Introduce additive to make flames visible

[Valve Bounce]

Surely an additive can be introduced to the fuel in Champ Cars to make the flames visible. The horrible sight of the mechanic writhing on the ground for no apparent reason while the pit crew throw water on him was frightening. How can this dangerous situation be allowed to continue?

[Jordi]

IT was weird to see the redish methanol flowing around too... surely something's needed

[The Snout]

What's F1 using ? I can't for the life of me think how F1 handle this issue. Maybe some idea can be pinched from them.

[ghinzani]

Originally posted by The Snout
What's F1 using ? I can't for the life of me think how F1 handle this issue. Maybe some idea can be pinched from them.

Petrol??

[The Snout]

Petrol??

If that's so then in 2005 the problem will go away. Just hope there's not too many KFC char grill tyrechangers until then.

[Lee Janotta]

They'll have to pry the turbos from my cold dead hands!

Hmm... What if they mixed in a proportion of kerosene, tuelene, or some other petrol-based fuel which wouldn't affect the octane?

[Jay]

I like methanol...here's why...

methanol or methyl alcohol was introduced to REPLACE gasoline because although it burns with an invisible flame, it burns much much cooler than gasoline and is not nearly as combustible or explosive. I remember a demonstration once where they spilled some gasoline and some methanol and ignited it. The gasoline exploded in a blaze the second the mach hit the ground. It took 5 matches to get the methanol to ignite! That said, if either are spilled on a hot engine, they won't stay stable very long.

Methanol may burn when it is spilled, but if the pitfire we saw yesterday had been with gasoline, it would have been much much worse...especially with the limited amount of fire proofing the crew were wearing. There's the possibility that the fuel tank itself could have exploded if it were gasoline, causing unimaginably injuries. I'm sure a number of the crew would be have some very nasty scars for life.

Yes, Formula One does use ordinary gasoline. They also have A LOT more fire safety procedures than Cart and fires are very rare. First of all, they use airplace refueling rigs (pumped not gravity fed like Cart). Everyone involved in a pitstop wears full fire gear including fireproof underwear, fire suit, balaclava, fireproof shoes, goggles and sometimes a helmet. The guys that actually do the fueling are in gear very similar to that of a firefighter (including a respirator). Not to mention the increased number of fire fighting equipment in F1... They usually have a pumping engine stationed at teh entrance of the pits ready to move to any pit box that would have such a fire like the one at Mexico Cart race.

To sum it up, I'm a big fan of Methanol in race cars. Besides everything I mentioned above there's the fumes(or lack thereof with methanol). If you've ever walked around a gasoline powered race paddock (like F1, or many lower formula) and the Cart paddock, you'll know exactly what I mean.

[Jay]

Geez...I didn't even mention that methanol is a polar compound and thus can be put out with water, and gasoline is very non-polar and has to be put out with a smothering foam. That's why all the fire extinguishers they use in F1 shoot a gucky foam, where as in Cart they have buckets of water placed all over the pitlane (and fire extinguishers). Those buckets of water would have been useless if it was gasoline burning.

[greg.n]

Overall methanol is much safer than gasoline. Cart has used methanol for the reasons above and because at one stage it was to become the fuel of the future because it can be derived from renewable resources. The Kanaan incident was caused by the drivers reaction to a variation in the pit stop procedures and pulling away too soon. At this years Bathurst 1000km the leading driver pulled away when the car was dropped off the jacks and still ahd the refuelling rig attached. He pulled the the whole thing over into the pit lane and spilt gasoline everywhere. The result was a FIVE MINUTE penalty! (A lap is less than 2.30...

[Valve Bounce]

Well Jay, thanks for the great explanation on the benefits of Methanol. Now can we get back to my lead post where I suggested an additive to make the flames visible?

[Lee Janotta]

Uhm, Greg, are you sure you're not confusing methanol with ethanol? Ethanol is renewable, as it's a natural form of alchohol derived from distilling sugars and starches from waste biomatter (most often corn stalks). It's very high octane, but currently there is not sufficient infrastructure in place to allow it's exploitation at a competitive price (mostly due to a lobbying war between the petroleum industry on one side and the farming industry and environmentalists on the other, currently losing side). It's been pushed as a possible gasoline alternative, though, by several automotive companies, most notably Ford.

Methanol is derived from fossil fuels, typically natural gas in the US, but also coal. And unlike the natural alchohol, it's not very friendly stuff from an environmental standpoint. But it is insanely high octane, hence it's usage in turbocharged and supercharged engines running high boost.

With the lower boost levels CART will be running next year, perhaps ethanol could be used instead as the series' fuel? Perhaps they could attract the huge farming corp Arthur Daniels Midland to come onboard as an associate sponsor?

