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 13 of 16 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 195 of 226

Thread: UCP Supercar II: Engine Department.

  1. #181
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    10,179
    ...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?

  2. #182
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    St Marys Western Sydney
    Posts
    20,953
    Yep, perhaps they should be known now as FuIn and FoIn
    I am the Stig

  3. #183
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,200
    Quote Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine View Post
    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?

    Quote Originally Posted by Matra
    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.


    Quote Originally Posted by Matra
    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...

    Quote Originally Posted by Matra
    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.
    Last edited by hightower99; 02-14-2007 at 03:55 AM.
    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.

  4. #184
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Posts
    2,038
    Quote Originally Posted by hightower99 View Post
    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).
    Go n-ithe an cat thu, is go n-ithe an diabhal an cat

    When you go Home, Tell them for us and say 'For your tommorrow, We Gave Our Today.'

  5. #185
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    IA
    Posts
    467
    Quote Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine View Post
    Chapman approach - make everything do at least 2 jobs
    Now that would be interesting.
    "In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not."

  6. #186
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,200
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Tiv View Post
    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.


    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Tiv
    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.
    Last edited by hightower99; 02-14-2007 at 11:28 AM.
    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.

  7. #187
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    nr Edinburgh, Whisky-soaked Scotland
    Posts
    27,777
    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
    Last edited by Matra et Alpine; 02-14-2007 at 11:43 AM.
    "A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'

  8. #188
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Posts
    2,038
    Quote Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine View Post
    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.
    Go n-ithe an cat thu, is go n-ithe an diabhal an cat

    When you go Home, Tell them for us and say 'For your tommorrow, We Gave Our Today.'

  9. #189
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    7,273
    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.

  10. #190
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    nr Edinburgh, Whisky-soaked Scotland
    Posts
    27,777
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Tiv View Post
    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.
    "A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'

  11. #191
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Posts
    2,038
    Quote Originally Posted by Coventrysucks View Post
    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.
    Go n-ithe an cat thu, is go n-ithe an diabhal an cat

    When you go Home, Tell them for us and say 'For your tommorrow, We Gave Our Today.'

  12. #192
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    7,273
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Tiv View Post
    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.

  13. #193
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Posts
    2,038
    Quote Originally Posted by Coventrysucks View Post
    Err... No.
    Yeah, I already got that, and, at least, Matra was good enough to say more than "No."
    Go n-ithe an cat thu, is go n-ithe an diabhal an cat

    When you go Home, Tell them for us and say 'For your tommorrow, We Gave Our Today.'

  14. #194
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,200
    Quote Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine View Post
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by Matra
    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.



    Quote Originally Posted by Matra
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by 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.

    Quote Originally Posted by Matra
    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.
    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.

  15. #195
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    nr Edinburgh, Whisky-soaked Scotland
    Posts
    27,777
    Quote Originally Posted by hightower99 View Post
    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 )
    "A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'

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
  •