UCP Supercar II: Engine Department.

[Kitdy]

...Ok, that is as I thought it was. When I saw this:

What basic design should we go for?
NA, V
NA, W
FI, V
FI, W

I got confused - I thought NA was Natural Aspiration and FI Fuel Injection. I suppose I was wrong then?

[fpv_gtho]

Yep, perhaps they should be known now as FuIn and FoIn

[hightower99]

In a mid/rear engine configuration there is LOTS of bodywork ahead of hte engine to provide protection.
You're thinking front location and even then sensible placement fo the anti-roll bar can provide protection.

You are not likely to mount a flat engine in the middle of the car. Yes at the rear it is protected (thats one of the reasons that so many flat engines are mounted in the rear) Thing is you are trying to solve one problem for a solution that has already been bettered. Why put so much trouble and thought into trying to get a flat engine to fit and be protected? When a V or W configuration fits better and has other positive attributes?

No it doesn't.
The exhaust can come out the top or the sides if you are clever - esp if using rotary valves

Yes for the majority of engines it does. Rotary valves have been proven time and again to be lacking compared to poppet valves.

Think you're not bothering to consider this because of lack of knowledge and understanding. THink out of the box -- a boxer NA flat 12 with top entry inlet using roof/side inlets to provide "natural" Forced Induction for higher speeds when the higher power is beneficial. ( Chapman approach - make everything do at least 2 jobs )
Exhaust could exit out the sides of the heads -- or out the top and let the inlet come in the side. or even both in and out on the top ( but has hot exhaust closer to charged inlet, so not ideal BUT, could use airflow and wrap to reduce the effect. Short stroke can keep the engine narrow to give lots of space at the sides for piping !

The start of that is very hurtfull Matra..

Anyways There is a difference between thinking outside the box and totally random speculation. Lets take your example. Firstly a flat 12 is way too big it is as long as the V12, it is much wider, and all of that space is taken up on a shorter plan meaning it reduces space for suspension, interior room, luggage space, ect. Ram air systems are difficult to make and show almost no added effect until very high speeds are reached, at which point the added drag of the system hurts more than the piddly gain in power. If the intake or the exhaust came out the sides of the engine (I.e. the top of the cylinder head) you would just be making the engine wider. Also to achieve the same flow as can be achieved when the intake and the exhaust go through the sides of the head, you have to make the cylinder much larger to allow for all the workings and the new port shapes. Your solution of giving the engine a short stroke to give more room for piping isn't exactly thought out either. You always want to maintain as close to square as possible when considering bore and stroke sizes. Shortening the stroke loses displacement unless you make the bore much bigger making the engine longer and taller. Even then you now have a short stroke, wide bore engine that doesn't breath properly at low RPM and doesn't combust fuel as efficiently.

I hope that wasn't your best idea...

erm, that's what casing are for
It's a GT I thought was asked for not a rally car !!!!
If it bothers, it's easy to add a c/f or duralumin "sump guard" just liek teh WRC cars run........

Yes but on a V or W engine you wouldn't need much strength in those casings (mostly just keep grime out of the system) On a flat engine they need to be stronger and heavier. As does anything else vital that is brought closer to the road. I am not saying bulletproof, but it does need to be protected more than if it was a V or W engine.

Why the overwhelming interest in wanting a flat engine?


So far I am planning on designing the engine with:

V configuration (7 out of 10 voted for it) 12 cylinders
Zero lag low pressure turbo system taking full advantage of exhaust pulse phenomena as well as a pressure pulse intake system. (it was a tie for NAvsFI so I will make it FI but the feel will be like a larger NA engine)
I am also trying to design a system that will control boost and turbine speed without blow off valves or wastegates.
The engine will run in DICI (Direct Injection Compression Ignition) mode using lean burn throttling (much like a diesel)
No throttle valves, the intake valves used in the engine will be variable lift and will help throttle the engine along with the lean burn throttling.
Intake and exhaust valves will be variable lift, and have a variable timing componant. I would like to have variable duration as well but I haven't thought of a system for that yet.
Variable compression from 16:1 down to 9:1.
For the direct injection system I was thinking of a pulsed Fuel/Air injector. One injector per cylinder which injects fuel though a series of ports cast into cylinder head that concentrate the fuel in the centre of the cylinder (hopefully with in cylinder swirling a relatively uniform ball of fuel can be created where it is stoichiometric inside the ball of fuel. More fuel injected meaning a larger ball is formed, maintaining the stoichiometric ratio), the injector then uses high pressure air to purge the ports and press the rest of the fuel into the cylinder.

