[WEC] LMP Future Regulations (was Le Mans EVO rules - now hypercar rules)

[Spyderman]

Originally Posted by deggis

If similar unhappy comments do not come from Stuttgart soon, I'm going to start preparing mentally for them coming out with a diesel.

I would be very surprised if that happens. It's more probable we would see a withdrawal rather than see them racing a diesel. (The group already has a diesel representative).

[Machin]

The ACO press release does say that the allocations aren't finalised yet and will be adjusted later this year after further testing... they did come out before this year's race didn't they (?), so its not surprising that the figures wouldn't take into account this year's results.

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by chewymonster

I think it's all smoke and mirrors. If you take his numbers than the rules are exactly spot on as a diesel with a 42.5% peak efficiency is thus inherently 11.8% more efficient than a gasoline engine that at its peak is 38% energy efficient. If you look at the fuel flow limits gasoline engines are allowed 22% more fuel flow which accounts for a diesel having 10% more energy per each liter.

The fuel efficiency numbers that are quoted by Kinoshlta make very little sense.

The density of the Shell racing fuel for Le Mans is 0.754 kg/liter for petrol (source) and 0.8338 kg/liter for diesel (source). And according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heating...bustion_tables the (high) heating value is 47.3 MJ/kg for petrol and 44.8 MJ/kg for diesel.

In the 2014 rules petrol cars get 4.95 liter per lap and diesel cars get 3.99 liter per lap. This corresponds with 4.95 * 0.754 * 47.3 = 176.5 MJ and 3.99 * 0.8338 * 44.8 = 149 MJ respectively.

Toyota claims that the target fuel efficiency for diesel engines will need to be 42.5% in 2014. This means that 149 * 0.425 = 63.3 MJ useful mechanical energy is available per lap. In order to produce the same amount of mechanical energy with a petrol engine, the fuel efficiency must be 63.3 / 176.5 = 35.9%! I do not understand where Toyota gets this 41.5%

If you start from a fuel efficiency of 41.5% for petrol engines, the target fuel efficiency for diesel engines will be 41.5 * 176.5 / 149 = 49.2%. That is a lot more than the 42.5% claim by Toyota

[Gingers4Justice]

Originally Posted by deggis

If similar unhappy comments do not come from Stuttgart soon, I'm going to start preparing mentally for them coming out with a diesel.

Porsche will never race a diesel, don't worry.

[gwyllion]

By taking the different hybrid options into consideration, I now understand how Toyota calculated the 2014 fuel efficiency for the petrol cars.

If we assume a fuel efficiency of 41.5%, we know that a petrol engine can deliver 0.754 kg/liter * 47.3 MJ/kg * 0.415 = 14.8 MJ/liter.
The mechanical energy produced by the combustion engine is the following for the different hybrid options:

• 0 MJ hybrid: 4.95 liter/lap * 14.8 MJ/liter = 73.3 MJ/lap
• 2 MJ hybrid: 4.80 liter/lap * 14.8 MJ/liter = 71.0 MJ/lap
• 4 MJ hybrid: 4.65 liter/lap * 14.8 MJ/liter = 68.8 MJ/lap
• 6 MJ hybrid: 4.50 liter/lap * 14.8 MJ/liter = 66.6 MJ/lap
• 8 MJ hybrid: 4.42 liter/lap * 14.8 MJ/liter = 65.4 MJ/lap

The difference between no hybrid and 8 MJ hybrid is exactly 8 MJ less energy from the combustion engine

If we assume a fuel efficiency of 49%, we know that a diesel engine can deliver 0.8338 kg/liter * 44.8 MJ/kg * 0.49 = 18.3 MJ/liter.
The mechanical energy produced by the combustion engine is the following for the different hybrid options:

• 0 MJ hybrid: 3.99 liter/lap * 18.3 MJ/liter = 73.0 MJ/lap
• 2 MJ hybrid: 3.93 liter/lap * 18.3 MJ/liter = 71.9 MJ/lap
• 4 MJ hybrid: 3.81 liter/lap * 18.3 MJ/liter = 69.7 MJ/lap
• 6 MJ hybrid: 3.68 liter/lap * 18.3 MJ/liter = 67.3 MJ/lap
• 8 MJ hybrid: 3.56 liter/lap * 18.3 MJ/liter = 65.1 MJ/lap

Conclusion: The fuel efficiency that Toyota claims for diesel engine, is wrong and should have been much higher (49% instead of 42.5%)!

