"Cooled" pits.

[kuchi]

I just wanted to know what do you think about th FIA banning teams that use cooled fuel. Does this really matters, is it a big problem?....

[THR]

well anything helps i think
they reckon 4bhp gain by cooling the petrol.
i dont really see y they should ban it,

it does help im sure it does, na i know it does.
basic chemical stuff.

4bhp might give them 1mph at monza

[KC]

Another reason to refrigerate the fuel is it will make it displace less area thus getting more fuel into the tank. this is probably not enough to really matter but they have spent millions chasing other intangible advantages.

[bobdrummond]

Fuel cooling has been an issue since the late '80's when a fuel limit was placed on F1 and no refuelling took place during the race. By cooling the fuel, the amount of fuel that could be stored in the tank could be increased. By the time the fuel warmed to ambient temperature, there wood be space in the tank to allow for expansion. Fine, in theory, but if there was a stoppage soon after the start, the fuel would warm up and increase the pressure inside the tank, an unacceptable safety hazard. What made people sit up and think again was Berger's fiery crash at Imola.

[Dino IV]

Well done by the FIA I'd say. I really do not understand why they don't supply the teams with standarised (i.e. all equal and the same ) refuelling riggs and connectors. The most simple solution and the safest as well I reckon.

KC brilliant!!! I was wondering from all different angles where those alleged 4 bhp could come from or what affects cooled fuel has in the tank etc but you probably ingnited the best one with this line: 'Another reason to refrigerate the fuel is it will make it displace less area thus getting more fuel into the tank'. As it's not really advantageous to fill the tank to the max with regards to the weight and thus the best speed under uncooled circumstances, just add one word to your line. FASTER
The refuelling time shortens! You get in the kilo's you wanna add to the car at a faster rate! Brilliant ... so ban it!

Those 4 bhp gained ... anyone any explanation?
My understanding about engines is that it isn't really advantageous for the mix to be cooled. It can contain about 1% more oxygen per 10 K lowered but I also thought that advantage is lost again because the lower temperature mix produces less energy compared to higher temperatures.
As cooled fuel contains more mass per unit volume formed the only reason for that 4 bhp means that if that 4 bhp is gained by little more mass injected in the cylinder that's something which could be reached by a lot more solutions like raising injection pressure, bigger jets etc.
I don't know much about injection, I prefer to drive carburetted cars
Can someone shed some light on this 4 bhp gain perhaps?

[bobdrummond]

I thought all the F1 teams did use identical rigs, manufactured by French firm Intertechnique.

[desmo]

I think that the increase in bhp, if any, would simply be down to the cold fuel cooling the incoming charge thus increasing it's density. A mild supercharging effect.

The first time I heard about this technique being employed was when Penske was running Ferraris in endurance racing with Mark Donohue driving. The primary benefit touted at the time was to speed up the refuelling process.

[Sharky]

Originally posted by bobdrummond
I thought all the F1 teams did use identical rigs, manufactured by French firm Intertechnique.

I'm asking myself the same question bob.

Say....I guess then that refueling my car at 6 in the morning when the temp is close to 0°C (32°F if i'm not mistaken) will really give me more gas for the same money!!

[Dino IV]

I don't know whether the manufacturer is the same, but they surely are not identical. I recall an interview with a BAR-engineer who said that they had bought F1's most expensive refuelling rigs last year and they proved to have some flaws so they returned to use the old Tyrrell-rigs.

[koenda]

The regulations say they SHOULD provide the teams with identical refuelling systems.
but that doesn't mean that the refuelling systems ARE indentical