Thats what I have so far. Some classic ideas (V12 configuration) with some new technology (DICI, Throttle-less). We will need to know more about the car to start deciding things like total displacement, max boost pressure, ect. But I have started designing the basics of the new technology.

[Mr.Tiv]

Why the overwhelming interest in wanting a flat engine?

Low center of gravity, it's inherently well balanced and doesn't vibrate a much as some other configurations do...


Why a 12 cyl; isn't that a bit over-done? I hope your thinking of a small 12(in displacement and physical size).

[Alastor]

Chapman approach - make everything do at least 2 jobs

Now that would be interesting.

[hightower99]

Low center of gravity, it's inherently well balanced and doesn't vibrate a much as some other configurations do...

A V12 is just as balanced and runs smoother. Yes there is a slightly higher CoG but not much and a V12 is much more space efficient.

Why a 12 cyl; isn't that a bit over-done? I hope your thinking of a small 12(in displacement and physical size).

Why is it overdone? we are making a GT, the majority of GTs have 8 or more cylinders and alot of them have V12s.

I will try to make it as compact as possible (It would be more compact if it was a W engine) But I will probably go for between 4.5 and 6L for displacement (the more boost I design into the system the closer to 4.5L I can go).

But it will be a big powerfull engine capable of producing some good performance figures with the heavy body of the car.

JFYI a 4.5L V12 would have roughly 78mm bore and stroke where as a 6L would make it 86mm bore and stroke.

[Matra et Alpine]

ht I'm afriad you dont' think out of the box.
Last comment on "space efficiency".
SMALLER is not always better.
WHAT FITS is best.
With a flat 6 ( i only said 12 coz the sound of the Ferrari flat-12 engine was unique and a dream to hear

It's a GT. So you need to find space for passenger AND luggage - and remember a fuel tank in a safe place !!
Look at what Hillman did with the imp in terms of packaging USING the engine - and they only had a slated coventry climax to start from For example you state categorically you would not mount a flat in a mid engine config. Of course you could. It could actually sit UNDER the rear seats if you want to be very clever and think laterally

Also remember I pointed out engine and suspension protection options used in WRC ? VERY thin and compact so what's the problem and BESIDES the sump is as importatn as the cylinder head. You smash the sump you lose the engine oil and engine. Please explain whjy stuck with trying to keep cylinder heads high for "Protection" ????

Vs and Ws are squarish boxes. These are NOT ideal in trying to accomodate in a product inherently long and thin

PS: You're lettting the "I will" slip in again

[Mr.Tiv]

It could actually sit UNDER the rear seats if you want to be very clever and think laterally

I like that, but why stop there. If the chassis were built in a similar fashion to a TVR, the engine could be between the two rear seats. In front of the engine could be the gas tank, and all of this would be well protected.

[Coventrysucks]

I've always been quite a fan of the Ferrari F130 as seen in the 333SP.

3997cc, 650bhp @ 11,000 rpm, 330lb ft @ 9000rpm.

I'm sure something could be done with technical wizardry to make it tractable at low speed.

Probably not in character with a GT though.

[Matra et Alpine]

I like that, but why stop there. If the chassis were built in a similar fashion to a TVR, the engine could be between the two rear seats. In front of the engine could be the gas tank, and all of this would be well protected.

