help engineering

[MBT]

You know what? I have to shorten the race!the average speed of the piston that results now is: 107x5000/30000 = 17,83(p.).too high.the shift to 100mm.

This once again shows that you are working with your head in the bag.
Stop!
define vital parameters.
define the layout
make calculations of the main, thermodynamic and mechanical things. . .
then see the details.
If you continue that blessed piston will arrive in revision 27 before the end of the year....

 

[Piccoloingegnere]

no in fact I finished, now I place the measurements and the final layout and then I start the real design.

 

[stevie]

How's the flu? Are you cured?

 

[Exatem]

cut...
but the hornet doesn't know and therefore keeps flying. :biggrin:

It's like when you get the chickenpox.
Why are you worried? She's not worried about you.

 

[Piccoloingegnere]

How's the flu? Are you cured?

No, I have 38.1 of freshly measured fever. ...

 

[stevie]

mmm 15:1 as a compression ratio seems a little bit to me... now all the turbodiesel are on 18:1

 

[Piccoloingegnere]

mmm 15:1 as a compression ratio seems a little bit to me... now all the turbodiesel are on 18:1

Not everyone!

toyota stands at 15.5 - 15,8:1(for 2.2 from 177 horses)http://www.toyotaclubitalia.it/foru...-avra-il-diesel-pulito-2-2-d-4d-da-177cv.htmla lower amount of rdc :1 makes the engine much less rough.

 

[stevie]

you took the engine with the lowest rdc in circulation. ..however I'm curious about what superpower pressure works.
for the sky of the piston you decided then?
What is your target?

 

[Piccoloingegnere]

the sky of the piston has you the chamber obtained inside it but has no fingerprints for the valves.insomma it is smooth as you see it in the design that I post. the pressure oversupply should stay at about 1.5 bar but this still is to be evaluated also because then I have to calculate it according to the maximum power that I want to get and right according to the architecture of the motor.if it has 15:1 of rdc it is obvious that will be a little more alcohol

 

[marcof]

the sky of the piston has you the chamber obtained inside it but has no fingerprints for the valves.insomma it is smooth as you see it in the design that I post. the pressure oversupply should stay at about 1.5 bar but this still is to be evaluated also because then I have to calculate it according to the maximum power that I want to get and right according to the architecture of the motor.if it has 15:1 of rdc it is obvious that will be a little more alcohol

I press that I take care of cars only in the misfortune situation of having to buy a new (situation that recurs punctual after tot kilometers, but also before, sometimes... ) throwing in the toilet the usual 15-20 thousand euros.
Well, I read the whole discussion. beautiful, even if I think you have taken away the questions and given all the answers "from yourself in person" :smile:. Maybe I have to read it again, but it seems to me that you already know how to do it and look for comfort and confirm to the numbers that jump out of you as your convalescence continues:

Hi.

 

[stevie]

the choice not to employ the intercooler according to me is a mistake for two main reasons:

- from the thermo-fluidodynamic point of view the intercooler is very beneficial. due to a minimum pressure loss the advantage linked to the greater density of the aspired air in terms of power, torque and consumption is remarkable.

- from the point of view of reliability the presence of the intercooler guarantees lower operating temperatures and therefore a lower thermal stress of all mechanical organs.

 

[Piccoloingegnere]

It is true that with the intercooler you have a substantial increase of turbolag, but without increasing the temperature even of 80°c under regime.....so, if you adopt a turbo-soft superpower too push for the temperature without intercooler I will have a specific power ridiculously low actually (perhaps of a 30 cv\l) but if I put an intercooler, especially if large, I suffocate the motor under the power more 1500 turns. then, actually it is necessary. let's have it with capacity not exceeding 5 liters. At first I had thought to make a diesel volumetric instead of conventional turbine but it does not suit at all and the double superpower is unnecessarily expensive, unless.....

 

[Piccoloingegnere]

I adopted the solution 1 turbine - every- 2 cylinders, 2 intercoolers.it is not extremely complicated, because nothing passes so much less you have operating intervals.every turbine needs 2 cylinders always at the same pressure, and they would adopt smaller turbines.even if the pressure and low there is no counter-pression because every turbine works on 2 cylinders and therefore and as if they were 2 small motors united in only 1.insomma

 

[Piccoloingegnere]

I press that I take care of cars only in the misfortune situation of having to buy a new (situation that recurs punctual after tot kilometers, but also before, sometimes... ) throwing in the toilet the usual 15-20 thousand euros.
Well, I read the whole discussion. beautiful, even if I think you have taken away the questions and given all the answers "from yourself in person" :smile:. Maybe I have to read it again, but it seems to me that you already know how to do it and look for comfort and confirm to the numbers that jump out of you as your convalescence continues:

Hi.

You're partly right!

