Official 2024 British Grand Prix Thread ***SPOILERS***

[TheDeuce]

732NM said:

TheDeuce said:

Probably, but the harder the system has to work, the hotter the coolant becomes, it could increase the chance of a failure at some point in the coolant circuit.

As you say, it could very well just be an ill timed minor failure. Either way, I suspect they did push the PU's a little for the sake of glory.

The cooling system is more than capable of handling any power increase, they run with most of it blanked off to reduce drag at the cooler venues in Europe. These things run at very high coolant temperatures. Cooling capacity isn't a problem.

I have no problem acknowledging that the failure probably wasn't related to whatever power they ran.

But surely if it's blanked off in terms of air flow, they would blank it off as much as possible whilst maintaining the normal safe level of cooling ability - if they do that and also increase the power, which puts more heat energy into that system, it has to have the potential to increase the chance of a coolant system failure doesn't it..?

[LHRFlightman]

732NM said:

LHRFlightman said:

Massi and family. Smashed up a jet ski and denied it. Refused to pay for the damages.

Just like AD21 then, smashed up a championship and scarpered.

That was a typo, it was Massa.

Great line though.

[732NM]

LHRFlightman said:

732NM said:

LHRFlightman said:

Massi and family. Smashed up a jet ski and denied it. Refused to pay for the damages.

Just like AD21 then, smashed up a championship and scarpered.

That was a typo, it was Massa.

Great line though.

I knew who you meant, I just found the typo amusingly appropriate.

[732NM]

TheDeuce said:

I have no problem acknowledging that the failure probably wasn't related to whatever power they ran.

But surely if it's blanked off in terms of air flow, they would blank it off as much as possible whilst maintaining the normal safe level of cooling ability - if they do that and also increase the power, which puts more heat energy into that system, it has to have the potential to increase the chance of a coolant system failure doesn't it..?

You are barking up the wrong tree.

[pingu393]

732NM said:

TheDeuce said:

Probably, but the harder the system has to work, the hotter the coolant becomes, it could increase the chance of a failure at some point in the coolant circuit.

As you say, it could very well just be an ill timed minor failure. Either way, I suspect they did push the PU's a little for the sake of glory.

The cooling system is more than capable of handling any power increase, they run with most of it blanked off to reduce drag at the cooler venues in Europe. These things run at very high coolant temperatures. Cooling capacity isn't a problem.

Most of it would have been blanked off at Silverstone. High speed / low drag circuit and it was only 11°C.

[TheDeuce]

pingu393 said:

732NM said:

TheDeuce said:

Probably, but the harder the system has to work, the hotter the coolant becomes, it could increase the chance of a failure at some point in the coolant circuit.

As you say, it could very well just be an ill timed minor failure. Either way, I suspect they did push the PU's a little for the sake of glory.

The cooling system is more than capable of handling any power increase, they run with most of it blanked off to reduce drag at the cooler venues in Europe. These things run at very high coolant temperatures. Cooling capacity isn't a problem.

Most of it would have been blanked off at Silverstone. High speed / low drag circuit and it was only 11°C.

That's my point. When determining how much they can blank off airflow to the rads, surely they want to reduce it as much as they can get away with - so will calculate that based on pushing the cooling system as much as if it were fully vented on another circuit, with far warmer air temp.

If the coolant system was less stressed at Silverstone than, say, Austria the week before - wouldn't that just mean they had wasted some potential for lowering drag? I'd have thought they'd want the cooling system to be run as close to it's safe limit as possible at each circuit, so they can reduce drag as much as possible as a result.

[silentbrown]

Am I the only one surprised that it was referred to as a WATER system failure, rather than using some esoteric liquid.

[TheDeuce]

silentbrown said:

Am I the only one surprised that it was referred to as a WATER system failure, rather than using some esoteric liquid.

It's not straight water, I imagine glycol is added - or whatever the F1 equivalent is! But as with road cars, it's still referred to as 'water cooled'.

The only other water based system on the car is the drivers drinking bottle and tube - I doubt he retired because of that though

[pingu393]

silentbrown said:

Am I the only one surprised that it was referred to as a WATER system failure, rather than using some esoteric liquid.

Joe Public wouldn't have a clue what etholyene (or possibly propolyene) glycol was

[Hustle_]

I imagine coolant in F1 has approximately zero water in it?

[pingu393]

TheDeuce said:

pingu393 said:

732NM said:

TheDeuce said:

Probably, but the harder the system has to work, the hotter the coolant becomes, it could increase the chance of a failure at some point in the coolant circuit.

As you say, it could very well just be an ill timed minor failure. Either way, I suspect they did push the PU's a little for the sake of glory.

The cooling system is more than capable of handling any power increase, they run with most of it blanked off to reduce drag at the cooler venues in Europe. These things run at very high coolant temperatures. Cooling capacity isn't a problem.

Most of it would have been blanked off at Silverstone. High speed / low drag circuit and it was only 11°C.

That's my point. When determining how much they can blank off airflow to the rads, surely they want to reduce it as much as they can get away with - so will calculate that based on pushing the cooling system as much as if it were fully vented on another circuit, with far warmer air temp.

If the coolant system was less stressed at Silverstone than, say, Austria the week before - wouldn't that just mean they had wasted some potential for lowering drag? I'd have thought they'd want the cooling system to be run as close to it's safe limit as possible at each circuit, so they can reduce drag as much as possible as a result.

Yes. AFAIK, they try to run the coolant as hot as possible without it boiling.

[silentbrown]

Hustle_ said:

I imagine coolant in F1 has approximately zero water in it?

