2014 - F1

And the sensor they used allowed for more fuel flow.

 

Because the one the FIA gave them was defective - the FIA admitted it, forced them to change it in Parc Ferme', then when that one was found to be defective, they wanted them to reinstall the first one.....THAT's what Red Bull was objecting too, being forced to use a defective part that might have made them uncompetitive. They claim their fuel flow measuring device was accurate and kept them within the letter of the rules while letting them race competitively.

However, despite being proved right (assuming they are), I'll bet the FIA will rule against them anyway.

 

They did not use an approved sensor and used one that was not allowed by FIA, one that allowed for more fuel flow. Case closed, in my eyes...if it was Ferrari I would feel the same way.

All I have been discussing is why they might have wanted more fuel flow in the first place.

 

We know that they did not use the FIA sensor, we do not know if the one they used allowed more fuel flow. Why do you keep insisting that they did, has someone reported that fact somewhere? Cause I haven't seen it, but I'd like to read about it........

But since they didn't use the FIA mandated one, even tho it was proven defective, admitted by the FIA to be defective and inaccurate, their appeal will probably be denied on those grounds, not that it gave them an unfair advantage.

But the proof of all this will be in Malaysia, if using the correct sensor they can still be competitive, to me that would prove their case that they did nothing that was outside the rules re: the fuel flow.

 

They used the FIA sensor. It's just that the FIA wanted them to put in a fudge factor. Red Bull said the fudge factor was wrong and would make them uncompetitive. Red Bull should be able to prove their flow calculations were right. The question will be is the rule a fuel flow limit or an FIA sensor rule.

 

Please see post #529 line 7.

 

They did indeed use the original sensor that had been installed in P1, but they changed the math that compensated for the readings.

So the sensor was saying X, the FIA said use X+Y to compensate, and Red Bull said, We don't like your math, we're using X+Z.

It doesn't actually mean that the fuel ever flowed at a greater volume. It means that the math used to determine how much fuel was flowing was not approved math.

Basically, the fuel flow sensor is a tube with a sensor. The sensor pulses at a certain frequency and reads the bounce back as a number. The rate of fuel that's passing through the sensor determines the reflection time of the pulses.

Remember on old vinyl record players the LED strobe light that helped indicate the timing? It's kind of like that. The timing of the pulses between the strobe analog in the sensor and the receiver is software driven. The FIA provided software that Red Bull didn't use.

 

Yes, but that does not prove that their fuel flow was outside the regulations, only that the FIA sensor was inaccurate, which was my main point. They could use a sensor that would probably cause them to be uncompetitive, or use the fuel model they KNEW was accurate and within the regs....they had to know that the FIA would be all over them for this, so they must have had a strategy and a way to prove they were well withing the fuel flow regs, otherwise why do it? - that's the only thing I can think.

We'll just have to wait and see what happens, but I hold little hope that the result will be re-instated.

The FIA have their reputation, after all.......:blush2::biggrin5:

 

Yeah, I agree. Wether or not the actual fuel flow was wrong is irrelevant. It was probably just fine. The FIA enacted punitive measures for the non-compliance of using the required software as expressed in the rules.

And really, it's not even that the sensor was inaccurate. The disqualification was entirely about Red Bull's decision to use unapproved software to compensate for that inaccuracy.

By the letter of the regulations Red Bull is at fault. I don't think that Daniel should be punished though.

Still, we're gonna be talking about this race for some time

 

Does not the fuel management system operate off this info from the sensor?

 

I don't think so. There are also fuel injection sensors that measure the fuel flow at the engine, and that's what Red Bull was relying upon as accurate. I think the fuel flow sensor is an FIA owned part that basically sits and passively monitors things.

So I think the fuel management system is more tied to the injectors than the mandated sensor.

I could be wrong though.

 

So this is just a ride along nanny sensor that has no purpose but to report back info to FIA? And would RB's math have shown more fuel flow or less?

 

That's the point, Red Bull contends the sensor was inaccurate and sending the wrong info, which the FIA relied on when they told them to use it or else.

So, if Red Bull can prove the sensor was wrong and the fuel used was never out of reg, will they win? I don't think so, but one can hope.

The open letter was interesting and I agree with the sentiments expressed there - I don't understand either why they have to regulate the rate of fuel flow, I'd think regulating the how much they have to use would be enough.

But that does leave open an end around if a fuel supplier for a particular team can make their fuel have more BTUs of energy for the same volume (or weight, however they measure it)

It's a complex matter for sure.....

 

My understanding is that the sensor showed more flow than was permitted, and they were directed by the FIA to compensate by using updated software that would in theory be more accurate. I think it would also have reduced their flow rate if they trusted the FIA readings over their own.

Therefore Red Bull decided to ignore the FIA's fix and used the readings from their own sensors at the injectors to determine the flow. I'm sure that the engineers at Red Bull are very confident that those sensors are accurate, but the FIA doesn't have access to them.

The FIA sensors have a known variance according the manufacturer: 52 percent of the sensors have an accuracy of between 0.1 percent, and 92 percent of the sensors are within 0.25 percent accuracy. So I'm guessing the FIA's fix was to have the software take that into account somehow.

The other teams did have similar concerns with the fuel flow sensor, but used the FIA's fix in the race. Red Bull was the only team to go their own way.

 

I had a quote a few pages back that kind of addresses that. It's kind of obtuse, but here it is: (from the free issue of RaceCar Engineering)

 

The fuel sensor issue seems to be drifting dangerously close to the standards of medieval theology - the FIA say that 100 angels can dance on the head of one of their pins while Red bull claim only 99 can.

 

Seriously........the new engines sound different (and better IMO) but to sue


F1 - F1: Australian GP officials unhappy with new F1 sound