BRC 1966 - Gentleman Brobots Club [RACE 6 P&Q]

[Packbat]

Reminder: City driving fuel economy is meaningless. Engine fuel efficiency at power and total fuel tank size is what matters. The car I submitted has a nominal fuel economy of 12.9 mpg, but I'm still only going to need one pit stop for fuel in a 90 minute race.

Preview-Edit: @AirJordan: My working assumption is that each pit stop will cost you 20-50 seconds. Over a hypothetical 90-minute race at ATT, that would be about a second a lap. I don't think you can make that formula pay dividends, but I posted my guide to fuel consumption estimation (linked above - it's on page 11) so people could calculate that tradeoff themselves.

[AirJordan]

Thanks for the reminder oooohhh there is soo much to tweak and tune in this challenge

[Denta]

Reminder: City driving fuel economy is meaningless. Engine fuel efficiency at power and total fuel tank size is what matters. The car I submitted has a nominal fuel economy of 12.9 mpg, but I'm still only going to need one pit stop for fuel in a 90 minute race.

Preview-Edit: @AirJordan: My working assumption is that each pit stop will cost you 20-50 seconds. Over a hypothetical 90-minute race at ATT, that would be about a second a lap. I don't think you can make that formula pay dividends, but I posted my guide to fuel consumption estimation (linked above - it's on page 11) so people could calculate that tradeoff themselves.

what is "r" value mean in your formula? and how you determine it?
for now what i see most track are pretty much fuel mid to high fuel consumption

im just bad when it comes to math

[Der Bayer]

The first pre-season test weekend is now being processed. Watch out for more news in a few hours.

[Packbat]

r varies by track. I designed my cars assuming r=0.75, because that's about the high end of the range for the most fuel-heavy tracks, but for the Automation Test Track it's usually between 0.44 and 0.61. So when you see how much fuel your car actually uses at ATT, plan for fuel consumption up to 25% more than that depending on the track.

Pre-Edit: Woo!

[pHanta]

I didn't see it mentioned but I assume the engine reliability is still recommended at 30, right ?

[Denta]

not sure if the calculation wrong or i did it wrong somewhere when calculating the racing fuel economy, even when i using packbat data

for some reason im always get larger result not even close to 1185 value

[Packbat]

@Denta: What value are you trying to get? If you multiply all the numbers together, you should get some number of kilograms of fuel, probably between 50 and 150.

[Lordred]

I cannot speak for the MR people but I know that I built an FR with a 50-50 weight distribution so fuel weight shouldn't affect its handling too much

[Packbat]

Last I heard fuel weight was added directly to the center of mass - has that been changed?

(Also, fuel weight does not lower effective ride height.)

[Der Bayer]

An engine reliability of 30 should be okay and fuel is added to the center of mass, not changing handling.

[Denta]

@Denta: What value are you trying to get? If you multiply all the numbers together, you should get some number of kilograms of fuel, probably between 50 and 150.

let me confirm my calculation using your data sample, what i do is

  Code:

1.5 * 523.85505501344005 * 135.65301510020001 * 1 * 0.75 = 79945.3323991

thats not even close to 118.5kg

[AirJordan]

^you forgot to divide by 1000. So 80kg of fuel for you

[Packbat]

Right - thank you, AirJordan.

80kg is probably a good point to be at - I expect you can complete all the races with one pit stop.

[07CobaltGirl]

I have no idea how you guys are getting data for fuel calculations but I suspect it means opening up a .lua file. There has to be an easier way!