Extra power from oil additives during the race.

[HscF1]

As the fuel on both the amount to use in a race as well as the substance is limited. Samples of the fuel are taken and examined if they have been altered after the race. It's not in any case been done on the oil.
There is a gap for teams to investigate this area as additives can have a positive influence on the power.
3 to 5 litre of oil is burned during a race so if they can find additives which will not harm the car but will have some catalytic reaction on the fuel there is your solution.

If you then release these additives to the oil from the sump in the part of the race were you need extra power you can have even more control.

Think about additives you would want to add to the fuel but are not allowed to but through the oil could be inserted into the engine.

There is no sample of oil taken from the car from the organisation other then the oil engineers from the team itself. Exxon mobil, shell, etc.

In gas engine technology (my background) additives in specific oil types and or specific engines are developed to increase efficiency but could just as well be engineered to improve power output. The possibility of this theory was confirmed to me by both oil technicians in gas engine oil suppliers as F1 team oil engineers on visits to a view F1 teams around races over the years. I got these "where did he get this" kind of looks bringing this up with all of them.

The devel is in the detail so my guess will be that besides the engine, areodynamics and all the obvious engineering items having made F1, the future will also be influenced by the use of chemists and catalyst specialists.

[J.A.W.]

As the fuel on both the amount to use in a race as well as the substance is limited. Samples of the fuel are taken and examined if they have been altered after the race. It's not in any case been done on the oil.
There is a gap for teams to investigate this area as additives can have a positive influence on the power.
3 to 5 litre of oil is burned during a race so if they can find additives which will not harm the car but will have some catalytic reaction on the fuel there is your solution.

"3-5 litres of oil is burned during a race..."

Really?
That seems somewhat excessive..
& it would make for a significant ratio in terms of energy/smoke production, on 'bout par with a 2T G.P. racer..

[Tommy Cookers]

..... 3 to 5 litre of oil is burned during a race so if they can find additives which will not harm the car but will have some catalytic reaction on the fuel there is your solution.
If you then release these additives to the oil from the sump in the part of the race were you need extra power you can have even more control.
Think about additives you would want to add to the fuel but are not allowed to but through the oil could be inserted into the engine.
There is no sample of oil taken from the car from the organisation other then the oil engineers from the team itself. Exxon mobil, shell, etc. ......

we know even from old ideas (as I pointed out years ago) ......
oil burned is effectively the same as fuel burned
so breaching what we could imagine to be the intent of the 100 kg fuel quantity and even the 100 kg/hr rate limits
though we could otherwise imagine that this is not in breach of the intent of the rules

octane booster eg TEL in excess of the tiny permitted lead content of the fuel is transportable into the combustion chambers by oil
this could be seen as breach of rule intent

some quite natural and totally legal fuel constituents (Triptane etc) are outstandingly responsive to TEL (that's why they were made)
though similar non-lead organometallic O boosters in fuel are anyway effictively unrestricted by the rules

[HscF1]

Tommy cookers wrote

[octane booster eg TEL in excess of the minute permitted lead content of the fuel is transportable into the combustion chambers by oil
this could be seen as breach of rule intent

The fuel is checked before and during the race. Regulations say:

All fuels must comply with strict requirements, and prior to each event the teams must submit two separate five-litre samples to the FIA for analysis and approval. Fuel samples will also be taken during an event to ensure the fuel being used is legal.

Explained in additions with:

[The rules are] intended to ensure the use of fuels that are composed of compounds normally found in commercial fuels and to prohibit the use of specific power-boosting chemical compounds.
Article 19.1.2 of the 2016 FIA Technical Regulations

All related to fuel. Additives in oil which have a catalic behaviour with the legal substances in the fuel tested before and during the race can then be a legal and smart way of improving the performance.
On top there are no regulations found about oil suppletion at all. So a section to release the needed additives when you need them seem to be legal.

Let alone the fact that clean oil (by suppletion during the race) improves the TBN and TAN of the oil and in the process could be reducing friction in the engine and might reduce the oil temperature. Having some active performance improving additives in the process is off course the ultimate goal.

[NL_Fer]

So what are you thinking of, the oil consumed from the cilinderwalls or the oil vapours that is sucked in trough the airintake?

[HscF1]

So what are you thinking of, the oil consumed from the cilinderwalls or the oil vapours that is sucked in trough the airintake?

In the combustion chamber besides fuel also oil is burned in the process.
That's why F1 cars use about 5 litres per race. In the oil are all sorts of additives to keep the oil in the right shape to protect from dirt, from harmful substances created by the high temperatures in the combustion process etc. but also to keep it oil at low resistance under those high rpm, etc.
So the combination of high quality base oil with the right additives is very important and will vary per car setup and even per track! Every stop in the pits a sample is taken and analysed in the mobile laboratory that travels along with the teams. Results from this lab even influences the car setup in some instances. You want to keep the car in one piece. Look at Ferrari and their turbo issue. A lot of information can be taken from the oil samples. Bearing material, hotspots etc. Oil management is a very underestimated item in F1 but I assure you not by the teams!

Now if you add some additives that would have a catalic effect on some fuel substances you could increase the efficiency of the fuel. I can imagine them having to add some more additives to protect the oil and the engine from the side effects of the catalic process but it's finding the right combination.

