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
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
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.