Yeah they are using quantum technology to change the state of the fuel and manipulate the sensor...PlatinumZealot wrote: β18 Dec 2019, 20:24The rumours seems sort of strange because any team with a return line, as I said before, can return fuel back to the tank and the flow meter would "double-read" the fuel, under-delivered or not. And, wouldn't these return lines be totally obvious?? This is why a sugested a second sensor on any-return lines to the tank.
Another thing I must mention, the most advanced ultrasonic meters integrate the fuel flow over the entire pipe diameter, in other words they take a velocity snap-shot of the fluid and it is easy to find out what flow regime is occurring in the fluid. Any special temperature manipulation can also be captured by the sensor. Forcing the sensor to under-report the fuel has to be done by some serious outside interference!
I posted this like two months ago in this thread. The article is about temperature sensors, but if you read the paper you will see how almost any sensor that needs signal amplification could be manipulated.PlatinumZealot wrote: β18 Dec 2019, 20:24Another thing I must mention, the most advanced ultrasonic meters integrate the fuel flow over the entire pipe diameter, in other words they take a velocity snap-shot of the fluid and it is easy to find out what flow regime is occurring in the fluid. Any special temperature manipulation can also be captured by the sensor. Forcing the sensor to under-report the fuel has to be done by some serious outside interference!
It has no return line, but that doesn't mean you might not get back flow.saviour stivala wrote: β18 Dec 2019, 20:41What fuel flows through the fuel flow sensor must end-up into the combustion chambers. in short, the fuel system is 'returnless', which means there is no fuel returning to the fuel tank.
I'm sorry to say that I don't think you understand the concept of back flow then. The sensor is not a check valve, so it is possible that do to pressure pulses, pressure build up, line expansion do to pressure etc, the fuel can flow backwards to an extent.saviour stivala wrote: β18 Dec 2019, 21:35It is a 'returnless system' and what fuel passes through the fuel flow sensor must end-up in the combustion chambers.
Its my understanding that the sensor is capable of back flow measurement also... to what extent this is implemented and the accuracy I don't know.dans79 wrote: β18 Dec 2019, 22:37I'm sorry to say that I don't think you understand the concept of back flow then. The sensor is not a check valve, so it is possible that do to pressure pulses, pressure build up, line expansion do to pressure etc, the fuel can flow backwards to an extent.saviour stivala wrote: β18 Dec 2019, 21:35It is a 'returnless system' and what fuel passes through the fuel flow sensor must end-up in the combustion chambers.
I would hope so, or it would be pretty much useless.
I am sorry, but when did FIA give a statement like that? Could you please direct me to the source? Thank youaral wrote: β18 Dec 2019, 12:58This thread is going around in circles , quoting unverified sources and theories. Whereas TDs were issued because of some innuendos, it was confirmed by the FIA that nothing was found amiss with the Ferrari PU. It might suit some to believe that there was some cheating, but there has been NO confirmation of any such event. Now, can we please get back to discussing the actual facts relating to the PU rather than all this "he says...you say" etc
@Aral, Could you please direct me to the source too? I can not find this anywhere. Thank you .siskue2005 wrote: β19 Dec 2019, 07:09I am sorry, but when did FIA give a statement like that? Could you please direct me to the source? Thank you