Preventing abnormal combustion

All that has to do with the power train, gearbox, clutch, fuels and lubricants, etc. Generally the mechanical side of Formula One.
Edis
Edis
59
Joined: 31 Jan 2010, 16:58

Re: Preventing abnormal combustion

Post

Tommy Cookers wrote:
Edis wrote: Thermal barrier coatings also tend to increase knock, not reduce it. This is because the end gases are actually being cooled by the cylinder head, and even the piston. End gases can reach temperatures in the region of 700 degC before the flame front arrives.
thermal barrier coating of the piston would usefully allow it to be lighter (it would receive less radiated combustion heat)

is the combustion chamber similarly coated and, if so, why ?
The only thing an insulated piston will cause is more knock and a lower volumetric efficiency.

The temperature of the piston is controlled by cooling, oil jets to the underside is a good method.

Not to mention that TBC's tend to be very sensitive.

riff_raff
riff_raff
132
Joined: 24 Dec 2004, 10:18

Re: Preventing abnormal combustion

Post

Knock is very much time dependent!
If you accept that "knock" implies spontaneous detonation type combustion ahead of the flame front in an SI engine, then it is not so much time dependent. Instead, it relies more on flame speed, heat transfer, air/fuel mixture, and charge temperatures.
The heating of the endgas during combustion is actually not that dependent on heat transfer
The peak temperature of the endgas trapped in the quench area is almost entirely determined by heat transfer. The thickness of the endgas volume in the quench area at TDC in a high CR engine is only about 1mm. And it's precisely because this endgas layer is so thin and has a very high rate of heat transfer into the piston crown and cylinder head deck that it inhibits detonation. In fact, this one reason most production auto engines don't use much quench area. The endgas mixture in the quench area never gets hot enough to ignite, so it results in large amounts of unburned HC emissions.
Air/fuel mixtures don't self ignite instantly, but depending on the conditions this ignition delay will vary. That's why HCCI engines are so difficult to control. With a HCCI engine you can't control ignition timing directly, instead the ignition timing is controlled by indirectly adjusting the ignition delay (usually HCCI engines operate with very lean homogeneous air/fuel mixtures). Diesels on the other hand are easier. Diesel fuel have a high cetane number - in other words, it self ignite quite rapidly if injected into a chamber containing hot air. So with a diesel you just control the start of fuel injection, often referred to as the alpha angle, then the fuel will self ignite after a few crankshaft degrees. Still, the ignition delay is much longer at low loads and low engine temperatures. That's why diesels tend to produce a "knocking" sound at low loads, but not at high loads when the engine is warm. This knocking sound is indirectly produced by long ignition delays - in a diesel a long ignition delay will lead to a more rapid pressure rise in the cylinders since more fuel has had time to premix with air before the combustion starts. That is also why diesels these days use pilot injection, a short fuel injection before the main fuel injection aimed to reduce the ignition delay.
OK, so technically air/fuel mixtures don't self ignite "instantly". The combustion process requires the correct combination of fuel/oxygen association and (heat) energy input to initiate. But in reality, the constant volume combustion process of HCCI is virtually instantaneous, and it's because of the very rapid heat release rate it produces that it is so thermally efficient. In theory, the HHCI process can be used with any fuel or stoichiometric ratio. But the best efficiency results are achieved with lean mixtures and a detonation resistant fuel. The very rapid constant volume combustion of HCCI also results in much lower peak combustion temperatures, which virtually eliminates any formation of NOx compounds.

As for combustion in DI CI diesel engines, the ignition delay is dependent upon many factors. The combustion process in a DI diesel engine is no different than that of any other engine. The combustion process will only initiate when there is the proper combination fuel/oxygen association and (heat) energy input. One of the biggest factors in DI diesel ignition delay is the mean droplet size of the fuel spray (Sauter). If you look at the combustion process at the micro level, you'll note that combustion in a DI diesel only occurs at the surface of each fuel droplet, where there is the correct ratio of oxygen and fuel. Plus, the greater mass of large fuel droplets means they take longer to heat up and evaporate. This is critical because only fuel vapor will combust, and not liquid fuel. Thus a well dispersed spray of numerous, very tiny fuel droplets will result in less ignition delay, and will produce faster combustion.
"Q: How do you make a small fortune in racing?
A: Start with a large one!"

