Jump to content
SAU Community

Formula One 2014

tweety bird

By tweety bird,
in Motorsport Discussion & Builds

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Roy
Roy

Tragic isnt it

djr81
djr81

Hoping he can do for 888 what he did for Williams & McLaren.

ctjet
ctjet

daaaaaaaaaaaymn hitting that tonight aswell? joises

Posted Images

JAS-25T Grand Master

JAS-25T

Posted
Posted

The stewards' decision in full:

The Stewards, having received a report from the Technical Delegate, heard from the team representatives, have considered the following matter and determine a breach of the regulations has been committed by the competitor named below and impose the penalty referred to.

No/Driver: 3, Daniel Ricciardo

Competitor: Infiniti Red Bull Racing

Time: 20:17

Session: Race

Facts: Car #3 was not in compliance with article 5.1.4 of the FIA Formula 1 technical tegulations.

Offence: Breach of article 3.2 of the FIA Formula 1 sporting regulations and Article 5.1.4 of the FIA Formula 1 technical regulations.

Decision: Car #3 is excluded from the race results.

Reason:

1) The technical delegate reported to the stewards that car #3 exceeded the required fuel mass flow of 100kg/h. (article 5.1.4 of the Formula 1 technical regulations)

2) This parameter is outside of the control of the driver, Daniel Ricciardo.

3) The fuel flow is measured using the fuel flow sensor (Art. 5.10.3 & 5.10.4 of the technical regulations) which is homologated by the FIA and owned and operated by the team.

4) The stewards considered the history of the fitted fuel flow sensor, as described by the team and the technical delegate's representative who administers the programme. Their description of the history of the sensor matches.

a. During practice one a difference in reading between the first three and run four was detected. The same readings as Run 4 were observed throughout practice two.

b. The team used a different sensor on Saturday but did not get readings that were satisfactory to them or the FIA, so they were instructed to change the sensor within parc ferme on Saturday night.

c. They operated the original sensor during the race, which provided the same readings as run four of practice one, and practice two.

5) The stewards heard from the technical representative that when the sensor was installed on Saturday night, he instructed the team to apply an offset to their fuel flow such that the fuel flow would have been legal. He presented an email to the stewards that verified his instruction.

6) The technical representative stated to the stewards that there is variation in the sensors. However, the sensors fall within a known range, and are individually calibrated. They then become the standard which the teams must use for their fuel flow.

7) The team stated that based on the difference observed between the two readings in P1, they considered the fuel flow sensor to be unreliable. Therefore, for the start of the race they chose to use their internal fuel flow model, rather than the values provided by the sensor, with the required offset.

8) Technical directive 01614 (1 March 2014) provides the methodology by which the sensor will be used, and, should the sensor fail, the method by which the alternate model could be used.

a. The technical directive starts by stating: "The homologated fuel flow sensor will be the primary measurement of the fuel flow and will be used to check compliance with articles 5.1.4 and 5.1.5 of the F1 technical regulations..." This is in conformity with articles 5.10.3 and 5.10.4 of the technical regulations.

b. The technical directive goes on to state: "If at any time WE consider that the sensor has an issue which has not been detected by the system WE will communicate this to the team concerned and switch to a back-up system."

(emphasis added.)

c. The back-up system is the calculated fuel flow model with a correction factor decided by the FIA.

9) The FIA technical representative observed thought the telemetry during the race that the fuel flow was too high and contacted the team, giving them the opportunity to follow his previous instruction, and reduce the fuel flow such that it was within the limit, as measured by the homologated sensor - and thus gave the team the opportunity to be within compliance. The team chose not to make this correction.

10) Under Art. 3.2 of the sporting regulations it is the duty of the team to ensure compliance with the technical regulations throughout the event.

Thus the stewards find that:

A) The team chose to run the car using their fuel flow model, without direction from the FIA. This is a violation of the procedure within TD/01614.

B) That although the sensor showed a difference in readings between runs in P1, it remains the homologated and required sensor against which the team is obliged to measure their fuel flow, unless given permission by the FIA to do otherwise.

C) The stewards were satisfied by the explanation of the technical representative that by making an adjustment as instructed, the team could have run within the allowable fuel flow.

