Comments by "" (@neutronalchemist3241) on "Driver61" channel.

You have to surpass 15% ethanol for the mixture to become slightly more corrosive than standard gasoline on certain plastics. Also ethanol is not that volatile. It's actually far less volatile than gasoline (because ethanol boiling point is 70 degrees higher than gasoline). That's why on old carburated cars converted to ethanol, starting was a issue (often the cars used gasoline just for starting), because the fuel vas not volatile enough for the carburetors to work correctly.
39
I'm by no mean an expert, but, when I saw the first car (the one some expert already said was "one year ahead of the competition") it seemed to me like the Ferrari F1 2009. The previous year's car adapted to completely different rules. Hardly a success. It came out it was a fake. Second car. Experts "revolutionary!". To me the sidepods were wrong. Usually you don't want your air intakes to ingest the boundary layer. That's why all the other cars have orizontal air intakes. It's obvious that Merc's engineers found a way for that design to work, controlling the fluxes of all the front end but, if that's the case, it's hard for it to work in every possible situation. A complicate solution to a not existing problem.
4
You have to surpass 15% for the mixture to become slightly more corrosive than standard gasoline. Also ethanol is not that volatile. It's actually far less volatile than gasoline (because ethanol boiling point is 70 degrees higher than gasoline). That's why on old carburated cars converted to ethanol, starting was a issue (often the cars used gasoline just for starting), because the fuel vas not volatile enough for the carburetors to work correctly.
3
AND it's not like the others are flatting out yet. They too are sparing the engines and seeing what parts wear first, before using full power. Ferrari was racing with a lot of rear wing too (that's why RB was faster on the straight) also to reduce the chances to smash the new car with few spare parts available on a wall... they too have evolution steps scheduled...
2
@johnnamkeh1290 Last year, tire temperature would have reduced the battle to max 3 laps as well. Like we have seen many times. This year, thanks to reduced trrails, cars can remain closer wiuthout suffering consequencies.
2
@woofy9977 A certain percentage of a liquid will always vapor from a surface in a given time (because a certain percentage of the molecules reaches the energy level required). But the closer the liquid is to the boiling point, the higher the percentage is (because it requires less energy to do so), that's why the lower the boiling temperature is, the more volatile the liquid is.
2
They use the new sidepods because they think, if they manage to solve the problems, they are going to give them an advantage. The old sidepods were practically those of the previous year's car. Made for completely diferent fluxes. They think that, even if they can made them work, they'll work mediocrely.
1
When did they came back? It's since 2012 that you knew they had the best car since the friday of the first GP of the season.
1
Engine is not only power. It's weight distribution, both for the engine itself and the fact that it dictates the placing of several other components of the car. It's very possible that the weight distribution dictated by the Mercedes engine conflicts with the aerodynamics the new cars require. Given the shape of the engine, there was an "easy way" to assemble the car that all the clients naturally followed, with the result of them all having the same problem.
1
The pump is the same for all, and the others didn't have problems.
1
@woofy9977 many chemicals used in constructions contains a solvent that vapor until it's completely dried off (IE glues), or are composed of chemicals that vapor until they polymerizes and become solid (IE polyester resins).
1
@Rishi3404 On the other hand, they are not going to spend capped money to fix problems they don't have, so they are going to have more for further develpoment.
1
Yeah. Had Bottas, Alonso and Ricciardo came to the finish line, Hamilton would have gained only three positions during the whole GP.
1
For Pirelli it would have been extremely easy to build tyres providing stable performances througout all the GP like Bridgestone did (even if the loads are completely different now) The FIA, when changed the tyres manufactiurer, EXPRESSELY asked tyres with performances that degrades in few laps. Degrading performances means that the working parameters of the tires changes from lap to lap, and so , sometimes, shit happens.
1
@c.g.c2067 Michelin prohibited all his cars to race because the tyres failed already in few laps during free practice. The situation here is a little different. I didn't jump to any conclusion regarding the Baku GP. I never said "any tyres pressure". For a manufacturer is MUCH easier to build tires that provide stable performances for 300km than tires that degrades in few laps, but differentiated so that the softer the tire, the faster it degrades. It's the degradation of the compound that makes so that the rest of the tire doesn't work in stable conditions. In this case, sometimes, shit is going to happen, because many more variables are introduced into the formula.
1
Engine is not only power. It's weight distribution, both for the engine itself and the fact that it dictates the placing of several other components of the car. It's very possible that the weight distribution dictated by the Mercedes engine conflicts with the aerodynamics the new cars require. Given the shape of the engine, there was an "easy way" to assemble the car that all the clients naturally followed, with the result of them all having the same problem.
1