Fuel

Testing is done with no fuel restrictions and the CRTs get to race with extra fuel, so will the gap from prototype to CRTs be much closer in the actual races than we realise.



If the factory bikes test with race mapping rather than qualifying mapping (full power), for how much of the test laps is this done? 0%, 50%, 100%?.



So, is the dream of closer racing a real chance , or is it as likely as a Gingrich/ Romney victory over Obama??

Never underestimate the power of dumb people. Keep in mind, at one time the following presidential candidates were all viable options and front runners according to very stupid voters: Palin, Cain (Herman), Bachman, and Perry.



To answer your GP question, I don't think the mapping during testing will make a detectible difference.

.

Jumkie said:

.

Click to expand...

Now there you go Jumkie, this is a great post from you. Probably your best post ever. Keep up the good work.











Or as they say in Istanbul : Jumkie bir pislik

Bunyip said:

Testing is done with no fuel restrictions and the CRTs get to race with extra fuel, so will the gap from prototype to CRTs be much closer in the actual races than we realise.



If the factory bikes test with race mapping rather than qualifying mapping (full power), for how much of the test laps is this done? 0%, 50%, 100%?.



So, is the dream of closer racing a real chance , or is it as likely as a Gingrich/ Romney victory over Obama??

Click to expand...

What im still struggle to grasp is that when we had 800cc the Factories would barely make race distance with 21 litres fuel.

Now they are 1000cc (more power more torque) and its gonna be evan harder. .... knows how they will do it.

Bunyip said:

Testing is done with no fuel restrictions and the CRTs get to race with extra fuel, so will the gap from prototype to CRTs be much closer in the actual races than we realise.



If the factory bikes test with race mapping rather than qualifying mapping (full power), for how much of the test laps is this done? 0%, 50%, 100%?.



So, is the dream of closer racing a real chance , or is it as likely as a Gingrich/ Romney victory over Obama??

Click to expand...

We'll have to see race pace vs QT times, it might help RDP and CE to take down some Satellite bikes. The other thing good about more riders on the grid fighting for points is no more hearing, "I decided to play it safe and hold my position", we had lots of extra action last year with Dovi and Bautista fighting at mid pack. Hopefully it turns into more action that last the entire race.

Stoner 27 said:

What im still struggle to grasp is that when we had 800cc the Factories would barely make race distance with 21 litres fuel.

Now they are 1000cc (more power more torque) and its gonna be evan harder. .... knows how they will do it.

Click to expand...

Energy in = Energy out + losses due to engine inefficiency.



Just because an engine is bigger doesn't mean it will burn more fuel.



The engine management electronics will govern ho much energy they will use, the thing they have to develop is better efficiency. Less bore friction etc. its all good development.

On fuel....

In the interview with Stoner after Sepang;

Link

With these more powerful, heavier bikes, you still have the same fuel capacity permitted. Do you follow the collaboration between Honda engineers and Repsol to provide Dani and yourself with the best fuel possible?

"Of course, when you have more power there is a critical aspect involved: Obtaining the same performance with less fuel consumption. We have the same fuel tank capacity as with the 800cc bikes, only with a lot more power available, so it is going to be rather difficult to ensure that we can finish each race. That is why it’s crucial that Honda and Repsol work together to find the best solution."



Surely teams can't 'develop' the best possible fuel.

I am sure there is a spec fuel for the series, and all the teams use the same fuel. If that is the case, how can they suggest Honda needs to work with Repsol to provide the best fuel possible.

Maybe Repsol engineers are assisting Honda design the engines to maximise fuel efficiency, but that is not the way the story reads.

Does anyone know - are Repsol the fuel suppliers for the series, or are teams free to get fuel from wherever they like.

Nuts said:

On fuel....

In the interview with Stoner after Sepang;

Link

With these more powerful, heavier bikes, you still have the same fuel capacity permitted. Do you follow the collaboration between Honda engineers and Repsol to provide Dani and yourself with the best fuel possible?

"Of course, when you have more power there is a critical aspect involved: Obtaining the same performance with less fuel consumption. We have the same fuel tank capacity as with the 800cc bikes, only with a lot more power available, so it is going to be rather difficult to ensure that we can finish each race. That is why it’s crucial that Honda and Repsol work together to find the best solution."



Surely teams can't 'develop' the best possible fuel.

I am sure there is a spec fuel for the series, and all the teams use the same fuel. If that is the case, how can they suggest Honda needs to work with Repsol to provide the best fuel possible.

Maybe Repsol engineers are assisting Honda design the engines to maximise fuel efficiency, but that is not the way the story reads.

Does anyone know - are Repsol the fuel suppliers for the series, or are teams free to get fuel from wherever they like.

Click to expand...

They are free to work in collaborative partnership with oil companies to tackle this issue from both ends ie mechanical (HRC) and chemical (Repsol). Electronics also play a significant role in all this fuel efficiency advancement.



The pairing of Ducati/Shell in 2007 lead to the development of a very efficient Engine/Fuel delivery system and is one of the reasons they managed a world championship....the bike rode itself apparently.

bubble

Nuts said:

On fuel....

