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

[feni_remmen]

I guess they are currently aurguing that 100kg/hour is not the same as 50 kg/30 minutes... Different to 25 kg/15 minutes too... 1.67 kg /minute anybody?

How would that not be the same?

Of course it's the same! Just depends on the frequency of the monitoring!!!
At 10 times a second and red bull exceed the limit.
Once an hour and they don't exceed that limit!

It's an obscure joke about measuring frequency!!!

[Maxion]

The rules are written as to not allow a fuel flow of over 100kg/h at any given time, so it's specified as "in every instant", not "30 minutes over and then 30 minutes under". However since in practical terms you cannot measure "in every instant" they have decided to use a certain sampling frequency. On the previous page someone mentioned it is 5 readings / second. So basically the practical fuel-flow limit is 5.56 gram/ 0.2 sec, since that's the window they are policing.

Where did you get that?

The official article is:
5.1.4 Fuel mass flow must not exceed 100kg/h.

Indeed, the technical regulations do not specify a measuring interval. Going from the stated mass flow of 100 kg/h you would assume the measuring period to be one hour. How do you otherwise argue that the fuel flow should be measured at 10hz? Arguing that it's the same as measuring speed in miles per hour does not make sense, as kg per hour is not a standard way to measure flow.

The technical regulations are also to be interperated literally in a black and white manner, you either comply or you do not. If the intent with rule 5.1.4 is to never exceed a fuel flow of 100 kg / hour you would have thought it would have been specified in the rules, or at least that a measurement period would be mentioned.

[pyrosian]

If you used 100kg in 30 mins and nothing for the next 30mins your fuel flow is 100kg an hour is it not?

The rules are written as to not allow a fuel flow of over 100kg/h at any given time, so it's specified as "in every instant", not "30 minutes over and then 30 minutes under". However since in practical terms you cannot measure "in every instant" they have decided to use a certain sampling frequency. On the previous page someone mentioned it is 5 readings / second. So basically the practical fuel-flow limit is 5.56 gram/ 0.2 sec, since that's the window they are policing.

So wouldn't it stand that if the FIA is only policing every 0.2 seconds you could burn 11.12grams for 0.1 seconds and nothing for the 0.1 seconds following it? The same logic applies. I'm not sure how feesible this is but is it possible or useful to fire, say, half of the cylinders on more fuel to increase power?

[NTS]

Where did you get that?

Here they mention changing the measurement procedure because of too many false alarms: http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 00988.html

And on Twitter (and this forum) multiple people mentioned the measurement frequency went from 10 Hz to 5 Hz, for example: https://twitter.com/schneebdotcom/statu ... 3593899008

[Lurk]

100kg/h = 2.56g/0.2s = 2.4ton/day.

It is a flow rate! It has no notion of frequency, therefore it must be respected all the time. The measure is done 5 times per second only because it is convenient. If they could have a continuous analogic measurement, they would have one.



edit: rate flow->flow rate.

[lombers]

I wouldn't be too surprised if the teams data will proof FIA wrong. Also, it's currently under investigation and NOT the final decision.

Very unlikely. The FIA pull their data from the fuel flow sensor which they would have checked after the race to ensure it's accuracy. The fact that the report said he had "consistently" exceeded the fuel flow rate looks very bad.

[SidSidney]

I can think of one person in the RB garage who will be quite happy with a Ricciardo DQ...

[basti313]

I guess they are currently aurguing that 100kg/hour is not the same as 50 kg/30 minutes... Different to 25 kg/15 minutes too... 1.67 kg /minute anybody?

How would that not be the same?

Of course it's the same! Just depends on the frequency of the monitoring!!!
At 10 times a second and red bull exceed the limit.
Once an hour and they don't exceed that limit!

It's an obscure joke about measuring frequency!!!

I don't think that the frequency of monitoring is questionable. It is just given by the sensor.
For me there is a systematic problem: FIA said with 1/10 measurements they get peaks they do not want and that produce fuel warnings. For me such a peak would be produced by some turbulence in the fuel system producing a lower and a higher point. Something like statistical noise. So now they take two of these points and sum up...but this would be completely wrong for statistical noise. For statistical noise you would at least take three points, sum up and divide. So you would have the same 1/10 of a second measurements, but with much more stability.

So the question now is: Do they look up every fault warning and look for the corresponding dip for the peak? For me that would be the correct solution. Peak with dip means no advantage, peak alone is an advantage.

[Maxion]

100kg/h = 2.56g/0.2s = 2.4ton/day.

It is a rate flow! It has no notion of frequency, therefore it must be respected all the time. The measure is done 5 times per second only because it is convenient. If they could have a continuous analogic measurement, they would have one.

Agreed, but there is no specification of measurement period in the technical regulations. The rule is stated with a measurement period of kilograms per hour. Using logic, one would assume then the measurement period to be one hour, no? The, to be compliant with the rule you cannot use more than one hundred kilograms of fuel in a one hour period.

Doing so you are in breach of the intent of the rule, but you are technically speaking not breaching it. With the technical regulations intent matters not, only technical compliance.

If the FIA intended this rule to be interpreted with a 10 Hz measurement period, then why is the flow limit stated as being per hour?

[Sombrero]

http://www.racecar-engineering.com/news ... uel-rules/

[Bomber_Pilot]

What if you could somehow tune your fuel flow rate with the FIA sensor? Let say when the sensor takes a measurment, your fuel flow rate is within the limits and in between it's way over it (pulsating)? Just some crazy ideas here, it's allmost 1 o'clock here and we are having a bbq

EDIT: just saw, that you are already discussing it.

[dave34m]

What if you could somehow tune your fuel flow rate with the FIA sensor? Let say when the sensor takes a measurment, your fuel flow rate is within the limits and in between it's way over it (pulsating)? Just some crazy ideas here, it's allmost 1 o'clock here and we are having a bbq

you a Kiwi?

[subasurf]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bi1xDN6CIAAg5wc.jpg:large

[Bomber_Pilot]

What if you could somehow tune your fuel flow rate with the FIA sensor? Let say when the sensor takes a measurment, your fuel flow rate is within the limits and in between it's way over it (pulsating)? Just some crazy ideas here, it's allmost 1 o'clock here and we are having a bbq

you a Kiwi?

No I'm from Slovenia and it's one in the afternoon here

[Ral]

What if you could somehow tune your fuel flow rate with the FIA sensor? Let say when the sensor takes a measurment, your fuel flow rate is within the limits and in between it's way over it (pulsating)? Just some crazy ideas here, it's allmost 1 o'clock here and we are having a bbq

EDIT: just saw, that you are already discussing it.

At a guess I would say you'd probably run afoul of the 100kg/h and won't be able to finish the race.