[WEC] Toyota LMP1 Discussion

[roderick]

Originally Posted by Bubak

Well, yeap, it is great that it can be possible (maybe with some fine to Toyota Racing, 5000 Euro +/-: D) to have Stéphane Sarrazin in num. 7. So, have two solid crews ... I think Toyota strategy will be clear and from oldstyle days: have two sprint cars to catch a win and one endurance trim behind two Porsches ... and who knows, perhaps num. 9 win a race as Porsche Num. 19 in 2015 (in terms of pace, but it will be f&cking miracle! ) ). I think that last endurance crew that already won Le Mans was Peugeot in 2009. Le Mans tyres strategy is a same as last year, no change on useing numbers of tyres, right?

Good or bad, Stéphane Sarrazin was so many times in driver lineup that battleing a win (in 2014 ... or last year in 6 num .... but there is clear indication that Porsche winning crew from last year in terms of whole performance were naturally better than No. 6 Toyota and more lucky one as No. 5. )

BTW, on June's issue of updated TS050 on Racecar Engineering Pascal Vasselon said that the weakest point was clearly the quality control last year. The part that broke physically [at Le Mans] was a quality issue which was impossible to catch (ehm, like wiring loom in 2014? :-/ ). Now, if they had the same failure, they would be able to do the last lap in four minutes at Le Mans (BTW they had similar problem with num. 6 later on Nürburgring WEC and car finised). It was because whole team
were running short of time of engine developing (well, right, run first dyno on the end of the year ((2015)) and 6 months later win LM? Not possible! ) and didn’t have right mode for the engine. So, late desitions about engine change to fit into a chassis (last year article about TS050 2016 spec. was saying that position of (inter)coolers was a nightmare).

The best picture of TS050 2016 engine so far what I have found is this one...

Attachment 49592

Well, line connector (pipes) from coolers and intercoolers are pretty weird... so maybe not suffering vibrations issues during a whole event... but, seems still a bit strange at whole.

The problem wasn't just because of its placement. The real problem of intercooler pipe problem was due to adhesive connecting carbon fiber duct and aluminum manifold port.
As far as I know, they've changed the layout drastically and no longer using CF for the piping between intercooler and manifold.

[TF110]

All aluminum now?

[bentley speed 8]

It all points out the fact that last year's car was a rushed job, with having to develop the new V6 much earlier than they expected. This year, they finally had time to optimize the car, and so far it seems to be quite good in the reliability department.

[Japanese Samurai]

Toyota will stream J-sports live broadcast of LM24 race for free (only in Japan ?).
http://toyotagazooracing.com/jp/wec/...4h-lemans.html

[Japanese Samurai]

Car Watch reports Toyota Le Mans tech briefing meeting.
http://car.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/1060699.html

2017 TS050 battery system electric pressure: 815V (2016 spec: 750V)
2017 TS050 battery running possible temperature: 85 degree (2016 spec: 60 degree)

Necessary time is 4 minutes and 30 seconds to charge 8MJ.

[GasperG]

Li-ion cells at 85°C

[Hiro]

Originally Posted by Japanese Samurai

Necessary time is 4 minutes and 30 seconds to charge 8MJ.

No I do not think so (I stand corrected). The writer does not understand this context. The actual slide is a comparison between Prius Prime and TS050. Prius takes 3 hours to charge 10.3 MJ (from the 200V outlet) while TS050 takes 1.3 lap of Circuit de la Sarthe (converted to 4.5 minutes) to charge the same but actually it only requires the braking time which may be several ten seconds. The performance of the racing car battery is astronomical.

[Japanese Samurai]

Thank you for correcting.

[ModelT]

Originally Posted by roderick

The problem wasn't just because of its placement. The real problem of intercooler pipe problem was due to adhesive connecting carbon fiber duct and aluminum manifold port.
As far as I know, they've changed the layout drastically and no longer using CF for the piping between intercooler and manifold.

Hmmmm, so it didn't simply run out of fuel then?

[TF110]

Can someone translate this image and what the square boxes represent?



I notice there's no representative of the Toyota's race engine on that graph, but they show the 'diesel turbo race engine', which I presume is based on Audi's R10, at 42.6% thermal efficiency.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by TF110

Can someone translate this image and what the square boxes represent?



I notice there's no representative of the Toyota's race engine on that graph, but they show the 'diesel turbo race engine', which I presume is based on Audi's R10, at 42.6% thermal efficiency.

The boxes are just more data points (engines) that they have data for. The square ones are diesel engines, the diamond ones are petrol engines. They've highlighted a few data points as stars, but the others are just other engines that are perhaps less relevant, so not highlighted. The diesel race engine they've highlighted comes in before the year 2000, so if the scales are accurate then that's not the Audi racing unit. There were a few diesel touring cars in the 90s, but they weren't really at the level of technology that diesel LMPs and touring cars ran in the 00s.

The line graph/arrow they've drawn through the points isn't accurate though. Both the lines should be significantly lower if they're to be accurate.

[chernaudi]

Yep, diesel racing engine corresponds to about 1998 or '99, which was the year that BMW won the Nurburgring 24 with a diesel.

To be honest, other than their current engine, I don't see any of Toyota's racing engines being that efficient, since the were high revving NA V8s without DFI. Granted, about the same can be said for anyone else, since especially at LM in '11 and '13 Audi burned more fuel to make more power, combined with the fact that they were running more downforce and needed that power to maximize top speed.

[Japanese Samurai]

Originally Posted by TF110

Can someone translate this image and what the square boxes represent?

Title: (WEC is) Thermal efficiency improvement competition

In box: We chose gasoline engine, but its thermal efficiency figures closes up (=nearly equal to) that of diesel engine.

*However, it's ambiguous whether the comparative target is a production diesel engine or a racing diesel engine in Japanese.

