View Poll Results: What basic design should we go for?

Voters
10. You may not vote on this poll
  • NA, V

    5 50.00%
  • NA, W

    0 0%
  • FI, V

    2 20.00%
  • FI, W

    3 30.00%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 2 of 16 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 226

Thread: UCP Supercar II: Engine Department.

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    2,975
    Quote Originally Posted by twinspark
    I don't see the whole idea of PM's here, I think that there's more to gain than to lose if people in different tasks know of the ideas of others.

    A good example might be the Mazda RX8, where the Wankel theme is visible also in the interior.

    I also think that things like emissions, weight, size and costs of the engine (etc) and the whole doability should be considered. Not just plain max power.

    One question; are you thinking of using an existing engine (which more or less eliminates the issues with recyclability for one) or designing one from scratch, as I understood in one of the other threads?
    you have some good points, IMHO :
    - emisions/weight/size etc will be considered thoroughly as they will be part of the design process. They arent an afterthought and are realistic targets.
    - Recyclability? for the engine will depend on material choice, which shouldnt be a problem, at least in a conceptual sense. People demand "oh it has to be recyclable" we would prefer "how about you use X material to make it recyclable" for a positive contribution. That would make a mature team
    - Ideas will be shared openly, everyone can make there point known quite freely. I know ht99 seems to be controling this but it isnt going to get to the point where your shut out at all.
    - use an existing engine? that would be sort of boring. I am confident that betweeen us we can through enough together to make at least a conceptual proposition with more than enough technical foundation and accuracy to meet requirements.

    thanks all for the contributions and hope you can keep adding to the think pot.

    EDIT: what do you study Twinspark..out of interest?
    autozine.org

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Tampere
    Posts
    817
    Quote Originally Posted by jediali
    EDIT: what do you study Twinspark..out of interest?
    Eh, computer science. And the mandatory basics of math and physics in the side.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Barcelona
    Posts
    33,496
    In my opinion it would be better to decide first which kind of car are we making, and then start thinking about the engine that will power it.
    Lack of charisma can be fatal.
    Visca Catalunya!

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    2,975
    Quote Originally Posted by Ferrer
    In my opinion it would be better to decide first which kind of car are we making, and then start thinking about the engine that will power it.
    You eager to get on? we havent started anyway... have we? i havent anyway
    autozine.org

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Barcelona
    Posts
    33,496
    Quote Originally Posted by jediali
    You eager to get on? we havent started anyway... have we? i havent anyway
    Well I think the suggestion of a 12 cylinder 6000cc or 7000cc engine is way off the scale for what we are going to need.
    Lack of charisma can be fatal.
    Visca Catalunya!

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    nr Edinburgh, Whisky-soaked Scotland
    Posts
    27,777
    Quote Originally Posted by hightower99
    What? You have got to be kidding right?
    erm, no.
    When I'm kidding you will see a smiley.
    Just as there is NOT one here !!!
    In the real engineering world
    What engineering world is this you live int ?
    The succesful projects seek input and collaboration and issues from ALL and the VERY best seek it from the end user continuously.
    The open communications ensure that everyeon IN a team is aware of issues.
    Having it held by a gate-keeper means assumptions are made and often made wrongly.

    Just trying to do MY role in the project which is consultant and facilitator.

    the engineers assigned to a project will be able to work together in relative peace, without some random guy walking in off the street and saying "Hey why don't you do that?"
    Well it's not quite "random" and you need to look at every rapid development lifecycle in existence as it does it's utmost to do EXACTLY what you don't want happening DSDM is a perfect example. Likewise QFD.

    Engineers and designers who think they know better than "random guy" often screw up and fail to deliver products meeting the real customers needs.

    A point not raised at an early stage will typically cost 10 times that to fix in the next one and then another 10 times in the next etc etc.

    It woudl be beneficial to use best-practices in engineering if folsk want a little experience of what it's liek to design and deliver in the real world.

    That's my 5 minute consultancy fee used up
    "A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    2,975
    Quote Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine
    A point not raised at an early stage will typically cost 10 times that to fix in the next one and then another 10 times in the next etc etc.
    <knocks on the boss's door>
    your not wrong my good friend however: many parts of the design can have quantites added later and much of the added quantities will be within excel or Matlab perhaps meaning simple alterations. It would be a bugger to redseign cad models as you say however. Not trying to prove you wrong, just speaking from an indefinate equational point of view.
    autozine.org

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,734
    Quote Originally Posted by hightower99
    First of all I wanted this thread to be the place where the engine department can consider ideas and think out loud as it where without having to account for the ridiculous posts, odd-ball irrelevant ideas, and useless comments that accompany almost every thread on this website.
    I've just had a flash of brilliance. If you want all of these things why not reverse the situation.

    Use PM's to discuss point between you three, and leave this open for comments from other members (and yes this may include some rubbish, buts that's par for the course around here... )

    you can always write down what you've discussed or even set up dummy email accounts and email each other...
    How can men use sex to get what they want?
    Sex is what they want. - Frasier

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,200
    Well I guess then that this thread is open to all!

    I am hoping to be able to get an MSN conference going with me jediali and P4g4nite (although I need P4g4nite's msn account if that is going to happen)

    Also so far nothing has been decided but the general direction is to make a GT. Probably a 4 door. I just don't see it having a Mid-engine layout. I know that more people voted for Mid-engine RWD but I will bet you that none of them where thinking (hmm lets get that into a GT). I think it will end up being a front mounted engine with either RWD or AWD. Either way GTs are supposed to be fast when you want and able to cruise as well. This requires a relatively large engine because the total car will be heavy. The majority of GTs around today have large (>5L) engines and many are 6L or larger V12s. I am still pulling for the much more compact W12 design as this will concentrate weight and enable the engine to be placed in a better position.