It's difficult to get two adults AND an engine in between them - remember the ancillaries And even if you manage it, making it safe is very difficult as no room to build in padding/airbags/deformation zones
You can't put an engine close to a gas tank for a road going car. THe potential for litigation is HUGE. Unlike in the 70s when Matra put a plastic fuel tank ABOVE the mid-mounted engine

But yeah , don't "stop there" think laterally on the issue and see what surfaces.

[Mr.Tiv]

I've always been quite a fan of the Ferrari F130 as seen in the 333SP.

3997cc, 650bhp @ 11,000 rpm, 330lb ft @ 9000rpm.

I'm sure something could be done with technical wizardry to make it tractable at low speed.

Probably not in character with a GT though.

That's not such a bad thing.

[Coventrysucks]

I like that, but why stop there. If the chassis were built in a similar fashion to a TVR, the engine could be between the two rear seats. In front of the engine could be the gas tank, and all of this would be well protected.

Err... No.

[Mr.Tiv]

Err... No.

Yeah, I already got that, and, at least, Matra was good enough to say more than "No."

[hightower99]

ht I'm afriad you dont' think out of the box.
Last comment on "space efficiency".
SMALLER is not always better.
WHAT FITS is best.
With a flat 6 ( i only said 12 coz the sound of the Ferrari flat-12 engine was unique and a dream to hear

I am not quite sure what you mean because a V12 fits better than a Flat 6.

It's a GT. So you need to find space for passenger AND luggage - and remember a fuel tank in a safe place !!
Look at what Hillman did with the imp in terms of packaging USING the engine - and they only had a slated coventry climax to start from For example you state categorically you would not mount a flat in a mid engine config. Of course you could. It could actually sit UNDER the rear seats if you want to be very clever and think laterally

You illustrate my point that if you want to think outside the box you have to use your brain and think about the options instead of pursuing random notions.

There is no way you are going to be able to mount a Flat 6 engine underneth the rear seats (not without having to make the roof jump up about 30-40cms between the front and rear passagers otherwise the guys in the back will have less than zero head room) So no there is nothing clever about that idea. Whereas with the V12 mounted midship you can have a large fuel tank under the rear seats (Ala BMW). A small luggage compartment behind the engine (ala Lambo. Countach) and the front compartment at the front of the car can be made into the main luggage compartment.

Face it a V12 fits almost perfectly into a mid engined GT.
A W12 would be more compact and allow slightly larger luggage areas or alittle more cabin space.

Also remember I pointed out engine and suspension protection options used in WRC ? VERY thin and compact so what's the problem and BESIDES the sump is as importatn as the cylinder head. You smash the sump you lose the engine oil and engine. Please explain whjy stuck with trying to keep cylinder heads high for "Protection" ????

Thing is all engines have to protect their sumps. Not all engines have to add extra protection for their cylinders and other vulnerable bits. Flat engines need more protection and in this case they don't have any advantage to merit it. Give it up Matra.

Vs and Ws are squarish boxes. These are NOT ideal in trying to accomodate in a product inherently long and thin

I would have to disagree. A W12 is indeed a squarish box and it tends to fit neatly into long, thin products quite well, in fact that is why it was thought up in the first place. A V12 is more a long, thin, tall box and also fits very well with other componants in a car. A flat engine is wide, short square that tends to interfer with other componants.

PS: You're lettting the "I will" slip in again

Yes I know that is mostly due to the fact that I am the only acting member of the engine department, jediali left and I haven't heard anything from P4 lately. So you are stuck with me. I am open to intelligent suggestions and I have not set anything in stone (clay maybe) It is going to be a while before I am able to produce any drawings so until then the design is totally open.

[Matra et Alpine]

I am not quite sure what you mean because a V12 fits better than a Flat 6.

Only in your square world thinking ht
Sketch a few and see. THINK LATERALLY

You illustrate my point that if you want to think outside the box you have to use your brain and think about the options instead of pursuing random notions.

None of it was "random" and most inportantly none of it was confined by erroneous misconceptions.

