Red Bull exceed fuel flow limit, Ricciardo DSQ at Australian GP

[foxmulder_ms]

It doesn't even matter what the "real" flow is. "Flow" is the "flow measured by the FIA device" which is the same for every team. So RedBull run on more fuel flow time to time than other teams which makes the disqualification perfectly reasonable.

How the F'k is any engine manufacturer supposed to get the max power and efficiency from their engines if the goal posts move every time they put a different FFM in their car?

Horner is 100% correct, the sensors being used are immature and seriously need work!

This is like the in car SC, Yellow flag & blue flag indicator system all over again, FIA just can't seem to implement systems properly first go! The difference being this time there are championship points on the line!

Every single other team raced in the limits of FIA flow meter. RedBull did not. RedBull cannot write its own rule, mate.

[TinoBoost]

There is no Renault fuel flow sensor. Fuel flow is calculated based on what the fuel injectors are using.

Which is measured... by a flow sensor in the injectors. They don't magically know how much they're using, they have sensors.

there is no "flow sensor" on the injector. It is calculated. There is injector PW, fuel pressure, temperature etc. Flow is not easily directly measured, hence the talk about the flow sensors.

[wunderkind]

It doesn't even matter what the "real" flow is. "Flow" is the "flow measured by the FIA device" which is the same for every team. So RedBull run on more fuel flow time to time than other teams which makes the disqualification perfectly reasonable.

How the F'k is any engine manufacturer supposed to get the max power and efficiency from their engines if the goal posts move every time they put a different FFM in their car?

Horner is 100% correct, the sensors being used are immature and seriously need work!

This is like the in car SC, Yellow flag & blue flag indicator system all over again, FIA just can't seem to implement systems properly first go! The difference being this time there are championship points on the line!

Every single other team raced in the limits of FIA flow meter. RedBull did not. RedBull cannot write its own rule, mate.

Agree

[beelsebob]

there is no "flow sensor" on the injector. It is calculated. There is injector PW, fuel pressure, temperature etc. Flow is not easily directly measured, hence the talk about the flow sensors.

What do you think a flow sensor is? Hint - it doesn't directly measure the mass flow. It measures the pressure, temperature etc. The injectors are doing the exact same thing is the FIA's flow sensor is doing, they're measuring the exact same parameters, and doing the same maths to come up with a result.

[joseff]

Every single other team raced in the limits of FIA flow meter. RedBull did not. RedBull cannot write its own rule, mate.

I'd +1 you if I could. The rules are the same for everyone.

Re. accuracy of sensor, from:
http://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/ ... eter_0.pdf

The device shall have an accuracy of no less than ‐1/+0% for post filtered instantaneous flow measurement (<0 mean that the sensor reads lower than reality)

Meaning there's already a tolerance, if your team wins the calibration lottery, it's possible to run up to 101kg/h

What do you think a flow sensor is? Hint - it doesn't directly measure the mass flow. It measures the pressure, temperature etc. The injectors are doing the exact same thing is the FIA's flow sensor is doing, they're measuring the exact same parameters, and doing the same maths to come up with a result.

Actually, it does measure the flow:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrasonic_flow_meter

Ultrasonic flow meters are affected by the acoustic properties of the fluid and can be impacted by temperature, density, viscosity and suspended particulates depending on the exact flow meter.

The GS Flow blurb makes no mention of monitoring density, viscosity & particulates. They only mention of flow & temperature. The petroleum engineers on this forum would be better informed on whether density & viscosity may be reliably estimated from temperature.
http://www.gillsensors.com/content/fuel ... ensor.html

[FW17]

What is the offset the fia is talking about?

If team is to feed data from 2 sources 1 the fia sensor 2 the teams own fuel sensor to a throttle map then which one data will the map choose? If there is to be an offset that is to be used, how does this affect the map, does the team have to reconfigured all the maps based on this offset? How do you test if that works?

[crc]

There is no Renault fuel flow sensor. Fuel flow is calculated based on what the fuel injectors are using.

Which is measured... by a flow sensor in the injectors. They don't magically know how much they're using, they have sensors.

Fuel injectors are not sensors in any way. They don't even inject. They are micro solenoids that simply open to set timings. The speed of the pulse / duty cycle / diameter of the injector / pressure of the fuel pumps and high pressure fuel line all determine how much fuel gets let through.

