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

[GasperG]

Hcl123, Real world FACT is that Toyota HSD is more efficient and at same cost as TDI+DSG. You will fail miserably trying to deny that fact either with EPA, fuelly or spritmonitor data. You could find a boundary case where that is not true, but that is apparently not the real world use for majority of people.

Now stop with this diesel conspiracy nonsense in a topic about LMP regulation.

[hcl123]

Originally Posted by Chiana

Technically there is... it's just masqueraded under the P1 Privateer Trophy Thing

I think in time of contention of expenses, no factory would *sponsor* privateers ... as proved earlier like with Oreca and older Audi R10 team, results are not very good if this teams are left on their own...

[Victor_RO]

2016 technical regulations published.

http://www.fia.com/file/37728/download?token=B2t1EIil

300kW limit on hybrid output applies only to Le Mans (and other non-Grade 1 circuits if they are ever added to the calendar). So the cars will still be at full chat on the other circuits. Fuel flow and tank size both reduced by the same percentage, so stint lengths should remain the same.

[Deleted]

5 kg weight increase in both LMP1-H and LMP1(-NH/P/P-C/L). What difference is that gonna make?

[Acid09]

Originally Posted by Chiana

5 kg weight increase in both LMP1-H and LMP1(-NH/P/P-C/L). What difference is that gonna make?

According to Rob Leupen, 10 kilos is a second at Le Mans. So half a second then

[Deleted]

If then 45 kilos universally equals 4,5 seconds at Le Mans, that means Rebellion has lost ever so much since 2014 when they were allowed to run 810 at Le Mans (800 post LM)

[cokata]

Originally Posted by Acid09

According to Rob Leupen, 10 kilos is a second at Le Mans. So half a second then

I think he said 10 kilos is half a second

[chernaudi]

5 kg is like 11 lbs, so everyone will have to run 10 lbs or so worth of ballast. The weight increase is due mostly to teams being asked to run more sensors in their cars by the ACO.

[Artur]

An f1 car weigths 700kg(driver included) and, on average, 10kg will increase laptime by ~0.35s(Spa, for instance ~0.4s). That's an extra weight of 1.4%.

5kg in a 950kg LMP1-H(car+driver) car means 0.5% of increase. So, for a track like Spa, the impact should be less than 0.2s(~0.14s). Due to LM's lengh, that would imply ~0.27s, but as LM is more spent close to top speed, where weight is irelevant, the actual impact should be relatively less. So, just a couple of tenths even at LM

Of course these extrapolations are not 100% accurate, but they give a good idea.

I didn't see the values of fuel allocation and flow, per lap, for the non-LM tracks there. I suppose they are still to be published.

Question for you guys, what's the reason for the 1.55 coefficient of the ERS release on non-LM tracks? I mean, why don't they ditch this? What if a team can, say Porsche, can harvest(thus possibly release) more than the proportional value of LM?

For instance, at CotA, 8MJ category cars can release no more than 5.02MJ, but what if they could harvest more than that? It would be pretty stupid, and against the spirit of this "efficient" rules, to waste potential recovered energy there.

Why doesn't ACO just drop that, why not let them release as much as they can harvest?

[Deleted]

LMP2 2016
http://www.fia.com/file/37729/download?token=dU9OJyKd

[GasperG]

So 300 kW is apparently a safety limit, it will be interested to see if a team (Toyota) can really gain anything without this limit on grade 1 Circuits.

Weight increase even a small one is definitely not good news for Porsche, as they already packaged everything in lighter package and can't go 10 MJ because it does not exist.

If Audi really did a thorough job on 6MJ diesel (not going over weight), competition will really have a hard time.

[hcl123]

Originally Posted by Victor_RO

2016 technical regulations published.

http://www.fia.com/file/37728/download?token=B2t1EIil

300kW limit on hybrid output applies only to Le Mans (and other non-Grade 1 circuits if they are ever added to the calendar). So the cars will still be at full chat on the other circuits. Fuel flow and tank size both reduced by the same percentage, so stint lengths should remain the same.

Isn't it the opposite ? reads;

**** NOT limited on grade 1 circuits

Isn't LM a grade 1 circuit ? (perhaps Spa e Bahrain also)

Annexe B is equal to previous EoT except weight of the *car* from 870 to 875Kg. perhaps drivers can do a little diet lol... no much of a difference here...

[Deleted]

LM is grade 2
All rest (after Sebring 2012 which is grade 2) has been grade 1

[MyNameIsNigel]

What about this provision at the end of Article 3.4:

The bodywork which part of the top surface is licked by the exhaust gas should be not less than 50mm (in Z direction) from diffuser at any point rearward of the transversal vertical plane of the exhaust exit.

