gums

What's up with Matchet and Co. discussing fuel measurement in pounds? Liquids are measured in units of volume, not weight.
I know it's no mistake, quite on purpose in fact.
What's the merit?

Veloce Raptor

Noticed that too. Wild guess here: maybe some of the F1 fuels being used are very dense, hence their ability to propel the car for XX laps may be related more to weight than volume? or maybe it's just that he wants to focus on how the fuel weight changes the behavior of the car?

gums

I'm inclined to think it's more along the lines of the latter

Veloce Raptor

You are probably right, Frank, since now that I think about it, IIRC there is a spec fuel density in F1.

gums

I might drop them an email during the next telecast to get their comments on it.
I know it's done intentionally, I recently read Matchett's book, but he doesn't explain it.
A recommended read, by the way.

multi21

There have been quite a number of pieces over the years on the relationship that Shell Oils have with Ferrari. As with anything in F1, everything is subject to improvement and one of the biggest is the endless pursure of reducing weight.

Given the no refueling rule currently in F1, the weight issue has taken on more urgency and what Shell has been trying to do is get more energy BTUs out of a gallon of gas while reducing the weight of that gallon of gas. If you can reduce the weight of a gallon of fuel without reducing the energy packed into that one gallon of fuel, (think E-85 vs. not E fuel in terms of MPG), it gives that particular car/team an advantage over their competitors, especially when you're talking about a few hundred pounds of fuel in your car to start a Grand Prix.

MB965

I saw a team crew weighing fuel cans at a Lime Rock ALMS race, so I asked why.
They wanted to measure how much fuel energy the car was using for performance analysis purposes.
The pretty simple answer is that the fuel energy is measured in BTU/pound (weight) not BTU/gallon (volume). This because the volume of the fuel varies with temperature were as the weight of fuel is constant with temperature.
I do not follow F1 but I have to believe that if there is a hard fuel limit in gallons there must be a stated temperature at which the gallons is being measured.
Mike

fuenfer

Frank, Bob Varsha has a Facebook fan page that he regularly answers questions on - maybe this might be a good question for him?

gums

probably better, as I just realized I never watch the telecast live anyway!

Gonna see you next weekend at Lightning, Phil?

9.5 Degrees

Pete is 100% correct. In addition, the FIA mandates that the fuel used in Formula One race cars consist of 5.75% bio-oxygenates by weight -- not volume. Shell will test the Ferrari fuels up to 40 times over a race weekend to ensure they are not below that 5.75% and ensuring they are not DQ.

Also Shell uses different blends for each track and they need to make sure they are compliant with FIA bio regs when changing that blend from track to track.

fuenfer

Nah, skipping Lightning - gonna do the Lime Rock PCA race instead. You?

gums

NO, I can't make Lime Rock!
How about Race Track Combat?

Greg Phillips

See this months Road & Track article on density and gasoline.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/racing/m...day-s-f1-world

Greg

gums

So if volume varies with temperature more than mass, then does it make sense that we'd save money by buying gas on a cold day? A gallon of fuel would be more dense.

Van

I have heard that yes, that makes a difference. Even buying gas in the morning when it's cooler, vs. the afternoon.