[WEC] BoP. Brilliant or Pants.

[Articus]

I don't know if that response is to me or to Gasper G (regarding the LMDH P-to-W), but in any case, this year the BOP is said to be entirely based on the homologation data and weight and power matched to the Le Mans circuit.

This year Toyota is only 10kg heavier than the Ferrari and the Porsche. This compares with something like +20-30 kg extra weight last year compared to Ferrari and Porsche. If the homologation has not changed for any of the cars then it can only mean the BOP was also balancing the performance/experience of the different teams last year. One can understand better why Toyota was upset.

I like the direction change they have made for this year. There is no entitlement to be competitive as a new manufacturer. You have to learn the ropes and extract the performance of your car. It may take a year, but this really adds to the reward of winning. The story is better also when you fail, take your learnings, and then triumph.

[Adam43]

Yeah it was to you

They adjust by constructor

[Articus]

I find this to be a really nice summary of what the more technically interested folks would like to understand about the BOP: https://www.pmw-magazine.com/feature...-analysis.html

A mock trial of BOP to fictitious hypercar data and complete with laptime simulation: https://www.pmw-magazine.com/feature...-analysis.html

[Articus]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Yeah it was to you

They adjust by constructor

Okay I see what you are saying. I was using "team" and "manufacturer" synonymously. The BOP table does not issue one BOP value for Team Jota, and another for Team Penske so I assumed that was clear.

Let us not forget many years ago that the ALMS did give a real "team" specific BOP to the Scott Sharp's ESM FErraris because they were so off the pace. So that happened before

[Articus]

Driver weight issue being brought up again. Calado at Ferrari says 10kg driver weight difference is worth 4 tenths at Le Mans.

***Ferrari driver James Calado believes that the current driver weight rules have the potential to put off Formula 1 world champion Max Verstappen from entering Le Mans in the future, estimating that a discrepancy of 10 kg between drivers in the same car is worth a lap time deficit of four-tenths of a second around the Circuit de la Sarthe.

***He said: “You see F1 drivers saying they won’t come here because of it. Maybe if [the rule makers] read the media they will change it, because one of the big names [Verstappen] isn’t coming because of that. He can’t compete fairly with unequal weight.”

https://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/...y-notebook-11/


It also perfectly validates Toyota's estimate from last year that the additional 37 kilograms added for Le Mans cost them 1.5 seconds per lap.

4 tenths per 10kg is equivalent to 1.5 seconds per 37 kg. Both produce a result of 0.4 tenths per kg. So Ferrari and Toyota are consistent in their understanding of the contribution of weight to laptime which means Toyota was not making up numbers last year as some suggested.


The driver weight detail is important because BOP changes are made in the same range. A team with heavier drivers is punished relative to those with lighter, smaller drivers. 5kg BOP adjustments go out the window when a driver change produces a 10kg adjustment.


It also influences the performance perception of the drivers, in favor of the lighter drivers. I suppose this is an issue in all sports, not just motorsport. It's a grey area to decide whether to "balance" the physical characteristics of the athletes which can be heavily influenced by genetics (tall driver always weigh more).

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Adam43

https://tentenths.com/forum/showthre...86#post4159186

These are all dodgy numbers. Another comedy reference point is from Kobayashi who says 36kg is 1.2 seconds lap time impact.

36kg 1.2s. Fact.

[Articus]

I misspoke and that was what I was referring to. It doesn't change the point. We have a reference for the sensitivity of the lap time to weight. 0.3-0.4 tenths per kg at Le Mans.

I still don't understand your post because you called it "comedy" and "dodgy", and then later call it fact. You are coming across in a very confusing way and I still have not worked out whether you are calling these numbers a joke or not. Regardless, I am happy with the reference points that I have provided even if you think they are dodgy. It's the right ballpark.

[Adam43]

I’m just being silly, but also making a point about relevance. They are reasonable, but also not certain. They are worth using, but also we must accept that it can be inaaprioate to use them.

You will see last year I used them to assess the impact of pre Le Mans changes but note the pitfalls of doing so. I downplay how much we should conclude from the analysis while still being happy we have learnt something.

[Articus]

Has anyone determined what meaningful insight we can draw from the stint energy allocations?

[Adam43]

It moves with power. generally, although some tweaks for Le Mans.

They all should have similar stints, but we’ve seen that it is possible to manage that and eke out the energy. Of course, that is harder at Le Mans due to the longer lap. But maybe (Caddy?) can do that? Although the recent changes haven’t helped here.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by Articus

I find this to be a really nice summary of what the more technically interested folks would like to understand about the BOP: https://www.pmw-magazine.com/feature...-analysis.html

A mock trial of BOP to fictitious hypercar data and complete with laptime simulation: https://www.pmw-magazine.com/feature...-analysis.html

Great analysis done there! Well worth the read.

[Articus]

“Filling the performance gap is part of our work,” said Cannizzo. “We have to find the right solution to get closer to the best-performing cars. We will try to exploit our strengths and minimize our weaknesses.

