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

[hcl123]

Originally Posted by J Jay

I think TF110 is suggesting the same thing as Richard Castro did earlier - that Audi can choose not to develop certain aspects of the ICE/MGU if they think it will be detrimental in other areas (e.g. reliability), but Porsche & Toyota have to develop and apply these upgrades because if they don't then they risk losing out by not being "best-in-class" and therefore not being used for the EoT calculations.

But again, there is nothing that can be done for this as part of the EoT process. You can't penalize a manufacturer for not putting a potential upgrade on their car. The only way to combat this would be to have +1/-1 entrants in the diesel class, so either Audi has a diesel competitor which it must produce better numbers than to not lose out on being the "best-in-class," or Audi abandon diesel and join the petrol fray (where again they would have to join in the powertrain race and compete with Porsche & Toyota directly in aspect).

Funny!... with Peugeot gone the only other possible 'diesel' is Toyota...

Houston we have a problem!... Nissan is not up to the challenge and may take a long time to be (if ever), that leaves only 1 relevant brand with petrol...

Audi abandoning diesel !?.. IMO clashes with the idea, why would VAG want 2 expensive programs to develop the same thing...

[TF110]

Originally Posted by MyNameIsNigel

The ACO-FIA are doing a pretty decent job at balancing diesel and petrol technology under the existing fuel-flow formula. Toyota was the dominant force last year. We have experienced very close and highly entertaining racing so far this year and Porsche won the Big One in June. What better demonstration that this ?

Just like 2012. New rules and Toyota can get a jump because everything is different. Then next year Audi sees what was done by them and uses its 'might' to jump higher than the others. They got caught out by Peugeot before using the same diesel fuel. They had to respond. We'll see what plays out the rest of this season.

[chernaudi]

Thing is that if Audi have done as well as they have this year so far with a slight power deficit, imagine how well they might be able to do now that the MJ ratings per LM lap are now equal.

Audi though have had the better car all year long so far, and their advantage is with aero and suspension. Giving them theoretically the same power as everyone else will just make their car that much faster.

Thing is will Porsche and Toyota pull the trigger on making some substantial aero and chassis changes to match what Audi have have done, considering that the current formula is good for only one more year unless the 2017 changes are minor.

And who knows what aero changes that the ACO might be up to for '16? 1600mm rear wings again?

[TF110]

Why would the aco change the aero? 2017 is for that. -10mj a lap is enough for now.

[chernaudi]

The ACO have made mention of aero changes to slow the cars down for next year because of cornering speeds. I think it's BS but the ACO don't want the cars very close to the 3:15 barrier at LM, which with minimal development Audi and Porsche will easily be pushing that next year.

[deggis]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

The ACO have made mention of aero changes

When/where?

[TF110]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

The ACO have made mention of aero changes to slow the cars down for next year because of cornering speeds. I think it's BS but the ACO don't want the cars very close to the 3:15 barrier at LM, which with minimal development Audi and Porsche will easily be pushing that next year.

With 10mj less energy, per lap? I dont see that happening. They may stay near the same as this year- 3:18's 3:17's in qualifying. But you dont just gain 2 seconds on top of clawing back what you will lose next year.

[chernaudi]

Just ask Michelin. In 2003 in the ALMS, all the cars (irrespective of class) got a 10% air restrictor cut, that easily cost the LMP1 cars the best part of 60bhp. But that didn't slow them down very much at most tracks, and in fact these cars did set qualifying lap and race lap records at some tracks.

Tires make a huge difference. Unless the 10MJ power drop knocks off quite a bit of top end speed, the ACO will look at reducing downforce.

Of course, it would've been nice if the LMP1 teams ran the estimated 10MJ+performance balancing reductions at the Nurburgring test, but the fact that teams were testing to the then-current regs (LM EOT/BOP regs) and that the ACO/FIA didn't finalize (or at least make known) the EOT/performance balancing until the day after the test really screws that up. In other words, we don't know what to expect.

However, changing energy/power allowance on the engine side is a lot cheaper than mandating radically modified aero--maybe the ACO learned their lesson from 2009 when aero changes hardly slowed the cars at all and cost each team thousands of dollars to implement.

And I think that the 10MJ cut is due in part to Audi and Toyota trying to move up an ERS class at the end of the season (so in reality it's an 8MJ loss for them between fuel/ERS combined MJ ratings), and is probably aimed more at stabilizing pace gains though development.

If things stay as they are now even, the LMP1 cars could be easily a couple of seconds a lap faster at LM just though better tires. And that alone, if things stay as they are at present, would put them close to the 3:15 barrier that the ACO doesn't want to see crossed.

[TF110]

-10mj per lap is 134.9 to 124.9mj/lap in 8mj petrol class. Thats a drop of near 7.5%! I dont think youll be seeing any more drastic measures taken before 2017. Now I know a total power loss isnt the same as lap time. And Im sure there are smarter people out there with more math, but thats a big reduction in power. The teams wont sit still, but they arent going to be putting out sub 3:15's from tire and other gains with that big of a power drop.

[Spyderman]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Of course, it would've been nice if the LMP1 teams ran the estimated 10MJ+performance balancing reductions at the Nurburgring test, but the fact that teams were testing to the then-current regs (LM EOT/BOP regs) and that the ACO/FIA didn't finalize (or at least make known) the EOT/performance balancing until the day after the test really screws that up. In other words, we don't know what to expect..

We may not know the precise times, but I certainly know what to expect: Audi will get faster. Porsche will get slower. Toyota will continue to struggle. Audi will again be quickest over one lap (unless customary sand bags are deployed) . The race pace gap between Porsche and Audi will increase (in Audi's favor). Audi will win the race and the championship. Everyone will rejoice and claim that on paper everything is equal.