[NaBUru38]

One question: how will the ACO enforce the consumption per lap limit? I mean, suppose that certain car has a 5 litres per lap limit at La Sarthe. What happens if the car burns all the 5 litres before the Ford chicanes? Will the fuel injection system refuse to inject more fuel until the car crosses the finish line?

[henk4]

Originally Posted by NaBUru38

One question: how will the ACO enforce the consumption per lap limit? I mean, suppose that certain car has a 5 litres per lap limit at La Sarthe. What happens if the car burns all the 5 litres before the Ford chicanes? Will the fuel injection system refuse to inject more fuel until the car crosses the finish line?

bad luck, the car will not make it to the finish. This is a self-enforcing measure...

[Fogelhund]

The formula is based upon average consumption, not each and every lap. I suspect that the fuel put into a car will be measured, giving the ACO a very accurate measurement of consumption levels.

Originally Posted by NaBUru38

One question: how will the ACO enforce the consumption per lap limit? I mean, suppose that certain car has a 5 litres per lap limit at La Sarthe. What happens if the car burns all the 5 litres before the Ford chicanes? Will the fuel injection system refuse to inject more fuel until the car crosses the finish line?

[henk4]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

The formula is based upon average consumption, not each and every lap. I suspect that the fuel put into a car will be measured, giving the ACO a very accurate measurement of consumption levels.

The ACO mentioned a debit-metering system during the press conference. So yes, they will be perfectly aware if somebody tries to be clever.

[deggis]

Originally Posted by Gingers4Justice

Porsche will never race a diesel, don't worry.

It's a worst case scenario.

[chewymonster]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

The fuel efficiency numbers that are quoted by Kinoshlta make very little sense.

The density of the Shell racing fuel for Le Mans is 0.754 kg/liter for petrol (source) and 0.8338 kg/liter for diesel (source). And according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heating...bustion_tables the (high) heating value is 47.3 MJ/kg for petrol and 44.8 MJ/kg for diesel.

In the 2014 rules petrol cars get 4.95 liter per lap and diesel cars get 3.99 liter per lap. This corresponds with 4.95 * 0.754 * 47.3 = 176.5 MJ and 3.99 * 0.8338 * 44.8 = 149 MJ respectively.

Toyota claims that the target fuel efficiency for diesel engines will need to be 42.5% in 2014. This means that 149 * 0.425 = 63.3 MJ useful mechanical energy is available per lap. In order to produce the same amount of mechanical energy with a petrol engine, the fuel efficiency must be 63.3 / 176.5 = 35.9%! I do not understand where Toyota gets this 41.5%

If you start from a fuel efficiency of 41.5% for petrol engines, the target fuel efficiency for diesel engines will be 41.5 * 176.5 / 149 = 49.2%. That is a lot more than the 42.5% claim by Toyota

That's what I thought about the quotes as well, sounds a lot like an effort to get the rules in their favor. I am certiainly taking everything he says with a giant grain of salt. Kino****a does the same thing with the WRC Yaris and says how the Yaris needs special help because it is too short and how the WRC needs to allow them to race a non production based engine ('cause their production 1.6 not so good) and how the WRC should put in hybrid rules and then maybe they will race the Yaris. If he wants all of those rule breaks to start a WRC program it sounds like he will throw around numbers that make it look like 24% extra fuel flow isn't enough. And to top it off let's say that we can only do one program, presumably with the one that offers the biggest concessions.

[TF110]

What's the big deal? The rules as they are now favor diesel powered cars. Why should someone spend money using a hybrid when the regular diesel can be more efficient? The same has been done by other manufacturers. Not just a guy from Toyota.

[henk4]

Originally Posted by TF110

The rules as they are now favor diesel powered cars.

the rules have always been favouring cars on which serious money is spent. (so not Pescarolos or Aston Martins...)

[TF110]

Toyota needed a hybrid to challenge the diesels. What if Audi had went RWD with their hybrid? What they said was they think Audi didn't get as much out of their hybrid as possible, or they're playing games.

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by TF110

What's the big deal? The rules as they are now favor diesel powered cars.

