Mercedes Power Unit Hardware & Software

All that has to do with the power train, gearbox, clutch, fuels and lubricants, etc. Generally the mechanical side of Formula One.
gruntguru
563
Joined: 21 Feb 2009, 07:43

Re: Mercedes Power Unit

Post

Gold dust?
je suis charlie

PhillipM
385
Joined: 16 May 2011, 15:18
Location: Over the road from Boothy...

Re: Mercedes Power Unit

Post

Webber2011 wrote:What would they be adding to the water to make it that gold colour then guys ?

Is that also just something to make leaks easier to detect ?
UV fluorescent dye.

Jolle
132
Joined: 29 Jan 2014, 22:58
Location: Dordrecht

Re: Mercedes Power Unit

Post

PhillipM wrote:
Webber2011 wrote:What would they be adding to the water to make it that gold colour then guys ?

Is that also just something to make leaks easier to detect ?
UV fluorescent dye.
I remember something from around 25 years ago, in motor racing, water was the only liquid allowed because of safety (no extra oil on track, no toxics). That they're allowed to color it, to check for leaks, makes sense.

Webber2011
10
Joined: 25 Jan 2011, 01:01
Location: Australia NSW

Re: Mercedes Power Unit

Post

gruntguru wrote:Gold dust?
You're a funny guy :roll:

graham.reeds
16
Joined: 30 Jul 2015, 09:16

Re: Mercedes Power Unit

Post

Paraffin solution? Utilising heat pipe solution like on PC?

PhillipM
385
Joined: 16 May 2011, 15:18
Location: Over the road from Boothy...

Re: Mercedes Power Unit

Post

graham.reeds wrote:Paraffin solution? Utilising heat pipe solution like on PC?
Not allowed. Even then, water is still good for that.

Webber2011
10
Joined: 25 Jan 2011, 01:01
Location: Australia NSW

Re: Mercedes Power Unit

Post

PhillipM wrote:
Webber2011 wrote:What would they be adding to the water to make it that gold colour then guys ?

Is that also just something to make leaks easier to detect ?
UV fluorescent dye.
Thanks Phillip.
You did already mention that but I completely missed where you said it was strongly coloured.
Some part of my addled brain pictured a colourless additive that would only be seen under UV.

So without trying to drag the conversation on too much longer, could I presume you guys are pretty unanimous that the coolant used in F1 is not a waterless product ?

PhillipM
385
Joined: 16 May 2011, 15:18
Location: Over the road from Boothy...

Re: Mercedes Power Unit

Post

There's a small add pack to raise the boiling point, reduce surface tension, etc, which is usually coloured (so you can quickly tell between treated and untreated in the garage), and then the UV dye will be a complementary colour but shifted - so if your coolant pack tints the water yellow then you'll make the UV shift that to gold/green so that you can tell the difference to make sure the wrong stuff is never used.
You use a colour close enough to what your add pack is in order to need less dye (although the amounts are very small anyway - you're talking 0.2% of the coolant), but enough that you can tell a clear difference between that treated with the add pack and that with the add pack + UV.

User avatar
PlatinumZealot
550
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 03:45

Re: Mercedes Power Unit

Post

Webber2011 wrote:
NL_Fer wrote:
PlatinumZealot wrote:Lewis' engine ran on zero water pressure for the last 16 laps in Russia. Of course ambient pressure water is a sign of either pump failure or some sort of back pressure valve failure. The key thing to take from this is that the water did not boil at ambient, meaning these new engines can run at very low temperatures and the radiators are a little over-designed.
Aren't they using some hightech waterless coolant, which has a much higher boiling point?
Remember the gold fluid spewing out of Fernando's car in the Australian crash ?

This is what I've been told the McLaren Honda uses, so I guess all Teams would have the same.
http://www.evanscoolants.com.au/questions-and-answers/

Although I'm not sure if the stuff we mere mortals can purchase is exactly the same as an F1 team would have available ?

Either way, 190c is a pretty impressive boiling point :o and no water means no steam, so it runs under much less pressure, even when very hot.

There's some good links on the page so check it out guys :wink:
Have a few coworkers who have tried a similar product. I think people mostly buy it for peace of mind but at the end of the day regular old coolant works fine if you maintain your engine properly. A radiator leak with this new coolant will perhaps save the engine for a few days passing unnoticed but eventually all your expensive waterless coolant will get leaked out and you have nothing left in the engine, so it might just blow a gasket anyway! lol

F1 engines will never see the miles street engines see, despite the higher duty cycle they will barely get any time to corrode and they are serviced literally every session. Saying that, though, I have no Idea if they do use waterless coolant, but since we are all love to pick around technical stuff lets break it down technically and see...

OK let's examine the properties - http://www.evanscoolants.com.au/assets/ ... oolant.pdf

Specific gravity: 1.2 - F1 cars have a massive amount of coolant.. so lets say they use 12 liters of water. They will need more of the waterless coolant to make up for lower heat capacity and also it will weigh more... probably you will need 3 liters more and that is 3.6 Kg more weight. Is this worth it?

Flash point - 120*C... a coolant leak onto the headers? Instant barbecue - Do you want prancing horse ribs? Or redbull honey glazed steak?

Thermal conductivity - 0.2 W/mK... Water is 0.6 W/mK. You will lose heat slower unless you make up for it with increased convection and that will be hard because...

Specific viscosity. - 2 Pas. Twice the viscosity of water! So the water pump will work harder to move and lift the waterless coolant and your convective heat transfer is going to be lower per given flow velocity.

