The fuel flow meter and how it will affect this year's F1

[Valve Bounce]

Well, first of all I have to apologise for being totally ignorant on this subject as I have not followed F1 for two years (for logistal and very personal reasons).
I did hear on today's radio that Red Bull claims there have been issues with this fuel flow meter with other teams. So I would ask here: 1) Did Lewis Hamilton's and Seb Vettel's retirements have anything to do with loss of power as a result of these fuel flow meters?
2) Did any other teams experience loss of power as a result of the fuel flow meters not working properly?
3) who designed the fuel flow meter, who manufactured these meters, and were these meters manufactured under an FIA contract, or a contract run by one of the teams?

I simply cannot understand the reason for these fuel flow meters if all cars were limited to 100kg of fuel - there must be some very good reason that I don't know of.

Many of my friends here will remember that I have always advocated the elimination of all on board computers and electrical devices. Just have the battery connected to the spark and to teh starter (for safety reasons the latter).

This way, the cost of F1 teams will plummet like a lead balloon, and the F1 competition will pit the driving abilities of 30 of the best drivers in the world directly against each other. Now what could be better than that?

[pcal226]

As far as I know the failures of Hamilton and Vettel's cars (as well those of the other retirees) had nothing to do with the fuel flow sensors. The defect with the sensors (if it turns out there is one as Red Bull claims) simply means that the FIA can't accurately read the fuel flow rate into the engines. I don't think the sensors have any impact on the performance of the engines themselves.

[Doc Austin]

I think we are in for a year of over officiating and DQs.

[Valve Bounce]

As far as I know the failures of Hamilton and Vettel's cars (as well those of the other retirees) had nothing to do with the fuel flow sensors. The defect with the sensors (if it turns out there is one as Red Bull claims) simply means that the FIA can't accurately read the fuel flow rate into the engines. I don't think the sensors have any impact on the performance of the engines themselves.

Surely, if the sensors, as I have just found out from Autosport were provided by the FIA, are incorrect, and result in wrong readings, leading teams to adjust their fuel flow rates, then this must have an impact on the engines performance themselves.

The question I'd like answered is why have these sensors in the first place? What is their aim?

The argument used by Red Bull is interesting, especially as they claim some cars ran without the sensors: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.ph ... ostpopular

[pcal226]

Surely, if the sensors, as I have just found out from Autosport were provided by the FIA, are incorrect, and result in wrong readings, leading teams to adjust their fuel flow rates, then this must have an impact on the engines performance themselves.

The question I'd like answered is why have these sensors in the first place? What is their aim?

When you put it that way your right. The sensors are there so that the FIA can police the teams and ensure that they are sticking with the fuel flow rate proscribed by the regulations. Now you can argue (and I think most fans would) that the fact that there even is a rule stipulating a maximum fuel flow rate is stupid because the cars are running on a limited amount of fuel as it is. But the fact is a rule is a rule, no matter how stupid or redundant it may seem to us. The sensors are there to make sure the rule is followed. If it turns out they're inaccurate though, thats gonna be a huge deal that the FIA needs to sort out NOW. Personally I think Ricciardo has a pretty good chance of having his DSQ overturned. If Red Bull can prove that just one other team was having problems with the sensors and their accuracy, I can't imagine how the FIA would be able rule against them. Still, proving there was an issue is a pretty big if. I'm not sure what the burden of proof is in FIA proceedings.

[donKey jote]

In my donkey experience, measuring fuel flow rates exactly can be extremely difficult. Anything to do with a volumetric flow meter is very sensitive to things like fuel temperatures, the position/length/material compliance of the hoses etc. Calculations based on fuel injection times are way more accurate.
Still, if the regulations say that is how it's to be done, and it's the same for all, then that's the way it's to be done, the same for all.

[Whyzars]

In my donkey experience, measuring fuel flow rates exactly can be extremely difficult. Anything to do with a volumetric flow meter is very sensitive to things like fuel temperatures, the position/length/material compliance of the hoses etc. Calculations based on fuel injection times are way more accurate.
Still, if the regulations say that is how it's to be done, and it's the same for all, then that's the way it's to be done, the same for all.

Extremely difficult as you say. I would imagine the tolerances would be difficult to get consistent across individual sensors as well. i would like to know how many are rejected or fail after acceptance.

If their objective is to set a hard maximum of available fuel flow than why not mandate the pump inlet size and even the pump. Let the teams handle pressure regulation and other whizz bangery around injector opening times.

[SGWilko]

As I understand it, the teams could run with 150KG fuel in the tank, so long as they do not consume at a rate AT ANY TIME above 100KG/h then they are fine. They'd be a bit daft to run so heavy mind - but I wanted to dispel any misconception that teams were only to run with 100KG of fuel on board.

A lot of the issues with these meters is electrical interference - there are two frequencies to use to monitor the sensors, but if there is electromagnetic interference, you could get skewed results. The teams either need to protect the sensors from the interference sources, or comply if the FIA recommend they reduce flow.

Of course RedBull know best, and in doing so, they have taken away a very good drive from a young upcoming star in his home race.

[steveaki13]

Its great that F1 2014 is under way and already we have 3 threads discussing fuel flow rates. I am sure that's what Bernie and the FIA wanted 2014 to be about. Controversial Fuel Rates.

Anyway that's what they get for introducing silly rulings that are so hard to police that no one seems to know what exactly is going on.

[Robinho]

As I understand it, the teams could run with 150KG fuel in the tank, so long as they do not consume at a rate AT ANY TIME above 100KG/h then they are fine. They'd be a bit daft to run so heavy mind - but I wanted to dispel any misconception that teams were only to run with 100KG of fuel on board.

A lot of the issues with these meters is electrical interference - there are two frequencies to use to monitor the sensors, but if there is electromagnetic interference, you could get skewed results. The teams either need to protect the sensors from the interference sources, or comply if the FIA recommend they reduce flow.

Of course RedBull know best, and in doing so, they have taken away a very good drive from a young upcoming star in his home race.

I don't think that is the case. As I understand it they are given an allocation of 100kg of fuel for the race distance AND at any time during the race cannot exceed a flow of 100kg/hr. What I'm unsure of is if that would be max flow and only applies when using the throttle, so they would not burn through 100kg in an hour, or if that rate is averaged over a sector or a lap. But I think their are 2 constraints involved, the total fuel of 100kg and the max fuel flow rate of 100kg/hr