WEC (World Endurance Championship) 2014

Please discuss here all your remarks and pose your questions about all racing series, except Formula One. Both technical and other questions about GP2, Touring cars, IRL, LMS, ...
User avatar
machin
162
Joined: 25 Nov 2008, 14:45

Re: WEC (World Endurance Championship) 2014

Post

Whiteblue wrote:According to what I have saved on my hard drive all competitors are going to have the same refuelling capacity in litres. Obviously petrol litre and diesel litre allowance are different but within fuel class they are the same.
And THAT is part of the brilliance of the 2014 rules... it is no secret that the FIA wanted to promote Hybridisation and therefore to give the Hybrid cars an advantage, but they didn't want that advantage to be used to increase lap speed; only to increase stint duration.

The fuel capacity and refuelling rates (between different fuels!) have been set such that the length of stint and time spent refuelling is the same (regardless of fuel type) if the hybrid energy options are ignored (and they are running at the per lap fuel consumption limit; nothing stops someone from lifting off the throttle to trade speed for economy). (That bit in bold is important).

it is quite brilliant; by lowering the per lap fuel allowance with increasing Hybridisation they maintain lap times regardless of size of the size of the Hybrid system (since Kinetic Energy per lap is maintained), but by "ignoring" Hybridisation in the fuel tank capacity allocations it gives a clear advantage in stint length.

That is the main reason why it is slightly surprising that Audi went for a 2MJ hybrid system; they will be at a clear disadvantage on stint length, however they gave two reasons;

1, Better reliabilty (and better lap speed if the Hybrid system breaks, since they only lose 2MJ of their per lap Kinetic energy allowance, not 6 or 8 )
2, Weight; they couldn't get their car weight down low enough to have an 8MJ system whilst maintaing optimum weight balance AND meeting the minimum weight. if you go over the minimum weight your lap speed will come down.
COMPETITION CAR ENGINEERING -Home of VIRTUAL STOPWATCH


henra
53
Joined: 11 Mar 2012, 19:34

Re: WEC (World Endurance Championship) 2014

Post

WhiteBlue wrote:It would be a good idea to simply use the primary energy equivalent. So if you invest more energy into processing you would be further penalized.
Although personally, I'm no fan of this equalisation stuff either, I can see where they are coming from.
The Problem with Petrol vs Diesel is, that Petrol engines wouldn't stand a Chance in raw Efficiency.
Due to the knocking proneness of Petrol engines they can't run the same compression and thus pressure ratios as the Diesels. So they won't be able to achieve comparable Carnot efficiencies. Diesels would always win on pure Efficiency of the usage of the energy stored in the fuel.

Since there are manufacturers out there who are focussing more on Petrol Hybrids in their Road Cars, they will excert pressure on FIA/ACO so they can competitively run Petrols in the race. You can't leave the Marketing aspects aside when dealing with big automotive manufacturers

User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: 14 Apr 2008, 20:58
Location: WhiteBlue Country
Contact:

Re: WEC (World Endurance Championship) 2014

Post

That is true when you look at the wish of the fans to have different technologies race each other. I think in the question Toyota vs Porsche who build the most efficient power pack we will have to wait a few races to become obvious who can do more laps with the 66.9L petrol they are both allowed to refuel. It should also be an issue of the fit of the downforce package for the respective circuits. I bet Porsche do not care much for the WEC. The big goal is Le Mans. One thing is for sure though. Toyota are much stronger than I expected them according to their budget.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)

User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: 14 Apr 2008, 20:58
Location: WhiteBlue Country
Contact:

Re: WEC (World Endurance Championship) 2014

Post

machin wrote:...That is the main reason why it is slightly surprising that Audi went for a 2MJ hybrid system; they will be at a clear disadvantage on stint length, however they gave two reasons;
1, Better reliabilty (and better lap speed if the Hybrid system breaks, since they only lose 2MJ of their per lap Kinetic energy allowance, not 6 or 8 )
2, Weight; they couldn't get their car weight down low enough to have an 8MJ system whilst maintaing optimum weight balance AND meeting the minimum weight. if you go over the minimum weight your lap speed will come down.
It could be possible that their efficiency advantage is so big that they do not need to stretch the refuelling laps that hard as the petrol cars have to do. All they needed from hybridization was traction out of the slow corners that they did not get last time due to the speed limit. They could be having enough power and lap numbers to feel comfortable.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)

