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

[idfx]

Honestly, it would be easier to supply each car with FIA desired volume of 100kg. Each supplier would provide the fuel and the FIA ​​would be responsible for the process.
is just an idea.

[djos]

If they want to restrict the fuel flow they only need to supply good old fashioned low tech fuel restrictors, then no one can argue about calibration and accuracy issues!

FIA as usual trying to be too clever!

[R_Redding]

No it is not.... Fuel rate measured using injector data vs a FIA flow meter that must be re-calibrated during the race. Any doubt about which is more accurate?

Brian

The fuel sensor is not calibrated during the race

They are calibrated by Gill Sensors initially and then by Calibra Technology.

All communication to the sensor are encrypted to stop the team having access to the flow meters internal memories..and calibration data.

Any offsets provided by the Fia ...are to the SECU ..to make the max injector squirt duration times and hence comsumption..comply with the reading they are obtaining from the fuel sensor.

Rob

[bill shoe]

Some people are asking why doesn't the FIA just use a fuel flow restrictor or just dole out a specific overall weight of fuel for the race?

The answer is that the FIA (and most of the F1 community) wants to maintain the traditional ramp-up step-down sound of the engine revving between gearshifts as the car accelerates.

To achieve this the FIA specifically needs to restrict low-rpm fuel flow more than high-rpm fuel flow. This forces low-rpm power to be lower than high-rpm power. In turn that forces gear changes to optimize the car's acceleration.

I think multiple gears are the big lie of modern high performance driving. I think any general type of racecar would be cheaper and faster with broad-powerband engines and direct-drive final drives. However, current racecar regulations consistently force engines with relatively narrow powerbands in combination with multi-speed transmissions.

So that's why 2014 F1 has a fuel flow meter.

[iotar__]

Technical Regulations copied from previous posts:
5.1.4 Fuel mass flow must not exceed 100kg/h.
5.10.3 Homologated sensors must be fitted which directly measure the pressure, the temperature and the flow of the fuel supplied to the injectors, these signals must be supplied to the FIA data logger.
5.10.4 Only one homologated FIA fuel flow sensor may be fitted to the car which must be placed wholly within the fuel tank.

Why people keep saying RBR did not use FIA supplied fuel meter? That part I don't understand.

As far as I know they did use it. It was in the car and obviously sending the values out. So RBR is compliant with 5.10.3 and 5.10.4.
The only issue is whether they adhere to 5.1.4 regulating the mass flow or not? If they can prove that they should win the appeal.

TD in question copied from: http://www.racecar-engineering.com/news ... uel-rules/

a. The Technical Directive starts by stating: “The homologated fuel flow sensor will be the primary measurement of the fuel flow and will be used to check compliance with Articles 5.1.4 and 5.1.5 of the F1 Technical Regulations…” This is in conformity with Articles 5.10.3 and 5.10.4 of the Technical Regulations.
b. The Technical Directive goes on to state: “If at any time WE consider that the sensor has an issue which has not been detected by the system WE will communicate this to the team concerned and switch to a backup system” (emphasis added by the FIA.)
c. The backup system is the calculated fuel flow model with a correction factor decided by the FIA.

If it's again about splitting hair about legality of TD, ignoring it and going straight to TR than I'll pass for now.

[Cam]

I think I'm going to stop pushing the point because its going nowhere.

But Ral, what you have posted just confirms what I have been saying. The teams need to abide by the code, the sporting regs and the technical regs. This just tells me that the technical directives (which RB violated) are NOT the binding power here, the regs are.

The TD is not just another heading, its a completely seperate document that doesn't (as I understand) have any legislative power.

I have to agree with Tim here. Here's why.

There's only 2 breaches that were indicated on Document 56 from the FIA:
Offence Breach of Article 3.2 of the FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations and Article 5.1.4 of the FIA Formula One Technical Regulations. Thats' it. Everything else does not matter. So focus on those two points.

Let's look at 3.2 - 3.2 Competitors must ensure that their cars comply with the conditions of eligibility and safety throughout practice and the race. At no point in either the "2014 SPORTING REGULATIONS 2014-02-28" nor the "2014 TECHNICAL REGULATIONS 2014-01-23_0" - does it say that a 'Technical Directive' must be followed. In fact, the term 'Technical Directive' does not appear in either document.

