[WEC] LMP Future Regulations (was Le Mans EVO rules - now hypercar rules)

[MyNameIsNigel]

Just a small correction. Appendix D actually provides that the second (redundant) fuel flow meter is placed in series with the first fuel flow meter along the fuel feeding line, upstream of the high pressure fuel pump which feeds fuel to the injectors. A third fuel flow meter is required only in case a fuel return line is provided in order to measure and take into account the return flow.

In other words - and this appears to be one significant difference with respect to the F1 rules - two fuel flow meters placed in series are used to measure fuel flow feeding the high pressure fuel pump. This redundancy should allow a more robust/reliable fuel flow measurement.

[MyNameIsNigel]

BTW, this is Audi's interpretation of the relevant ventilated compartment housing the fuel flow sensors:

(also posted in the Audi R18 thread)

[Spyderman]

Originally Posted by MyNameIsNigel

Just a small correction. Appendix D actually provides that the second (redundant) fuel flow meter is placed in series with the first fuel flow meter along the fuel feeding line, upstream of the high pressure fuel pump which feeds fuel to the injectors. A third fuel flow meter is required only in case a fuel return line is provided in order to measure and take into account the return flow.

In other words - and this appears to be one significant difference with respect to the F1 rules - two fuel flow meters placed in series are used to measure fuel flow feeding the high pressure fuel pump. This redundancy should allow a more robust/reliable fuel flow measurement.

I don't mean to be factitious (and please don't read this in that way),but two wrongs do not make a right.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by Spyderman

Actually, and according to what was reported on Midweek Motorsport, other teams also had ïssues. The difference was that they turned down their engines when they were warned by the FiA. Red Bull did not. In all these cases, the team's measurements differed to those shown on the meters.

Thats what Im saying. No team had a problem running to the fia's request to stay within the margin of error. Red Bull must have missed that memo.

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by Spyderman

I don't mean to be factitious (and please don't read this in that way),but two wrongs do not make a right.

Fore sure This being said, one should assume that the sensors are normally properly calibrated and supposed to give an adequate reading of the fuel flow. If one of the two sensors happens to be defective, the other could still be exploited for the purpose of measuring the fuel flow. The defective fuel flow sensor could then be exchanged at the occasion of a pit stop. That's the theory

[Spyderman]

I read somewhere that someone linked to the company that fabricates these meters says that Red Bull will win their appeal because the accuracy of the meters is not that good.
I don't agree with him that Red Bull will win the appeal as the FiA will not allow themselves to be embarrassed, but it does raise some questions over the reliability of the meters.

also - If this is going to be a success, then they need to make sure that the system is accurate, and that the teams trust and are happy with it.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Spyderman

I read somewhere that someone linked to the company that fabricates these meters says that Red Bull will win their appeal because the accuracy of the meters is not that good.
I don't agree with him that Red Bull will win the appeal as the FiA will not allow themselves to be embarrassed, but it does raise some questions over the reliability of the meters.

also - If this is going to be a success, then they need to make sure that the system is accurate, and that the teams trust and are happy with it.

If the evidence RBR has effectively proves that they did not cheat (were within the 100kg per hour flow restriction and they do not reinstate Ricciardo they will have a huge problem on their hands...
Effectively they are then manipulating the championship....

[GT6]

So is anyone surprised at that statement

[Spyderman]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

If the evidence RBR has effectively proves that they did not cheat (were within the 100kg per hour flow restriction and they do not reinstate Ricciardo they will have a huge problem on their hands...
Effectively they are then manipulating the championship....

I agree, but what I have been hearing from many of those defending the FiA, is that "rules are rules". Apparently (I have not read them) they say that the FiA measurements are the correct ones (even if they aren't) and that the teams must comply. That in essence, is why RB were disqualified. They did not comply.

[Scooter185]

Originally Posted by Spyderman

I agree, but what I have been hearing from many of those defending the FiA, is that "rules are rules". Apparently (I have not read them) they say that the FiA measurements are the correct ones (even if they aren't) and that the teams must comply. That in essence, is why RB were disqualified. They did not comply.

In case of a bad sensor it is the fia who determines if they should move to a mathematical model, RBR ignored their sensor and used a mathematical model without permission from the fia.

[Spyderman]

Right....So they disobeyed and violated the rules; However, that still does not mean that they did in fact consume more than the rules allowed.
I really don't give a hoot what happens to RB. I just don't want to see this happening in Sportscar racing.

