Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Assume you have 2 IDENTICAL motors with all supporting mods (FMIC, Exhaust, Fuel Pump)

Motor 1 makes 200rwkw @ 16psi, It makes it power by upping the boost.

Motor 2 makes 200rwkw @ 12psi, It makes it power by having adjustable cam gears and cams.

Now these motor are exerting the same amount of force, in this case 200rwkw, but is one motor doing it easier than the other?

I guess what im asking is, is there different ways to make the same power but one way is easier on the motor?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/244873-how-hard-is-an-engine-working/
Share on other sites

Efficiency is the key, if the motor as a whole is optimised for efficiency then more energy is converted to power instead of emissions and heat. To use your two examples you would have to ask which one is operating more efficiently, which one is using more fuel, generating more heat or creating more emissions etc

Your first example could be the best alternative for that type of motor, it could run cooler, be more fuel efficient and have lower emissions along with a longer engine life.

the more boost, the more you ring the engines neck basically

the higher the boost you cram in, is the higher there is a restriction across the in vs out

you are always better off with less boost in any situation

a knock sensor is a good indication of how hard an engine is working

keep adding timing till it knocks, then back out 2 deg - done :)

the more boost, the more you ring the engines neck basically

the higher the boost you cram in, is the higher there is a restriction across the in vs out

you are always better off with less boost in any situation

a knock sensor is a good indication of how hard an engine is working

keep adding timing till it knocks, then back out 2 deg - done :P

I've seen engines lose torque/power by using that approach - usually large duration camshafts and unreactive chamber shapes cause this.

And generally less boost in spark ignitions engines is better but I have seen cases that are contrary to this as well. Diesel engines are quite the opposite though - the more boost the better. Its really a case of giving the engine what it likes.

In this statement is just so many variables that u cant say

Whats the static compression ratio?

Peak power is a very small part, what about how the engine delivers its power and torque from idle?

But for the sake of this exercise id go with motor 1, reason being option 2 has a smaller time to burn fuel due to wider cam duration and u probably will have the same amount of air getting into the engine

(option 1 less time more boost, option 2 more time less boost) but because the burn time is less u will have to run leaner to get more out of the fuel increasing the heat in the engine raising the risk of predetination breaking a ring land.

My thoughts anyway.

And generally less boost in spark ignitions engines is better but I have seen cases that are contrary to this as well. Diesel engines are quite the opposite though - the more boost the better. Its really a case of giving the engine what it likes.

Boost is only a measurement of the charged air

20psi into an engine with a 11.5 comp ratio = dangerous

20psi into an engine with a 7.5 comp ratio = safe

my cats name is mittens

ROFL!

Imo, Both engines are working just as hard being that there making the same Power figures, But it depends if you have to rev the cammed engine harder due to larger cams, but the engine with cams is the more efficent air pump (e.g sucks and blows easier) But the cylinder pressures whould be ablout the same, Remember boost is just manifold pressure not so much cylinder pressures.

Andrew

there is no real difference. boost is a measure of restriction in the intake. it's a pressure reading, not a flow reading. so it's possible both cars are injesting the same amount of air (almost certainly if they are identical and making the same power). so perhaps changing cam timing has reduced a restriction which allows the car to flow the same amount of air but at a lower pressure. anyway, it's kind of pointless comparison. I'd run the 16psi AND the cam adjustment and make 220kw instead. :P:(

a torque read out is a good indication of how hard an engine is working

keep adding timing till it stops making more torque, then back out 2 deg - done :)

Your right on the money there mate :D

my cats name is mittens

That is an amazing coincidence. I once had a friend with a dog called Rufus. :)