“[Power Gain] is certainly important. At a track like Le Mans, we are above 250 km/h for 45 percent of the lap, so you can draw your own conclusions.

https://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/...ht-line-speed/

Ferrari said that 45% of the lap is spent above 250km/h so I used this to compute a weighted average power level for the full lap ( I previously did this calculation with an estimate of 60%, so that was too high). It's a little bit murky because you are not always using the throttle when you are above or below 250km/h (you can be above and braking or above and lifting, and the same below).

Nevertheless, the result is below for what it's worth:

[Articus]

Anthony Davidson said during the qualy broadcast that 1hp was worth 1 tenth at Le Mans (thus 1kW = 1.34 tenths), so using this, and the previous reference points regarding 10kg being worth 4 tenths (or for Toyota 36kg being 1.2 seconds), I decided to calculate a weight and power corrected hyperpole. The Porsche is the reference car for the calculations. For each kilogram more or less that another hypercar weighs relative to the Porsche, I added or subtracted 0.03 tenths to its hyperpole time. For each kW more or less that another hypercar has relative to the Porsche, I added or subtracted 1.34 tenths to its laptime. If you are following, then you should understand that no correction needed to be performed for the reference car, the Porsche.


Correction Factors:



Weight and power corrected hyperpole classification:



Ferrari on top by 4.5 tenths to the nearest manufacturer. If the Toyota participated in hyperpole, then I would have expected them to be somewhere near the Ferrari. Difficult to say if it would have been ahead or behind but definetely ahead of any LMDH car.


This is an academic exercise, of course. It has no meaning. The premise of the category is to balance the cars using BOP. Low drag cars like the Ferrari will have their straight line speed balanced with the rest.

[kartman24]

So practice and qualifying done and dusted, are we anticipating any BOP changes today ahead of the race? Wouldn`t be surprised if Peugeot got a bit more `help`, other than that i would be surprised if they tinkered too much.

[Adam43]

Changes are very very unlikely.

[Simmi]

Originally Posted by kartman24

So practice and qualifying done and dusted, are we anticipating any BOP changes today ahead of the race? Wouldn`t be surprised if Peugeot got a bit more `help`, other than that i would be surprised if they tinkered too much.

I agree with you and Adam. I think Peugeot should have been given a better set of cards last week. But the chances of it happening now feel very unlikely. From a one-lap perspective it's looking very decent.

Race-pace we'll find out.

[Adam43]

It was too risky to do anything else with Peugeot. The car is too new, the data they have is limited.

[joeb]

Originally Posted by Simmi

I agree with you and Adam. I think Peugeot should have been given a better set of cards last week. But the chances of it happening now feel very unlikely. From a one-lap perspective it's looking very decent.

Race-pace we'll find out.

Originally Posted by Adam43

It was too risky to do anything else with Peugeot. The car is too new, the data they have is limited.

Race pace for the rest of the pack will be slower than practice/qualy times, and Peugeot can only hope to maintain their practice pace to stay with the pack. I'm also interested to see how the new car works in potential "changing" conditions Sunday.

[Articus]

Peugeot's problem isn't the BOP parameters. The problem is that the car is not fully sorted.

My observations from this week:
1) Porpoising on the straights earlier in the week as they tried to lower the car.
2) Fastest car on the straights
3) Drivers have been reporting a bad vibration on the straights even after changing tires
4) Low speed understeer.


For one reason or another, the car is just not dialed in on this circuit. They underestimated the challenge of bringing a new car to Le Mans.

[JT240Z]

Hard to say what the "changing conditions" will be right now. Sunday is going to be potentially damp but it's looking more like some impact on Saturday as well.

I may be a sick person, but I don't actually mind a little non-sun on race day. Makes for a challenging exercise for the teams. Just as long as it's not a gully washer.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Articus

Peugeot's problem isn't the BOP parameters. The problem is that the car is not fully sorted.

My observations from this week:
1) Porpoising on the straights earlier in the week as they tried to lower the car.
2) Fastest car on the straights
3) Drivers have been reporting a bad vibration on the straights even after changing tires
4) Low speed understeer.


For one reason or another, the car is just not dialed in on this circuit. They underestimated the challenge of bringing a new car to Le Mans.

Yes. BoP isn’t a free pass even if you are French.

[TF110]

I think there's hope for Peugeot. I very much think they'll be up in the top 10 after a couple pit stops.

[kartman24]

I think the BOP in the top class was pretty spot on, the Ferrari`s were quicker in a straight line but lost time to the other cars in the twisty bits, over a lap the cars were pretty well matched.

[Articus]

Originally Posted by kartman24

I think the BOP in the top class was pretty spot on, the Ferrari`s were quicker in a straight line but lost time to the other cars in the twisty bits, over a lap the cars were pretty well matched.

I think something was missing just a bit. While a Porsche or Cadillac could have won the race, it does not mean their performance was equal to the others.
In the dry weather stretches, the Ferrari and the Toyota simply streaked away from the Porsche and the Cadillac, especially on the straights. The LMdh cars were helped a lot by the safety cars which bunched the field together and then they simply capitalized on the mistakes of the Ferrari and the Toyota.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Here is a list of the proofs that the ACO fix this race.

Ferrari - want the prestige

See.