×
Login Register an account
Top Submissions Explore Upgoat Search Random Subverse Random Post Colorize! Site Rules
4

Expansion fans on exhaust valve seats.

submitted by usedoilanalysis to Fluiddynamics 1.3 yearsJan 29, 2023 20:45:47 ago (+4/-0)     (Fluiddynamics)

During the blowdown phase, as the exhaust valves open, the gas entering the exhaust ports is just about supersonic, especially at low lift angles. This supersonic flow is susceptible to expansion fans.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prandtl%E2%80%93Meyer_expansion_fan

This is why radiused exhaust valve seats and tulip valves with a rounded valve edge on the CC side helps flow. Expansion fans accelerate flow and are isentropic, that means without generating entropy in the way that a normal or oblique shockwave does. Not only does this simplify the calculations, but the expansion fans have very little losses. Typically a shockwave acts as a barrier for air, and causes non-reversible losses. An expansion fan on the other hand eliminates MOST, not ALL losses up to the accelerated velocity of ~Mach 1.4.

The angle needed to achieve M1.4 via expansion fans is ~9-10 degree steps. The air that flows through the seat and the valve face is flowing through a series of angles, if these angles can be kept to 9-10 degrees, one can dramatically lower losses on exhaust blowdown.

This is a lot harder to achieve on the intake valve(s) because the flow there never goes above Mach .55 maybe locally at low lifts with high VE it could get close to M=.6-.7 or the trans-sonic regime. Although for port injection, one also has to consider wet flow(ie fuel) and as a result limits the angles that can be used depending on the engine application. So while a full radius job on the intake will flow more CFM, it won't necessarily make more power, because smooth angles not only allow air to stick, but also any other fluid, such as fuel.

https://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s92/chippievw/F1technical/F1technicalintakeport002_zps9d11215f.jpg

Here you can see a cross section on the valve seats of a Cosworth V-10 F1 engine. Exhaust on the right, intake on the left. You can see the curve on the exhaust port is more pronounced compared to the relatively straight intake port, which only has a slight curve near the valve seat. This turn is necessary to guide airflow across the seat and into the combustion chamber, as well as to allow fuel and some air to separate from the wall to avoid pooling. Of course, at 18,000rpm the air is already mostly turbulent and will mix the crap out of the fuel. However at part throttle and lower rpm, the flow can be so laminar that fuel sticks to the walls and falls out of suspension.

For this reason engines that operate at lower RPMs and are undervalved(ie not enough valve for the combustion chamber), will benefit from 5 discreet angles on the intake side, particularly if the engine is carbureted.

https://www.speednik.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2013/05/Valves_2.jpg

While such a setup will flow a bit less than a full radiused valve seat, they typically work better in terms of combustion stability, and can help to limit flow reversion. On the exhaust seats, there is usually no fuel being burned(unless you're doing anti-lag), and you want the flow to leave the CC as fast as possible, doing full radius helps. You don't have much reversion on the exhaust seats, because the exhaust manifold is at a much lower pressure, and the overlap helps maintain the pressure gradient towards the exhaust.

With direct injection, since you don't have to worry about fuel in the intake, the rules change somewhat, and what is beneficial for the exhaust side, is also beneficial for the intake side as fuel is injected directly into the CC. When boost is introduced the similarities and ability to exploit expansion fans starts to work on the intake side because air density has a small but measurable effect on flow velocity. This can leave the air smack dab in the transonic region especially at low lift levels. Since valves open and close, the valves are at low lifts twice, and high lift once.


29 comments block


[ - ] HeyJames 2 points 1.3 yearsJan 29, 2023 20:50:51 ago (+2/-0)

I work on heavy duty engines. The trust fund babies can have that fragile F1 racing crap. I want tough designs that can take a shit beating and keep going for 60k hours

[ - ] RedBarchetta 1 point 1.3 yearsJan 29, 2023 22:17:30 ago (+1/-0)

Clearly you are ignorant to the "Fragile" F1 racing "Crap." Each race is approx. 200 miles long and the rules are the engine must go seven races. These engines are 1000HP the car can go from 0-60MPH in 2 seconds and reaches 200MPH. While the engines are not iron cast,they are made out of carbon, aluminum, magnesium, titanium and ceramics weighing around 180lbs. Modern diesels benefit from what is learned in F1 engines. Moreover the engines are capped to 15,000 RPM.

So before you start labeling "Trust Fund babies" also understand the Heavy duty engines are overbuilt and wasteful for reliability and not performance. Given reliability is the goal, any moron can overbuild something to last as long as you need.