Yet still the 5 month TS030 drove into the lead on pure performance against the mighty, hugely experienced Audi

[TF110]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

Yet still the 5 month TS030 drove into the lead on pure performance against the mighty, hugely experienced Audi

Taking the lead doesn't mean the Toyota was at the advantage. Audi getting passed isn't meaning the Diesels don't have a favorable advantage in the regulations. That just means Toyota did a great job. It still wouldn't be there if it didn't have a hybrid powertrain.

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by TF110

What's the big deal? The rules as they are now favor diesel powered cars.

Originally Posted by gwyllion

Yet still the 5 month TS030 drove into the lead on pure performance against the mighty, hugely experienced Audi

Yup. Audi (and I'm not an Audi fan) has been saying for years we were just seeing the difference between a full-fledged factory effort and other half-hearted efforts. The ACO has been trying to get the balance better. By leading Le Mans, Toyota proved Audi right, at least under the current formula.

Maybe they should have refrained from that glory so they could keep using that old argument.

On the other hand, the development of high-performance racing diesel engines isn't nearly as refined as high-performance racing gasoline engines, so it's an area that will require constant attention to keep them similar and the diesels continue to make significant improvements.

[Deleted]

We don't really know how much of a difference the hybrid system made to Toyota's pace so you cannot make direct comparison between them and other petrol runners.

[TF110]

We don't know for sure, but from what Toyota has said, they feel they'd only be 2-3 seconds faster than the HPDs/Rebellions. So 3:28's maybe a 3:27, compared to what the Ultra Audi was capable of; 3:24's and lower.

[canam]

Originally Posted by chewymonster

That's what I thought about the quotes as well, sounds a lot like an effort to get the rules in their favor. I am certiainly taking everything he says with a giant grain of salt. Kino****a does the same thing with the WRC Yaris and says how the Yaris needs special help because it is too short and how the WRC needs to allow them to race a non production based engine ('cause their production 1.6 not so good) and how the WRC should put in hybrid rules and then maybe they will race the Yaris. If he wants all of those rule breaks to start a WRC program it sounds like he will throw around numbers that make it look like 24% extra fuel flow isn't enough. And to top it off let's say that we can only do one program, presumably with the one that offers the biggest concessions.

Duh.

Doesn't every manufacturer do that? They wouldn't be doing their job right if they didn't.

So long as the sanctioning bodies salivate over factory entries, they will have to deal with this kind of argument. If Audi were to be the only 'factory' entry, I surmise that we would see a big balance change in favour of privateers in P1.

As I said before, it was a question of 'which Audi wins'. That cannot be a permanent situation. Mr Toyota is doing his job as he knows this: Audi Euros 100m vs Privateer Euros 2m doesn't make for good reading to the bods in the ACO.

[chewymonster]

Originally Posted by canam

Duh.

Doesn't every manufacturer do that? They wouldn't be doing their job right if they didn't.

So long as the sanctioning bodies salivate over factory entries, they will have to deal with this kind of argument. If Audi were to be the only 'factory' entry, I surmise that we would see a big balance change in favour of privateers in P1.

As I said before, it was a question of 'which Audi wins'. That cannot be a permanent situation. Mr Toyota is doing his job as he knows this: Audi Euros 100m vs Privateer Euros 2m doesn't make for good reading to the bods in the ACO.

I am sure everyone lobbies for their team but at least he could have told some truthful technical figures to back up their claims instead of giving us bs.

[Félix]

That situation illustrates exactly what I was thinking when the "energy parity" aspect of the rules was first discussed. Diesels are inherently more efficient and sticking to the spirit of that new rule would make them automatic winners all over again. There needs to be performance balancing so that a less efficient technology can benefit from a head start to compensate its lack of efficiency.

And that's what is making me say all this is not a "sport" anymore: the equivalency rules are defined by manufacturer lobbying and the "sport" is full of millionaires who want to have fun and look like real racers.

[TRuss]

That's all that it's ever been.

[Machin]

There needs to be performance balancing so that a less efficient technology can benefit from a head start to compensate its lack of efficiency.

Why? don't we want to see the best technology regardless of what fuel it uses?

[TF110]

How do we know Mr. Kino's words aren't truthful? How do we know the Audi's aren't playing games with regards to how efficient their diesels are? There's always two sides, so don't fault one.