There is no way you are going to be able to mount a Flat 6 engine underneth the rear seats (not without having to make the roof jump up about 30-40cms between the front and rear passagers otherwise the guys in the back will have less than zero head room)

Why is there a "jump" ?
Because you are thinking "square"
For comfort the rear of a seat does NOT sit level with the floorpan. So in reality with clever design you CAN fit an engine below the seat. Have you bothered to go see how clever Hillman were with the Imp or not ?
Think modern materials ( especially hd foams !!)

So no there is nothing clever about that idea.

Minor correction on your English ...
YOU cannot see anything clever.

Whereas with the V12 mounted midship you can have a large fuel tank under the rear seats (Ala BMW).

HIGHLY questionable -- I thought this was going mid-engine ?
Fuel tanks dont' do well near engines - vapourisation is a biatch

A small luggage compartment behind the engine (ala Lambo. Countach) and the front compartment at the front of the car can be made into the main luggage compartment.

Getting there. Of course you can have a sensible saloon sized boot above the engine if you went flat. Sorry ht you keep seemingly only thinking SQUARE

Face it a V12 fits almost perfectly into a mid engined GT.

Name one GT that seats 4 that has a mid engine V12 ?
Yep, none, because too many square shapes competing for space

A W12 would be more compact and allow slightly larger luggage areas or alittle more cabin space.

Where are the ancillaries on the W12 ?
Careful you seem perhaps to be forgetting those.
V's fit them nicely in the angles.
I think you need to sketch your engine ideas IN an engine compartment for comparisons. I'm not vconvinced the reason you're not following this isn't because you are stuck comparing volume of engine rather than fit-into-space.

Thing is all engines have to protect their sumps. Not all engines have to add extra protection for their cylinders and other vulnerable bits.

One more time slowly.
Protection is protection.
WHAT you protect doens' matter.
You are clearly putting up stupid arguments coz you don't liek "consultants" providing facilitation that goes against the "I" choices you want to make.

Flat engines need more protection and in this case they don't have any advantage to merit it. Give it up Matra.

And yet you are wrong.
I will give up at the end of the day the role of a consultant is to bring things to the attention of good engineers and managers to help them see alternatives they may be locked out of because of static thinking.
Done MY role in the engine department many times over already.
BUT you better go seek the PM and chassis guys inputs before you stick to the my square compact engine is best and find it doesn't make a good package.

I would have to disagree. A W12 is indeed a squarish box and it tends to fit neatly into long, thin products quite well, in fact that is why it was thought up in the first place.

cough ... it was though up for a SPECIFIC space.
You don't have that luxury. You are being asked to provide engine for a 4 seater, mid/rear engine RWD GT with luggage space.
You need to go read up on shape matching algorithms.l ... Squares are one of the worst often involving huge wastage -- my wife developed software for a major UK steel fabricator to maximise the use of 1" steel plate for pressure cylinders. She taught me a lot about "fit"

A V12 is more a long, thin, tall box and also fits very well with other componants in a car. A flat engine is wide, short square that tends to interfer with other componants.

You are pshowing again you are stuck in tryign to compare with what exists.
The role was to come up with a UCP GT car. You are not constrained and because you dont' recognise that are in fact preventing yourself from seeing any advantage.

Yes I know that is mostly due to the fact that I am the only acting member of the engine department, jediali left and I haven't heard anything from P4 lately. So you are stuck with me. I am open to intelligent suggestions and I have not set anything in stone (clay maybe) It is going to be a while before I am able to produce any drawings so until then the design is totally open.

You have had plenty of "Intelligent" suggestions and you still aren't listening.
Perhpas it's time to remove my tech consultant hat and fit my R&D consultant hat and do your first performance review

Look back, you are posting biased nonsense and irrational comments.
Hint identify three good things about EVERY idea anyone gives to you and write them fown before you then raise the first negative. It will help you be a better designer ( this method is named the "archibald technique" after one of my engineers who taught me it 20 + years ago )