More controversy surrounding 2014 engines

[JamesH]

re: Fuel flow

I presume that the engines use fuel injection? Since the amount of fuel injected by an injector at any one time is known, the instantaneous fuel flow can be calculated from the rpm and the amount. Why are they not using that sort of scheme to measure flow? Would be very accurate but require the ECU to provide the information.

[ScotsBrutesFan]

Does anyone have a note of who is using what combination of power train parts ?

Ferrari and Mercedes obviously will use their own in house engine, ERS and Gearboxes.

Red Bull are the lead customer for Renault, does that mean the RB ERS and Gearbox will be the offered standard from Renault?

I think I read Williams are using Merc Engines but their own gearboxes...but is it the Merc or a Williams developed ERS.

Or like everything else in F1 it's not that clear cut?

[TRuss]

Originally Posted by Marbot

It seemed to me, at least, that Auto, Motor und Sport were fairly 'alarmed' by this.

"Even more alarming" is that some very accurate technical stuff isn't yet accurate enough.

Point being that if all of them are struggling to achieve expected targets, then it's likely we'll see some of the engine manufacturers pushing things to and beyond the limit, which will be infinitely more interesting than Red Bull's latest front wing end plate.

I completely agree. I for one am very excited about the regs. And I like that F1's best and brightest are truly being pushed. It's like a challenge or something... Weird.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by JamesH

re: Fuel flow

I presume that the engines use fuel injection?

It's direct fuel injection. The fuel is injected directly into the combustion chamber, rather than into the inlet tracts before the inlet valve.

Originally Posted by JamesH

Since the amount of fuel injected by an injector at any one time is known, the instantaneous fuel flow can be calculated from the rpm and the amount. Why are they not using that sort of scheme to measure flow? Would be very accurate but require the ECU to provide the information.

The teams are allowed to upgrade their injection systems until 2019, so that could interfere with anything that the FIA planned to use as a fuel flow indicator in that area.

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2013/09/1...gines-in-2014/

Originally Posted by ScotsBrutesFan

Does anyone have a note of who is using what combination of power train parts ?

Good question.

I think that all of the engine swaps have been confirmed, with only Williams swapping to Mercedes power for 2014. As for ERS...not sure, but it's likely that the top teams will be using their own systems.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Marbot

I think that all of the engine swaps have been confirmed, with only Williams swapping to Mercedes power for 2014. As for ERS...not sure, but it's likely that the top teams will be using their own systems.

Well that should solve all team Willie's problems, no body could possibly be competitive with that heap of rubbish they are running this year!

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by wnut

Well that should solve all team Willie's problems, no body could possibly be competitive with that heap of rubbish they are running this year!

All of that Williams-Renault nostalgia seems not to have paid off. Rose-tinted glasses don't work in the real world.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Marbot

All of that Williams-Renault nostalgia seems not to have paid off. Rose-tinted glasses don't work in the real world.

Funny that!


Wonder how many of the Mercedes board are about their decision not to supply RBR!

[ScotsBrutesFan]

Originally Posted by ScotsBrutesFan

Does anyone have a note of who is using what combination of power train parts ?

Originally Posted by Marbot

Good question.

I think that all of the engine swaps have been confirmed, with only Williams swapping to Mercedes power for 2014. As for ERS...not sure, but it's likely that the top teams will be using their own systems.

IT was that good a question I've tried to answer it myself... this is based on memory of what I've seen, so could be totally wrong.

Team	Engine	ERS	Gearbox
Red Bull	Renault	Red Bull ??	Red Bull
Ferrari	Ferrari	Ferrari	Ferrari
Mercedes	Mercedes	Mercedes	Mercedes
Lotus	Renault	??	??
McLaren	Mercedes	??	McLaren ??
Sauber	Ferrari	Ferrari	Ferrari
Williams	Mercedes	??	Williams
Force India	Mercedes	??	??
Toro Rosso	Renault	Red Bull	Red Bull
Caterham	Renault	??	??
Marussia	Ferrari	Ferrari	Ferrari

The obvious questions based on this are:

Will Renault produce a "standard ERS and Gear box" as a customer option for Lotus and Caterham?
Lotus could likely do their own gearboxes but an ERS?

Force India have the technology deal with McLaren, so will it be McLaren ERS (if they have their own) and Gear boxes or "standard" Mercedes ones?

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by JamesH

re: Fuel flow

I presume that the engines use fuel injection? Since the amount of fuel injected by an injector at any one time is known, the instantaneous fuel flow can be calculated from the rpm and the amount. Why are they not using that sort of scheme to measure flow? Would be very accurate but require the ECU to provide the information.

I haven't paid close attention, but I think the problem is small errors in the fuel flow rate at various RPM's. If I understand that correctly, I think it's a bit of a non-issue because provided the total fuel put into the car is monitored correctly.

