The never ending Toyota return to Le Mans (LMP1) Saga

[vincegail]

500 kJ released in different times gives different amounts of horsepower (1 kW = 1,36 hp):
500 kJ/1s = 500 kW = 680 hp (bhp is slightly less, but I'll stick to hp) during 1 second
500 kJ/2s = 250 kW = 340 hp during 2 seconds
500 kJ/3s = 167 kW = 227 hp during 3 seconds
500 kJ/4s = 125 kW = 170 hp during 4 seconds
500 kJ/5s = 100 kW = 136 hp during 5 seconds
etc.
etc.
To have 300 hp the 500 kJ is unleashed/available during 680/300=2,27 seconds.

Same math with 8000 kJ:
8000 kJ/1s = 8000 kW = 10880 hp during 1 second
8000 kJ/2s = 4000 kW = 5440 hp during 2 seconds
8000 kJ/3s = 2667 kW = 3627 hp during 3 seconds
8000 kJ/4s = 2000 kW = 2720 hp during 4 seconds
etc.
This means that with 8 MJ Toyota could have 1000 hp during (2720/1000)*4 = 10,88 seconds!
Imagine what that could do on the Mulsanne straight or Mulsanne to Indianapolis!!!
Only the small matter of getting those huge amounts of power on the tarmac through the wheels!

[gustavobamba]

Originally Posted by arakis

not exactly, cause you'd need 30s of breaking to charge it up as well...

Well your right :-) but in Le mans they have what? 20 seconds?

If any one know

[vincegail]

For 300 hp it will be 10880/300 = 36,27 seconds, which is slightly more realistic than 1000 hp for 10,88 seconds to be honest.

[arakis]

Originally Posted by vincegail

500 kJ released in different times gives different amounts of horsepower (1 kW = 1,36 hp):
500 kJ/1s = 500 kW = 680 hp (bhp is slightly less, but I'll stick to hp) during 1 second
500 kJ/2s = 250 kW = 340 hp during 2 seconds
500 kJ/3s = 167 kW = 227 hp during 3 seconds
500 kJ/4s = 125 kW = 170 hp during 4 seconds
500 kJ/5s = 100 kW = 136 hp during 5 seconds
etc.
etc.
To have 300 hp the 500 kJ is unleashed/available during 680/300=2,27 seconds.

Same math with 8000 kJ:
8000 kJ/1s = 8000 kW = 10880 hp during 1 second
8000 kJ/2s = 4000 kW = 5440 hp during 2 seconds
8000 kJ/3s = 2667 kW = 3627 hp during 3 seconds
8000 kJ/4s = 2000 kW = 2720 hp during 4 seconds
etc.
This means that with 8 MJ Toyota could have 1000 hp during (2720/1000)*4 = 10,88 seconds!
Imagine what that could do on the Mulsanne straight or Mulsanne to Indianapolis!!!
Only the small matter of getting those huge amounts of power on the tarmac through the wheels!

That shouldn't be a problem at all, since Electric engines are much more responsive/easier to Traction control.

On a related note, having an 8MJ capacitor might not be the best thing.
In my opinion the most efficient system would be to find the maximum power that can be collected from braking (eg 800KW) then calculate the length in time of the longest breaking area, and calculate the maximum capacity accordingly.

I say this, as if you can only charge up 6Mj at the longest breaking area, the other 2MJ are just dead weight in the car, since all of it is expelled before the next breaking area

[gwyllion]

The 8 MJ number is per lap not per braking zone

The FIA has defined 6 braking zones. So 8 MJ per laps means 1.33 MJ per braking zone. Compared to 0.5 MJ that is allowed now.

[vincegail]

So the 500 kJ that is allowed now is per breaking zone too? Or per lap at Le Mans/which ever circuit?

Edit: per lap.

[arakis]

I think there are no limitations as to how much, and when you fill it up, only that they're are 5 places to do it, and maximum capacity of the system must be 500Kj, this is my understanding, meaning you can top it off every breaking zone... I think only f1 has the per lap rule.

[TF110]

With a lighter car, the braking forces might be lower, but they should be able to brake later. They shouldn't have a problem creating over 1MJ. Technology is getting better as well, so with the 2014 rules coming, I know Toyota will be on top of it. May even see battery technology instead of the supercapacitor.

[jpp]

Concerning 2013, do you know if Toyota will design a new engine to improve performance and also fuel sonsumption ?
- do they install direct injectino on their V8 3.4 NA
- do they prepare a turbo charged 2 liter engine ( that can be also be in line with the 2014 regulations)

If Toyota does not prepare a step in terms of fuel efficiency, it will be difficult to beat Diesel vars ....

[jpp]

at Le Mans because on other tracks, it is already OK ...
Due to the longer lap, le Mans is much more severe in this area

[Graham Goodwin]

Originally Posted by jpp

Concerning 2013, do you know if Toyota will design a new engine to improve performance and also fuel sonsumption ?
- do they install direct injectino on their V8 3.4 NA
- do they prepare a turbo charged 2 liter engine ( that can be also be in line with the 2014 regulations)

If Toyota does not prepare a step in terms of fuel efficiency, it will be difficult to beat Diesel vars ....

Toyota have already confirmed to me that they will build a 2014 car

[vincegail]

I am getting very confused.
This:
http://www.lemans.org/en/races/24h/u...uit-_7185.html

And this:
"The amount of energy used between 2 braking must not
exceed 0.5 MJ."
(rule 1.13 of http://www.mulsannescorner.com/2012LMP12.pdf)

Leads me to believe that how often you can use the 0,5 MJ/500 kJ amount is not per lap in total, but 7 times per lap.