Searching "Technical Directive 016-14" does not show any results on the FIA website.

Searching "Technical Directive" does not show any results on the FIA website.

Is that not strange? For a car to be disqualified, you would expect a fairly robust outline of what a TD is and access to documentation outlining that.

If we stick directly to that exact wording of 3.2 - what can we find in there?

"Conditions of eligibility" and "safety". We can rule out safety as that was not mentioned. So the FIA must be referring to the "conditions of eligibility". I cannot see a rule or definition stating that a condition of eligibility is failed, leading to a DSQ when a technical Directive is not followed. There is no such wording in either document, or other FIA resources.

So what is a Technical Directive? It's not defined anywhere I can see. So let's look to 'experts' and what they say.

The rules cannot be changed during the year - so an 'advisory' document is drafted to 'clarify' the FIA's 'intention' of the rules. You can see this in practice where in 2012 a statement from the FIA says "Changes to the 2012 Technical Regulations -- All engine standard ECU setup and control parameters, which were formerly contained only within a Technical Directive, are now contained within the relevant parts of the Technical Regulations."

So, previous to that, Technical Directives were not Technical Regulations?

James Allen in a previous 2012 article - "In all probability the FIA will follow up this week with a rule clarification (known as a Technical Directive)". So James thinks a TD is a 'clarification'. What about someone with actual power to enforce change? Charlie Whiting said in a previous article - "technical directives stay in force until they’re incorporated into the rules or superseded". So TD's can be issued and over ruled, changed etc. Interesting. This is far from cut and dry.

Ok - so now let's look at 5.1.4 - the second breach - 5.1.4 Fuel mass flow must not exceed 100kg/h.

Remove the TD for the moment, as illustrated above, a TD is not a 'rule' per se. Given that, it seems to be widely accepted that Red Bull can demonstrate that they did not exceed this flow limit.

So we have 5.1.4, which Red Bull can show they did not breach, and 3.2 which is very vague, mentions no "Technical Directive" and at no point (that I can find) is a "Technical Directive" established as a "rule" - which can be broken.

This is by far a very grey area and as far from a black and white breach as it can get. There is good grounds to appeal here.

• Define the "conditions of eligibility"
• Define a "Technical Directive and whether it is a 'rule'
• Demonstrate fuel flow did not exceed 100kg/h

[SiLo]

Its a story of being too smart for ones boots. It could have gone like this:

RB: Sensor is faulty.
FIA checks it out: No, it isn't.
RB: Its faulty!
FIA: Use the FP one then.
RB: No, we like the faulty one better.
FIA (scratches head): Really? Suit yourselves.

RB susses the FIA sensor representative is NOT smart as a button and invents new fuel flow model.
RB to RB engineer: Use the backup.
RB engineer: But it says on the tin to ask the FIA FIRST.
RB: Just you the damn backup or prepare for gardening in Siberia!
Smart as a button FIA sensor representative immediately spots RB's trick.

FIA: Use this correction factor to bring your fuel rate back in line.
RB: The sensor is faulty.
FIA: The sensor is faulty? Didn't we hear that one before? Use the correction factor now.
RB: Our fuel rate is just fine, you can't tell us how to measure fuel rates.
FIA: Enh?!
RB: Yes, our fuel flow model is better than yours.
FIA: What?!

Bang! Disqualification, FIA pulls the trigger.

+10000000000000

[beelsebob]

why are you nit-picking? no one is concerned as to what happens inside the thing - the output is the mass flow, therefore you can ignore the detailed specifics and just say - it measures mass flow

I'm not nit picking. This is an important distinction. You guys claimed that there were no "flow meters" in the engine injectors because they're simply measuring time open, pressure etc, and then computing flow from that. Similarly, the FIA official flow meter is simply measuring velocity, temperature etc, and then computing flow from that. The two are doing the exact same job, in the exact same way. There is no reason to believe that the injectors do it more accurately than the FIA's sensor.

The FFM uses an ultrasonic measuring device, this is in no way the same as calculating the fuel flow using pump pressure and injector open times!