If a fuel flow meter is allowing a squinch more fuel flow than it should, the car will end up a squinch short of the finish line if the team doesn't try to conserve.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by miatanut

I haven't paid close attention, but I think the problem is small errors in the fuel flow rate at various RPM's. If I understand that correctly, I think it's a bit of a non-issue because provided the total fuel put into the car is monitored correctly.

If a fuel flow meter is allowing a squinch more fuel flow than it should, the car will end up a squinch short of the finish line if the team doesn't try to conserve.

Those little balls that run in a closed loop within a fuel line provide extremely accurate flows! Is this not just a problem of trying to re-invent the wheel!

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by wnut

Those little balls that run in a closed loop within a fuel line provide extremely accurate flows! Is this not just a problem of trying to re-invent the wheel!

This sort of thing?

[wnut]

Hi Miatanut, I was thinking more like the gas flow indicator above.
You have a captive magnetic ball as above in the fuel line, you then have a winding in a collar at right angles to the ball's path around the circular race which counts each time the ball goes past. The ball displaces a constant amount each time it circulates, and it is easy to accurately calculate exactly how much fuel has gone through the sensor.
The accuracy of these devices is very good.

As fate would have it, I can't find a picture of one on the internet!

[JeremySmith]

Will it be fun?

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by wnut

Hi Miatanut, I was thinking more like the gas flow indicator above.
You have a captive magnetic ball as above in the fuel line, you then have a winding in a collar at right angles to the ball's path around the circular race which counts each time the ball goes past. The ball displaces a constant amount each time it circulates, and it is easy to accurately calculate exactly how much fuel has gone through the sensor.
The accuracy of these devices is very good.

As fate would have it, I can't find a picture of one on the internet!

I get it! An amazingly simple device, even when you add a little electronics to it.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by wnut

Those little balls that run in a closed loop within a fuel line provide extremely accurate flows! Is this not just a problem of trying to re-invent the wheel!

0.5% accurate over the entire range of expected flow rate plus in the high g environment of an F1 car? I am highly skeptical. Does anyone actually have the publish specs of those devices?

(Edit: my guess is that when calibrated they are highly accurate with steady state flow rates, but not so much with dynamic conditions.)

Richard

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

0.5% accurate over the entire range of expected flow rate plus in the high g environment of an F1 car? I am highly skeptical. Does anyone actually have the publish specs of those devices?

(Edit: my guess is that when calibrated they are highly accurate with steady state flow rates, but not so much with dynamic conditions.)

Richard

Does it really matter that much?

The main rule is the fuel allotment for the entire race. The limit on fuel flow based on revs is really to discourage fuel economy runs by everybody working under limits for various transient conditions. In the end, they all have have to get to the end under their fuel allotment and if one car runs a hair more or less fuel flow under certain conditions, the team still needs to watch their overall consumption to make sure they make it to the end.

[Marbot]

Found image of Gill F1 flow metre. Doesn't really tell us much, but there it is.



Flow metre purpose is to prevent high fuel-high boost runs being made in qualifying. You can run as much boost and chuck in as much fuel as you like during the race, but you only have 100kgs of fuel to play with, so use it wisely.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

0.5% accurate over the entire range of expected flow rate plus in the high g environment of an F1 car? I am highly skeptical. Does anyone actually have the publish specs of those devices?

(Edit: my guess is that when calibrated they are highly accurate with steady state flow rates, but not so much with dynamic conditions.)

Richard

Richard, the device is not as crude as the photo, the tolerances between the ball and its race are extremely small, the weight of the ball can be very close to the specific gravity of the fuel, and the fuel is under high pressure is non compressible and contains no air bubbles. The ball is therefore pretty much fixed in a solid medium with no leakage possible. Playing with the volume of fuel flow that causes the ball to travel one revolution of the race will yield the accuracy you seek!
Vibration will not bother the device if the fuel line is delivering fuel suitable for an injector!

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by wnut

Richard, the device is not as crude as the photo, the tolerances between the ball and its race are extremely small, the weight of the ball can be very close to the specific gravity of the fuel, and the fuel is under high pressure is non compressible and contains no air bubbles. The ball is therefore pretty much fixed in a solid medium with no leakage possible. Playing with the volume of fuel flow that causes the ball to travel one revolution of the race will yield the accuracy you seek!
Vibration will not bother the device if the fuel line is delivering fuel suitable for an injector!

No, I get that the photo was just of a similar device. Even that one in question is just to indicate flow and not to measure it. Not trying to be argumentative here as I would accept any solution that would work (not that it is up to me), but I still don't think that basic concept would likely fit the specifications that the FIA is requiring. And to other points made above, is the FIA requirements over the top or not is a different topic of which I can't comment on other than to say that I expect the manufactures themselves were part of the rule creation and felt that there needed to be that level of accuracy to (what I assume) create a level playing field.

