told to use KERS urgently so the unit didnt over heat/charge. I dont think they would go this far just to throw people of!?

[murtoidf1]

Surely the start only kers makes the Red Bull even more of a sitting duck on the straights? or even at places like corner exit?

The McLaren has maximized value adds. i.e usually the best mercedes kers, while the L shaped sidepods boost air to the rear wing and therefore maximize the effect of having the rear wing flap open.

With a car so fast on the straights, McLaren could pass Red Bull on the straights and then hold them up the rest of the lap. We saw this happen last year

Attached is a copy of the speed traps

http://www.fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre/f1 ... g-trap.pdf

[mep]

I am also not convinced of the start theory.
If you don't want to use it you can leave it out totally of the car. It depend how long the start straight is to get an advantake by it. Maybe they expected to get the complete first row. Then they don't have to bother very much about others at the start.
At the moment it seems like Redbull just does not require it and rather want to hide their performance.

[timbo]

Start only KERS article: http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2011/03/r ... only-kers/

Makes a lot of sense to me.

Does not make sense actually.
There's no gain in weight distribution, and the gains in packaging are not dramatic, because you still need motor and some kind of battery.
After all, once you start you are only using them as ballast.

[piast9]

I also doubt in that lightweight KERS theory. How much do you gain by leaving motor/generator and electronics only limiting the weight of the batteries? I assume that these mentioned 20kg is the weight of whole KERS so by using lighter batteries you gain few kilos.

[imightbewrong]

It might not be because of the weight, it might be the braking. Braking is heavily influenced by the KERS harvesting.

[timbo]

Braking is heavily influenced by the KERS harvesting.

Most folks with KERS seem to handle it.
Also, if braking was an issue, RB could still charge KERS on out-lap and then use the charge on start-finish straight.

[nacho]

Maybe they can get away with a smaller battery and also a smaller and not so robust motor and less cooling if its really used only once and not hundreds of times a race.

Kovalainen said it is hard to optimize the brake balanace with KERS for the entire braking zone, you're easily brakeing too much or too little with it. That might put strain on the rear tires and cause extra degradation. If degradation is key this year then optimal brake balance might just be worth it?

[imightbewrong]

There is an autosport article now:
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/90255

Regarding the braking. The other teams might be handling it, but it still might not be ideal. I remember people claiming that Fisis poor form in Ferrari was because it was so dodgy under braking with KERS. Also, FI had problems with braking in testing this year, because of KERS.

What I'm trying to say is, of course they can brake, but the braking system might be slightly better without KERS. Put that together with less weight (better placement of ballast possible), less cooling (= drag) and you potentially have enough to make it worth it. IF they can charge the system in the pits, that is.