Red Bull RB10 Renault

[feynman]

Wait... so no strategic use of KERS anymore?

My vaguest of understandings is that application of electric power is part of the engine mapping, the car will decide when to apply electric boost.

They'd like to deploy all their allocated charge in the optimum way all around a lap, seems very tricky, they ideally have to program the car to consistently dump their limited store of electric power in all the right places. But the drivers do not hold down a KERS button for 33seconds per lap. Perhaps the mapping is designed not to attempt to consume all the power, and leave some available for the driver to apply manually. (So that big display might be handy to have).

There might be some strategic use of the MGU-H (or TERS as I prefer to call it) which is unrestricted in terms of energy collection ... but how the deployment of this charge compares to KERS ... I dunno.
The cars are allowed to deploy 4MJ from battery to KERS (160hp/33secs), but by rule can only harvest back 2MJ from KERS per lap. So the question is how much energy can TERS practically put back into the battery, or how you choose to balance using that extra TERS energy as anti-lag or store it for later use by the KERS motor. Can TERS even generate the missing 2MJ?

Go into KERS conservation mode and full recharge for one lap while following a car, to allow you to switch to full-bananas 4MJ KERS mode for the next lap and an overtake attempt.

Hmmm, anyways I figure with fuel economy being the main concern this year, strategic overtaking will likely be done with the fuel-mix switch as opposed to any KERS button.

[rssh]

Wait... so no strategic use of KERS anymore?

My vaguest of understandings is that application of electric power is part of the engine mapping, the car will decide when to apply electric boost.

They'd like to deploy all their allocated charge in the optimum way all around a lap, seems very tricky, they ideally have to program the car to consistently dump their limited store of electric power in all the right places. But the drivers do not hold down a KERS button for 33seconds per lap. Perhaps the mapping is designed not to attempt to consume all the power, and leave some available for the driver to apply manually. (So that big display might be handy to have).

There might be some strategic use of the MGU-H (or TERS as I prefer to call it) which is unrestricted in terms of energy collection ... but how the deployment of this charge compares to KERS ... I dunno.
The cars are allowed to deploy 4MJ from battery to KERS (160hp/33secs), but by rule can only harvest back 2MJ from KERS per lap. So the question is how much energy can TERS practically put back into the battery, or how you choose to balance using that extra TERS energy as anti-lag or store it for later use by the KERS motor. Can TERS even generate the missing 2MJ?

Go into KERS conservation mode and full recharge for one lap while following a car, to allow you to switch to full-bananas 4MJ KERS mode for the next lap and an overtake attempt.

Hmmm, anyways I figure with fuel economy being the main concern this year, strategic overtaking will likely be done with the fuel-mix switch as opposed to any KERS button.

I agree drivers can setup maps were to use ERS in lower gear for better accleration when they are cruising in the race were all the 33 secs of ERS are used automatically by maps and then they can have mapping were the system applies only 25sec worth ERS and the rest can be used by driver in higher speeds to defend. Kers button is not outlawed IMO.

[stefan_]

via F1talks

[Coefficient]

As pointed out by Dren the advantage of this design is isolating the spinning driveshaft from the airflow.

Interesting that many teams used such setup last year, but this year abandoned it (at least for now). I wonder why.

I don't get it either...

So far only Red Bull and Mercedes right?

Perhaps the poorer teams are just a little behind on manufacturing detail parts because of the massive challenge the rest of the car poses. The Sauber didn't even have brake duct winglets or pod vanes whilst running yesterday but I'm sure they will make an appearance.

[gandharva]

[gandharva]

[AlexT]

This is interesting

[gandharva]

All outlets of engine and coolers are as far in the back as possible it seems.

[avatar]

Deleted

[gandharva]

[raymondu999]

The car looks rather lackluster and basic atm - perhaps this is merely a reliability check vanilla-spec RB10?

[gandharva]

The car looks rather lackluster and basic atm - perhaps this is merely a reliability check vanilla-spec RB10?

In terms of aero i agree. But packaging seems quite well done. Engine seems to sit very low.

[motobaleno]

the rear whishbones form behind seem similar to ferrari's ones but hot air exits much lower in rb

[acosmichippo]

I don't see the point to the huge displays, all a driver needs to see is gear, lap time info and when to change gear - everything else can be provided by radio if the driver needs to know it.

Gear change and DRS activation is all via audio queues in the helmet now.

Problem is drivers always say radio is difficult for them to hear, and additionally can fail. Also engineers have a tendency to disturb drivers in crucial moments. Why not have some redundancy built-in and have info available to drivers when they are ready for it instead of in the middle of a braking zone?

[Jonnycraig]

The car looks rather lackluster and basic atm - perhaps this is merely a reliability check vanilla-spec RB10?

It's not often teams run their Melbourne package on day 1 of pre-season testing.