Standardized Fuel

All that has to do with the power train, gearbox, clutch, fuels and lubricants, etc. Generally the mechanical side of Formula One.
roon
212
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2016 6:04 pm

Re: Standardized Fuel

Post by roon » Fri Feb 02, 2018 12:05 am

Formula E uses a spec battery pack. Maybe fuel companies want to dump money into this sort of research; otherwise, spec fuel seems like a good idea.

J.A.W.
65
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 4:10 am
Location: Altair IV.

Re: Standardized Fuel

Post by J.A.W. » Mon Feb 12, 2018 12:33 am

Effective fuel formulations for racing power & efficiency - goes back a ways, over 90 years..

This Napier Lion, (an oversquare DOHC 4V design) in racing form, duly accepted an increase to 10:1 comp-ratio,
& made 880hp at a fairly efficient, (how does the current Bugatti Veyron compare?) - 50 gallons per hour.

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/ ... 01118.html
Dr Rick Marshall sez..
"Science shows no mercy - & neither do I..."

marmer
16
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 5:48 am

Re: Standardized Fuel

Post by marmer » Tue Feb 13, 2018 12:29 am

The only thing g that should be standard in F1 are safety features everything else should be fair game to out develop your opponent. Ideally all teams would have custom engines fuel and tyres that would really give you the best of the best

godlameroso
204
User avatar
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 8:27 pm
Location: Miami FL

Re: Standardized Fuel

Post by godlameroso » Thu Feb 15, 2018 6:58 pm

Frankly I don't think any team is using anything ultra exotic as far as fuel is concerned. The actual gains being made are more as follows.

Large Petrochemical Company(LPC): Here are all the detailed fuel kinetics analysis you wanted.
Large Engine Manufacturer F1 team(LEM): Thanks LPC, and thanks for the free predictive simulations, we could have never done it without you. Because it costs billions to do this type of research.
LPC: No problem, just make sure you plaster our names big and bright on the side of your car, team clothing, and name drop us like you're breathing air.
LEM: Absolutely, we'll even claim the fuel you give us which is the same stuff going around the world because it all comes from about 16 refineries is extra special. No one needs to know that the predictive models based on all the research you've done is what's helping us design our combustion chamber. By the time the others catch on it'll be 3 years too late for them and they'll be fighting an uphill battle trying to catch up. In the mean time everyone can think up crazy conspiracy theories like oil burning, we can have a chuckle and get back to mopping the floor with them.

People are worried about all sorts of exotic mechanical bits that will save the day, thermodynamics has been well studied, and any gains simply come from better engineering. Combustion is the most important aspect of the power units, would it not help you get the most out of the combustion if you understand exactly what it is you're combusting, and how it's being combusted? Fuel isn't just burn hot not hot, there is a lot that goes on, fuel reformulates itself several times during combustion. Fuel itself is a very complex mixture of chemicals, during combustion these chemicals are "broken down" mix with oxygen, form oxygen rich compounds called radicals, and there's a chain reaction too long to describe with words, and this is before we even get to the exothermic side of it. These radicals are essentially what cause combustion, they're here ionizing and robbing and giving electrons all over the place. Eventually in this dance certain molecules get created during the reformulation process which are unstable and create the exothermic reaction, and during this period more stuff that can be described happens again.

In an ideal world you'd just get water and CO2, but the world isn't perfect, and reality is more complex than our puny brains can comprehend. The more you understand this combustion process the better you can design your hardware to accommodate this process, to exploit it for your needs.

If I had to peg my finger on it, this predictive software has been available in "rough draft" versions since 2010, today it's just so much better. The resolution is much better, but you still need massive super computer clusters to do this type of research. Luckily, or unluckily for their competitors LPC's aren't bound by the sporting regulations of CFD on-time.

I guess that's why no new manufacturers want to join?

Who else is there besides Esso/Mobil1:Honda, Castrol/BP:Renault, Pennzoil/Shell:Ferrari, Petronas:Mercedes, besides Total is there any other LPC that can compete? There's not a lot of LPC's that could partner with large manufacturers that want to enter the sport. Maybe Sunoco/BMW :lol:
The height of cultivation is really nothing special. It is merely simplicity; the ability to express the utmost with the minimum. Mr.Lee

Cold Fussion
123
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2010 3:51 am

Re: Standardized Fuel

Post by Cold Fussion » Fri Feb 16, 2018 6:07 am

dans79 wrote:
Mon Jan 29, 2018 1:31 am
Personally I don't understand why so many want to push F1 towards a spec series, nothing could be further from it roots and true DNA. F1 is basically ritualized industrial warfare and has been since the beginning, yet some want to turn it into the European equivalent of NASCAR.
Some people have deluded fantasies about F1 being a drivers championship akin to gladiatorial combat in an arena.