henra
53
Joined: 11 Mar 2012, 19:34

Re: WEC (World Endurance Championship) 2014

Post

WhiteBlue wrote:That is true when you look at the wish of the fans to have different technologies race each other.
I think the fans want just different Manufacturers fighting against each other on a competitive level.
The Manufacturerers on the other hand see this adventure primarily as a Marketing platform for the (drive) technoclogies of their Road cars. If you take Toyota and Porsche for example, their main Focus for the cars they earn their Money with is on Petrol engines. So a pure Diesel series would not be attactive to them.
And that fact again would be less attractive for the fans.
It's all about Business.

User avatar
machin
162
Joined: 25 Nov 2008, 14:45

Re: WEC (World Endurance Championship) 2014

Post

WhiteBlue wrote: It could be possible that their efficiency advantage is so big that they do not need to stretch the refuelling laps that hard as the petrol cars have to do.

I'm afraid that is definitely not the case in terms of engine efficiency since the relative efficiency of the best diesel engine and the best Petrol engine has been removed in the EOT process in which maximum fuel usage and specific fuel consumption (engine efficiency measured in kW/kg.hour) have been "equalised", and if they exceed either the fuel allowance per lap, or the pre-agreed engine efficiency, they will be penalised since both parameters are monitored in real-time by the FIA during the race.

Unless you are talking about Aero and Chassis "efficiency", I.e. they believe that they have a big enough aero and chassis advantage to make up for the fact that during a stint they will have less Kinetic Energy available from Fuel and Hybrid systems... but imagine how much better they would be if they had the 8MJ Hybrid system as well.... assuming they could have it without affecting overall weight/balance or reliability.... (which Audi have themselves admitted They can't)
COMPETITION CAR ENGINEERING -Home of VIRTUAL STOPWATCH

User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: 14 Apr 2008, 20:58
Location: WhiteBlue Country
Contact:

Re: WEC (World Endurance Championship) 2014

Post

The equalization process has no influence on refuelling volume. Hence Audi may have so much efficiency in hand that they can post a lower kinetic energy value to the FiA than they actually have available. They could still have enough power to compete with the petrol driven cars. But it would significantly stretch their lap number to allow them not to use much hybrid technology beyond what they need to accelerate out of corners. I think this is the true reason for their system configuration.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)

User avatar
machin
162
Joined: 25 Nov 2008, 14:45

Re: WEC (World Endurance Championship) 2014

Post

WhiteBlue wrote:The equalization process has no influence on refuelling volume.
Are you ignoring my posts to try and wind me up?! :lol:

Here is the preliminary EoT table prior to the pre-season tests (dated 6-Jan-14):-

Image

And here is the EoT table after the tests when manufacturers had to declare their maximum engine efficiency (dated 14-April-14):-

Image

It is clear to see that not only has the fuel calorific (chemical) energy per lap been adjusted to account for the relative efficiencies of the engines (red highlight).... but also the maximum fuel capacity ("Refuelling volume" in your parlance) has also been adjusted for the same reason (blue highlight).
WhiteBlue wrote:Audi may have so much efficiency in hand
There is no possibility for Audi to have "efficiency in hand" where the fuel is concerned; They had to declare their maximum efficiency to the FIA (in the form of BSFC, or brake specific fuel consumption), and if they go above this at any point during a race, they WILL be penalised. This is monitored in real-time by the FIA using the fuel flow meter and torque meters that are fitted to the LMP1-H cars.

Here are the FIA's own words on the subject:-
If the FIA notices during the race that a car has an average or instantaneous (P max) BSFC (Brake Specific Fuel consumption) exceeding what was announced in February by more than 2% (estimation of the maximum error of the sensors), and to the advantage of this car, the technical delegate shall inform the stewards, after which there will be an open debate with the competitor in order to propose to him a minimum stop and go penalty of 60 seconds (which can be extended at the discretion of the stewards according to the duration of the infringement noted, i.e. the time during which the competitor ran while exceeding the authorised values). The duration will be recorded on the basis of the on-board sensors (fuel flow meter and torque meter), information which will be available to the competitor.
The full EOT process (from which the above quote has been pulled) is here:-

http://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/ ... %20EoT.pdf

I'll say it again; the EOT process does not allow anybody to "Sandbag" or have "fuel efficiency in hand". The rules have been specifically written to ensure that nobody gets an advantage in terms of lap time from using either petrol or diesel, or by having a 2MJ or 8MJ Hybrid system, but a clear advantage IS given to stint length (time between refuelling stops) if the cars have the biggest Hybrid system compared to a car (using either fuel system) which has a 2MJ system.
The FIA wrote: The EOT is defined as an equivalence of BSFC: no ICE technology (diesel or gasoline) should get an advantage from the regulations.