 

[MBT]

but put it with capacity not exceeding 5 liters.

dimensioning with the spanometer or comforted by calculations?
and in any case, at what speed do you suppose the air comes out of the intercooler? and with what vehicle speed?

I adopted the solution 1 turbine - every- 2 cylinders, 2 intercoolers.it is not extremely complicated, because nothing passes so much less you have operating intervals.every turbine needs 2 cylinders always at the same pressure, and they would adopt smaller turbines.even if the pressure and low there is no counter-pression because every turbine works on 2 cylinders and therefore and as if they were 2 small motors united in only 1.insomma

Yes, but caspiterina.. .
2 turbines with related intercoolers for a 4 cylinder??? ?
pig world, it was a 6 liters.... That's academic, but then. .
Speaking by speaking, put a turbine with his good intercooler for each cylinder. So much is academic. . .

 

[Meccbell]

the boy has many ideas, but very well confused.

However, I have not yet understood, it might well have escaped me, if in its intentions the engine object of the elucubrations must be a unique example, type concept engine, or hide with the idea of being able to really produce it and in a considerable number of specimens.

In the first case, some "bizzarrie" like the 2 turbines for 4 cylinders would be allowed.

in the second hypothesis, instead, it is necessary to be with the feet well planted on the ground, perhaps accepting some inevitable compromise between the "visto that in theory we can do it" and the "it is done only if it is convenient and if it does not complicate too much life to those who must realize it and also to those who must repair it"

 

[Piccoloingegnere]

It is impossible for the encumbrances, for the costs, and for the repair expenses as well as for the availability of very small turbines, but inefficient precisely because too small. on 2 turbines according to my scheme, therefore not to cascade, but each for itself always at the same pressure (scheme already used by psa for the 2.2 hdi 4 cylinders from 170 horses) the undoubted advantage there is!

 

[MBT]

...cut...
are simply modified on spherical bearings and placed both at 0.7 bar (which for 2 diesel cylinders is ideal).

What is it? I always have a few spherical bearings in the 24 hours... :tongue:

apart, you have to re-calculate the bearings... and ahead of calculations.
But I'm still waiting for a shortcut of layout.. .

 

[Piccoloingegnere]

for the layout I think it will take me tonight to indicate it accurately, but the changes on bearings are simple to find because this turbine with this modification is sold already, so here is more a copying work.... .

 

[peppo82]

It was a long time that I was missing in this forum, fortunately 5 minutes ago I felt like taking a trip around here, and less bad than I did, dear little engineer, you're making me die, not only laughs, but also fear.... okok laughs perhaps is too much, it is not nice to laugh at who is driven by strong passion like you, we say I smile so much for your unbridled enthusiasm, and for your conviction of being able to process a 4 diesel times by adopting lines of principle. The fear arises from the fact that despite everyone trying to stop you to reflect, you continue to hunt new innovative solutions, you seem like a computer that is performing a routine.... .

Stop! !

I don't work in the automotive field, but I understand enough, both because at 17 I used to be a madman on the engines, as I think you do now, and because I had the opportunity to study them also from the thermofluidonic point of view.

the design then, is still another thing, and that we want, as far as the engines are almost entirely designed to the computer, by a team of expert designers and analysts under the guidance of very experienced motorists (experience at the counter) then after they are put on the bench, they never go like the last evolution of the previous engine, but it is practically the norm that they go worse. at the bench the motorists experts who guided the designers and analysts in the design of the engine, will have their nice to do with the tuning that takes time comparable to the design time, yet they have designed it.

to tell you what? that the engine is not an exact science, and it is rich in unknown even for those who have been working for 20 years, let alone for a 17 who can not listen (or read ) who tries to take it on the path of reason, so do not leave it saccentemente with a splinter of inventions one behind the other if you want to get something, so you will only make you many enemies, or at least, you will know very few people (one?) willing.

I suggest you focus on one aspect at a time, one... .

Anyway, and here someone will punch me definitely, the diesels just elaorate raising the pressure of the turbine, compatibly with the mechanical and thermal resistance of the various components. there is little more to process, you can't make it turn wonder how much faster, because the oil needs its time to burn, which is greater than that of the gasoline because the gasoline air mixture is heterogeneous, and this must evaporate in the room, and the diesel is less volatile than the gasoline, so the rotation speed practically imposes it in the first place the fuel, then the average speed of the piston.
retouch the valves is a waste of time, because the engine is slow, you do not have big problems of load losses in the valves, increase the diameter means to change the shape of the room that for a diesel is much more delicate than for a gasoline, change the diagram means to look for a coupling to a higher regimen, but you can hardly reach it (of course someone has reached the 6000 with a jtd but it was an intense but short emotion)

read a nice book about the engines of non-academic ones, clear your ideas and then focus on one aspect at a time.