Pingguest
10
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 3:31 pm

Re: Standardized Fuel

Post by Pingguest » Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:37 pm

I believe it is better to have tires, electronics and fuel as a part of the competition instead of being a part of politics and lobbying.

https://www.racefans.net/2018/03/13/tyr ... li-vettel/

zac510
32
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 11:58 am

Re: Standardized Fuel

Post by zac510 » Sat Mar 17, 2018 10:04 pm

Cold Fussion wrote:
Fri Feb 16, 2018 6:07 am
dans79 wrote:
Mon Jan 29, 2018 1:31 am
Personally I don't understand why so many want to push F1 towards a spec series, nothing could be further from it roots and true DNA. F1 is basically ritualized industrial warfare and has been since the beginning, yet some want to turn it into the European equivalent of NASCAR.
Some people have deluded fantasies about F1 being a drivers championship akin to gladiatorial combat in an arena.
And even in spec-racing series, the same teams dominate every year because they simply have more money, can buy better race engineers, facilities, run the spec-car in a wind tunnel/chassis rig, etc.

johnny comelately
9
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 11:55 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Standardized Fuel

Post by johnny comelately » Mon Mar 19, 2018 12:56 pm

Zynerji wrote:
Wed Jan 31, 2018 6:12 pm
Maritimer wrote:
Mon Jan 29, 2018 5:37 pm
Here's the saddest song on the smallest violin. If the next ruleset shifts toward more spec anything I know I'm certainly done watching, as are a huge chunk of the viewership/fanbase. This isn't Formula Budgetcap.
Zynerji wrote:
Mon Jan 29, 2018 2:40 pm
... the single tyre supplier has done very well...
:lol:
Please give an instance where the single supplier have one team an unfair advantage? It's not funny, its sad actually how broken F1 is sometimes.
Funny story, sort of related: here in Australia at a round of the superbikes, there were control tyres, but one of the works teams had their name on allocation, so mate picked them up and walked quickly but then eruption and chase. when they caught up we said what does it matter if they are control tyre... more eruption
...ah politics ....

johnny comelately
9
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 11:55 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Standardized Fuel

Post by johnny comelately » Mon Mar 19, 2018 1:04 pm

Zynerji, I agree but for different reasons you said at the start.
With non standard consumables there is too much potential for an unfair advantage for the teams with the big money and (different mapping for customer engines)(which I believe can be done)
Maybe the slower teams should be given some advantages like they did in Motogp, (more fuel etc etc)which certainly worked, look at Ducarti now.
I know there are two sides (or 3 or 4) to this story but that's where i stand on the unfair advantage potential.
There is also the open ended fuel specs....all that waffle but no max on energy content or octane, That in itself gives open slather to the fuel suppliers

PhillipM
151
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 2:18 pm
Location: Over the road from Boothy...

Re: Standardized Fuel

Post by PhillipM » Mon Mar 19, 2018 2:41 pm

Zynerji wrote:
Wed Jan 31, 2018 6:12 pm

Please give an instance where the single supplier have one team an unfair advantage? It's not funny, its sad actually how broken F1 is sometimes.
Ah, you mean like when bridgestone built tyres to suit the Ferrari and everyone else using those tyres had to run them or lump it?

Zynerji
22
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:14 pm

Re: Standardized Fuel

Post by Zynerji » Mon Mar 19, 2018 3:49 pm

PhillipM wrote:
Mon Mar 19, 2018 2:41 pm
Zynerji wrote:
Wed Jan 31, 2018 6:12 pm

Please give an instance where the single supplier have one team an unfair advantage? It's not funny, its sad actually how broken F1 is sometimes.
Ah, you mean like when bridgestone built tyres to suit the Ferrari and everyone else using those tyres had to run them or lump it?
Last time I saw Bridgestones on an F1 car, they were winning the championships with Red Bull, not Ferrari.

It seems that you are pointing out EXACTLY THE REASON that the tyre war was ended, and exactly point out the congruency to the current fuel situation.