Renault R31

[ESPImperium]

I suspect it isn't possible for a team to switch to an FEE mid season even if they wanted to. That sort of change would be limited by the homolgation rules on the chassis and crash structures. Just like teams are unable to do a mid-season copy of the McLaren side pods.

The exhausts position is mandated next season so we'll never know if the FEE would be live for more than one year.

The monocoques aren't homologated this year

Yes they are. Cost wise they are, as this keeps chassis numbers down. Some teams have been known to produce 10 each season at a cost of $600,000+ each. The FIA want to ideally kaap teams to at maximum 4 or 5 ideally.

Renault have now written off 3 out of 5 chassis this year i belive.

[Richard]

So it was a fault in the exhaust that caused the fire.

Allison also identified the purpose of the mysterious bottle:

There was an explosion shortly after Nick got out of the car, on the left. What was it?
Allison: “This was caused by the air bottle which supplies the air valves in the engine. It has overheated in the fire and failed.”

http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2011/08/h ... explosion/

[mep]

In case it was a air bottle I wonder why it doesn't had a pop up valve?

[timbo]

In case it was a air bottle I wonder why it doesn't had a pop up valve?

Even if it had it could be damaged due to fire. But I think it was one of those case when people didn't even think they need one.

[mep]

Shouldn't a valve be mandatory?
Also why should it get damaged by the fire?
Fire is exactly the scenario where you need it so it has to be fireproof.

I still suspect the Battery causing the explosion.
Even when it is located a bit further apart the temperatures can easily reach dangerous values especially considering the battery can be close to those temperatures even under normal conditions.
Not to forget those strange sparks coming of the car after leaving the pit.

FIA has reasons to keep a low profile when it was KERS.
There was a fire and an explosion which naturally brings up nasty questions.
The issue is handled to easy for my taste.

[cravenciak]

New part of R31? http://i.imgur.com/yBjew.jpg

[hardingfv32]

This is motor racing, not the commercial aero industry. How many times has an air bottle blown up?

Do you want the designers solving performance issues or making the cars safe for every possible accident situation.

Brian

[mep]

Listen harding you should never compromise safety for performance.
A safety valve on a pressure vessel will not make the car slower at all. Also is overheating of the vessel a very likely incident. The FIA should make stricter restrictions on such parts and now allow to race a pressure vessel without safety valve.

[PhillipM]

It may have been that the vessel let go when the cold CO2 steam hit it rather from the lack of a safety valve.

[hollus]

When this aluminium cylinder was heated in the flames and then suddenly cooled by the marshals extinguisher, the casing shattered sending the pressurised gas out in a hail of debris.

That is right off the Scarbs blog, and yes, it only his theory (clear in the context of the full post), but a plausible one.

[Richied76]

theres a good chance that the fire extiguisher wasnt Co2. we all know that Co2 works by starving the fire of O2. OUTSIDE!!! no matter how hard you try the sightest bit of wind remove the carbon dioxide away. Chances are more likely that it was a foam type. cooling exposed areas and nutralizing the chances of oils, greases, fules burning. but i know what you mean, the cooling effect. i think it was a pressure vessel but if it was for the engine valve train, renault have put it in one stupid place. i remeber on this thread ages ago that the same bottle was debated, and it was directly on the outside of the sidepod over the exhaust...little exposed dont you think?

And i think if it was the battery it would have blown a hole in the bottom of the car! either that or would have burnt the whole car to a crisp. Li-po batterys are deadly! i know most teams use cappasitors but even so i would have expected the marshal that got hit to have had some kind of chemical burn.

[hardingfv32]

And when do we start looking for explosives planted by terrorist?

"you should never compromise safety for performance" Life is a compromise...

I personally choose performance over safety every time. If you can be competitive and safe at the same time, that is great.

This current situation highlights an issue that is simple to fix at no penalty to performance. So, add rule requiring some kind of relief system. But, it highlights the designers focus on performance and not safety. It is not like relief valves on pressure vessels is that unusual.

Brian

[Jersey Tom]

I personally choose performance over safety every time.

I assume (and hope) then that you're not a practicing engineer.

[Caito]

I personally choose performance over safety every time.

I assume (and hope) then that you're not a practicing engineer.

Let's see if you backup that harding if you get inside your own racecar.

[marekk]

According to this source http://stason.org/TULARC/sports/motorsp ... -work.html they charge this gas replenishment cylinder to approx 150 bar. If exhaust pipe was broken somwhere near the bottle, hot gases could drive it to 300 bar or more before it goes off.
Pressure relief valve is a must, and moving this thing away from fuel tank wouldn't be bad idea either.

Performance over safety ? Don't think so:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzn6MDVq ... detailpage[/youtube]