In the interview with Stoner after Sepang;

Link

With these more powerful, heavier bikes, you still have the same fuel capacity permitted. Do you follow the collaboration between Honda engineers and Repsol to provide Dani and yourself with the best fuel possible?

"Of course, when you have more power there is a critical aspect involved: Obtaining the same performance with less fuel consumption. We have the same fuel tank capacity as with the 800cc bikes, only with a lot more power available, so it is going to be rather difficult to ensure that we can finish each race. That is why it’s crucial that Honda and Repsol work together to find the best solution."



Surely teams can't 'develop' the best possible fuel.

I am sure there is a spec fuel for the series, and all the teams use the same fuel. If that is the case, how can they suggest Honda needs to work with Repsol to provide the best fuel possible.

Maybe Repsol engineers are assisting Honda design the engines to maximise fuel efficiency, but that is not the way the story reads.

Does anyone know - are Repsol the fuel suppliers for the series, or are teams free to get fuel from wherever they like.

Click to expand...

Isn't the Spec. "it must be pump fuel", doesn't matter who makes it.

BarryMachine said:

Isn't the Spec. "it must be pump fuel", doesn't matter who makes it.

Click to expand...

It has to be spec'd to a certain octane but they are free to do other things to the fuel, lubricants I think. Where is the guy who works in the oil industry when we need him? Remember last year we were making fun of Suzuki because they didn't have a major fuel sponsor, some said they would have to go into the other teams garages and steal race fuel at night. The spec was put out last year, I think it was something like 115 octane rating or equivlant, but don't quote me, that was long ago and we all know how our threads here get.

Well its not the Octane rating that helps fuel economy, its the "energy density". Octane rating merely indicates the fuels ability to fight pre-ignition ( needed because higher compression engines will ignite fuel o compression and heat ) . That saying most energy dense fuels are of higher octain ratings



I have a bike here that I used to commute, and being an obsessive techo my "thing" with that bike is to get it running as fuel efficiently as I can.



In my obsessive interest I have settled on one type of fuel, known here as "Shell V Power 98oct. or 102 ( racing, harder to find ) ". Shell state that it, and their Shell Premium ( 95 oct.), are "energy dense fuels".

I can concur, I get much greater range out of a tank of V Power than anything else, talking going from say 480km to near 600km for a tank on the open freeway. The V Power has a markedly different feel to its power delivery also, I can feel each beat of the engine and acceleration is noticeably snappier.



The stupid thing is, when I looked for data on the product, Shell don't give out the energy figures, they will however merely describe it as an "energy dense fuel". .......s!! I like to do the math!!

I once got 2.78 L/100km out of that bike ( mountains and highway at speed ) I wanted to see what percentage energy efficient I was being. No figures from Shell meant all I could describe my efficiency, using their Shell Premium, was ......... very efficient.

BarryMachine said:

Well its not the Octane rating that helps fuel economy, its the "energy density". Octane rating merely indicates the fuels ability to fight pre-ignition ( needed because higher compression engines will ignite fuel o compression and heat ) . That saying most energy dense fuels are of higher octain ratings



I have a bike here that I used to commute, and being an obsessive techo my "thing" with that bike is to get it running as fuel efficiently as I can.



In my obsessive interest I have settled on one type of fuel, known here as "Shell V Power 98oct. or 102 ( racing, harder to find ) ". Shell state that it, and their Shell Premium ( 95 oct.), are "energy dense fuels".

I can concur, I get much greater range out of a tank of V Power than anything else, talking going from say 480km to near 600km for a tank on the open freeway. The V Power has a markedly different feel to its power delivery also, I can feel each beat of the engine and acceleration is noticeably snappier.



The stupid thing is, when I looked for data on the product, Shell don't give out the energy figures, they will however merely describe it as an "energy dense fuel". .......s!!

I like to do the math!!

I once got 2.78 L/100km out of that bike ( mountains and highway at speed ) I wanted to see what percentage energy efficient I was being. No figures from Shell meant all I could describe my efficiency, using their Shell Premium, was ......... very efficient.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the info but did you ever test the engine on a turn table hahaha sorry man I couldn't help myself.

This was all I could find by one of the motogp fuel suppliers

The FIA limits for racing fuels are 102 RON and 90 MON, therefore Elf racing fuels with 102 RON and 90 MON include:

- Elf LMS

- Elf WRF

- Elf Moto GP

- Elf Euro 102

- Elf TurboEvo

maximum 3.7% oxygen.

They also had this at their site and the entire site seems to be geared towards Australia, maybe helpful to you



In the united states and Canada the method of calculating octane is: RON + MON / 2 note that this technique is NOT used in Australia, oil companies here will always use the RON rating to describe their fuels eg: 98 RON = Ultimate, V Power, Vortex, 95 RON = Premium ULP, 91 RON = ULP.