[Jay]

Sorry Valve, I was just surprised that people were suggesting gasoline was actually safer.

When it is used in cars they add a bit of gasoline to it to give it a coloured flame, but I would think those two wouldn't mix so...I don't know.. Is there a chemist in the house?

I do know there are things you could add to the fuel to give it a coloured flame, the only issue is getting the engine to work properly with those additives. I don't think that should be a major problem though.

[Lee Janotta]

Jay, I know in the consumer experiments with ethanol, they've blended in about 10% gasoline to produce a visible flame.

Perhaps Tuelene and Methanol would work as super high-octane combo? Or, like I said, with the lower boost, a combo of Ethanol and high-octane gasoline.

[Jay]

You mean Toluene I assume... I remember dealing with that stuff in highschool chem class...nasty smell and made us all sick, but apparently it's also a great fuel additive.

I'd still search for a non-hydrocarbon based additive that wouldn't increase the flammibility of the fuel. There are lots of things out there that would make a coloured methanol flame(of course the coloured part won't be the methanol), just a matter of making sure it works with the engine.

[Morris 1100]

If you run on petrol you need a lot less fuel than with alcohol fuels (your fuel economy is much better on petrol)
This means less total fuel, less pit stops and less pit stops means less fuel spilt in pitlane.

Sure alcohol burns cooler .... I am sure the guy rolling around on the ground appreciated that!

[KC]

I have experience with both fuels in a racing engine. In the 502 cu in Chevy we used gasoline and carburettors. We switched to injected methanol. We get around 100 more horsepower due to the increase in compression we run, we also run under 200 degrees fahrenheit making the engine last longer. The fuel is stable, its volatility is low (meaning it produces very little explodable gas) unlike gasoline. It burns cleaner than gasoline. It does not produce carbon deposits on the valves and pistons. Its also safer for me, the crew chief to work with.

There have been many experiments in the past to add a dye to methanol but none have been sufficient enough to make the fire readily visible in broad daylight.

[greg.n]

Yeah, youre right Lee, I was confused about that. Still prefer menthanol over petrol/gasoline though.

[greg.n]

Toulene was used in F1 as an additive in the Turbo days until it was banned along with a few other substances.

[Jay]

Maybe we should just stick to what we have and train everyone involved in Champcars on how to recognize a methanol fire. It may appear to be a bunch of people rolling around on the ground for no reason on TV, but up close there are a lot of signs (besides guys jumping around) that there is a fire.

Firstly, pure methanol actually has a slightly blue flame. If you saw the fire up close I'm sure you'd be able to see very faint flames. As well you could see the reactions of the methanol on the ground and the effects of the heat on clothing and the car itself (ie paint burning). Again, as bad as that fire in Mexico was, it would have been 10 times worse had they used a hydrocarbon fuel.

[Warwick]

When running methanol in F1 Sidecars a 5% blend of toluene is required,my understanding of this was in case of fire it produces a visible flame.

[Jay]

I still wonder, I don't know much about fuels, but how do you mix toluene and methanol? Isn't that like trying to mix gasoline and water?

[Valve Bounce]

I think KC has come up with the most detailed and positive (or negative, depending which way we look at the technical side) answer. Surely there must be an industrial chemist in this forum. OK, so how about not only using an additive but also some sort of filter in the goggles of the pit crew that would show up the slightly coloured flame? There must be a very simple answer to this, maybe even a polaroid filter in the lens, or one of those peciliar yellow lenses. How about an infra red device for pit marshalls that can spot these fires?

[macdaddy]

I remember Michigan once, when I noticed the plastic signs were melting from the pit wall, seemingly without reason. It was hot that afternoon, but not that hot! Fuel fires are dangerous no matter what, but I'd prefer an invisible flame over an uncontrollable one. I don't have a long history as an F1 fan, so could somebody refresh my memory here? I've seen video of a spectacular pit fire, I presume from the early 90's. Who was that?

Anyway, I much prefer gravity-fed methanol to pressurized gasoline. And I betcha most of the over-the-wall gang agree.

[paul-collins]

Originally posted by Valve Bounce
How about an infra red device for pit marshalls that can spot these fires?

There's the answer, night vision goggles for all firefighters in pit lane.

I don't think there's any other filter that would work, because they all work on the visible spectrum, and we know there isn't any visible spectrum in those flames.

[Jay]

To be honest, I don't think the problem of the invisible flame is as big of problem as some would make out. It might look odd on TV, but I'm pretty sure everyone near the pitfire in Mexico was well aware of where the fire was.

Like I said before, the flames are not completely invisible, and you can usually see the effects of the heat (whether it be people acting as if they're on fire or signs melting).

I guess I say, it works now, why change it.