[vincegail]

Note the bad translation of 'freinages' to 'braking' instead of 'moments/acts of braking'. Not my mistake!

[gwyllion]

There seems to be some confusion regarding energy recovery per braking zone vs per lap.

The 2012 technical regulations talk about 0.5 MJ per braking zone and the sporting regulations define the braking zones (number and location) for every track.

• Spa (7004 m): 5 braking zones x 0.5 MJ = 2.5 MJ per lap
• Le Mans (13629 m): 7 braking zones x 0.5 MJ = 3.5 MJ per lap
• Silverstone (5891 m): 4 braking zones x 0.5 MJ = 2 MJ per lap
• Sao Paulo (4309 m): 5 braking zones x 0.5 MJ = 2.5 MJ per lap
• Bahrain (5412 m): 7 braking zones x 0.5 MJ = 3.5 MJ per lap
• Fuji (4563 m): 4 braking zones x 0.5 MJ = 2 MJ per lap
• Sanghai (5451 m): 4 braking zones x 0.5 MJ = 2 MJ per lap

You can immediately see why Toyota is looking forward to Bahrain. This is the track with the most braking zone relative to the track length. The Audi R18 ultra will really struggle to keep up with the hybrid cars.

In post #4149 Mal recalls that Toyota stated that their "system is capable of recovering 8MJ". Clearly that number is per lap and not per braking zone.

The 2014 technical regulations talk about "five categories of energy defined from 0 to 8MJ per lap of the Le Mans circuit". So in fact the capacity of the hybrid system will not increase that much with the new rules. It will only double.

BTW I do not understand your translation remark.
The noun "le freinage" is translated in English as "the braking" and in Dutch as "het remmen".
The noun "le frein" is translated in English as "brake" and in Dutch as "de rem".
The verb "freiner" is translated in English as "to brake" and in Dutch as "remmen".

[vincegail]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

There seems to be some confusion regarding energy recovery per braking zone vs per lap.

Thanks for the clear explanation!

Originally Posted by gwyllion

BTW I do not understand your translation remark.
The noun "le freinage" is translated in English as "the braking" and in Dutch as "het remmen".
The noun "le frein" is translated in English as "brake" and in Dutch as "de rem".
The verb "freiner" is translated in English as "to brake" and in Dutch as "remmen".

In French it states
"La quantité d’énergie restituée et mesurée Ã* la sortie du
SRSE entre 2 freinages ne doit pas être supérieure Ã*
0.5 MJ."
Which translates to the following in English:
"The amount of energy used between 2 braking must not
exceed 0.5 MJ."
Slight error, imho. The English translation is singular, not plural. And also the word 'Braking' is correct, but not very good English. '2 freinages' should be better translated to '2 braking points' or '2 moments of braking'

But now I am becoming a grammar freak and that is not what I want to be!

Better to stay OT again! It's not the first and surely not the last time something got lost in translation from French to English v.v.

[gwyllion]

Yes, plural would have been better, but the translation is not wrong.

In the decisions of the FIA endurance committee, this wording is clarified. For instance

In the view to achieve a proper control of energy released by Hybrid cars between ‘’brakings’’, a clarification of the definition of ‘’braking’’ (art 1.13 of technical rules) will be applied by predetermination of braking zones on the circuit.
Simulation have conducted to predetermination of the following braking zones for SPA (5 ‘’braking zones’’):
...

source: http://private.fia.com/web/fia-publi...df?Openelement

Also do not forget article 18:

The French version is the only one valid regarding the implementation and interpretation of the regulations.

[TF110]

I guess they aren't using the 'Grand' course? That's too bad. It says they're using the long layout on the WEC site, but the track map is of the F1's layout. It looks like every 'hyrbid zone' turn besides 11 and 13 will really play to Toyota's strength. All the others are below 120kmh. And as many 'hybrid zones' as LeMans really doesn't hurt either.

[gwyllion]

Nakajima is not on the provisional Bahrain entry list. There is another clash with SuperGT that weekend.

[Bentley03]

Quick question.....has the 5 second difference in refuelling times between Silverstone and Sao Paolo been explained?

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by Bentley03

Quick question.....has the 5 second difference in refuelling times between Silverstone and Sao Paolo been explained?

Shorter pitlane

In Silverstone Audi spent 54-55 sec in the pitlane for a fuel stop and in Sao Paulo only 50-51 sec.

[Bentley03]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

Shorter pitlane

Ok, perhaps I misunderstood something. I thought there was a 5 second fuel flow discrepancy between the Audi's and the Toyota. In other words, the Toyota needed to be stationary in the pitlane 5 seconds longer than the Audi's during a fuel only stop. Was this not the case?

[Bentley03]

Originally Posted by Bentley03

Ok, perhaps I misunderstood something. I thought there was a 5 second fuel flow discrepancy between the Audi's and the Toyota. In other words, the Toyota needed to be stationary in the pitlane 5 seconds longer than the Audi's during a fuel only stop. Was this not the case?

That was at Silverstone, but at Sao Paolo the cars had parity, in terms of fuel flow.

[gwyllion]

Okay, you meant relatively to Audi.

Yes, you are correct. Toyota did improve their refueling stops. Maybe this is the result of the anti-clockwise track layout? Perhaps the R18 can not refuel on both sides of the car, whereas the Toyota can? I am just speculating, because I did not see the race.

[gwyllion]

I just found pictures from Sao Paulo to confirm my theory.

Toyota was fueling the TS030 on the left side:


Audi had to fuel the R18 on the right side:


Longer fuel hose implies slower refueling. That is why Toyota lost a bit less.

[DeathOrGlory]

The fuel rigs are gravity fed?