Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

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.

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.

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.

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".

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.

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.

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 (?)

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?"

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



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • What does it look like with highway driving? And yes, I had a similar thought as Duncan. It looks quite similar in my Stagea and I have made myself accept it as normal. Might have to look into it some day  
    • While I was waiting for the new parts to come in for the charge pipe and radiator I decided to do some turbo modification. The drive pressure (exhaust backpressure) was a lot higher that I thought it should be. For 32lbs of boost drive was 55lbs. The turbine housing is a 1.10AR and my turbo builder has suggested to go to a 1.25AR. To test if a larger AR would do anything to reduce drive pressure AND not spend any money I decided to hog out the divider in my current housing. I removed it from the inlet and the whole way through the housing.  After reassembly and testing it doesn't look like this modification did anything for reducing drive pressure or requiring more fuel (making more power). Oh well, it was worth a shot. We'll get some data at the track if it makes it past the 60ft. I also machined a $7 shift knob off Amazon to fit my Stillway shifter since I didn't like the Stillway shift knob. Next on the list was the radiator replacement and fabrication of a new intercooler tube that had no silicon coupler. No pictures of this - I was short on time each night after work to get this done and didn't stop to take pictures.  Next was to get the clutch disks out and replaced. Previously when installing the dogbox I had ordered a set of the same sintered iron disks I had been running because I switched to the 26-spline input shaft. I thought it was odd that they didn't have any markings or brand name on them like all my old disks had but installed them anyway. At the track I could not get the clutch to lock up using my normal strategies. After two track nights I reached out to the clutch manufacturer and ask their thoughts. They said they had to switch the material out because they were having trouble getting the original material and that this new material would not take to being slipped very well.  So out with the first set of 26-spline disks and in with the correct material 26-spline disks. While I had the trans out I added an inspection/service hole. I've wanted one of these for a while. Now I can have a look at things and change the front cover shimming when needed (clutch wear). I hustled and got the clutch change done in a few hours on a Saturday. Hopped in the car and drove home. On the way home I did a 1-3 pull. When shifting from 2nd to 3rd the core plug in the back of the cylinder head popped out and dumped all the coolant. Thankfully I was only 30 seconds from home and coasted it there. Datalog showed nothing unusual and 2.5psi of coolant pressure. That plug has been in there since 1992 but I guess it worked its way out. Pulled the trans AGAIN and replaced the plug, JB welded it in, and made a brace. Also deleted the head drain I had added in during the bearing issue fiasco.  I am currently changing my boost control plumbing to make it cleaner. After that is done I'll make another attempt at getting past the 60.
    • Are you 100% sure this isn't tune related?
    • 140-150 across the board. At this point hoping the grounding harness fixes it. My grounds are all tied to the chassis and none to the battery. For SR and KA that’s never been a problem for me but had a few other guys here and Reddit who told me RB really like a very solid ground setup tied to the battery so going to try that next, I’m stumped if that doesn’t do it. Never had a car have spark and fuel and not fire off before. Only thing I can think is the spark is intermittent/weak because of grounds nothing else really makes sense at this point 
    • I am having close to the same issue. Can you help me with what wire you grounded to get your pump to trigger?
×
×
  • Create New...