Home Mobile Forum News Cookbook FaceBook Us T-Shirts etc.: Europe/Worldwide. eBay Motorsport Links Advertising  
Site Partners: SpotterGuides  
Related Sites: Your Link Here  

Go Back   TenTenths Motorsport Forum > Saloon & Sportscar Racing > Sportscar & GT Racing > ACO Regulated Series


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10 Apr 2014, 14:08 (Ref:3390785)   #3466
wewantourdarbyback
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
United Kingdom
Goodwood
Posts: 943
wewantourdarbyback should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridwewantourdarbyback should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
http://www.24h-lemans.com/en/news/le...746_14726.html
wewantourdarbyback is offline  
Quote
Old 10 Apr 2014, 17:46 (Ref:3390828)   #3467
JoestForEver
Veteran
 
JoestForEver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
United Kingdom
New York
Posts: 734
JoestForEver should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
So not only does diesel car has smaller fuel tanks but also smaller refueling systems to balance their pitstop times I believe. But should it? The advantage of shorter refueling time cannot even compensate the deficit in stint distances. This really annoys me.
JoestForEver is offline  
__________________
Eat, sleep, race, repeat.
Quote
Old 10 Apr 2014, 18:31 (Ref:3390837)   #3468
TF110
Veteran
 
TF110's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
United States
Posts: 14,181
TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!
Will they have shorter stints? I'm not so sure.
TF110 is offline  
Quote
Old 11 Apr 2014, 04:06 (Ref:3390952)   #3469
JoestForEver
Veteran
 
JoestForEver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
United Kingdom
New York
Posts: 734
JoestForEver should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by TF110 View Post
Will they have shorter stints? I'm not so sure.
Numbers speak louder than wild guessing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoestForEver
Ok, a bit more computing here, hopefully not too scary.
Based on @MyNameIsNigel 's figure, we have
FTFave=1.074
FTFMax=1.088
KTF=0.987
Penergy(allocation)=139.5 MJ/lap
Pflow=89.5 kg/h
Ptank=68.3L
Denergy=138.7 MJ/lap
Dflow=80.2 kg/h
Dtank=54.3L

As published lately, ACO/FIA decides the fuel type should be E20/B10 diesel(base bio 10%). Source:http://www.fia.com/sites/default/fil..._2014_fuel.pdf
For convenience and data availability, we refer to B20 diesel for energy density per kg.
http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/heavyvehic...-biodiesel.pdf shows B20 is 2% down on energy comparing with petroleum diesel at 38.6MJ/L
http://www.biodiesel.org/docs/ffs-ba...5.pdf?sfvrsn=6 shows the density of B20 is 0.856
http://psrcentre.org/images/extraimages/212181.pdf reveals the energy density of E20 at 15 degrees Celsius is 32.43 MJ/L with 0.7541 kg/L.

As a result, the ED(petrol) and ED(diesel) in the formula of FTF should be 43MJ/kg and 44.19 MJ/kg respectively, which allows us to compute the ratio of BSFC(petrol) and BSFC(diesel) average. And the answer is 1.103, bigger than 1.090 previously. As for BSFCmax(petrol)/BSFCmax(diesel), it is 1.12 now. Diesel is still superior at peak power economy.

In terms of E(additional) (a.k.a, additional allocated diesel energy due to technology differences.), we can know easily compute it by maneuvering the formula of KTF. And the result is 1.71 MJ comparing with 2.24 MJ in the past.

So now what? We can compare stint lengths of petrol and diesel class based on BSFC fuel consumption and fuel tank volume. The ratio of petrol and diesel is 1.14 against 1.12 in the past.
However, the final number actually means nothing other than its relative relationship as it is not the fuel consumption per lap or per minute. It only means that although Audi is making progress in fuel economy, it still needs more pitstop than Toyota and Porsche. Thanks to the reduction in fuel tank volume, the more economic diesel engine is forcing Audi to refuel more! Ridiculous I'd say. Unless Audi's pace is better than Toyota and the gap is greater than 2013. There's no way it is going to win anything.
JoestForEver is offline  
__________________
Eat, sleep, race, repeat.
Quote
Old 11 Apr 2014, 08:56 (Ref:3390993)   #3470
TF110
Veteran
 
TF110's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
United States
Posts: 14,181
TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!
I will wait until Silverstone to see who goes how far.
TF110 is offline  
Quote
Old 11 Apr 2014, 10:10 (Ref:3391008)   #3471
MyNameIsNigel
Veteran
 
MyNameIsNigel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Switzerland
Lake Geneva Area
Posts: 2,132
MyNameIsNigel has a real shot at the podium!MyNameIsNigel has a real shot at the podium!MyNameIsNigel has a real shot at the podium!MyNameIsNigel has a real shot at the podium!
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoestForEver View Post
Numbers speak louder than wild guessing.
With these figures, the minimum fuel autonomy for Porsche and Toyota at LM would increase to more than 15 laps (assuming that all the fuel energy allocation is consumed at each lap):
(32.43 MJ/l * 68.3 l) / 139.5 MJ/lap = 15.88 laps
They could potentially stretch the stints to 16 laps at LM.