Maybe he'd just run out of drinking water..?

[TheDeuce]

Hustle_ said:

I imagine coolant in F1 has approximately zero water in it?

Got me to google it now..

https://motorsport.tech/formula-1/car-cooling-syst...

[TheDeuce]

pingu393 said:

TheDeuce said:

pingu393 said:

732NM said:

TheDeuce said:

Probably, but the harder the system has to work, the hotter the coolant becomes, it could increase the chance of a failure at some point in the coolant circuit.

As you say, it could very well just be an ill timed minor failure. Either way, I suspect they did push the PU's a little for the sake of glory.

The cooling system is more than capable of handling any power increase, they run with most of it blanked off to reduce drag at the cooler venues in Europe. These things run at very high coolant temperatures. Cooling capacity isn't a problem.

Most of it would have been blanked off at Silverstone. High speed / low drag circuit and it was only 11°C.

That's my point. When determining how much they can blank off airflow to the rads, surely they want to reduce it as much as they can get away with - so will calculate that based on pushing the cooling system as much as if it were fully vented on another circuit, with far warmer air temp.

If the coolant system was less stressed at Silverstone than, say, Austria the week before - wouldn't that just mean they had wasted some potential for lowering drag? I'd have thought they'd want the cooling system to be run as close to it's safe limit as possible at each circuit, so they can reduce drag as much as possible as a result.

Yes. AFAIK, they try to run the coolant as hot as possible without it boiling.

Makes sense to me...

[richhead]

TheDeuce said:

Probably, but the harder the system has to work, the hotter the coolant becomes, it could increase the chance of a failure at some point in the coolant circuit.

As you say, it could very well just be an ill timed minor failure. Either way, I suspect they did push the PU's a little for the sake of glory.

No team I have ever worked with ever runs anything at less than 100% unless there is a problem, to say they turned it up is a bit naive.

[TheDeuce]

732NM said:

TheDeuce said:

Probably, but the harder the system has to work, the hotter the coolant becomes, it could increase the chance of a failure at some point in the coolant circuit.

As you say, it could very well just be an ill timed minor failure. Either way, I suspect they did push the PU's a little for the sake of glory.

The cooling system is more than capable of handling any power increase, they run with most of it blanked off to reduce drag at the cooler venues in Europe. These things run at very high coolant temperatures. Cooling capacity isn't a problem.

I have no problem acknowledging that the failure probably wasn't related to whatever power they ran.

But surely if it's blanked off in terms of air flow, they would blank it off as much as possible whilst maintaining the normal safe level of cooling ability - if they do that and also increase the power, which puts more heat energy into that system, it has to have the potential to increase the chance of a coolant system failure doesn't it..?

[richhead]

Back in the old days we used to use qualy engine's that were only good for a few laps, but that doesn't happen now, they may turn the engine down for reliability sometimes, but they run as close to max where possible, and the cooling systems are more than capable at any power level, it probably lost coolant pressure, that would make it overheat, as normally they pressurise so the boiling point is higher, hotter engines are more efficient

[TheDeuce]

richhead said:

TheDeuce said:

Probably, but the harder the system has to work, the hotter the coolant becomes, it could increase the chance of a failure at some point in the coolant circuit.

As you say, it could very well just be an ill timed minor failure. Either way, I suspect they did push the PU's a little for the sake of glory.

No team I have ever worked with ever runs anything at less than 100% unless there is a problem, to say they turned it up is a bit naive.

Thats plainly not true, they used to use different power modes for qualifying, then turned to a lower power mode for the race. The power unit components have a finite life, they used to be turned up only when needed for a specific session and then turned back down to extend their life for the target number of races.

Now they have to settle upon a single power mode for the quality and race, so it's a compromise between the most power and the minimum reliability they need to attain. That compromise can be pushed in favour of more power if a home race or key race weekend justifies it.

How is that not 'turning it up'?

[richhead]

TheDeuce said:

Thats plainly not true, they used to use different power modes for qualifying, then turned to a lower power mode for the race. The power unit components have a finite life, they used to be turned up only when needed for a specific session and then turned back down to extend their life for the target number of races.

Now they have to settle upon a single power mode for the quality and race, so it's a compromise between the most power and the minimum reliability they need to attain. That compromise can be pushed in favour of more power if a home race or key race weekend justifies it.

How is that not 'turning it up'?

What I was very badly trying to say is that they run them for the best power for the circuit they are at, they don't "turn them up " for any race, as there is a limit on engines, like I said, we used to have pretty much unlimited engines, so qualy engines etc, that's just not the case now, I now work in wec and the hours the engine have to do now is massive, it's getting that way in F1 as well, you wouldn't risk a failure if you could avoid it as the penalty is harsh

[Sandpit Steve]

TheDeuce said:

Hustle_ said:

I imagine coolant in F1 has approximately zero water in it?

Got me to google it now..

https://motorsport.tech/formula-1/car-cooling-syst...

Watching back the last couple of laps from his onboard, they were troubleshooting an issue with high engine temps before he retired, that was leading to the PU derating on the straights. Guess would be low water pressure due to a leak somewhere in the system, that was going to be unrecoverable. Not sure George was expecting the call to box though, I think he thought they could work through it.

The coolant itself is, as your link suggests, a pressurised water/glycol mix, and they use the minimum amount of cooling they can get away with for the circuit conditions, as the cooling inlets and outlets affect the aerodynamic performance of the car Whatever the issue was, it wasn’t something they could fix by removing some tape from the radiator inlet.