[Spyderman]

Originally Posted by TF110

-10mj per lap is 134.9 to 124.9mj/lap in 8mj petrol class. Thats a drop of near 7.5%! I dont think youll be seeing any more drastic measures taken before 2017. Now I know a total power loss isnt the same as lap time. And Im sure there are smarter people out there with more math, but thats a big reduction in power. The teams wont sit still, but they arent going to be putting out sub 3:15's from tire and other gains with that big of a power drop.

...and the irony of it all is that the time gained from tyres is mostly in breaking, cornering, and acceleration out of a corner. Precisely the areas where they are trying to slow down the cars.

[TF110]

By dropping total power thats promoting more corner speed and less braking distances to recover the time lost from power loss. Theyre shooting their own foot.

[deggis]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Of course, it would've been nice if the LMP1 teams ran the estimated 10MJ+performance balancing reductions at the Nurburgring test, but the fact that teams were testing to the then-current regs (LM EOT/BOP regs) and that the ACO/FIA didn't finalize (or at least make known) the EOT/performance balancing until the day after the test really screws that up. In other words, we don't know what to expect.

Both of the EoT docs are dated July 27 afternoon, which was the 1st test day, Monday. Certainly weird timing, unless they were communicated to the teams before that.

[Deleted]

http://www.dailysportscar.com/2015/0...g-6-hours.html

The privateer LMP1 entries – Rebellion Racing and Team ByKolles – also receive a boost. Fuel flow for the non-hybrid cars is increased by more than 5% from 100.9kg/h to 106.5kg/h. In addition, the fuel capacity has been increased from 68.3 litres to 75 litres: nearly 10%. This will certainly close the gap between the manufacturer and privateer cars, although it remains to be seen whether the AER-powered Rebellion R-Ones will be able to use their increased power to worry the Toyotas.

The writer of that piece must've been drunk because it's written as if this was some new brand thing, yet the same exact 106,5kg/h and 75 liters has already been applied to every session this season (except at Silverstone the flow was 104,9)

[YZFrider]

And being the LMP1-H are set for a speed reduction, Perhaps the gap between privateer and hybrid is reduced again. Now that's not to say the factories won't be busy clawing back speed that was reduced.

[deggis]

Kyle Wilson-Clarke, race engineer on the Timo Bernhard/Mark Webber/Brendon Hartley Porsche 919, estimates that the changes represent an advantage to Audi of around 1.5 seconds per lap at Le Mans, which would equate to around 0.7s per lap of the Nürburgring. “It was a little surprising, to be honest,” he told me earlier today. “We only found out about the adjustment to the EoT when we got to the ’Ring, so we’re not sure yet what it will mean in the race.”

[TF110]

My caption on the ACO's decision "Here ya go, Audi. Sorry about that Le Mans miss!"

[Spyderman]

Prepare for an Audi fest until after Le Mans 2016 (at least). Possibly until 2017.

[MyNameIsNigel]

Well, let's wait and see.

The upcoming Nurburgring race will tell us a bit more about the impact of the new EoT.

As far as the 2016 season is concerned, up to an including LM, further performance improvements will be achieved by the manufacturers and I am confident that we can still expect close racing between the guys at the front.

This being said, Porsche's apparent frustration in respect of the new EoT - as conveyed by KWC - is fully understandable. They are the ones that are most impacted by the new EoT.

[Spyderman]

The only silver lining I can draw from this EoT fiasco, is that Audi will have no more excuses. If they don't win now, they must hang their head in shame.

[Akrapovic]

At Silverstone Porsche qualified 0.6 ahead of the nearest diesel car.
At Spa Porsche qualified 0.8 ahead of the nearest diesel car.

So this means that outright pace should be within 0.1 then, if Porsche estimate that a normal circuit it gives Audi 0.7 a lap.

[Spyderman]

Audi won at Silverstone and at Spa. They had the quickest race pace at Silverstone, Spa and at Le Mans. They were substantially quicker than Porsche in sectors 1 and 3 at Le Mans.Why do they need a helping hand?

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by Spyderman

Audi won an Silverstone and at Spa. They had the quickest race pace at Spa and at Le Mans. They were substantially quicker than Porsche in sectors 1 and 3 at Le Mans.Why do they need a helping hand?

I thought this was about balancing the speed of the technology, rather than balancing which team achieved the wins.

Sectors 1 and 3 at Le Mans are of course aero dependant, and the EoT doesn't take into account aero of the cars.

[Spyderman]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

I thought this was about balancing the speed of the technology, rather than balancing which team achieved the wins.

Sectors 1 and 3 at Le Mans are of course aero dependant, and the EoT doesn't take into account aero of the cars.

Can you explain to me exactly in what way was Audi's technology behind that of Porsche's? Besides some possible "theoretical calculation" that some may come up with, it most certainly was not apparent on track.

[Akrapovic]

It certainly looks apparent on circuit. Everybody has commented on how rapid the Porsche is out of the corners. And since both Audi and Toyota are looking at moving towards battery hybrid systems, they clearly both feel that the Porsche system is superior too.

And you cannot rubbish the maths people have done by saying "some possible theoretical calculations". Maths is maths.

But you've clearly made up your mind on this one and will not be swayed, so I won't argue about it until the end of time. But just so they don't get forgotten on the last page, here's the lap time numbers -

At Silverstone Porsche qualified 0.6 ahead of the nearest diesel car.
At Spa Porsche qualified 0.8 ahead of the nearest diesel car.

So this means that outright pace should be within 0.1 then, if Porsche estimate that a normal circuit it gives Audi 0.7 a lap.