Fuel for 2013 Engines

[Racer-X]

For 2013 the fuel formulations will change a lot.
With the new engine (Turbo & Direct Injection) the engine requirements for fuel will be quite different to what it is today.
With the fuel flow limitation to be imposed by the FIA it will be more critical.
It will be very difficult to see a F1 engine running with oxygenated fuel. Oxygenates are known by its low energy content and the fuel suppliers will probably work on new products. Although by the regulations the fuel has in its formulae 5% of bio-oxygenates it will probably be replaced by 2nd and 3rd generation of hydrocarbons from a bio source and without O2 in its molecules.

[WhiteBlue]

What are the objectives to make changes? Only when we know the reason we can understand and support or reject changes.

[Racer-X]

What are the objectives to make changes? Only when we know the reason we can understand and support or reject changes.

The main changes will be done by the fuel suppliers together with the engine manufactures. If the fuel regulation remains the same (nothing was said yet) the fuel suppliers will maximise the heavy components in order to increase power (and fuel economy). Remember that in the "turbo era" the fuel was praticaly only toluene
The fuel suppliers will work within the regulation to deliver the maximum power possible and the bio-oxygenates will be replaced by bio-hydrocarbons. The most common bio-hydrocarbon today is the bio-diesel from vegetables or animal fat but there are researches going on to produce gasoline from the same sources.

[horse]

the bio-oxygenates will be replaced by bio-hydrocarbons. The most common bio-hydrocarbon today is the bio-diesel from vegetables or animal fat but there are researches going on to produce gasoline from the same sources.

I don't like the idea of F1 moving to bio-fuel. It's a real dead end in automotive technology. There will never be enough land to serve every car in the world with bio-fuel and it puts pressure on land and food markets.

It's the same scam as hydrogen - oil companies want a product to sell, through a pump, and bio-fuels fits this bill nicely. Admittedly, biofuel might be the only option for aviation, but straight electricity has to be the ideal for cars. Hydrogen might be required if other energy storage options are not workable.

[WhiteBlue]

There are different bio fuels and some are not competing with food production at all. Examples are biogas (methane) produced from agricultural waste, slurry, sewage sludge, organic waste and forestal waste. Other examples are marine algae produced in salt water on desert land or conversion of surplus wood to methane and methanol. The point is those fuels will not be available in quantities that would justify increasing the bio content of our current fuel mix. The logical reaction is to replace fossil fuel use by efficiency technologies which reduce specific consumption. F1 is the show room of automotive technology and any effort by the sport to improve fuel efficiency would support the quick proliferation of efficiency technologies. If it works in F1 it is good for my car. One thing that might work in the long distance future are binary fuels or fuels for HCCI. 2013 is much too early for that as it is for eco friendly bio fuel.

[xpensive]

When I'm leaving the Pulp & Paper industry (Heidenheim) for a new assignment within Oil & Gas (Trondheim) on Monday,
I guess that I should support natural gas (basically methane) rather than methanol from cellulose from now on?

There's plenty of natural gas to support the world for a long time after we run out of oil, there are some 17.5*10^13 m^3 of proven reserves, which converted to mass is 125 billion tons at an energy density of 53.6 MJ/kg (crude oil is 46.4).

One ton of crude is roughly 8 barrels, which means world's gas-reserves has the energy equivalent of more than 1200 billion barrels of crude, while the world's proven oil-reserves are some 1350 billion and consumption is 86 million per day.

Go figure.

[djos]

There are different bio fuels and some are not competing with food production at all. Examples are biogas (methane) produced from agricultural waste, slurry, sewage sludge, organic waste and forestal waste. Other examples are marine algae produced in salt water on desert land or conversion of surplus wood to methane and methanol. The point is those fuels will not be available in quantities that would justify increasing the bio content of our current fuel mix. The logical reaction is to replace fossil fuel use by efficiency technologies which reduce specific consumption. F1 is the show room of automotive technology and any effort by the sport to improve fuel efficiency would support the quick proliferation of efficiency technologies. If it works in F1 it is good for my car. One thing that might work in the long distance future are binary fuels or fuels for HCCI. 2013 is much too early for that as it is for eco friendly bio fuel.

Dont forget Bio-Ethnanol produced from Sugar Production waste products - we use E85 108 RON Sucrogen for the Aussie V8 Supercars now and it hasn't hurt power or performance at all.

[Racer-X]

USA has just informed they will increase the amount of ethanol in its gasoline from 10 to 15%. E85 will be used in cars from 2007 onwards...
F1 will probably go in the same direction... The level of biocomponents today is 5,75% minimum... It will probbaly go to a minimum of 10%v/v.

[riff_raff]

Racer-X,

In the US, ethanol is added to gasoline primarily for emissions reasons. It acts as an oxygenate, and the percentage added varies from state to state, and at different times of the year. In California, we have different gasoline formulas for winter and summer months.

GM makes most of their gasoline engines available with a "Flex Fuel" option for a couple hundred dollars. This allows operation on any mixture from straight gasoline up to E85.

As for the ideal fuel for F1, I say any liquid fuel should be allowed. As long as it is available to all teams and is safe. The various fuels can be equalized by regulating a fixed mass for the race based on each fuel's Btu content.

riff_raff

[Racer-X]

Racer-X,

In the US, ethanol is added to gasoline primarily for emissions reasons. It acts as an oxygenate, and the percentage added varies from state to state, and at different times of the year. In California, we have different gasoline formulas for winter and summer months.

GM makes most of their gasoline engines available with a "Flex Fuel" option for a couple hundred dollars. This allows operation on any mixture from straight gasoline up to E85.

As for the ideal fuel for F1, I say any liquid fuel should be allowed. As long as it is available to all teams and is safe. The various fuels can be equalized by regulating a fixed mass for the race based on each fuel's Btu content.

riff_raff

Are you suggesting a single fuel supplier to F1?
If you do that you will see important sponsors leaving the sport...

How will you calculate accurately the BTU content of each fuel?

And it is not only the energy content responsible for a fuel performance. In a F1 engine the flame speed of the fuel will play an important role on the engine final output...

[riff_raff]

Racer-X,

What I'm suggesting is the opposite of a single fuel supplier. Any fuel would be acceptable as long as it was safe and widely available. Diesel, alcohol, gasoline, hydrogen, etc.

The Btu content of a fuel would be established using conventional practices. The LHV value determined by a combustion bomb.

As far as I know, there is no direct relationship between "flame speed" and engine performance for various fuels. If what you mean is heat release rate, then whatever fuel/engine combination produces the closest to constant volume combustion, will be the most efficient.

riff_raff

[Racer-X]

What does it mean when the FIA says that in 2012 F1 will increase the use of Biofuels? The current Tec regulations says the petrol must contains 5,75% of renewable material...

[Tim.Wright]

What I'm suggesting is the opposite of a single fuel supplier. Any fuel would be acceptable as long as it was safe and widely available. Diesel, alcohol, gasoline, hydrogen, etc.

I like the idea of there being full freedom allowed in terms of fuels but really how will you police the safety aspects?

I remember during a Claude Rouelle seminar he mentioned that back in the days when refuelling was banned and there was no restrictions on the fuels, everybody would clear out of the garages when they were putting fuel in the car because it had become such dangerous stuff.

Tim

[mpower]

we would even add nitromethane...........when "they" could not discover it

[autogyro]

I used to wear a witches hat when mixing fuel for the dragster we ran.
Methanol mixed with ever growing amounts of Nitro.
Loverly stuff, ten foot blue flames from the headers.
Played hell with the engine oil and lead indium crankshaft bearings.