In Ausralia a 102 RON fuel is conisdered high octane

http://www.racefuels.com.au/racingFuelFAQ.asp doh, now I see why it's for you guys

hawkdriver said:

Thanks for the info but did you ever test the engine on a turn table hahaha sorry man I couldn't help myself.

Click to expand...

That was my job for over 15 years, testing force measurement stuff under operating conditions and susceptibilities.



What may seem a"joke" to you ..... was reality for me ............ yes we had a turntable ( stepper driven ) amongst a thousand other bits and bobs for testing "stuff , it wasn't specifically used for engines ....... but it could be. I could quite easily do as i proposed. What seems "amazing/unbelievable/........" to you would actually be a mundane procedure to many.



Hawk, you laugh ..... but sadly its cos you have no idea...



Daily I did stuff like that. To the point of boredom, past the point of boredom!!





On your figures you provided??? what are you attempting to show me!?? Thats just sales data ........ same problem no energy figures whatsoever.



Or are you saying you believ that Octane rating is a direct measure of the power/energy available in the fuel?



Quit posting absolutely superfluous figures, they aren't scoring you points with me fella



I don't think Elf even import here !

BarryMachine said:

That was my job for over 15 years, testing force measurement stuff under operating conditions and susceptibilities.



What may seem a"joke" to you ..... was reality for me ............ yes we had a turntable ( stepper driven ) amongst a thousand other bits and bobs for testing "stuff , it wasn't specifically used for engines ....... but it could be. I could quite easily do as i proposed. What seems "amazing/unbelievable/........" to you would actually be a mundane procedure to many.



Hawk, you laugh ..... but sadly its cos you have no idea...



Daily I did stuff like that. To the point of boredom, past the point of boredom!!





On your figures you provided??? what are you attempting to show me!?? Thats just sales data ........ same problem no energy figures whatsoever.



Or are you saying you believ that Octane rating is a direct measure of the power/energy available in the fuel?



Quit posting absolutely superfluous figures, they aren't scoring you points with me fella



I don't think Elf even import here !

Click to expand...

Barry I know how important those things are that you were testing, I just don't think it's what's wrong with the Duc. It sounds like your specialty was failure testing or finding fatigue life cycles. I'm not posting anything to impress you, just giving what I could find on motogp fuel. I know .... all about octane and like I said in the earlier post it's what I was able to find, I even included the piece on the V power fuel you were talking about in your post.

hawkdriver said:

Barry I know how important those things are that you were testing, I just don't think it's what's wrong with the Duc. It sounds like your specialty was failure testing or finding fatigue life cycles. I'm not posting anything to impress you, just giving what I could find on motogp fuel. I know .... all about octane and like I said in the earlier post it's what I was able to find, I even included the piece on the V power fuel you were talking about in your post.

Click to expand...

No my specialty was not fatigue or destructive testing? how do you get that?

Especially after I told you that we tested for performance under operating conditions. If I had a specialty it was in sticking sensors to things, data acquisition methods, test rig design, test procedure design, temperature control, force measurement, an expert on loadcell testing ( for this I was very well known, worldwide ), expert in dynamic force measurement/loads.



Oh .... here comes the old ..... I'm bored with this job feeling again ......



As I have even said many moons ago on here, we even tested a Ferrari gearbox controller for electronic interference susceptibility. Though after revealing this in a discussion Roger then disclosed that according to him my real profession was "tea lady" ........ after which I rightfully informed him that our tea lady wielded far more power than I could ever have dreamed of



Testing a Ducati motor to find any effects on turning of of a vehicle fitted with said engine was ....... right up my alley. Hence why I have a somewhat obsessive interest, hence why I proposed such cures and tests.



Do you think as Rog. did, that everyone who races/raced/has an interest in bikes is a "tea lady" ........ though I find that a slur on a wonderful lady, who helped guide me through a misguided young test engineers life, and would have put me in my place rapidly had i such poor thoughts as to her value in my life.





Anyway. back at it. I still maintain the L90 engine was crap due to inherent VSG's set up in such an engine.



Perhaps we should start with VSG's, do you understand what they are Hawk? Can you identify and describe one to me?

I don't understand why a MotoGP team would test without their normal fuel management strategy in place? It would be like testing with bikes weighing only 150kg when they knew they have to run at 157kg, pointless. Surely in this day and age when a huge chunk of testing is testing electronics of which fuel management is a huge component they would be testing race set up. Maybe at the end of the day they go to a qualifying set up to get a lap.

Mental Anarchist said:

I don't understand why a MotoGP team would test without their normal fuel management strategy in place? It would be like testing with bikes weighing only 150kg when they knew they have to run at 157kg, pointless. Surely in this day and age when a huge chunk of testing is testing electronics of which fuel management is a huge component they would be testing race set up. Maybe at the end of the day they go to a qualifying set up to get a lap.

Click to expand...

I agree. But does it happen? Maybe Krop could shed some light on this.

BarryMachine said:

Isn't the Spec. "it must be pump fuel", doesn't matter who makes it.

Click to expand...

Pump Fuel so the what the B.P Ultimate 98 i run in my R1 (2011) would run in a grand prix bike...