Horsepower of the engines.

[Brian Coat]

Yes, same as last season.

The water cooled matrix is believed to be on the engine coolant circuit so you get cooling down towards (not to) T_eng_coolant without the need for another radiator in the side pod. Then the air-air cooler takes the pre-cooled air and cools it down towards (not to) T_pod_inlet. The result is full charge cooling with minimised aero drag burden. Andy Green (FI TD) told RET it adds 3-5 kg cf. air-air. He said they'd like to use it but can't justify the weight offset cost.

Merc can presumably afford to 'buy' weight offsets at "J*DI" per kg.

[Abarth]

If you burden the Engine coolant with part of charge air cooling, there is still aero burden. That water - air cooler has to be bigger with than without this.
Can't see any advantage, as any cooling in a formula one boils down to an xx -to- air cololer.

[J.A.W.]

If you burden the Engine coolant with part of charge air cooling, there is still aero burden. That water - air cooler has to be bigger with than without this.
Can't see any advantage, as any cooling in a formula one boils down to an xx -to- air cololer.

The liquid coolant offers a density/heat transfer advantage, as well as greater choice in low-drag siting of the air ducts..

[Abarth]

If you burden the Engine coolant with part of charge air cooling, there is still aero burden. That water - air cooler has to be bigger with than without this.
Can't see any advantage, as any cooling in a formula one boils down to an xx -to- air cololer.

The liquid coolant offers a density/heat transfer advantage, as well as greater choice in low-drag siting of the air ducts..

Of course, air-water cooling leads to a smaller heat exchanger than air-air.

But what happens with the water after this heat exchange? It has taken the heat and needs to be cooled down in the water-air heat exchanger (the radiator) in the sidepod, if not where would go the heat?
As long as the temperature of the water at entry of the water-air exchanger is not higher (to increase delta T to the air), there is no gain.
And I doubt they are able to increase water temp at radiator entry in a significant manner, I assume they are already at the upper limits of a vapor pressure / weight of components - balance.

[Brian Coat]

Yes. It is right to say the same amount of heat always needs to be extracted - the same laws of thermodynamics and heat transfer always apply.

But does that mean all practical inter cooler layouts will be equally efficient at doing this job?

[Paul]

I think heat soak is the main benefit of including liquid coolant into the process, allows the overall cooling system to be a bit more marginal.

[J.A.W.]

& Mercedes knows liquid coolant allows for more closely controlled/reactive to racing parameter - heat exchange variables..

[Cold Fussion]

I think heat soak is the main benefit of including liquid coolant into the process, allows the overall cooling system to be a bit more marginal.

On a related question, do the teams use electric water pumps or are they driven off the engine?

[Facts Only]

I think heat soak is the main benefit of including liquid coolant into the process, allows the overall cooling system to be a bit more marginal.

On a related question, do the teams use electric water pumps or are they driven off the engine?

Engine driven

[Blackout]

Yes, same as last season.

The water cooled matrix is believed to be on the engine coolant circuit so you get cooling down towards (not to) T_eng_coolant without the need for another radiator in the side pod. Then the air-air cooler takes the pre-cooled air and cools it down towards (not to) T_pod_inlet. The result is full charge cooling with minimised aero drag burden. Andy Green (FI TD) told RET it adds 3-5 kg cf. air-air. He said they'd like to use it but can't justify the weight offset cost.

Merc can presumably afford to 'buy' weight offsets at "J*DI" per kg.

So If I understand it well, the w-a intercooler has no dedicated water rad, it shares the water cooling with the classic engine water rad?

According to Magneti Marelli (AFAIR in the last Racecar engineering), V8 (Ferrari?) thermal efficiency was 32% and today's V6 is 45%!
If fuel heating value is 43MJ/kg, 700hp ICE needs 44% efficiecy. 45% efficiency equates 715 approx IMO

[wuzak]

Didn't Andy Cowell suggest that 100kg/h was 1240kW fuel "power"?

Which would mean that 45% efficiency would give 558kW//748hp!

If they have either 715hp or 748hp, they are still maybe 15 or 20hp down on Mercedes!

[NL_Fer]

Does it really matter? Say they are 30 bhp down, but harvesting efficiency allows for 10s more wastegate open time. Maybe they can hit higher topspeeds on shorter straights.

[gruntguru]

Didn't Andy Cowell suggest that 100kg/h was 1240kW fuel "power"?

ie 44.64 MJ/kg HV

[Abarth]

[[...]According to Magneti Marelli (AFAIR in the last Racecar engineering), V8 (Ferrari?) thermal efficiency was 32% and today's V6 is 45%!
If fuel heating value is 43MJ/kg, 700hp ICE needs 44% efficiecy. 45% efficiency equates 715 approx IMO

It's always confusing not to clearly specify whether these efficiency / power figures are ICE only or compounded, i.e. with the MGU-H transferring Energy to MGU-K. Cosworth called it "self sustained mode".
Estimates on this board stated that this power could be between 70 - 100 kW.

In my book, any efficiency or power estimate has to be always in compounded mode, as extracting more from ICE can well mean harvesting less MGU-H power, and vice versa.

[Abarth]

44.64 MJ/kg = 179 g/kWh = 758 HP = 558 kW Compounded
If MGU-H to -K is 80 kW net, then
ICE only is 625 HP
ICE with max MGU-K is 782 HP (not self sustaining, as 120-80=40 kW must be drained from Battery/ES)
ICE with max MGU-K and MGU-H driven from ES (Quali Mode) and Wastegate open is perhaps 820 HP, due to backpressure reduction?