Regards,
Henk Schuurman

[HscF1]

3-5 litres of oil is burned during a race..."

Really?
That seems somewhat excessive..
& it would make for a significant ratio in terms of energy/smoke production, on 'bout par with a 2T G.P. racer..

That was my reaction also when it was explained. The residu not burned is to be recycled by the rules into the air inlet of the car by sump breather.

[HscF1]

So what are you thinking of, the oil consumed from the cilinderwalls or the oil vapours that is sucked in trough the airintake?

Yes the oil from cilinderwalls get taken up into the fuel mixture when burned. 5 litres of oil on a 100 kg fuel use in a race is substantial.

[NL_Fer]

So what are you thinking of, the oil consumed from the cilinderwalls or the oil vapours that is sucked in trough the airintake?

Yes the oil from cilinderwalls get taken up into the fuel mixture when burned. 5 litres of oil on a 100 kg fuel use in a race is substantial.

Yes but teams seem to run races with 90 or 95kg of fuel. It would be more interresting for additives.

[hollus]

So how much extra power is coming from burning these 3 liters or oil on top of the allowed 100 kg of fuel? I mean from the actual burning of hydrocarbons, not from the additives.

[HscF1]

So how much extra power is coming from burning these 3 liters or oil on top of the allowed 100 kg of fuel? I mean from the actual burning of hydrocarbons, not from the additives.

Not sure but from experience in the gas engine industry I know engine efficiency could get up to 1-1,5% extra when they were running new parts in and the oil use was a bit more then normal. Reason for this being the energy coming out of the oil on top of the measured m3 of gas per hour going in the engine.

In this case it's not the actual burning of the oil which is interesting but the additives that will end up in the combustion and the effect on the fuel components. Remember they are not measured as part of the fuel because they come from the oil into the combustion. All the fuel itself however is measured.

If the additives are not damaging for the engine as part of the oil you could imagine releasing more then needed from the oil to even increase the impact on the fuel quality and efficiency.

[R_Redding]

The oil additive speculation was checked out and dismissed by the FIA at the 2015 Canadian Gp.


http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/fia-a ... &q=fia+oil

[HscF1]

The oil additive speculation was checked out and dismissed by the FIA at the 2015 Canadian Gp.
http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/fia-a ... &q=fia+oil

Well found. =D>

The thing is here that the FIA was looking for differences between main tank and engine sump to find differences between the substance of the fluids. If the necessary additives in the oil are already there they will find no differences. This test just makes sure they do not release more in to the engine oil then there is in the oil from the main tank but expecting the additive itself to be giving power by burning the additives in the combustion chamber.

To get the result I am referring to you need a catalyst material that will activate the chemical reaction to improve the fuel efficiency. In exhaust scrubber installations for greenhouses behind gas engines it is activated by Urea nozzled into the exhaust system, properly mixed and then feed into the platinum covered ceramic blocks. This will reduce the Nox from the exhaust and cleans the exhaust gasses so well they can be fed straight into the greenhouse. The plants like roses or tomatoes use this CO2 for faster growing but will die from Nox. Crops that uses more CO2 then there is available in the greenhouse because of light in summer times need help so need extra CO2 to insert into the greenhouse. Before this was developed from CHP gasses it was taken either from the boilers or from liquid CO2.

In F1 the catalyst could be platinum (or another material) alloy surface pistons. The chemical proces activator most likely could be an additive in the oil. You further need high temperatures which is well available inside a F1 car.

Other teams obviously had their suspicions about a gain of extra power they can not explain hence the FIA tests. My guess is they do not have a chemical specialist in there team who knows this well proven technique outside of the F1 world. Not everything is invented in F1.

[Edis]

As the fuel on both the amount to use in a race as well as the substance is limited. Samples of the fuel are taken and examined if they have been altered after the race. It's not in any case been done on the oil.
There is a gap for teams to investigate this area as additives can have a positive influence on the power.
3 to 5 litre of oil is burned during a race so if they can find additives which will not harm the car but will have some catalytic reaction on the fuel there is your solution.

"3-5 litres of oil is burned during a race..."

Really?
That seems somewhat excessive..
& it would make for a significant ratio in terms of energy/smoke production, on 'bout par with a 2T G.P. racer..

Cosworth specified an oil consumption of 1-1.5 liters per 100 km for a new engine back in 2006 (hence about 3-5 liters for a race), but since then the oil consumption has gone down significantly. In 2013 the oil consumption was down to 0.1-0.3 liters per 100 km, giving an oil consumption if less than a liter for a race.

As 1% of the fuel is basically free, I can't see any reason for adding additives to the oil rather than the fuel directly. Oil consumption in itself is not something that is desired. Crankcases gases must be recirculated back into the inlet by the regulations, but before you do everything you can to separate the oil from the gas.

[HscF1]

As 1% of the fuel is basically free, I can't see any reason for adding additives to the oil rather than the fuel directly. Oil consumption in itself is not something that is desired. Crankcases gases must be recirculated back into the inlet by the regulations, but before you do everything you can to separate the oil from the gas.

The amount of oil use was explained to me during the Monaco grandprix team pit visit last year.
By the way the oil use is burned and not so much recirculated through the sump breather system to the inlet. That would be a bad situation indeed. And that would mean the additives would not reach the pistons but would be situated below them.