To go off topic - the measure of how hard an engine is working is BMEP - its brake mean effective pressure. Go look that up on Wikipedia. How the air gets to the engine is largely irrelevent.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • This is the other log file, if only we had exhaust manifold pressure - would understand what's going on a bit better   Can you take a screenshot of your wastegate setup in the Kebabtech?   Engine Functions --> Boost Control (looks like this):  
    • You just need a datalogger of some sort. A handheld oscilloscope could do it, because it will make the trace visible on screen, so you can look at the peak, or whatever you need to look at. And there are cheap USB voltage loggers available too. You could get a 2 channel one and press a button to feed voltage to the second channel at points that you want to check the sensor voltage, when you knew what the guage was saying, for example.
    • it's not the issue with making power, it's the issue with controlling boost, and this isn't the first time I've seen a 6Boost having issue with controlling boost down low.   The boost control here looks interesting.   Looking at your logs, looks like it's set to open loop boost control strategy (which is fine). We can see VCT being kept on till about 6600RPM (no issue with that). Ignition timing (I'm assuming this is E85, seems within reason too, nothing too low, causing hot EGTS and boost spiking). There's about 15 degrees of advance when your boost shoots up, however can't be this as the timing isn't single digits. I'm assuming there's no EMAP data, as I wasn't able to find it in the logs. We can see your tuner sets the WG DC to 0% after 4300RPM, trying to control boost.   My thoughts, what frequency is your wastegate set to?  AND why aren't you using both ports for better control?
    • While that sounds reasonable, this is definitely a boost control problem, but the real question is why are you having the boost control problem? Which is why I pondered the idea that there's a problem at ~4000rpm related to head flow. In that instance, you are not yet under boost control - it's still ramping up and the wastegate is yet to gain authority. So, I'm thinking that if the wastegate is not yet open enough to execute control, but the compressor has somehow managed ot make a lot of flow, and the intake side of the head doesn't flow as well as the exhaust side (more on that later), then presto, high MAP (read that as boost overshoot). I have a number of further thoughts. I use butterfly valves in industrial applications ALL THE TIME. They have a very non-linear flow curve. That is to say that there is a linear-ish region in the middle of their opening range, where a 1% change in opening will cause a reasonably similar change in flow rate, from one place to another. So, maybe between 30% open and 60% open, that 1% change in opening gives you a similar 2% change in flow. (That 2% is pulled out of my bum, and is 2% of the maximum flow capacity of the valve, not 2% of the flow that happens to be going through the valve at that moment). That means that at 30% open, a 1% change in opening will give you a larger relative flow increase (relative to the flow going through the valve right then) compared to the same increment in opening giving you the same increment in flow in outright flow units. But at 60% opening, that extra 2% of max flow is relatively less than 1/2 the increase at 30% opening. Does that make sense? It doesn't matter if it doesn't because it's not the main point anyway. Below and above the linear-ish range in the middle, the opening-flow curve becomes quite...curved. Here's a typical butterfy valve flow curve. Note that there is a very low slope at the bottom end, quite steep linear-ish slope in the middle, then it rolls off to a low slope at the top. This curve shows the "gain" that you get from a butterfly valve as a function of opening%. Note the massive spike in the curve at 30%. That's the point I was making above that could be hard to understand. So here's the point I'm trying to make. I don't know if a butterfly valve is actually a good candiate for a wastegate. A poppet valve of some sort has a very linear flow curve as a function of opening %. It can't be anyelse but linear. It moves linearly and the flow area increases linearly with opening %. I can't find a useful enough CV curve for a poppet valve that you could compare against the one I showed for the butterfly, but you can pretty much imagine that it will not have that lazy, slow increase in flow as it comes off the seat. It will start flowing straight away and increase flow very noticeably with every increase in opening%. So, in your application, you're coming up onto boost, the wastegate is closed. Boost ramps up quite quickly, because that's really what we want, and all of a sudden it is approaching target boost and the thing needs to open. So it starts opening, and ... bugger all flow. And it opens some more, and bugger all more flow. And all the while time is passing, boost is overshooting further, and then finally the WG opens to the point where the curve starts to slope upwards and it gains authority amd the overshoot is brought under control and goes away, but now the bloody thing is too open and it has to go back the other way and that's hy you get that bathtub curve in your boost plot. My position here is that the straight gate is perhaps not teh good idea it looks like. It might work fine in some cases, and it might struggle in others. Now, back to the head flow. I worry that the pissy little NA Neo inlet ports, coupled with the not-very-aggressive Neo turbo cam, mean that the inlet side is simply not matched to the slightly ported exhaust side coupled with somewhat longer duration cam. And that is not even beginning to address the possibility that the overlap/relative timing of those two mismatched cams might make that all the worse at around 4000rpm, and not be quite so bad at high rpm. I would be dropping in at least a 260 cam in the inlet, if not larger, see what happens. I'd also be thinking very hard about pulling the straight gate off, banging a normal gate on there and letting it vent to the wild, just as an experiment.
    • Not a problem at all Lithium, I appreciate your help regardless. I've pulled a small part of a log where the target pressure was 28psi and it spiked to 36.4psi. I've only just begun using Data Log Viewer so if I'm sending this in the wrong format let me know.
×
×
  • Create New...