Jersey Tom wrote:What would be the purpose of Ethanol in F1? .
There is actually one big advantage to using ethanol as a race fuel. There is only one chemical composition for ethanol. So the fuel used by every team would be exactly the same.
The subject being E-85 or E-70 –attempts to use gas station fuel in carburetor engines suggest that the spec is “no more than 85% or 70% ethanol”. Depending on the ethanol market price the ethanol content can be a good bit lower. OK in FI but it can result in catastrophic misjetting in a carbureted engine.
Typically the % change in ethanol is a result of climate (mainly decreased ethanol for colder climates / colder seasons to aid cold starting) and has nothing to do with the $-value of the ethanol base as the alcohol base is typically significantly cheaper than the petroleum base it is mixed with. The economics of it simply make no sense.
As Tommy has rightly pointed out, in the 2014 spec engines, it would be a step down from the 2014 FIA spec fuel and you'd need to carry a lot more.
That said, I run E85 in my race cars and as a fuel you need about 30-35% more than with a straight race fuel from VP, ELF etc for similar performance.
However, even the control blended E85 is significantly cheaper than the race fuels and the pump fuel even more so. It takes more timing, runs cooler and in forced induction engines provides a huge benefit in terms knock control. The performance difference between a turbo race fuel and E85 is as close to zero as makes no difference. The main issue is hardware related switching to teflon fuel lines, larger injectors, increased pump capacity etc.
In Australia, there are three (3) ethanol production plants which use differing biomass feeder stocks (Manildra - grain starch, Sarina - sugarcane and Dalby - red sorghum). Most of the feeder is either excess, low quality or other non-food competing sources.
E85 in F1 "MIGHT" (its a big might) be useful to make the tech more road relevant. Personally I'd have no issue with making them run it now they have the turbo engines.
Indy cars used to run on methanol (which is more problematic than ethanol due to its corrosive nature) and now runs on E98 or E100 in Brazil. Indy even reduced the engine displacement to 3.5L as ethanol was making more power apparently, however ethanol has less calorific value vs methanol.
Ethanol is also much more "friendly" when compared to methanol. Ethanol is not caustic and is not a carcinogen. Maybe a switch in F1 to make it "green" and road relevant could be in its future.
Never approach a Bull from the front, a Horse from the back, or an Idiot from any direction
olefud wrote:The subject being E-85 or E-70 –attempts to use gas station fuel in carburetor engines suggest that the spec is “no more than 85% or 70% ethanol”. Depending on the ethanol market price the ethanol content can be a good bit lower. OK in FI but it can result in catastrophic misjetting in a carbureted engine.
With pump gas, the ethanol content is limited to 85% (E85), due to the fact that most auto engines require at least 15% gasoline to ensure starting in cold weather conditions. With modern EFI systems it is quite easy for any SI engine to use gasoline/ethanol blends anywhere between straight gasoline to 85% ethanol. For $100, you can purchase almost any US GM vehicle with a "flex fuel" option, which allows use of straight gasoline or up to E85 blends.
If GM can figure out how to do this for a $100 option on a production vehicle, I'm sure the F1 engine gurus could do likewise.
"Q: How do you make a small fortune in racing?
A: Start with a large one!"
Making an engine and fuel system run on E85 is not difficult or expensive, but the amount of engineering necessary to cram in a significantly larger fuel tank will push the cost of conversion well over $100.
Lycoming wrote:Making an engine and fuel system run on E85 is not difficult or expensive, but the amount of engineering necessary to cram in a significantly larger fuel tank will push the cost of conversion well over $100.
As I said earlier:
"As Tommy has rightly pointed out, in the 2014 spec engines, it would be a step down from the 2014 FIA spec fuel and you'd need to carry a lot more."
and
"The main issue is hardware related switching to teflon fuel lines, larger injectors, increased pump capacity etc."
Never approach a Bull from the front, a Horse from the back, or an Idiot from any direction
Jersey Tom wrote:
...
I would have to think that using pump gas of any flavor would be a pain in the ass for engine guys, and a substantial performance loss. Race gas is it's own thing.
Feel free to elaborate on the above?
I think using roadside fuels in F1 will come sooner or later, but first step will be a single fuel-supplier beginning 2015.
After that, it will move into roadside qualities without a doubt, all in order to make F1 more "road-relevant" as the FIA says.
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"
2014 F1 requires 'designer gasoline' with 5% biofuel content, like most road fuel
this adulteration with 5% Ethanol depresses the energy of the resulting fuel to 98% of the unadulterated value
using instead 5% IsoButanol the energy value is 99% of the unadulterated value
so gaining 1% power over the 5% Ethanol blend
the FIA allows any biofuel where commercial intent is shown by its producers
IsoButanol qualifies thereby
and gasolines made from it ?, these would give no loss of energy
(btw aviation kerosene made from bio IsoButanol is the real interest)
Lycoming wrote:Making an engine and fuel system run on E85 is not difficult or expensive, but the amount of engineering necessary to cram in a significantly larger fuel tank will push the cost of conversion well over $100.
As I said earlier:
"As Tommy has rightly pointed out, in the 2014 spec engines, it would be a step down from the 2014 FIA spec fuel and you'd need to carry a lot more."
and
"The main issue is hardware related switching to teflon fuel lines, larger injectors, increased pump capacity etc."
A bit late now, but currently (2013) F1 cars start with about 130kg so I have heard. In 2014 the rule is to be 100kg max. So in theory you could have just left the tank size the same as 2013 (ethanol is slightly more dense than unleaded so it would actually shrink slightly for the same calorific value).
Hardware change isn't an issue in F1. do you think much of next years car is a carry over from this year??
Luke wrote:
A bit late now, but currently (2013) F1 cars start with about 130kg so I have heard. In 2014 the rule is to be 100kg max. So in theory you could have just left the tank size the same as 2013 (ethanol is slightly more dense than unleaded so it would actually shrink slightly for the same calorific value).
Hardware change isn't an issue in F1. do you think much of next years car is a carry over from this year??
.
wiki wrote:
1.5 gallons of ethanol has the same energy content as 1.0 gallon of gasoline.
The energy content of 1.0 US gallon of ethanol is 76,100 BTU, compared to 114,100 BTU for gasoline. (see chart above)
A flex-fuel vehicle may experience as much as 25% lower MPG when using E85 (85% ethanol) products. This is in part because the engine's compression ratio is fixed mechanically and electronic sensors can only modify the timing of the spark and/or instruct the fuel injection system to provide more of the reduced energy-content fuel.
