| When something like this happens, and the driver is not at fault, I think they should find a better way to lay out the punishment...after all the driver did put his life on the line just by getting into the car. They have at times punished the team instead of the driver. Seems to me like they should have done that in this case as noted in point #2 in the 'Reason' section. |
|
|
|
N°/ Driver 3, Daniel Ricciardo
Competitor Infiniti Red Bull Racing
Time 20:17
Session: Race
Facts: Car #3 was not in compliance with article 5.1.4 of the FIA Formula 1 technical tegulations.
Offence: Breach of article 3.2 of the FIA Formula 1 sporting regulations and Article 5.1.4 of the FIA Formula 1 technical regulations.
Decision: Car #3 is excluded from the race results.
Reason:
1)
The technical delegate reported to the stewards that car #3 exceeded
the required fuel mass flow of 100kg/h. (article 5.1.4 of the Formula 1
technical regulations)
2) This parameter is outside of the control of the driver, Daniel Ricciardo.
3)
The fuel flow is measured using the fuel flow sensor (Art. 5.10.3 &
5.10.4 of the technical regulations) which is homologated by the FIA
and owned and operated by the team.
4) The stewards considered the
history of the fitted fuel flow sensor, as described by the team and
the technical delegate's representative who administers the programme.
Their description of the history of the sensor matches.
a. During
practice one a difference in reading between the first three and run
four was detected. The same readings as Run 4 were observed throughout
practice two.
b. The team used a different sensor on Saturday but
did not get readings that were satisfactory to them or the FIA, so they
were instructed to change the sensor within parc ferme on Saturday
night.
c. They operated the original sensor during the race, which
provided the same readings as run four of practice one, and practice
two.
5) The stewards heard from the technical representative that
when the sensor was installed on Saturday night, he instructed the team
to apply an offset to their fuel flow such that the fuel flow would have
been legal. He presented an email to the stewards that verified his
instruction.
6) The technical representative stated to the
stewards that there is variation in the sensors. However, the sensors
fall within a known range, and are individually calibrated. They then
become the standard which the teams must use for their fuel flow.
7)
The team stated that based on the difference observed between the two
readings in P1, they considered the fuel flow sensor to be unreliable.
Therefore, for the start of the race they chose to use their internal
fuel flow model, rather than the values provided by the sensor, with the
required offset.
8) Technical directive 01614 (1 March 2014)
provides the methodology by which the sensor will be used, and, should
the sensor fail, the method by which the alternate model could be used.
a.
The technical directive starts by stating: "The homologated fuel flow
sensor will be the primary measurement of the fuel flow and will be used
to check compliance with articles 5.1.4 and 5.1.5 of the F1 technical
regulations..." This is in conformity with articles 5.10.3 and 5.10.4 of
the technical regulations.
b. The technical directive goes on to
state: "If at any time WE consider that the sensor has an issue which
has not been detected by the system WE will communicate this to the team
concerned and switch to a back-up system."
(emphasis added.)
c. The back-up system is the calculated fuel flow model with a correction factor decided by the FIA.
9)
The FIA technical representative observed thought the telemetry during
the race that the fuel flow was too high and contacted the team, giving
them the opportunity to follow his previous instruction, and reduce the
fuel flow such that it was within the limit, as measured by the
homologated sensor - and thus gave the team the opportunity to be within
compliance. The team chose not to make this correction.
10) Under
Art. 3.2 of the sporting regulations it is the duty of the team to
ensure compliance with the technical regulations throughout the event.
Thus the stewards find that:
A)
The team chose to run the car using their fuel flow model, without
direction from the FIA. This is a violation of the procedure within
TD/01614.
B) That although the sensor showed a difference in
readings between runs in P1, it remains the homologated and required
sensor against which the team is obliged to measure their fuel flow,
unless given permission by the FIA to do otherwise.
C) The
stewards were satisfied by the explanation of the technical
representative that by making an adjustment as instructed, the team
could have run within the allowable fuel flow.
D) That regardless
of the team's assertion that the sensor was fault, it is not within
their discretion to run a different fuel flow measurement method without
the permission of the FIA.
The stewards find that car #3 was out
of compliance with the technical regulations and is therefore excluded
from the results of the race.