[TF110]

Thanks for the translations. I didn't look at it right the first time. I agree with you guys and see now the year for the diesel race engine is around the '99, 2000 mark so too early to be the R10. But if Audi was only that efficient 5 or 6 years later it's still a good deal higher than the petrol engine cars. No wonder Audi and Peugeot were said to be making near 800hp.

[GasperG]

Toyota claimed "over 40%" for TS-040, they also claim 40% for last generation Prius (pfi) and 41% for last generatin 2.5 hybrid engine (Camry).

Graph doesn't reveal anything about new TS-050 engine, I think it's just old graph they showed for representation, that diesel and gasoline efficiency are about to meet.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by TF110

Thanks for the translations. I didn't look at it right the first time. I agree with you guys and see now the year for the diesel race engine is around the '99, 2000 mark so too early to be the R10. But if Audi was only that efficient 5 or 6 years later it's still a good deal higher than the petrol engine cars. No wonder Audi and Peugeot were said to be making near 800hp.

What it really does show is the amount of money thrown at diesel engines for development in road use. In Europe especially governments were on a massive diesel push because of better fuel mileage and lower emissions. In the UK you saved hundreds of pounds a year on tax using a diesel. Only the last 5 years or so did they start throwing the same money at petrol engine, usually little ones with turbos. Then the VW stuff kick started that more. In the UK it has highlighted we weren't even measuring the correct emission gas, nevermind the amount of gas.

The graph is pretty inaccurate in a lot of ways, but it is good at demonstrating the attitude towards the fuels and how governments pushed certain agendas at certain times.

Remember that a diesel engine is generally more efficient, and diesel contains more energy per litre than petrol, but it requires a larger and heavier engine to extract it, which makes it difficult for racing use, and more suited to high torque vehicles (lorries, tractors), and long distance motorway travelling where you don't have to do a lot of stop starting with the extra weight.

[CyberMotor]

In the US, I remember the old Mercedes diesels that smoked and rattled. If, you got behind one, you would think they were burning coal for fuel. With the increase in emissions laws, they faded.

Along comes the Audi LMP with "clean diesel". I bought into it even when my eyes were seeing something different. I hoped that the efficiency of the diesel could be a viable tool for increased efficiency and clean while doing so.

The last time I saw Audi and Peugeot racing at PLM, late in the night it looked like they were fogging for mosquitoes they had so much smoke coming out. Some said at the time, "All race cars smoke late in a race." I've seen many race cars at the end of a race and I know when some cars are not smoking at all and some are puffing.

VW's deception sealed the deal in the US, I think. Full electric will probably be the future while diesel stays where the torque is needed for moving larges masses.

[Akrapovic]

Yeah the ACO regs regarding diesels said there must be no visible emissions. This was fine with the R10, but come 2008 Peugeot had turned up the fuel mixture and it was very clearly visible from trackside. Stood trackside at the esses looking up at the Dunlop bridge and you could see it against the sky in the morning. Since the ACO were then ignoring it (rule obviously didn't apply to the French cars), Audi had to respond and come the R15 they had visible fumes too, and the ACO decided to not bother with that rule.

Where did the Toyota graph come from? It's a very odd one. Doesn't seem to fit with the scales and since its LMP based you'd expect a bit of data on the Audi diesels, but they've highlighted toad cars. Its a bit strange that one.

[chernaudi]

Also same rules don't apply to Ford, Chevy and Dodge pick ups with diesel engines, which probably pollute a lot more than VAG's cheater engines ever did. Diesels are better at carbon emissions, but NOX emissions have never really been much different between the two.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Also same rules don't apply to Ford, Chevy and Dodge pick ups with diesel engines, which probably pollute a lot more than VAG's cheater engines ever did. Diesels are better at carbon emissions, but NOX emissions have never really been much different between the two.

Pickups are classified differently. I believe they have different safety standards too.

[chernaudi]

Never the less, I think that they should have to abide by similar emissions standards, considering their popularity, and that gasoline engined trucks already use modified V8s from Ford, GM and Chrysler road cars.

[Akrapovic]

Yeah, I agree but it's because they're classified differently (utility vehicles) which is how they get away with. One of the many reasons pickups are not that popular in Europe. In the UK you'd bankrupt yourself on the emissions tax. That might change with the new tax laws we have starting this year.

[CyberMotor]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Yeah the ACO regs regarding diesels said there must be no visible emissions. This was fine with the R10, but come 2008 Peugeot had turned up the fuel mixture and it was very clearly visible from trackside. Stood trackside at the esses looking up at the Dunlop bridge and you could see it against the sky in the morning. Since the ACO were then ignoring it (rule obviously didn't apply to the French cars), Audi had to respond and come the R15 they had visible fumes too, and the ACO decided to not bother with that rule.

Yes, I do think the Audis were cleaner early on. The Peugeot entry did seem to affect the rules and things weren't as clear as before.

When everyone was talking about equalizing diesel and petrol, with a petrol engine you can restrict the air on the front end, with a diesel, you have particulate filters that restrict the engine on exhaust.

Later on, it seemed the particulate filters weren't focused on as they were earlier.

[TF110]

I don't think we'll see a diesel back in lmp1 unless it's with Peugeot. But that doesn't look likely either.

On topic, does anyone think we'll see Toyota do a qualifying type run at the test day? These last few years they seem to have been focusing mostly on race pace. But now with three cars they have that much more data to compile and can split programs through three cars instead of two.

[Articus]

Qualifying serves no real purpose in a 24 hour race other than bragging rights. The test day priority is going to be the race setups. Fundamentally is poor management to pursue anything otherwise.

Will they put low fuel on a race setup, new tires, max turbo boost, max ers in qualifying practice on wednesday/thursday of raceweek? Absolutely.