Unless I am mistaken this clarification is new as the previous iteration of Article 3.4 was merely providing:

The trailing edge of the bodywork must be at least 50mm higher than the trailing edge of the diffuser.

Is that supposed to close the "loophole" exploited by Porsche on their recent sprint package ?

[Artur]

Why would it? With that particular article, I mean.

As I understand it, it just states that those little winglets(I think they are permitted, thus not considered as wing elements, which are forbidden FW&RW apart, due to their constant thickness) should be at least 5cm higher than the diffuser at any point. The only problem I see concerning Porsche's design in relation to this article is the central section.

I would recommend to look at Richard Casto's great shots of the 919's back end(afair, they are linked on the CotA thread)

What I think it's interesting on this topic is the article 3.6. I think that's, perhaps, where the potential for loophole explotation is. Btw, imo, the central section of Porsche's "thing" seems to be against this part, anyway:

Are considered as aerodynamic elements added on the
bodywork:
• Angle brackets not permitted by the regulation being an
integral part or not of the bodywork.
With angle bracket (or gurney) defined as an angled piece
of material at the trailing edge (or closed) of bodywork or
aerodynamic element.
Any device that attempts to mimic the aerodynamic impact
of an angle bracket using a small radius or other profile will
also be considered as a gurney.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Artur

I would recommend to look at Richard Casto's great shots of the 919's back end(afair, they are linked on the CotA thread)

Thanks for the nice comment. Here is a link to that album...

http://imgur.com/a/xoQ0W

Two things...

1. I got a kick out of the verbage... "top surface is licked by the exhaust gas". I know the French is what counts and that the English is a translations, but I personally don't see the word "licked" come up that often! But I do believe I understand what they are saying.

2. There is a small change in 3.4.6.c that mentions that if you use the side cutout style in the rear wheel fender, that the shape must be "convex". The creative Porsche wrapped around to allow an exhaust blown fender and that cutout was "concave". So if my assumption is correct, that might be targeting the Porsche solution?

Richard

[Artur]

Oh no, Richard. I'm the one who needs to thank you. Your pics have the best shots I've seen of those winglets, so, thanks very much for sharing!

I also thought the wording is quite "odd" there. It seems too coloquial for such official regulations but I also believe to have understood it's meaning(I hope so).

I don't know about the second thing you mentioned there, but I hope it(the winglets) will still be around.

[wolfhound]

I came across this over in the F1 forum but I think the principle of a turbine motor driving a generator powering hub motors and using a battery to store the excess might be almost possible in the current LMP1 regs. I expect there might be a problem with the 8MJ limit but should it increase then this type of power unit should be possible.
I suspect it would make a good G56 project initially.

https://youtu.be/F4H3FE0Z4QQ

[Victor_RO]

Turbine engines are currently banned, it's only 4-stroke reciprocating piston engines.

[wolfhound]

Originally Posted by Victor_RO

Turbine engines are currently banned, it's only 4-stroke reciprocating piston engines.

So at least my eardrums will not be blown apart by any future rotary Mazda.

[cokata]

Mazda are getting back into rotary engines and are claiming that they are making significant progress. I'm sure that if they want to return to Le Mans to show of what rotary engines are capable of the rules will quickly be tweaked to allow that. There will also be no better platform to promote the engines then the WEC, if they manage to beat the competition in a fuel efficiency formula rules.

[CTD]

When will we see the first Carless engine at Le Mans?
And is it possible with todays regulation?
http://jalopnik.com/what-its-like-to...ine-1529865968

[Deleted]

Hehe camless, not carless

Don't know, but Koenigsegg. Haven't heard that name for a while. What happened to them, or rather didn't happen, in GT1 was travesty.

[CTD]

Originally Posted by Chiana

Hehe camless, not carless

Don't know, but Koenigsegg. Haven't heard that name for a while. What happened to them, or rather didn't happen, in GT1 was travesty.

Stupid Autocorrect! - I actually changed it once, after it was autocorrected, and apparently it changed when I pressed "Submit Reply"...

Koenigsegg, has actually been rather busy, with the One:1, Agera and Regera.
They just stopped racing them.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by CTD

When will we see the first Carless engine at Le Mans?
And is it possible with todays regulation?
http://jalopnik.com/what-its-like-to...ine-1529865968

Regarding the regulations...

Sadly no. Part of Article 5.1.1 explicitly bans the concept...

Electromagnetic valve actuation systems are forbidden.

The same section limits the ICE to petrol or diesel fuel, four stroke, reciprocating piston, four valves per cylinder and reciprocating poppet valves only.

Richard