So is this heavier, thicker coolant worth the trouble of feeling secure in a higher boiling point? hmm.. I am no F1 engineer.. but for the philosophy that says an F1 car is designed to be on the limit, I would go with the water based coolant and hope my mechanics don't screw up.
🖐️✌️☝️👀👌✍️🐎🏆🙏

User avatar
rscsr
51
Joined: 19 Feb 2012, 13:02
Location: Austria

Re: Mercedes Power Unit

Post

So what is that EVANS coolant based on? I couldn't find anything about what it actually is.
And what is the flashing point? Does it mean that it can begin to burn if there is air somewhere in the cooling system and it has more than 120°C?

Tommy Cookers
617
Joined: 17 Feb 2012, 16:55

Re: Mercedes Power Unit

Post

rscsr wrote: ..... Does it mean that it can begin to burn if there is air somewhere in the cooling system and it has more than 120°C?
no, it means that it will burn when at 120 degC in a flash point apparatus

User avatar
godlameroso
309
Joined: 16 Jan 2010, 21:27
Location: Miami FL

Re: Mercedes Power Unit

Post

The amount of coolant the vehicle holds is mostly to do with the volumes of the parts that require coolant jackets and it's associated heat exchangers. Having more water isn't going to cool things better, flow and a good radiator is all you need, also maybe it works well enough for the tolerances and temperatures they're looking for. That said they're probably using water if the engine operates at normal temperatures (90-105 C)

They probably wouldn't be using water if for example they designed their engines to run a little hotter than normal engines(over 105 C). Just for the simple fact that the hotter you run the higher the pressure of the system becomes because it's the only way to stop water from boiling. If you're working with a higher boiling point you don't have to have as high system pressure. That said, I doubt they're doing anything crazy like running the engines at 120 C or anything like that.

*The viscosity is 2x water at -40c, do you want me to tell you the viscosity of water at -40c?
Saishū kōnā

User avatar
PlatinumZealot
550
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 03:45

Re: Mercedes Power Unit

Post

Reading error, but we can find that value at room temp if anything or the value at 105C if required. It is even worse!
Further contributing to cylinder head temperature elevation is the fact that Evans waterless products are considerably more viscous than water, or a 50/50 mix. At operating temperatures, water, and water with No-Rosion, has a viscosity of 0.28 cp. (No-Rosion does not alter the viscosity of water.) A 50/50 mix has a viscosity of 0.70 cp. The Evans products have viscosities of 2.3 to 2.8 cp. In other words, Evans waterless products are almost 10 times more viscous than water coolant, and 3-4 times more viscous than a 50/50 mix. This creates significant drag on water pumps. OEM auto manufacturers design water pumps for the viscosity of a 50/50 mix.
Well here is more information, a little review: http://www.norosion.com/evanstest.htm
Evans offers several different iterations of their waterless coolant products. Each is 100% glycol. Some are 100% propylene glycol, and others are a mix of propylene glycol and ethylene glycol.
The product provides very good overall rates of corrosion protection, and passed ASTM D1384. The only concerns were: (a) the relatively high rate of corrosion for solder, and (b) the net gain in weight on aluminum. Inspection of the aluminum test coupon indicated inhibitor deposition from the Evans product. In a cooling system, this can cause problems. Inhibitor deposition causes hot-spots to develop on metal heat exchange surfaces. This can cause granular fatigue in aluminum radiators, and result in stress cracks and failures, depending on the thickness of the metal.

It is important to note that this level of corrosion protection can only be achieved if the coolant consists of 97%-100% Evans coolant. If only 3% or more of coolant previously used in the system remains, the corrosion resistance of Evans coolant is lost. When this happens, water combines with the glycol in the Evans coolant to form glycolic acid. The result is reduction in coolant pH, and corresponding corrosion problems.

After proper conversion to the Evans products, the average temperature of engine cylinder heads increased by 115-140oF, versus running with No-Rosion and water

The reason for hotter cylinder heads relates to the specific heat capacity of these different fluids. Water has a specific heat capacity of 1.00. It transfers heat more effectively than any other fluid, and is therefore used as the reference fluid in the scientific measure of specific heat capacity. Comparatively, the specific heat capacity of the various glycol solutions in the Evans products ranges from 0.64 to 0.68. So they conduct roughly half as much heat as does water, or water with No-Rosion. (No-Rosion does not alter the specific heat capacity of water.)
By having engine cylinder head temperatures 128oF hotter with the Evans product, a number of performance setbacks were observed: (1) the octane requirement was increased by 5-7 numbers, (2) the computerized ignition system retarded timing by 8-10o to avoid trace knock, (3) horsepower was correspondingly reduced by 4-5%, as confirmed on a chassis dyno.
🖐️✌️☝️👀👌✍️🐎🏆🙏

Brian Coat
99
Joined: 16 Jun 2012, 18:42

Re: Mercedes Power Unit

Post

Oops, I accidentally browsed to the Evans Patent Coolant Medicine Show review thread! :D

User avatar
godlameroso
309
Joined: 16 Jan 2010, 21:27
Location: Miami FL

Re: Mercedes Power Unit

Post

Fair point, again if they're using normal engine temperatures it doesn't make sense to use non-water based, it all depends what kind of temperatures these engines see. Seeing as most aluminum alloys start fatiguing above around ~180C, we can put around 120C as a conservative upper limit. I imagine they run the engines a little hot for the simple fact that slightly higher temperatures can actually facilitate rapid combustion.
Saishū kōnā

Post Reply