[Maelochs]

The FIA issue is just politics at this point---they have no interest in the truth, just the power and the press.

This raises the question though: if the fuel sensors are the basis for balancing every single P1 (and F1) car and the fuel sensors aren't reliable, what then is the basis for basically all the engine-related rules in both series?

How an either series fairly run a race when the most basic measuring device which determines winning and losing (because getting across the line first is not the point any more--doing it most efficiently is) cannot be trusted?

And even if wo are used in series, if both are wrong, then what? Only if every sensor is wrong by the same exact amount would the whole system work; otherwise, who wins is based on who gets the better malfunctioning fuel flow sensor that weekend.

WEC had best be paying attention and checking their batch of fuel sensors, otherwise every single race will end with a flurry of protests, and I am not sure WEC can afford to lose all legitimacy. F1 might recover, but WEC is pretty much purely factory supported, so once the factories are too upset to stay ...

[Gingers4Justice]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

If the evidence RBR has effectively proves that they did not cheat (were within the 100kg per hour flow restriction and they do not reinstate Ricciardo they will have a huge problem on their hands...
Effectively they are then manipulating the championship....

I disagree. They knew full well that the FIA would be going by their own equipment.

I heard a great analogy on MWM. If the Police stopped you for speeding, you wouldn't say "it's okay, according to the speedometer I made myself, I was within the limit".

Smacks of arrogance on Red Bull's part.

[Spyderman]

Actually, If you went to court and could prove that your speedometer was correct, and the police device was incorrect.....

[Richard C]

So... to some degree, I was hoping that in the sports car thread we would not end up being hyper focused on the Australian F1 GP Red Bull DSQ. Mostly because I didn't want to rehash a multipage argument in the Australian GP thread, in the F1 forum, with some (but not all) of the same players in this thread. And secondly because this is the sports car forum.

But if we are going to go there, here are a few points to raise that haven't shown up here yet...

(1) While the lack of accuracy of the sensors is the root of the RBR DSQ, a few think that another major factor in the DSQ is that RBR repeatedly ignored directives from the race stewards over the weekend and that all of the other teams did follow those directives. Earlier in the weekend the stewards asked (per the rules) for RBR and a number of other teams to put in place an offset in their fuel mapping. The other teams complied, but RBR refused to do so. During the race the stewards again asked RBR to make adjustments. RBR refused to do so.

(2) While RBR potentially may not have exceeded the flow levels, many other teams did turn theirs down as asked below what they also thought was appropriate levels. In effect RBR was likely running at a higher flow level than everyone else? So why should RBR get a flow advantage over the other teams?

Ultimately the FIA may be an evil organization run by the devil himself and is bent on world domination. And there may very well be issues with the sensors. And the way the rules are written might be really awful (however it's not as if they were also not a known quantity for months now).

But, I do think the stewards were just doing the best given the situation (A Rulebook to follow and a team who decided to throw down the gauntlet in a major way) You may disagree with the rulebook, or even the stewards decisions during the race, but I think it is hard to make arguments for ignoring either during a race. What's next? Ignoring black flags? By definition, it had to end in tears.

IMHO, Even if RBR can definitively prove they never exceed the fuel allocation limits, I think they deserve some type of penalty for repeatedly ignoring the stewards direction. And I think DSQ is probably pretty accurate. But just like everyone else, I have an opinion and that is mine.

With that being said... I do think there are issues with the entire concept of measuring instantaneous flow to the level of accuracy that it doesn't accidently impact race results. And more specifically how the F1 rules are written (one sensor, etc.). At least for this thread, I am more interested in how this will play out for LMP1 racing? Is the multiple sensor thing going to work? How are the teams dealing with this? Are they averaging between the too sensors, or using one and then getting directions from the race stewards to switch to the installed backup during an event?

Richard

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Gingers4Justice

I heard a great analogy on MWM. If the Police stopped you for speeding, you wouldn't say "it's okay, according to the speedometer I made myself, I was within the limit".

I am sorry, I am going to continue to derail this thread, but I just had to comment. I like the analogy, but I don't think it is completely accurate.

It is more like the police are chasing you down the highway shouting on the bullhorn to pull over because you are speeding. You look down at your speedo and think you are just fine, so you ignore the police, continue to drive home as the police continue to chase and shout for you to slow down. Then when you pull into your driveway, you act surprised when they wrestle you to the ground and arrest you for speeding and evading.

Richard

[Gingers4Justice]

Originally Posted by Spyderman

Actually, If you went to court and could prove that your speedometer was correct, and the police device was incorrect.....