Appendix B has been computed based on the Committee recommendations, in order to conserve an incentive for big ERS system
COMPETITION CAR ENGINEERING -Home of VIRTUAL STOPWATCH

User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: 14 Apr 2008, 20:58
Location: WhiteBlue Country
Contact:

Re: WEC (World Endurance Championship) 2014

Post

Machine, I can obviously not make you understand what I'm talking about. Your own documents show that the refuelling capacity is constant for all petrol cars and all diesel cars for a given release. The values change when there is a new assessment, that is correct. But you can still play the game and post a lower BSFC than you can actually achieve. Let's assume you are sure to have enough power with 80% of your potential BSFC. Then you are limited to that value in the race. But as a reward you will have some more laps. And you are not oblige to show your hand in the first race if you want to keep your ability hidden. You can run with a less efficient mapping and sandbag that way. It may not make a lot of sense but it is possible in my view. So when you come to Le Mans you would use your most efficient mapping which will not give you more power but will give you 20% more laps. Perhaps that example explains my thinking.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)


User avatar
machin
162
Joined: 25 Nov 2008, 14:45

Re: WEC (World Endurance Championship) 2014

Post

So when you come to Le Mans you would use your most efficient mapping which will not give you more power but will give you 20% more laps. Perhaps that example explains my thinking.
You simply can't do this..... "more efficient mapping" would means a higher BSFC.... and the following are all directly fixed by the FIA:

1, BSFC (after declaration from the manufacturers)
2, fuel flow rate (calculated using the BSFC declared by the manufacturers)
3, Fuel flow per lap (calculated using the BSFC declared by the manufacturers)
4, Fueltank capacity (calculated using the BSFC declared by the manufacturers)

This also means the following are indirectly fixed, and equalised amongst the best diesel and petrol competitors (runnning in the same Hybrid category):-

5, The maximum instantaneous Power output of the engine (using BSFC and an instantaneous fuel flow rate)
6, The maximum Per lap Kinetic Energy available (using BSFC and the per lap fuel usage)
7, The maximum average power output during a lap (using BSFC and the per lap fuel usage)
8, The maximum Kinetic Energy available from the fuel between pit-stops (using BSFC and Fuel capacity limit)
9, The maximum number of laps completed whilst running at the maximum average power output (using fuel capacity, fuel flow rate per lap and BSFC).

But lets go through this step by step....

You're Audi and you secretly test and achieve a BSFC of 0.2 kilograms of fuel per hour per BHP produced over the hour. (number plucked out of mid-air)

You down-tune your engine and declare to the FIA that you can only achieve a BSFC of 0.230 (higher is worse, i.e. less efficient).

Your opponents have a petrol engine, but lets assume that they have identical aerodynamics and chassis performance. Can you use your engine's ability to run at a higher efficiency than you declared to gain longer or faster stints between pitstops...?

In order to equalise your power output (and hence Kinetic energy available over a specified time) compared to the petrol car the FIA tell you your fuel flow rate cannot be more than 120kg per hour and you must not go over the declared BSFC. This limits you to a maximum power output of 522bhp (120/0.23 = 522). You cannot have more power than this since to do that you either need to use more fuel (and hence will break your fuel flow limit) or have a better BSFC (and hence break your BSFC limit imposed on you by the FIA); even though your engine could achieve better BSFC or fuel consumption, you aren't allowed to use it because of the constant monitoring by the FIA.

