F1technical.net

I dont have the data, but looking on the % consumption during the race. The ferrari was pretty much equal with mclaren.

Tommy Cookers wrote:today's race suggests that Williams and Mclaren loaded about 92 and 95 kg of fuel respectively, the others the full 100 kg ?
presumably most teams are doing significant mgu-k 'recovery' from engine running
and the above 2 teams are not

What makes you say Mclaren and Williams didn't load the full 100kg? Also, I don't think anyone is burning much fuel on the over-run. I think it would be worth more under acceleration because it doesn't suffer from the electrical losses associated with moving energy from mgu-h to es to mgu-k. With the brake by wire, why would they want to burn fuel on the overrun?

Has anyone captured all the graphics on fuel consumption for the different stages in the race?

ringo wrote:I noticed that the ferrari engine is respectively fuel efficient.
The williams seem to be the most fuel efficient.

As for the fuel used, i think all cars will have the full 100kg of fuel in the tank. I don't think they will remove 5kg just to be exact.

From the % stats in the race, I wonder whether williams are underfueling because their car is above the weight limit? Therefore they would have to save a bit more fuel in the race but wouldnt be much quicker than those around them.

Pierce89 wrote:

Tommy Cookers wrote:today's race suggests that Williams and Mclaren loaded about 92 and 95 kg of fuel respectively, the others the full 100 kg ?
presumably most teams are doing significant mgu-k 'recovery' from engine running
and the above 2 teams are not

What makes you say Mclaren and Williams didn't load the full 100kg? Also, I don't think anyone is burning much fuel on the over-run. I think it would be worth more under acceleration because it doesn't suffer from the electrical losses associated with moving energy from mgu-h to es to mgu-k. With the brake by wire, why would they want to burn fuel on the overrun?

the fuel used figures were clearly presented in the TV coverage, even near the end of the race
after a quite long period of both Williams cars apparently competing strongly trying for 6th place
Williams must have known that they could not make use of 100 kg, so surely they wouldn't have loaded it ?
similarly to a lesser but still significant extent the Mclaren

even if these cars have rather poor DF but correspondingly lower drag (ie they couldn't apply so much power in corner exits)
surely this could not account for the consumption being so much less ? (about 8% less for Williams than most others)

many (most ?) races will not allow the full desired recovery-to-storage from braking alone (in part as it's limited to 120 kW)
loading the engine to generate electricity (necessarily for storage) is possible whenever the driver doesn't need full torque
it is a pretty race-useful thing to do with fuel (IMO better than leaving some of the 100 kg in the pit)
most are doing it ? (I predicted they all would) but apparently and conspicuously Williams and Mclaren are/did not
maybe they have designed eg their storage system around this concept, and accessed some other beneficial savings ?
IIRC Malaysia is (quite surprisingly as it's rather fast) not a fuel-hungry race ?

Tommy Cookers wrote:many (most ?) races will not allow the full desired recovery-to-storage from braking alone (in part as it's limited to 120 kW)
loading the engine to generate electricity (necessarily for storage) is possible whenever the driver doesn't need full torque
it is a pretty race-useful thing to do with fuel (IMO better than leaving some of the 100 kg in the pit)
most are doing it ? (I predicted they all would) but apparently and conspicuously Williams and Mclaren are/did not
maybe they have designed eg their storage system around this concept, and accessed some other beneficial savings ?
IIRC Malaysia is (quite surprisingly as it's rather fast) not a fuel-hungry race ?

Most is correct. I did some calcs which showed only Singapore being comfortably over the 2MJ limit, all others being below. The next closest is Abu Dhabi, with approximately 1.8MJ recoverable per lap, a few (including Bahrain) were about 1.5MJ.

As the MGU-K is only 120 kW it depends on time and charging efficiency, with 100% efficiency you need is 16.7 sec of braking for 2 MJ, but already that is a lot. According to Brembo, average braking time per lap at Sepang was 15% or about 15 seconds.

But I doubt if the total efficiency is much more than 80%, why you would need at least 20 seconds of braking for 2 MJ.

ringo wrote:The williams seem to be the most fuel efficient.

It's worth noting that from Australia we learned the Williams drivers often shift at 10500 or there abouts rpm, so it would be expected they use less fuel than the other teams.

xpensive wrote:As the MGU-K is only 120 kW it depends on time and charging efficiency, with 100% efficiency you need is 16.7 sec of braking for 2 MJ, but already that is a lot. According to Brembo, average braking time per lap at Sepang was 15% or about 15 seconds.

But I doubt if the total efficiency is much more than 80%, why you would need at least 20 seconds of braking for 2 MJ.

Was the regulations changed this year, so you can't harvest energy from the MGU-K unless you're braking?

How should you otherwise harvest energy with the MGU-K and what would be the point?

xpensive wrote:How should you otherwise harvest energy with the MGU-K and what would be the point?

If the regulations does not stipulate that you can only harvest from the K during braking, clever maps could be generated to have a more progressive power delivery out of corners during acceleration. And of course help to charge the full 2 MJ a lap.

But only if you can use the full 2MJ a lap, too.

mrluke wrote:

ringo wrote:I noticed that the ferrari engine is respectively fuel efficient.
The williams seem to be the most fuel efficient.

As for the fuel used, i think all cars will have the full 100kg of fuel in the tank. I don't think they will remove 5kg just to be exact.

From the % stats in the race, I wonder whether williams are underfueling because their car is above the weight limit? Therefore they would have to save a bit more fuel in the race but wouldnt be much quicker than those around them.

From Autosport

12:08 Meanwhile, Bottas has confirmed to EDD STRAW that he didn't start the race with all 100 kilograms of allowed fuel on board, as the team was confident of not having any consumption worries.

Noting the very high trap speeds of the Williams, I bet they are running less DF thus less drag than others. It helps them with their fuel consumption.

dren wrote:But only if you can use the full 2MJ a lap, too.

What do you mean?? They can use 4 MJ a lap. And I'm pretty sure they would be able to use the full 4MJ.

Holm86 wrote:

xpensive wrote:How should you otherwise harvest energy with the MGU-K and what would be the point?

If the regulations does not stipulate that you can only harvest from the K during braking, clever maps could be generated to have a more progressive power delivery out of corners during acceleration. And of course help to charge the full 2 MJ a lap.

That's what I thought they are doing too.
I checked quickly, but I couldn't find any hint that it was not allowed to harvest with MGU-K while applying a torque demand >0% on the PU.

On the contrary, I think they are doing this extensively during phases of high performance requirement. Looking at the onboards, it seems they are much more often than last year demanding less than 100% but >0% torque, so this comes in handy if consumption is not a problem.