Replacement F1/WEC Fuel Flow Sensor?

[thisisatest]

I still feel a simpler method of metering the fuel is a good idea, but a simple orifice "valve" isn't enough. Maybe if the valve had a pop-off pressure regulator that was temperature compensated?

you could make the valve orifice out of a material with a high rate of thermal expansion. then if the fuel was cooled, the orifice would shrink.

[gruntguru]

Thanks for the clarification.
my point being it didn't need to be. 100kg/race is pretty easy to measure weight the car before the race weight it after. Instead of spelling out a complicated fuel flow limit simply state a FIA standard orifice must be place XX Cm from the injector rail with no other path to the injectors. Every one has the same orifice. They can be easily checked. They don't require dodgy calibration and offsets. This would have been a much cheaper option than the current methods. Basically the same as an air limited series call out a hole size and be done with it.

It needs to be tapered to ensure teams run to at least 10,500 rpm. If 100 kg/hr fuel was the only stipulation, the designers would run the engines at much lower revs and higher boost to improve efficiency.

[flynfrog]

Thanks for the clarification.
my point being it didn't need to be. 100kg/race is pretty easy to measure weight the car before the race weight it after. Instead of spelling out a complicated fuel flow limit simply state a FIA standard orifice must be place XX Cm from the injector rail with no other path to the injectors. Every one has the same orifice. They can be easily checked. They don't require dodgy calibration and offsets. This would have been a much cheaper option than the current methods. Basically the same as an air limited series call out a hole size and be done with it.

It needs to be tapered to ensure teams run to at least 10,500 rpm. If 100 kg/hr fuel was the only stipulation, the designers would run the engines at much lower revs and higher boost to improve efficiency.

Why do we need teams to run 10500 RPM? I thought greater efficiency was the name of the game with this formula

[Peter Tabmow]

Has everyone read this article? It's a clear, concise explanation of why this type of approach and device were adopted, courtesy of Cosworth...

http://www.racecar-engineering.com/arti ... ow-meters/

[wuzak]

Thanks for the clarification.
my point being it didn't need to be. 100kg/race is pretty easy to measure weight the car before the race weight it after. Instead of spelling out a complicated fuel flow limit simply state a FIA standard orifice must be place XX Cm from the injector rail with no other path to the injectors. Every one has the same orifice. They can be easily checked. They don't require dodgy calibration and offsets. This would have been a much cheaper option than the current methods. Basically the same as an air limited series call out a hole size and be done with it.

It needs to be tapered to ensure teams run to at least 10,500 rpm. If 100 kg/hr fuel was the only stipulation, the designers would run the engines at much lower revs and higher boost to improve efficiency.

Why do we need teams to run 10500 RPM? I thought greater efficiency was the name of the game with this formula

It was a marketig decision.

High rpm has been an F1 signature since 1989, and probably for even longer than that.