In order to equalise your energy output over a lap (and hence average power over that lap) compared to the other cars the FIA tell you your fuel flow rate cannot be more than 6kg per lap and you must not go over the declared BSFC. Assuming a 4 minute lap this limits you to an average power output of 391bhp ((60/4)*6/0.23 = 391bhp), which is an energy of 391 x 0.7457 x 60 x 4 = 70MJ. You cannot have more energy than this since to do that you either need to use more fuel (and hence will break your fuel flow limit) or have a better BSFC (and hence break your BSFC limit imposed on you by the FIA); even though your engine could achieve better BSFC or fuel consumption, you aren't allowed to use it because of the constant monitoring by the FIA. You could use less energy of course (either by using less fuel or running at a lower efficiency), but then you'll simply go slower than your opponents who are using all their energy.

In order to equalise the stint length the FIA tell you that your fuel capacity cannot be more than 80kg. in order to be competitive with your opponents you will need to use all 80kg of fuel, and you will need to use it at the highest allowable efficiency figure (the declared value of 0.230) to achieve the highest possible kinetic energy output (since fuel used x time / BSFC = kinetic energy). You could burn fuel at a lower rate, but you can only do so at the declared BSFC limit, so you are simply trading a lower average BHP for more laps, but that means you'll be slower over those laps (since your average BHP is less which is less kinetic energy per lap) than your competitor, who, through the EoT process has exactly the same amount of Kinetic Energy (and hence power) available over a single lap, and between pit stops.

You can see that there is no way to use your engine's ability to be more efficient than the figure you declared, and the only strategy available to you is to trade average BHP with the number of laps between refuelling stops. But this will make you slower over those laps than your opponents.

Now remember, the amount of Hybridisation is not taken into account in the fuel capacity calculations.... so more Hybrid energy = more kinetic energy between pitstops. But Hybridisation IS taken into account in the per lap fuel allowance.... so you can't use the hybrid power to go faster, but you can use it to go further.... The only reason for going for a smaller Hybrid class is:-

1, You cannot build a Hybrid system light enough to meet the minimum weight limit.
2, Fitting the hybrid system has some other detrimental affect on the car (aerodynamics, CG height, balance, reliability etc).
COMPETITION CAR ENGINEERING -Home of VIRTUAL STOPWATCH

User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: 14 Apr 2008, 20:58
Location: WhiteBlue Country
Contact:

Re: WEC (World Endurance Championship) 2014

Post

I guess it depends what the FiA does with the data. If they only check torque and fuel flow limit then you can manipulate. If they permanently evaluate the BSFC and compare that with the posted value then you can't cheat. So it depends what they do. I did not think they compute this all the time. But reading the additional documents one can conclude that instant and continuous evaluation of BSFC is done.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)

User avatar
machin
162
Joined: 25 Nov 2008, 14:45

Re: WEC (World Endurance Championship) 2014

Post

WhiteBlue wrote: So it depends what they do. I did not think they compute BSFC all the time. But reading the additional documents one can conclude that instant and continuous evaluation of BSFC is done.
We do not have to guess, since the FIA have made it absolutely clear, as I have posted before:-
FIA wrote:If the FIA notices during the race that a car has an average or instantaneous (P max) BSFC (Brake Specific Fuel consumption) exceeding what was announced in February by more than 2% (estimation of the maximum error of the sensors), and to the advantage of this car, the technical delegate shall inform the stewards, after which there will be an open debate with the competitor in order to propose to him a minimum stop and go penalty of 60 seconds (which can be extended at the discretion of the stewards according to the duration of the infringement noted, i.e. the time during which the competitor ran while exceeding the authorised values). The duration will be recorded on the basis of the on-board sensors (fuel flow meter and torque meter), information which will be available to the competitor.
COMPETITION CAR ENGINEERING -Home of VIRTUAL STOPWATCH

Lycoming
106
Joined: 25 Aug 2011, 22:58

Re: WEC (World Endurance Championship) 2014

Post

machin wrote:
So when you come to Le Mans you would use your most efficient mapping which will not give you more power but will give you 20% more laps. Perhaps that example explains my thinking.
You simply can't do this..... "more efficient mapping" would means a higher BSFC.... and the following are all directly fixed by the FIA:
But hold on... don't you achieve something similar if you lean the mix? Obviously power will drop, but it will be more efficient.

Of course it's silly to think that you can just get 20% more efficiency without any penalty by changing maps, since if you could do that, you may as well do it from day 1 and not just at le mans.

Post Reply