As for Audi, the minimum fuel autonomy would increase to more than 14 laps:
(27.83 MJ/l * 54.3 l) / 138.7 MJ/lap = 14.81 laps
That is still one lap less than Porsche and Toyota, but Audi could likewise try to stretch the stints to 15 laps at LM.

It is however far from being an ideal situation for Rebellion Racing (and Lotus, if they ever make it to the race track...) which would end up with a minimum fuel autonomy of slightly more than 14 laps at LM:
(32.43 MJ/l * 68.3 l) / 157.2 MJ/lap = 14.09 laps

In that respect, I am a bit surprised that the Endurance Committee did not increase the fuel tank capacity in the LMP1-L class.

Obviously, the above is only based on revised assumptions concerning the relevant fuel specifications. Aren't Shell going to make those specifications public BTW ?
MyNameIsNigel is offline  
__________________
In order to finish first, first you have to finish
Quote
Old 20 Apr 2014, 10:14 (Ref:3395430)   #3472
Chiana
Veteran
 
Chiana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,777
Chiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Fame
So I was wondering, if there's a situation at LM where P1 team has exceeded BSFC by more than 2% and refuses to take the in-race penalty as said below:

"If the competitor refuses the penalty, the final classification will be published subject to further investigations, with possible exclusion following the race, further to detailed analysis between the FIA and the competitor: “dissuasive penalty”. The detailed post race analysis could involve tests and inspections with the competitor or elsewhere (calibration sensor check), and will include an analysis of the other data at the disposal of the FIA (reverse engineering)"

but then goes to win the race - do we really think that FIA and ACO would later disqualify the winner of the largest motor race in the world? It would be one of the biggest farces in decades, whichever stand they take (whether they disqualify the team in question OR not). Just utterly terrible PR.

Why did they leave the door open for teams not to accept the in-race penalties (stop and gos)? What exactly was the thought process in this...
Chiana is offline  
Quote
Old 20 Apr 2014, 10:42 (Ref:3395448)   #3473
MyNameIsNigel
Veteran
 
MyNameIsNigel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Switzerland
Lake Geneva Area
Posts: 2,132
MyNameIsNigel has a real shot at the podium!MyNameIsNigel has a real shot at the podium!MyNameIsNigel has a real shot at the podium!MyNameIsNigel has a real shot at the podium!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiana View Post
So I was wondering, if there's a situation at LM where P1 team has exceeded BSFC by more than 2% and refuses to take the in-race penalty as said below:

"If the competitor refuses the penalty, the final classification will be published subject to further investigations, with possible exclusion following the race, further to detailed analysis between the FIA and the competitor: “dissuasive penalty”. The detailed post race analysis could involve tests and inspections with the competitor or elsewhere (calibration sensor check), and will include an analysis of the other data at the disposal of the FIA (reverse engineering)"

but then goes to win the race - do we really think that FIA and ACO would later disqualify the winner of the largest motor race in the world? It would be one of the biggest farces in decades, whichever stand they take (whether they disqualify the team in question OR not). Just utterly terrible PR.

Why did they leave the door open for teams not to accept the in-race penalties (stop and gos)? What exactly was the thought process in this...
Disqualification may indeed be the likely outcome, but this at least leaves a chance to appeal the decision if the relevant manufacturer believes that this is not justified. You cannot appeal a stop-and-go penalty, nor any other penalty imposed during the race.

I am keeping my fingers crossed and hope that we shall not experience such a mess.
MyNameIsNigel is offline  
__________________
In order to finish first, first you have to finish
Quote
Old 20 Apr 2014, 16:04 (Ref:3395723)   #3474
Chiana
Veteran
 
Chiana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,777
Chiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Fame
Missed this before, why is the petrol refuelling restrictor 0,2mm larger at Le Mans than elsewhere??
http://www.fia.com/sites/default/fil...20diameter.pdf
Chiana is offline  
Quote
Old 20 Apr 2014, 16:07 (Ref:3395725)   #3475
Victor_RO
Veteran
 