Erm. Not sure how to respond to this other than - good point, well made.

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

I am sorry, I am going to continue to derail this thread, but I just had to comment. I like the analogy, but I don't think it is completely accurate.

It is more like the police are chasing you down the highway shouting on the bullhorn to pull over because you are speeding. You look down at your speedo and think you are just fine, so you ignore the police, continue to drive home as the police continue to chase and shout for you to slow down. Then when you pull into your driveway, you act surprised when they wrestle you to the ground and arrest you for speeding and evading.

Richard

That's more like it! Spyderman, this analogy is my final answer

[Spyderman]

I love it!

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

So... to some degree, I was hoping that in the sports car thread we would not end up being hyper focused on the Australian F1 GP Red Bull DSQ. Mostly because I didn't want to rehash a multipage argument in the Australian GP thread, in the F1 forum, with some (but not all) of the same players in this thread. And secondly because this is the sports car forum.

But if we are going to go there, here are a few points to raise that haven't shown up here yet...

(1) While the lack of accuracy of the sensors is the root of the RBR DSQ, a few think that another major factor in the DSQ is that RBR repeatedly ignored directives from the race stewards over the weekend and that all of the other teams did follow those directives. Earlier in the weekend the stewards asked (per the rules) for RBR and a number of other teams to put in place an offset in their fuel mapping. The other teams complied, but RBR refused to do so. During the race the stewards again asked RBR to make adjustments. RBR refused to do so.

(2) While RBR potentially may not have exceeded the flow levels, many other teams did turn theirs down as asked below what they also thought was appropriate levels. In effect RBR was likely running at a higher flow level than everyone else? So why should RBR get a flow advantage over the other teams?

Ultimately the FIA may be an evil organization run by the devil himself and is bent on world domination. And there may very well be issues with the sensors. And the way the rules are written might be really awful (however it's not as if they were also not a known quantity for months now).

But, I do think the stewards were just doing the best given the situation (A Rulebook to follow and a team who decided to throw down the gauntlet in a major way) You may disagree with the rulebook, or even the stewards decisions during the race, but I think it is hard to make arguments for ignoring either during a race. What's next? Ignoring black flags? By definition, it had to end in tears.

IMHO, Even if RBR can definitively prove they never exceed the fuel allocation limits, I think they deserve some type of penalty for repeatedly ignoring the stewards direction. And I think DSQ is probably pretty accurate. But just like everyone else, I have an opinion and that is mine.

I have to agree fully with you.

[nkoske]

Originally Posted by Spyderman

Actually, If you went to court and could prove that your speedometer was correct, and the police device was incorrect.....

Richard Castro is spot on. I'll add.

I deal with calibrated instruments all the time. Was the RBR sensor calibrated to a national standard, capable of measuring flow at least as accurately as the FIA sensor, and at the same rate? On top of that is the RBR sensor/data/signal conditioner subject to tampering (just because you show me a piece of paper with the right number means absolutely nothing)?

RBR may have data from their sensor that shows compliance, but then they have to prove it was calibrated properly and there was no way to tamper with the data, sensor, and signal conditioner. Actually becomes tricky to prove that.

[Spyderman]

....Not forgetting of course , that the FiA's sensor had malfunctioned prior to the race too.
Again - the point I am trying to make is that it is vitally important that the system in place works and inspires confidence...to the teams, spectators and officials. It is not sufficient to just say, "rules are rules". One might find that some important players might eventually get sick of "just following orders" and walk away.

[Spyderman]

Right on cue...: http://www.racecar-engineering.com/n...el-flow-meter/

I really should play the lottery.

[belt driven]

I can't recall the last time an F1 car ran out of fuel before the checker; but a few times in recent years they lacked enough fuel for the postrace check, or shut the car off on the cooldown lap to save enough.

I think this proves the teams are pretty accurate in their own fuel calculations. Nobody seems to have confidence in the accuracy of FIA's sensors.

The whole concept of limiting max flow rates is stupid. You don't tell an aircraft builder his range/endurance record is invalid because it burned fuel too fast climbing to altitude. You let them figure out the most efficient use of it. Indy has limited total fuel usage for decades. In the turbo years teams could never run the boost limit and make the distance.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Spyderman

Right on cue...: http://www.racecar-engineering.com/n...el-flow-meter/

I really should play the lottery.

[JoestForEver]

Can anyone remind me of how Group C measures their fuel consumption? As it was a time-proven success.....