The math of how much fuel gets through is fairly simple though. I would think RBR/Renault would be arguing based on injector duty cycles etc against measured flow rate of the mandated sensor.

[zoro_f1]

Kobayashi had a brake failure (ERS-K, specifically).

than the FIA should punish the team!!!
let me point this one again... there is no punishment yet and FIA is still promoting "SAFETY FIRST"!!!

Well which rule exactly was broken?

also... the team did not gave Kobayashi brakes!!! and still no one gets a punishment but FIA says "SAFETY FIRST"... WTF

Give me a brake, Kobayashi tells critics
http://www.supersport.com/motorsport/ar ... Id=2361384

[ChrisM40]

I cant believe people are still arguing over this.

Whether or not the FIA sensor is accurate or not it is the rule. RB didnt follow it, the other teams did, this gave RB an unfair advantage, so they get DQ'ed, end of. Its that simple.

[djos]

I cant believe people are still arguing over this.

Whether or not the FIA sensor is accurate or not it is the rule. RB didnt follow it, the other teams did, this gave RB an unfair advantage, so they get DQ'ed, end of. Its that simple.

It's quite simple, the FFM seems to be inconsistently inaccurate, there wouldn't be an argument if the readings where consistent across all units.

[MadMatt]

What about top speeds during this GP? No info whatsoever on TV, what a joke. No Gforce information, no nothing. Are they too ashamed of how slow the cars are?

[ChrisM40]

I cant believe people are still arguing over this.

Whether or not the FIA sensor is accurate or not it is the rule. RB didnt follow it, the other teams did, this gave RB an unfair advantage, so they get DQ'ed, end of. Its that simple.

It's quite simple, the FFM seems to be inconsistently inaccurate, there wouldn't be an argument if the readings where consistent across all units.

Besides the point.

I dont know if this is news to anyone but in the food and water industry there are set testing methods for safety, both chemical and microbiological. All companies have to use these methods for testing in labs. Some are old, some are downright stupid and useless, but they are the law. You cannot use any other method, even if its better, even if you can prove its better.

It might be acceptable in a civil case against the company, but in a regulatory case or criminal case the evidence gained from such methods will be invalid. Thats all there is to it.

Its the same in any investigation. Even for murder, if the police don't follow procedure the case can be invalidated, even if its obvious the person did it.

[thomin]

I cant believe people are still arguing over this.

Whether or not the FIA sensor is accurate or not it is the rule. RB didnt follow it, the other teams did, this gave RB an unfair advantage, so they get DQ'ed, end of. Its that simple.

It's quite simple, the FFM seems to be inconsistently inaccurate, there wouldn't be an argument if the readings where consistent across all units.

The only ones arguing are Red Bull and the only inconsistency they can point to was in FP1 and hasn't appeared again.

[djos]

Besides the point.

Not sure how you figure that! A .25% variance between 2 FFM's could be the difference between competitive power in one car and uncompetitive power in another resulting in WDC/WCC points loss or gain and actually undercuts the level playing field the FIA are aiming for.

[Jano11]

I cant believe people are still arguing over this.

Whether or not the FIA sensor is accurate or not it is the rule. RB didnt follow it, the other teams did, this gave RB an unfair advantage, so they get DQ'ed, end of. Its that simple.

It's quite simple, the FFM seems to be inconsistently inaccurate, there wouldn't be an argument if the readings where consistent across all units.

Besides the point.

I dont know if this is news to anyone but in the food and water industry there are set testing methods for safety, both chemical and microbiological. All companies have to use these methods for testing in labs. Some are old, some are downright stupid and useless, but they are the law. You cannot use any other method, even if its better, even if you can prove its better.

It might be acceptable in a civil case against the company, but in a regulatory case or criminal case the evidence gained from such methods will be invalid. Thats all there is to it.

Its the same in any investigation. Even for murder, if the police don't follow procedure the case can be invalidated, even if its obvious the person did it.

People are well aware that the FDA, EFSA and various other national agencies do enforce food and drugs safety tests which are outdated.
What I was not aware is that you think that you can compare food safety tests (like chromatography, spectrometry, mass spectrometry etc) for a candy bar worth 50 cents with measuring fuel flow for a high tech device like a car worth millions of $.
One of the most out of place comparisons I've ever heard of.