Victor_RO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Romania
Cluj-Napoca, Romania
Posts: 6,212
Victor_RO is going for a new world record!Victor_RO is going for a new world record!Victor_RO is going for a new world record!Victor_RO is going for a new world record!Victor_RO is going for a new world record!Victor_RO is going for a new world record!Victor_RO is going for a new world record!Victor_RO is going for a new world record!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiana View Post
Missed this before, why is the petrol refuelling restrictor 0,2mm larger at Le Mans than elsewhere??
http://www.fia.com/sites/default/fil...20diameter.pdf
Different fuel specification for Le Mans? Or different refuelling pump supplier?
Victor_RO is offline  
__________________
When in doubt? C4.
Quote
Old 20 Apr 2014, 16:09 (Ref:3395726)   #3476
Chiana
Veteran
 
Chiana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,777
Chiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameChiana will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Fame
24h-lemans says

"Note that height of the fuel reserves (in the pits) is 2.60 m at Le Mans and 2 m at the other circuits."


? Has that anything to do with that. No? Wouldn't explain diesel staying same
Chiana is offline  
Quote
Old 20 Apr 2014, 16:32 (Ref:3395744)   #3477
Victor_RO
Veteran
 
Victor_RO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Romania
Cluj-Napoca, Romania
Posts: 6,212
Victor_RO is going for a new world record!Victor_RO is going for a new world record!Victor_RO is going for a new world record!Victor_RO is going for a new world record!Victor_RO is going for a new world record!Victor_RO is going for a new world record!Victor_RO is going for a new world record!Victor_RO is going for a new world record!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiana View Post
24h-lemans says

"Note that height of the fuel reserves (in the pits) is 2.60 m at Le Mans and 2 m at the other circuits."


? Has that anything to do with that. No? Wouldn't explain diesel staying same
Diesel and petrol do flow differently, different chemical compounds, density and viscosity, so I suspect that's what they took into account. And the fuelling systems are gravity-fed, not pressurised.
Victor_RO is offline  
__________________
When in doubt? C4.
Quote
Old 21 Apr 2014, 16:11 (Ref:3396245)   #3478
Richard Casto
Subscriber
Veteran
 
Richard Casto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
United States
Durham, NC, USA
Posts: 2,756
Richard Casto will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameRichard Casto will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameRichard Casto will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameRichard Casto will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameRichard Casto will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameRichard Casto will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameRichard Casto will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameRichard Casto will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameRichard Casto will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameRichard Casto will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Fame
Any mention of F1/Red Bull style problems with the homologated FIA fuel sensors this past weekend?

Richard
Richard Casto is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Apr 2014, 16:13 (Ref:3396246)   #3479
MyNameIsNigel
Veteran
 
MyNameIsNigel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Switzerland
Lake Geneva Area
Posts: 2,132
MyNameIsNigel has a real shot at the podium!MyNameIsNigel has a real shot at the podium!MyNameIsNigel has a real shot at the podium!MyNameIsNigel has a real shot at the podium!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Casto View Post
Any mention of F1/Red Bull style problems with the homologated FIA fuel sensors this past weekend?

Richard
None that have been reported, which is a good sign, isn't it ?
MyNameIsNigel is offline  
__________________
In order to finish first, first you have to finish
Quote
Old 21 Apr 2014, 19:47 (Ref:3396333)   #3480
hcl123
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 889
hcl123 is heading for a stewards' enquiry!
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoestForEver View Post
Ok, a bit more computing here, hopefully not too scary.
Based on @MyNameIsNigel 's figure, we have
FTFave=1.074
FTFMax=1.088
KTF=0.987
Penergy(allocation)=139.5 MJ/lap
Pflow=89.5 kg/h
Ptank=68.3L
Denergy=138.7 MJ/lap
Dflow=80.2 kg/h
Dtank=54.3L

As published lately, ACO/FIA decides the fuel type should be E20/B10 diesel(base bio 10%). Source:http://www.fia.com/sites/default/fil..._2014_fuel.pdf
For convenience and data availability, we refer to B20 diesel for energy density per kg.
http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/heavyvehic...-biodiesel.pdf shows B20 is 2% down on energy comparing with petroleum diesel at 38.6MJ/L
http://www.biodiesel.org/docs/ffs-ba...5.pdf?sfvrsn=6 shows the density of B20 is 0.856
http://psrcentre.org/images/extraimages/212181.pdf reveals the energy density of E20 at 15 degrees Celsius is 32.43 MJ/L with 0.7541 kg/L.

As a result, the ED(petrol) and ED(diesel) in the formula of FTF should be 43MJ/kg and 44.19 MJ/kg respectively, which allows us to compute the ratio of BSFC(petrol) and BSFC(diesel) average. And the answer is 1.103, bigger than 1.090 previously. As for BSFCmax(petrol)/BSFCmax(diesel), it is 1.12 now. Diesel is still superior at peak power economy.