    Alot of time and thought will be put into refining and designing relatively new technologies to be included in the design. Weight, size, power curve, construction, fuel economy, emissions, endurance, ect. will be major points for the design.

    Jediali: I am still working on some ideas for a variable compression system. I will have some sketches to you soon. I like your valve system, I think we should run with that. I have been trying to find info about running on detonation but mostly as HCCI. But I think that direct injection is better as it will allow us to run lean and get better efficiency by using the "dry" air as insulation from the cylinder wall.
    Power, whether measured as HP, PS, or KW is what accelerates cars and gets it up to top speed. Power also determines how far you take a wall when you hit it
    Engine torque is an illusion.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    2,975
    Quote Originally Posted by hightower99
    Jediali: I am still working on some ideas for a variable compression system. I will have some sketches to you soon. I like your valve system, I think we should run with that. I have been trying to find info about running on detonation but mostly as HCCI. But I think that direct injection is better as it will allow us to run lean and get better efficiency by using the "dry" air as insulation from the cylinder wall.
    you like my valvle lift system? im surprised becasue that was no more than a forgotton dream. I thought it might have issues - to simple to actually work! im going to push on with it then

    There are several advantages to DI adding to your reasons so far. remeber indirect injection would sound better and make a more reliable engine for the record.
    autozine.org

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,200
    If you can post some images of the system and maybe a quick description of how it works at the moment that would be great.
    Power, whether measured as HP, PS, or KW is what accelerates cars and gets it up to top speed. Power also determines how far you take a wall when you hit it
    Engine torque is an illusion.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney, Down Under
    Posts
    8,833
    Quote Originally Posted by hightower99
    Jediali: I am still working on some ideas for a variable compression system. I will have some sketches to you soon. I like your valve system, I think we should run with that. I have been trying to find info about running on detonation but mostly as HCCI. But I think that direct injection is better as it will allow us to run lean and get better efficiency by using the "dry" air as insulation from the cylinder wall.
    I've only seen one variable compression system before, a Saab one (not sure if it actually made production) where IIRC the whole head moved up and down. What ideas do you have for a variable compression system?
    Faster, faster, faster, until the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death...
    – Hunter Thompson

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,200
    Quote Originally Posted by 2ndclasscitizen
    I've only seen one variable compression system before, a Saab one (not sure if it actually made production) where IIRC the whole head moved up and down. What ideas do you have for a variable compression system?
    I am working on two ideas.

    One: Similar to Saab's idea only because we will be designing either a V or W12 it doesn't seem smart to have the massive cylinders and heads moving around arcing in relation to the crankcase. Instead I am thinking of a worm gear mechanism (pretty simple one really) that will push the cylinders and heads out or pull them closer. That way we will only need a flexible connection to the intake and two simple sliding joints in the exhaust (one each side) and of course the cam chains will run with some extra chain with the slack taken up by a single tension gear for each bank of cylinders. relatively simple the only problem being that how the hell do I cool the exposed cylinder wall when it is fully extended? I figure I will have to lift the water jacket with the cylinders instead of just the liners.

    Two: More complicated. The pistons have a cylinder hole in the middle and a metal cup with its bottom completing the pistons face. The cup can be raised or lowered by pumping oil underneth it. The oil would come from a high pressure line built into the engine. More problems, sealing the cup to stop by-products of combustion from contaminating the oil, chance for increased reciprocating weight, Also I am not entirely sure that the suction of the oil chamber is enough to hold the cup in the piston when the piston stops at TDC. Also changing the shape of the piston will complicate the swirl dynamics that we want to achieve to help DI detonation mode combustion. On the other hand it should be a lighter solution in total, it will also get rid of the need to have moving links in the exhaust, intake, and slack in the cam chains. I could also make the cup have a hollow in it to help keep some more heat in the combustion chamber instead of flowing through the piston, that is if it doesn't weaken the cup enough that it fails suring the pressure of combustion.

    Actually when I think about it I could make the entire piston face into a cup that fits over the piston "body"... solving some of the problems with changing the face shape... Still have to seal it properly....
    Power, whether measured as HP, PS, or KW is what accelerates cars and gets it up to top speed. Power also determines how far you take a wall when you hit it
    Engine torque is an illusion.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Porto - Portugal
    Posts
    5,596
    Quote Originally Posted by hightower99
    I am working on two ideas.

    One: Similar to Saab's idea

    Two: More complicated. The pistons have a cylinder hole in the middle and a metal cup with its bottom completing the pistons face.
    You make it sound like you're actually building it. Nice. But now take your tools from the kitchen table because lunch is about to be served.
    Money can't buy you friends, but you do get a better class of enemy.

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Porto - Portugal
    Posts
    5,596
    After one very clever post, Hightower was banned.
    I guess we'll have to fit some pedals into UCP supercar now that we have no engineer...
    Last edited by McReis; 02-08-2007 at 05:57 AM.
    Money can't buy you friends, but you do get a better class of enemy.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Mercedes-Benz C111 Research Car 1969-1979
    By Matt in forum Matt's Hi-Res Hide-Out
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 10-21-2015, 10:35 PM
  2. The New UCP Supercar's Engine!
    By Egg Nog in forum Technical forums
    Replies: 77
    Last Post: 12-29-2005, 11:19 AM
  3. If you were going to build a mid engine supercar...
    By "Clevor" Angel in forum General Automotive
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 10-07-2005, 12:25 PM
  4. International Engine of the year 2005 is.....
    By lukeh in forum Car comparison
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 06-20-2005, 05:08 AM
  5. Help create the UCP Supercar!
    By Egg Nog in forum Technical forums
    Replies: 296
    Last Post: 04-07-2005, 08:23 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •