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

[Pup]

Ultrasonic measurement is a last resort, it's resolution is terrible - go ask a senographer to demonstrate one of the new multi-hundred thousand dollar 3D ultra-sound machines next time you are in a radiology dept of a hospital and then compare the imagery to an MRI machine!

There was a proposal to place MRI scanners into the fuel tanks, but the cost of keeping a radiologist on staff was beyond most of the teams' budgets.

That's THREE, THREE jokes in one!

[SidSidney]

Frankly, I think FIA was generous to warn RedBull like three times...

Quite correct. Same at every level of motorsport from karts through F1. The onus is on the competitor to conform to the regulations, not the FIA or delegate ASN to remind them. What's actually interesting is that they monitor the data from the cars live - in the old days you could probably have got away with that by fiddling the flow datalog.

RB has to appeal it, from political, sporting and CYA viewpoints. They can't afford to lose 18 WCC points this season, and an appeal is a cheap recourse. But they know they have a snowball's chance.

[djos]

We have been over this a million times, it doesnt really matter. At least for this year the FIA will not back down, RB have no case.

RedBull will win this fight, they will IMO show data proving that the 2 different sensors provided to them showed wildly varying results and therefore can't be trusted.

Why would that make them able to win the fight? They already showed the varying data to the FIA. The FIA told them it was within spec, and to get on and race within those constraints.

IMO they wouldn't be standing their ground if their own data wasn't beyond conclusive.

[djos]

Ultrasonic measurement is a last resort, it's resolution is terrible - go ask a senographer to demonstrate one of the new multi-hundred thousand dollar 3D ultra-sound machines next time you are in a radiology dept of a hospital and then compare the imagery to an MRI machine!

There was a proposal to place MRI scanners into the fuel tanks, but the cost of keeping a radiologist on staff was beyond most of the teams' budgets.

That's THREE, THREE jokes in one!

Lol

[ChrisM40]

IMO they wouldn't be standing their ground if their own data wasn't beyond conclusive.

Still irrelevant, they broke the correct procedure, so will not win.

Best they can hope for is for the FIA to say, fine, the flow was OK, but you broke procedure, so no points.. Even this will not happen. Id be surprised if they are even allowed to present evidence of correct flow since its irrelevant! At this point the flow is irrelevant, they broke the rules, end of story.

[langwadt]

Ultrasonic measurement is a last resort, it's resolution is terrible - go ask a senographer to demonstrate one of the new multi-hundred thousand dollar 3D ultra-sound machines next time you are in a radiology dept of a hospital and then compare the imagery to an MRI machine!

There was a proposal to place MRI scanners into the fuel tanks, but the cost of keeping a radiologist on staff was beyond most of the teams' budgets.

That's THREE, THREE jokes in one!

You can actually use NMR to measure flow

[beelsebob]

The bottom line is that the ENTIRE POINT of this rule is to give a consistent way of measuring fuel flow for all cars. The second one team uses their own way of measuring flow, this goes out of the window. There's absolutely zero chance that RedBull will win this.

[djos]

The bottom line is that the ENTIRE POINT of this rule is to give a consistent way of measuring fuel flow for all cars. The second one team uses their own way of measuring flow, this goes out of the window. There's absolutely zero chance that RedBull will win this.

That autosport article I linked to shows the other teams don't believe the FFM is consistent or accurate either - clearly they are happy for Redbull to take on the FIA and wear all the risk.

[langwadt]

IMO they wouldn't be standing their ground if their own data wasn't beyond conclusive.

Still irrelevant, they broke the correct procedure, so will not win.

Best they can hope for is for the FIA to say, fine, the flow was OK, but you broke procedure, so no points.. Even this will not happen. Id be surprised if they are even allowed to present evidence of correct flow since its irrelevant! At this point the flow is irrelevant, they broke the rules, end of story.

yeh, it is like the case of flexi wings, even if everyone could see they were flexing, they were not by the definition that mattered; the FIA test

So even if they could prove that they didn't exceed the flow, they did by the definition that matters; the FIA flow meter

[beelsebob]

The bottom line is that the ENTIRE POINT of this rule is to give a consistent way of measuring fuel flow for all cars. The second one team uses their own way of measuring flow, this goes out of the window. There's absolutely zero chance that RedBull will win this.

That autosport article I linked to shows the other teams don't believe the FFM is consistent or accurate either - clearly they are happy for Redbull to take on the FIA and wear all the risk.

Again, the point is it doesn't matter if it agrees with your own measurement systems. It only matters that it's consistent between teams. Then all teams get the exact same maximum flow, and everyone's happy, except RedBull, who want to break the rules.

[djos]

Again, the point is it doesn't matter if it agrees with your own measurement systems. It only matters that it's consistent between teams. Then all teams get the exact same maximum flow, and everyone's happy, except RedBull, who want to break the rules.

You are ignoring the circumstantial evidence that indicates a variance across the grid - I'm sure if redbull had 3 ffm's that performed virtually identically we would not be having this discussion but clearly they have seen an unacceptable difference between the units they have been supplied with.

You tried claiming a few pages back that these units weren't ultrasonic tech and the evidence from the oem has shown that they are, I respectfully suggest that you are also wrong about the level of variation between units across the grid.

[Sandropim]

There have been reports all through winter testing – and the Melbourne free practices – that the FIA homologated sensors were delivering faulty, or at least unreliable, data as the sensor units turned out to have a rather unacceptable range of error. You could run 98 kg/h or 102 kg/h and still be legal, depending on how wonky your fuel flow meter is.

The FIA reacted by softening measurement from 10Hz to 5Hz and told teams to run significantly below 100 kg/h (by offset) because they couldn’t measure and govern their own limits as prescribed by the rules. But here’s the kicker – they would still decide the legality of a car by equipment proven to be unreliable.

Unless I’ve missed a news item that said that the FIA HQ has been moved from France to North Korea, such an approach is utterly unacceptable. Their own rules say that fuel flow is limited to 100kg/h and the teams have sensors in place to make sure they stay below that limit. But according to the rules, only the reading of the FIA sensor counts, whether it is accurate or not. What that means is – in everyday terms – the police can fine the raw stuffing out of you, if their wonky speed camera said you were speeding – even if your accurately measuring speedo says you weren’t.

I may be weird, but am I alone in thinking you can’t enforce a limit if you have no reliable way to measure it? Mercedes and other teams did what all blithering idiots tend to do – they blindly followed the fatwa from the authorities and ran lobotomised cars. Mercedes ran their cars to a limit of 96 kg/h, to avoid going over the limit, even if the sensor had a Münchhausen moment again..

From: http://thejudge13.com/2014/03/17/hippos ... -red-bull/

[Sandropim]

There have been reports all through winter testing – and the Melbourne free practices – that the FIA homologated sensors were delivering faulty, or at least unreliable, data as the sensor units turned out to have a rather unacceptable range of error. You could run 98 kg/h or 102 kg/h and still be legal, depending on how wonky your fuel flow meter is.

The FIA reacted by softening measurement from 10Hz to 5Hz and told teams to run significantly below 100 kg/h (by offset) because they couldn’t measure and govern their own limits as prescribed by the rules. But here’s the kicker – they would still decide the legality of a car by equipment proven to be unreliable.

Unless I’ve missed a news item that said that the FIA HQ has been moved from France to North Korea, such an approach is utterly unacceptable. Their own rules say that fuel flow is limited to 100kg/h and the teams have sensors in place to make sure they stay below that limit. But according to the rules, only the reading of the FIA sensor counts, whether it is accurate or not. What that means is – in everyday terms – the police can fine the raw stuffing out of you, if their wonky speed camera said you were speeding – even if your accurately measuring speedo says you weren’t.

I may be weird, but am I alone in thinking you can’t enforce a limit if you have no reliable way to measure it? Mercedes and other teams did what all blithering idiots tend to do – they blindly followed the fatwa from the authorities and ran lobotomised cars. Mercedes ran their cars to a limit of 96 kg/h, to avoid going over the limit, even if the sensor had a Münchhausen moment again.

Source: http://thejudge13.com/2014/03/17/hippos ... -red-bull/

[Pup]

But even if they did see inconsistencies, those weren't necessarily the fault of the fuel flow meters themselves. If the variations are due to interference from the car - electrical, ultrasonic, or otherwise - then it becomes Red Bull's problem to either fix the interference or accept that they have to run with a significant safety margin.

Indeed, it's not inconceivable that it's their car that's causing the problems. We know that some of the variation in the units is due to interference, and there was a lot of discussion here early on that at least part of Red Bull's engine problems were caused by electrical interference. And if they have an interference issue that's either difficult to track down or to fix; and if the safety margin they have to use is significant; then it would make sense that they'd want to cause a fuss and hopefully get the units puled from competition. After all, the strategy worked for them last year with the tires.

[Pup]

Source: http://thejudge13.com/2014/03/17/hippos ... -red-bull/

No offense to you for posting it, and I'll admit to not having read that piece. But just in general, that fat hippo guy doesn't seem worthy of even TJ13, which frankly is a pretty low bar to miss. Just one guy's opinion, of course.