Ultrasonic measurement is a last resort, it's horribly low res and why ultrasonic tape measures went the way of the dodo as soon and laser tape measures became affordable!

You only use ultrasonic measuring when you have no other choice.

Again – read the FIA's document. Your assertion that it is ultrasonic is in direct conflict with the contents of the specification.

[beelsebob]

Honestly, it would be easier to supply each car with FIA desired volume of 100kg. Each supplier would provide the fuel and the FIA ​​would be responsible for the process.
is just an idea.

That would not measure what's required. Ricciardo was not disqualified for going over the 100kg limit. He was disqualified for going over the 100kg/h limit.

[djos]

Yep, sensor is fine, no one else thinks it's innacurate ....

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/112973

[ChrisM40]

The only bad thing the FIA did here was to not black flag Ricciardo during the race. Normally if you break a rule during the race you are out as soon as its known. If they had, RB would undoubtedly be furious, but the whole debate about points would be moot, since he never got any and no protest would have changed any results.

[ecapox]

Yep, sensor is fine, no one else thinks it's innacurate ....

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/112973

They arent agruing that "The sensor is fine".

Instead, the teams have accepted that when they are alerted to the possibility the sensor could exceed the 100kg per hour rate at peak flow, irrespective of what their own data says, they have to peg back their rate slightly to ensure there is no breach of the rules.

The most important part is in red, and underlined, in case you missed it in your own link.

Hence, Redbull DQ.

[idfx]

Honestly, it would be easier to supply each car with FIA desired volume of 100kg. Each supplier would provide the fuel and the FIA ​​would be responsible for the process.
is just an idea.

That would not measure what's required. Ricciardo was not disqualified for going over the 100kg limit. He was disqualified for going over the 100kg/h limit.

Got it, sorry for the previous comment. My logic was this:
The FIA ​​fueling car before the race.
after the race with the same equipment to remove the leftovers of fuel and split with race time. You have kg / h

[turbof1]

Many people have, understandingly, trouble with the difference between the 100kg limit and the 100kg/kg limit. Last sunday I spent half a hour to make my dad understand what the difference is and why Ricciardo was DSQ'd.

So I'll try to make sure to explain the difference properly. If it turns out people get out of the confusion because of it, a moderator could pin it somewhere for easy reference.

So we have 2 limits:
-A limit of 100kg for each car to do a complete race: this rule only applies on sunday. When the lights go to green, this rule comes in action and ends when the car crosses the chequered flag, so for the whole amount of race laps (that also includes laps spend behind the safety car). During this period the driver can only spend a total of 100kg worth of fuel. How he does this doesn't matter: he can drive at a constant consumption, or he can drive faster at certain intervals while slowing during other periods. The rule does NOT apply on any other timeframe then those laps! That means installation laps (laps to get the car to the grid), the formation lap, the inlap after crossing the chequered flag and the regulatory fuel sample do not count towards the 100kg, and as a result is extra fuel the teams have to carry. So in practice every car has more then 100kg on board when it drives out of the pits on sunday to get to the grid.

-The second limit is more elaborate: a fuel flow limit of 100kg/h. This limit isn't about how much fuel you are allowed to spend in one hour, but how much fuel you are allowed to spend at a certain moment. It is very much comparable to a speed limit (I can't remember the member who came up with the example, but thanks!): say a highway only allows 120km/h. You are of course allowed to travel more then 120km, but at no point you are allowed to go faster then 120km/h. You can also view this limit as 1,667kg/m, 27,778g/s and so on. This limit is in effect during both the race AND qualifying. The FIA keeps track of the fuel flow through a special developed sensor. This sensor is calibrated for each car. Teams have to use this device as reference for their fuel flow. When this device starts to malfunction during the race, the FIA can allow a team to switch to different methods for calculating the flow, but only if the fia allows it.

[Dragonfly]

This sensor is calibrated for each car.

I don't think this is true. The sensors are calibrated (by the manufacturer of other authority) to give equal readings within a defined tolerance.
On a particular car however, a correction value (coefficient) might be introduced in the ECU to comply with the readings from the sensor (no matter they are real or not).