Post by ~misfit~ Post by larkim Post by Edmund Post by larkim Post by Edmund Post by keefy Post by Botham
Making of mockery out of F1. Unable to preventing oil burning yet
again, for the 5th year running.
Tell me what ICE does not burn oil and I will you which extremely
large motor manufacturer claims all ICEs burn some oil.
According to Renault some! ICE's - Ferrari and Mercedes -
uses/burn six times as much oil as Renault.
If they can do that on demand, I don't know but I think they can.
In a fuel unlimited qualifying session,
AFAIK there is no unlimited fuel flow.
Yes of course, you're correct - fuel flow remains limited to
?100kg/hour? I presume during quali and race, with the 105kg limiting
I don't know the answer to this btw, but is the 100kg/hour actually a
limiting factor in quali? The way the commentators describe things
like lift and coast, it always seems to me that fuel usage is the
issue rather than peak flow.
Post by Edmund Post by larkim
why would you seek to gain power
from a fuel source which gains no signficant weight advantages and
which is broadly less effective at delivering power than "petrol"
(for want of a better phrase)?
First I think you are grossly underestimate the caloric value of
lubrication oil, even the ordinary wall marked oil and the do not
use that brand.
Second it is not instead of petrol, it is in addition to.
Yes, of course it is supplementary. But is the calorific value of oil
higher or lower than petrol? If it is not higher, you'd choose to use
petrol instead UNLESS it is fuel flow that you are managing as the
fuel flow sensor I believe is mounted in the fuel cell area, so
presumably would not detect any oil in the mix at that point.
Post by Edmund Post by larkim
If Merc do have a party mode button to use in quali, does it really
make any logical sense for the fuel for that to be oil?
I can see how using it in a race provides a way around the fuel
restrictions which could be advantageous, but surely not in quali?
Happy to be put in my place by anyone with good technical knowledge
though, despite being an F1 fan my knowledge of ICE and power
trains is sparse to say the least.
My reaction was to the oil burning and what I read someone of
Renault said which is both Ferrari and Merc using the max limit
while Renault uses 1/6 of that.
BTW if you use your imagination you can think of similar tricks right?
Absolutely, I can see the potential trickery in it. Though I must
admit that I'd had it in my head that the oil burning (if it does
exist) was a way of getting around the 105kg fuel allowance limit
rather than getting around the 100kg/hour fuel flow limit.
If my understanding is incorrect, that wouldn't surprise me!
It was always to get around the fuel flow rate rather than the absolute
limit. However the FIA have significantly reduced the amount of oil that
maye be consumed and have done an about-turn for 2018 on allowing a solenoid
on the crankcase breather. Thay have also stipulated that the breather goes
to atmosphere rather than ICE inlet (as was standard ractice in F1
previously and is on almost all other ICEs).
Ferrari are protesting this by situating their breather in a very visible
place near the tail light, trying to make F1 look like polluters while
Mercedes have situated theirs near the exhaust so that any vapour / oil fog
is dragged into the exhaust plume and 'hidden'.
Hence on-demand oil burning is no longer possible in F1 in 2018 (and only
ever gave a few percentage points of extra power when it was). If Renault
are (were?) making the claims Edmund is quoting (without a source or cite)
then it was because they couldn't work out how to do it themselves.
"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)