Understand, I am a fan of diesels everything has a time and place. Sadly our engines are being chased away like nuclear energy which is also efficient but misunderstood. You might find it interesting that many Diesels have won in very difficult situations. https://www.hotcars.com/diesel-powered-cars-won-motorsports/#audi-r10-tdi

[ - ] HeyJames 0 points 1.3 yearsJan 29, 2023 23:02:14 ago (+0/-0)

any moron can overbuild something to last as long as you need.

So that's why a few manufacturers like CAT and Komatsu dominate the HD market while people who make atrocious crap like Renault can get into f1? Yeah get real lol

[ - ] usedoilanalysis [op] 0 points 1.3 yearsJan 30, 2023 05:13:08 ago (+0/-0)

Aluminum is better for engines, it's lighter, dissipates heat faster, suffers less corrosion, and with modern materials technology, can be made stronger than the cast iron stuff.

Did you know that Honda was casting its F1 blocks up until 2019? It wasn't until 2020 that they started making billet blocks. They used 3d printed sand molds, and a process that gave them very good repeatable tolerances. If you know anything about castings, you know that castings tend to have quite a bit of variance, no 2 cast parts are exactly the same. Going from cast to billet took them to another level, along with their Kunimitsu plating.

[ - ] usedoilanalysis [op] -1 points 1.3 yearsJan 29, 2023 22:22:32 ago (+0/-1)

Modern F1 engines have to last 8 races, including practice and qualifying sessions. 3 practice sessions and one qualifying equals to roughly 70 miles, and the race itself is ~200 miles, so 270 miles per race weekend. That's ~2,100 miles per engine. When you consider they're running ~ 42psi of boost, running close to 18:1 compression, and are running on the ragged edge, they're actually quite reliable. If your "heavy duty" engine was tasked with the same cylinder pressures, it would maybe last 500 miles before you window the block, or play Kerbal Space Program with your piston(s) as its jettisoned through the cylinder head.

[ - ] HeyJames 1 point 1.3 yearsJan 29, 2023 22:59:30 ago (+2/-1)

Lol the engines I work on run all day every day 365 any weather twin turbos at 30psi boost at 100% load, never take a break unless maintenance. 2100 miles doesn't compare to 60k hours lol

[ - ] usedoilanalysis [op] 0 points 1.3 yearsJan 30, 2023 05:05:34 ago (+0/-0)

Depends. Like I said, if the engines you work on saw the same continuous cylinder pressures as F1, they'd likely grenade themselves to oblivion in ~10 hours. Then again, F1 engines are starting to resemble diesel engines, running 18:1 compression with 40+ psi of boost, but using pump gas.

Diesel engines are churning at what 5,000 RPM tops? 2-3k RPM for continuous running? The piston speeds are lower, the stresses on the crank, rods, pistons is much lower.

[ - ] HeyJames -1 points 1.3 yearsJan 30, 2023 08:35:14 ago (+0/-1)

These engines max out at 1000-1350 lol

Trust fund racing engines can't be compared to stuff that has to work for a living and be profitable to run for literally decades. As I said you can have absolute trash automakers like Renault get into f1 and do decent. They could never make a competitive engine in the industrial market.

[ - ] usedoilanalysis [op] 0 points 1.3 yearsJan 30, 2023 09:01:59 ago (+0/-0)

Renault has been pretty much trash, also Renault is state funded, they can keep pouring money into the engine program. They top out at 1,050hp but consider they're using 100kg/hr of fuel. They're pulling over 1,000hp with the equivalent of ~750cc injectors, and a 350LPH fuel pump. If you tried to do this with a road car engine, you'd be lucky to make 600 HP. It's not easy to make the kind of power they're making without spending large amounts of money to develop them. You have to run very high compression ratios, your combustion process has to be extremely precise. Materials have to withstand detonation and not break. A lot of iteration and trial and error is involved. Then you have to consider the electric motors themselves, their development, their cooling. The motor generator on the turbo weighs ~11lbs and produces ~80hp, it has to work with the motor generator on the engine. The electronic control between the electrical systems is cutting edge stuff to minimize losses.

"stuff that has to work for a living" is easy to do by comparison, you over fuel, cap power, have loose tolerances by comparison and weight is almost a non issue.

A U.S. big rig truck engine makes ~500-550hp with 14+ liters of displacement, meanwhile these F1 engines make twice the power with 1/9th the displacement. Sure the truck engine can go 400k miles between rebuilds, but it's also far less stressed.