In terms of E(additional) (a.k.a, additional allocated diesel energy due to technology differences.), we can know easily compute it by maneuvering the formula of KTF. And the result is 1.71 MJ comparing with 2.24 MJ in the past.

So now what? We can compare stint lengths of petrol and diesel class based on BSFC fuel consumption and fuel tank volume. The ratio of petrol and diesel is 1.14 against 1.12 in the past.
However, the final number actually means nothing other than its relative relationship as it is not the fuel consumption per lap or per minute. It only means that although Audi is making progress in fuel economy, it still needs more pitstop than Toyota and Porsche. Thanks to the reduction in fuel tank volume, the more economic diesel engine is forcing Audi to refuel more! Ridiculous I'd say. Unless Audi's pace is better than Toyota and the gap is greater than 2013. There's no way it is going to win anything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoestForEver View Post
Quote:
Will they have shorter stints? I'm not so sure.
Numbers speak louder than wild guessing.
An understatement lol

But lets play it fairly.

* Gravimetric energy density

Its the base to calculate the fuel flows, and its ok to me, since *its supposed* FIA/ACO controls tightly the quality of fuels... no *additives* are allowed and this is "inspected" !... (IS IT ? -> a Ferrari took fire at Silverstone while re-fueling, dangerous stupid stuff, seems not like regular E20 gasoline at all -> so if it isn't "inspected" this fuels (surprise samples taken on pit garages of every team), even a very small addition of alpha or beta pirenes, or turpentines, on any of those petrol or diesel fuels, can alter the numbers radically in terms of energy densities -> yes a "race petrol" could have more energy density than a regular diesel with only a small amount of additives... even more difference if the other way around)

Fuel flows in the rules are in Kg/hour... http://www.fia.com/sites/default/fil...2013-FINAL.pdf annexe/appendix B

So in light of the new biofuel revelations

Petrol = 43MJ/Kg
Diesel = 44.19 MJ/Kg

Difference is 2.767 % in favor of diesel, so diesel should have 2.767% less fuel flow.... which is not the case at all, since in the rules if you calculate from appendix B, is around 7% difference, that is, ~2.5 to 3 x percent *less* diesel fuel flow than it should be, and this even attending the different hybrid release categories.

* Volumetric energy density

Its the base ( or should be) to calculate the fuel tank capacity... which in the rules are in liters

Petrol = 32.43MJ/L
Diesel = ( -1% of 38.6 MJ/L for B10) = 38.21 MJ/L

Difference is 17.82% in favor of diesel ... makes sense since the diesel substance in itself is more dense, and so more heavy... and so if a petrol tank is 66.9 Liters, a diesel tank should be 56.8 Liters, 4.2% more tank capacity than now.

And the worst is not that, why not give more lean way with it, why not 70 Liters petrol and 59.4 Liters diesel. And why that ? ... because you can even regulate the flows of the refueling hoses, but is a side issue, you could opt for more laps and or less laps per stint and so the refueling time can vary a lot to, independent of the hoses or fuels used.

Those are the REAL numbers, the technology factors and the energy spend per lap "A RUSE, SMOKE & MIRRORS"... if you go real slow you can beat the more conservative estimations by a large margin, it depends NOT on the fuel "per se", it depends NOT on how much efficient your engine is, it depends most above all on the pace you adopt. The present rules have no flexibility and or options at all, fuel tanks are too small, specially diesel, even if 2 or 3 liters more, perhaps would not be enough for an additional lap... an on purpose clumsy way to try to make things slower, when the best option above all would had been "more weight" that is independent of number of laps ... instead of less weight... but that would benefit the engines with much more torque... yeah! a rejected no brainer!, and why did they rejected a no brainer!?...
hcl123 is offline  
Quote
Reply

Bookmarks




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ACO Publish 2010 Le Mans Regulations Gingers4Justice ACO Regulated Series 88 10 Dec 2009 04:41
[LM24] Whats the future of LMP's at Le Mans?? Garrett 24 Heures du Mans 59 8 Jul 2004 16:15
[LM24] 2004 Le Mans Rules pirenzo 24 Heures du Mans 6 16 Dec 2002 19:35
[LM24] No Lister LMP 900 for Le Mans. pink69 24 Heures du Mans 1 30 Nov 2001 13:17
[LM24] Entry Rules for le Mans? Liz 24 Heures du Mans 5 5 Nov 2000 23:41


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:46.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Original Website Copyright © 1998-2003 Craig Antil. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2004-2018 Royalridge Computing. All Rights Reserved.