And again, I have no doubt those devices can be made to be very accurate, but likely in steady state scenarios. I suspect that quick deltas in flow are likely to not track quite linearly with this type of device. Also, I am less concerned about vibration, but rather the ability of the device to work in high g environments and give the same level of accuracy. I expect that the ball would have relatively close tolerances with the walls and that in a high g environment you might introduce some extra level of drag upon the side walls, or ride closer to one wall than another which might change the flow characteristics that are likely key to the accuracy of the device. I am guessing that high quality devices like this exist and are used in lab and production environments. I also am assuming that for the most part they likely are for measuring static flow rates (adjust flow up to a target number and then hold it via a control system) as that is likely the predominant need. And lastly, I am guessing that whoever is building the FIA sensor has experience in this area and felt that using ultrasonics was the way to go.

All of this is conjecture on my end. I consider myself to be reasonably intelligent and have an engineering background, but will also say this is not my area of expertise. I could be completely wrong. I would love for someone to produce some actual manufacture spec sheets on a high quality lab grade version and see what it's operating range is, accuracy, etc.

Richard

[wolfhound]

I have been looking at power figures ans fuel use from 1988 the last year of the old 1.5 litre turbo formula.

Honda were able to produce about 685 bhp in race conditions with a 2.5 bar boost limit and a maximum of 150 litres of fuel. In some races they did not even fill the tank full. There were some races where they only had 620 bhp because of the fuel limit.

Next year there will be 100 kg limit on fuel so that equats to about 135 litres(density of petrol 0.74l/kg) or about 90% of what they had in 1988. I know they also have a fuel flow limit as well but looking at those figures I suspect that we should see 700bhp possible from the engines along with 165 bhp from the EARS. I do not expect those outputs straight away but it would seem realistic that we should have had at least a 10% improvement in fuel consumption in 25 years probably better.

I have used data from The Turbo Years by Alan Henry.

[wolfhound]

Pat Fry of Ferrari suspects that there are a some loopholes to be found in the 2014 engine/power train regs.

I wonder have Ferrari found something that will give them an edge or are have they missed something and only recently found it hopeing nobody else has.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/111790

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

Pat Fry of Ferrari suspects that there are a some loopholes to be found in the 2014 engine/power train regs.

I wonder have Ferrari found something that will give them an edge or are have they missed something and only recently found it hopeing nobody else has.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/111790

I take that article as a two sides of the same coin...

* FUD that some teams might put out there as part of a mind game strategy. Such as "We know something you don't" even if that isn't true.
* Handwringing in that maybe someone else figured something out, but we didn't. Or in short, "They might know something we don't!"

Personally, I think it is less about "loopholes" than it is a totally new game to be played, and that someone may do a better job than you and still stay completely within the rules (no loophole). And that even while you can roll out drivetrain changes as needed (no freeze), this assumes you actually know "why" you are not as quick as the other guy and what needs to be changed!

If anyone has found something tricky and they feel it is not likely to get banned, why show their hand?

Richard

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

I take that article as a two sides of the same coin...

* FUD that some teams might put out there as part of a mind game strategy. Such as "We know something you don't" even if that isn't true.
* Handwringing in that maybe someone else figured something out, but we didn't. Or in short, "They might know something we don't!"

Personally, I think it is less about "loopholes" than it is a totally new game to be played, and that someone may do a better job than you and still stay completely within the rules (no loophole). And that even while you can roll out drivetrain changes as needed (no freeze), this assumes you actually know "why" you are not as quick as the other guy and what needs to be changed!

If anyone has found something tricky and they feel it is not likely to get banned, why show their hand?

Richard

This is going to be fun!

A bit like the good old days.

[Marbot]

Of course there are going to be loopholes!

The one draw back will be that we aren't likely to find out what they'll be because the teams will be doing their best to keep things ultra secret.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Of course there are going to be loopholes!

The one draw back will be that we aren't likely to find out what they'll be because the teams will be doing their best to keep things ultra secret.

In my opinion, there clearly is an inherent risk with respect to playing deep in the gray areas with a new rule set. The risk being that you find something creative, but... it is so good, so different that it makes a mockery of the entire field and it is instantly banned. Additionally if your design hinges upon that trick, undoing it may ruin the rest of your design (and your season).

So, I really don't know how this works, but I think you (a team/designer) can take a concept to the FIA (Charlie Whiting??) and say "We are thinking of doing X, Y and Z, but it is a creative interpretation of rules A, B and C. What do you think?" and the FIA can give an opinion, but not a 100% rock solid thumbs up/down, but the details are kept secret??? And that ultimately it may be up to another team (or even your own team) to actually lodge a protest before an official ruling is made, but with the understanding that with an official ruling the concept (but maybe not all of the implementation details) are now public? (Please correct me if I have this wrong)

Assuming my understanding is right, and the FIA is not watertight, I will contradict my earlier opinion that this is mostly mind games and hand wringing. Could there be teams working on private clarifications on things and news is leaking out (not to the specifics, but that the clarifications are happening)?

Richard