D) That regardless of the team's assertion that the sensor was fault, it is not within their discretion to run a different fuel flow measurement method without the permission of the FIA.

The stewards find that car #3 was out of compliance with the technical regulations and is therefore excluded from the results of the race.

PN-Mad Grand Master

PN-Mad

Posted
Posted

Power.

Not economy. The economy part is the fact they only have 100 litres to start and finish the race with.

Fuel flow restricts the maximum power available from the turbo motor. Otherwise with an unrestricted flow, you could run massive power to pass at will, then just trickle around to save fuel.

djr81 Grand Master

djr81

Posted
Posted

Power.

Not economy. The economy part is the fact they only have 100 litres to start and finish the race with.

Fuel flow restricts the maximum power available from the turbo motor. Otherwise with an unrestricted flow, you could run massive power to pass at will, then just trickle around to save fuel.

Yeah you have to laugh at the mainstream medias attemps to explain what the hell it was he got pinged for. Hopeless. Still brilliant effort by Dan none the less. He just needs to repeat it in a couple weeks and he is on his way to crushing Tool.*

Also good effort by Magnussen. Pretty young looking podium, all up.

*May have gone a bit early with that prediction.

PN-Mad Grand Master

PN-Mad

Posted
Posted

It was a little strange seeing the McLaren not make much ground on the RB down the straight, when all the talk was about how slow the Renault was in a straight line.

Overall it's a sad state of affairs for a sport that revived such a PR boost in this country with Dans result. Not saying it could be over looked for the PR, but it's just sad.

I skimmed over that stewards report, makes me very uneasy about these fuel flow meters for "parity".

djr81 Grand Master

djr81

Posted
Posted

It was a little strange seeing the McLaren not make much ground on the RB down the straight, when all the talk was about how slow the Renault was in a straight line.

Overall it's a sad state of affairs for a sport that revived such a PR boost in this country with Dans result. Not saying it could be over looked for the PR, but it's just sad.

I skimmed over that stewards report, makes me very uneasy about these fuel flow meters for "parity".

Back in the eighties they used to have the same issues with the boost limiters (bovs basically if i remember correctly) they used to limit the turbo motors. FIA stuff was not up to scratch and the teams quickly figured out how to game them anyway.
Roy Grand Master

Roy

Posted
Posted

Lets see Vettel get a good weekend in and see if Dan can ruffle feathers. It does look like being a race for the 3rd step between RBR, Williams and McLaren which will make for interesting racing. But Mercedes are clearly quicker much like Seb was in Singapore last year. Pace to burn.

sh@un Grand Master

sh@un

Posted
Posted

RBR are probably, in leagalese, screwed; but we'll see

To clarify, it turns out not to be L/h fuel flow (volume) but rather mass flow (kg/h)

Depending on the specific gravity of the control fuel and the ambient temp, 100kg/h would probably be between 110-120L/h (?)

GTR-N1 Grand Master

GTR-N1

Posted
Posted

here's an excellent picture for all you Kobi fans out there

rajab knows why you're fans, but you deserve pics regardless

http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000ZyJhCjP7Gb4/s/1000/I0000ZyJhCjP7Gb4.jpg

Great picture with a caption below it...

"WHAT DEFECT?"

hrd-hr30 Grand Master

hrd-hr30

Posted
Posted

here's an excellent picture for all you Kobi fans out there

rajab knows why you're fans, but you deserve pics regardless

http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000ZyJhCjP7Gb4/s/1000/I0000ZyJhCjP7Gb4.jpg

yeah bag him because his rear brakes didn't work.

fans because a Caterham has never been far enough up the grid to crash into anyone before!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • alburger87
      HY51 Fuga Hybrid

      By alburger87 · Posted

      Thanks! Will get it looked at before winter 🥶 other than that she's a mint ride love it aye 
    • joshuaho96
      How much roughly to convert stock r32gtr to single high mount turbo + ecu and tune

      By joshuaho96 · Posted

      FWIW a lot of the local owners that do a big build tend to have cars that are perpetually broken. 
    • Watermouse
      R34 GTT Battery Relocation To Trunk