Like yeah, a Wartsila is more powerful and efficient, but you're not putting that in a car, period.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xAaD2aM3uPA

Also, Renault makes truck engines that "work for a living and be profitable to run for literally decades".

https://www.renault-trucks.com/en/long-haul-range

[ - ] HeyJames 0 points 1.3 yearsJan 30, 2023 09:05:57 ago (+0/-0)

14l is small. Really really small. You can't overfuel a modern lean burn emissions equipped engine. Starting to wonder how much you really know.

[ - ] usedoilanalysis [op] 0 points 1.3 yearsJan 30, 2023 09:18:16 ago (+0/-0)

Apparently more than you, 14 liters is what most U.S. longhaul trucks use. If you're talking about heavy machinery for mining, like excavators and such, what can those vehicles do? 30 mph tops? Diesel tankers? They're not built for speed, they're built to last, completely different set of requirements. And yes modern "lean burn" emissions equipped engines use urea fluid to bond with NOx, and have particulate filters. Otherwise they're just as dirty as anything else hauling stuff cross country.

[ - ] usedoilanalysis [op] 0 points 1.3 yearsJan 30, 2023 09:20:24 ago (+0/-0)

Also if 14 liters is a tiny engine, then what, you need 28 liters and 30psi of boost to push out 1,000+hp? Meanwhile these F1 engines are doing that with 1.6 liters and torque to match.

[ - ] usedoilanalysis [op] 0 points 1.3 yearsJan 30, 2023 09:31:14 ago (+0/-0)

So how many of those 28 liter engines are in race cars going 200 miles an hour? Who in their right mind would put a 4 ton engine in a sports car and go racing with it? Explain that to me since you're so smart n know so much.

[ - ] HeyJames 0 points 1.3 yearsJan 30, 2023 12:11:37 ago (+0/-0)

Even 28 liters is small to me lol

[ - ] usedoilanalysis [op] 0 points 1.3 yearsJan 30, 2023 12:22:08 ago (+0/-0)

You're just boosting my point, you can't put that in a car, that kind of heavy machinery is also trust fund shit, unobtanium for the normal person. If you really want power though, you don't even waste your time with reciprocating engines, you go straight to power turbines. Those engines put everything to shame. Power turbines even run on nuclear power. Imagine an automobile powered by an LM9000.

[ - ] bonghits4jeebus 0 points 1.3 yearsJan 29, 2023 23:52:15 ago (+0/-0)

What does "radiused" mean?

[ - ] RepublicanNerd 1 point 1.3 yearsJan 30, 2023 00:28:20 ago (+1/-0)

I believe he means a seat that has been cut at multiple angles as opposed to a seat with only one or two angles

[ - ] bonghits4jeebus 0 points 1.3 yearsJan 30, 2023 18:19:57 ago (+0/-0)

ty

[ - ] usedoilanalysis [op] 0 points 1.3 yearsJan 30, 2023 04:59:43 ago (+0/-0)

Radius means a smooth continous curve.

[ - ] Spaceman84 0 points 1.3 yearsJan 29, 2023 21:26:39 ago (+0/-0)

So why are GDI (consumer grade) engines such pieces of shit if they ostensibly bypass certain engineering considerations like the intake? Some motors need to get blasted with walnut shell particles as a regular maintenance procedure to clean carbon buildup.

[ - ] RedBarchetta 2 points 1.3 yearsJan 29, 2023 22:19:11 ago (+2/-0)

MONEY. Planned Obsolescence. Shit don't break, they have no reason for you to come back.

[ - ] HeyJames 1 point 1.3 yearsJan 29, 2023 23:00:36 ago (+1/-0)

Emissions systems. Best consumer engines were early 2000s designs

[ - ] usedoilanalysis [op] 0 points 1.3 yearsJan 30, 2023 05:07:45 ago (+0/-0)

Japan had a deflationary monetary policy, so late 90's to early 2000's saw the Japanese produce cheap but also very high quality parts. If it wasn't for that era, the Honda S2000 would never have been made.

[ - ] usedoilanalysis [op] 0 points 1.3 yearsJan 29, 2023 22:17:32 ago (+0/-0)

A few reasons, for one these engines have exhaust gas recirculation to reduce chamber temperatures, these often have things like soot and unburned hydrocarbons. The positive crankcase ventilation recirculates this crap back into the intake where it settles on the valves. Direct injection engines also have no fuel cooling, and washing the intake valves. The combination of these factors leads to the intake valves having large amounts of build up. Old oil formulations also contributed to this.

Things have improved dramatically in terms of oil formulations reducing the tendency of valves to build up crap on them. Along with redesigned EGR and PCV systems. Also some manufacturers like Toyota and GM are using both port and direct injection in their engines giving you the benefits of both.