TFSA wrote: ↑08 Nov 2024, 11:58
djones wrote: ↑07 Nov 2024, 11:27
Can somebody please explain in simple terms how this would ever be an advantage?
Surely any water warms up in a single lap (reaches maximum heat capacity) then it is nothing more than a disadvantage due to its weight.
Grip matters way more than weight. Tires are pretty much everything in F1. Their condition matters way more than a little extra weight. 10 kilograms of extra weight is a laptime loss of 0.3 seconds +/-. A tire in bad condition will lose you more than that, especially if you go off.
Also, even evaporated, is still useful for conducting heat inside the tire. It would lead to a more even heat distribution, and therefore lessen the heating cycles the tire goes through on a lap. That would certainly improve the lifespan of the tire immensely.
The disadvantage is that steam creates pressure - even more than heated air. Teams generally don't want to run their tires with too much pressure. And also, this should theoretically be detectable by the FIA by tire pressure sensors.
The conventional view is essentially wrong footed here in our or journalists appraisal.
We are used to hearing that they don't want too much pressure, which is because the team and driver wants the most flex they can have in the tire. So too high = less grip for a driver.
If there's benefit EXCEEDING that pressure /flex curve by altering heat transfer/stability or whatever the aim is, the pressure absolute (within reasonable boundary) becomes subservient to that quality.
F1 will always trade off one thing IF there's more gain to be had through another method.
The advantage projected here is to have a more consistent tire performance over the stint life by altering the humidity within the tire artificially. That's over and above a policy of lowest possible pressure being the "conventional" route.
It will be interesting to observe if there's anything tangible in coming races.