      By Watermouse · Posted

      I just got this system but haven’t installed yet I got a Moroso sealed box (defect reasons) which will be set up same as their pic The quality is high grade, the correspondence I had with the owner (former head designer for Rockford Fosgate) was unbelievable, guiding me with what I needed. Even told me not to buy some things as it could be sorted in a different way at his loss. Just a bit of a bite with the exchange rate and don’t purchase gear in 1 hit that goes over $1,000 au, lol I forgot!  
    • elir32
      Rv37 400r questions

      By elir32 · Posted

      Thanks mate for that reply. Very helpful.    it’s a 2022 400R so would most likely lose those features as you say.     I did a quick compare of a rv37 nav and heading for sale in Japan to q50 model. I’ll pop pics below. Seems  Japan spec head into top, nav unit second below it   below pic Q50 aud delivered     differences seem to be Aus delivered has a different plug top left hand side of head unit- not sure what and where it goes.   and nav unit Japanese tv37 had an extra plug put    Again I’m really not sure what each of these differences mean!       the actual plugs on a v37 and q50 screens look identical on both screens… pics below for comparing. (One screen was is a us delivered one) but should be same gps signals etc as Australia.    If it were as simple as swapping a nav unit from q50 aud delivered im interested -just want to figure out what the missing plug is for before spending big $ on a second hand part for it to not work, and I guess with the head unit, if the band expander does the job (I got a 20mHz so should get the range I’m after) so should narrow my issue down to nav unit only.  I’d love to know what the extra cable on rv37 does and if I eliminate that part what it’ll do to the setup,    and also, if I can figure out what that head unit plug difference is, what does that cable do and where does it got can it be altered or re-plugged?! Excuse my ignorance what is ACP/AA, what does that stand for? (Apple car play? Android air play)? so If I swapped head units to save using a band expander, I’d likely lose those better features to have an oem Unit operational. Better to use a band expander and retain AirPlay options and newer version of head unit     provably best to band expand it, and focus on the nav unit. th isn’t  a big deal/ would be cool to have it working  from what I can tel we use a PAL Signal and Japan uses a NTSC signal  I don’t know if there’s a co better or if the screen only reads NTSC, or if it’s the tv module that needs replacing… no big deal don’t need it but more of a curiosity thing on that!   Thanks for the info re tyre sensors, helpful and great to know.  I was reading the online manual off Japan website and it seemed to make it sound more confusing than it is  I guess a rim replacement would require the sensors to be moved to a new rim to carry that option over?!     Thanks for the info regarding diagnostic mode. I appreciate your help mate. Trying to brainstorm here to find a solution to get as much gadgets as I can working! I plan to get my local Nissan tech to have a look too who used to be at an Infiniti dealer back in the day to see if any thing they have or idea can find a soliton. But hoping anyone here has gone down the same route to make life easier!!   i guess identifying the cable/plug differences and what they do would be a great way of finding out if the units are transferable    thanks again 
    • sonicii
      Rv37 400r questions

      By sonicii · Posted

      No idea about the remote start part. If the V37 nav is anything like other Nissan JDM vehicles, you can't get the factory Japanese nav working in australia, a card from a different car almost certainly won't work, those cards are usually matched to the serial number of the DCU.  You could be possibly swap out the components from a AuDM Q50 to get it working, but if this is a new model (2021+) 400R, then you will lose the newer features like ACP/AA.  That said, if you have ACP/AA, just use google maps.. I assume a band expander would be required to get the local radio stations, but don't forget the Japanese FM band is narrower than ours, so you still might not be able to receive all Australian stations. I can't see any reason the tyre pressure sensors won't work here, there is the sensor unit inside the rim and the receiver nearby in the wheel well.  I have never had to change the batteries on my 2015 Q50, so I assume they last quite a while.  A straight battery change shouldn't need them to be re-registered as they are the same unit, that should only be required if you replace a sensor with a new one.   Word of warning, if you ever go into the 'secret' diagnostics mode on the main screen, DO NOT EVER do a 'reset' in this menu, it will erase all of your model specific data in the DCU and you will need a trip to a dealer to re-program it all, which would be particularly painful being an import.  This applies to the AuDM Q50 too.
×
×
  • Create New...