Tommy Cookers
Tommy Cookers
650
Joined: 17 Feb 2012, 16:55

Re: Preventing abnormal combustion

Post

Edis wrote:Toyota's RVX-09 for instance had a compression ratio of 13.6:1, and other F1 engines should have similar compression ratios.
F1 engines doesn't really have any problems with engine knock due to their very high speeds. The time available for the end gases to self ignite during combustion is so short that knock isn't a problem.
does anybody have evidence that this generation of 18000 and/or higher rpm engines with their fast-burning fuel combusts fast enough such that essentially all the heating takes place at or very close to TDC ?
ie is the thermal efficiency is as good as the CR suggests, or otherwise ?

User avatar
pgfpro
75
Joined: 26 Dec 2011, 23:11
Location: Coeur d' Alene ID

Re: Preventing abnormal combustion

Post

Tommy Cookers wrote:
Edis wrote:Toyota's RVX-09 for instance had a compression ratio of 13.6:1, and other F1 engines should have similar compression ratios.
F1 engines doesn't really have any problems with engine knock due to their very high speeds. The time available for the end gases to self ignite during combustion is so short that knock isn't a problem.
does anybody have evidence that this generation of 18000 and/or higher rpm engines with their fast-burning fuel combusts fast enough such that essentially all the heating takes place at or very close to TDC ?
ie is the thermal efficiency is as good as the CR suggests, or otherwise ?
TC a very good read about flame speed and rpm up to 18000rpm. Enjoy:)
http://ltces.dem.ist.utl.pt/lxlaser/lxl ... 12.2_6.pdf
building the perfect beast

Tommy Cookers
Tommy Cookers
650
Joined: 17 Feb 2012, 16:55

Re: Preventing abnormal combustion

Post

brilliant stuff !

many thanks

riff_raff
riff_raff
132
Joined: 24 Dec 2004, 10:18

Re: Preventing abnormal combustion

Post

TC- I gave a quick scan of the paper linked by pgfpro (which was quite nice by the way!), but the data shown simply showed that the mean flame front velocity, calculated from the point of ignition to when the optical sensor at the edge of the cylinder detected the arrival of the flame front, showed a general increase with regard to higher rpm/piston speeds. Unfortunately, I did not see any discussion of how the greatly increased turbulence and flow velocities produced within the quench area at TDC affected flame propagation/combustion rates. Obviously, deflagration type combustion flame front speeds within the quiescent conditions of the open chamber volume would be fairly uniform regardless of piston speeds. But the pronounced flow velocity and turbulence conditions resulting at the quench area around TDC would be greatly affected by piston velocity/engine rpm. So how much of the increase seen in flame front velocity was due to the quench effect?
"Q: How do you make a small fortune in racing?
A: Start with a large one!"

Tommy Cookers
Tommy Cookers
650
Joined: 17 Feb 2012, 16:55

Re: Preventing abnormal combustion

Post

my impression from the paper is that combustion speed and consistency is less than ideal
(although as good as could be expected in a large bore engine at such very high rpm)

because the PV diagram seems wide compared with eg a high compression 2000 rpm engine
and the ignition timing seems very advanced (over 60deg btdc ?), even with the help of knock sensing ?
presumably some combustion is happening before tdc
engine behaviour at 18000 rpm (helped by fast-burning fuel and knock sensing) seems the same as 11000 rpm engines 50 years ago

AFAIK some high power engines show (harmlessly) some detonation of end-gas relatively late in the combustion process
eg Jaguar winning those 24 hr races, the detonation is what slowly erodes pistons due to heat effect of local shock processes
such detonation will be limited by the effects of the continuing expansion ? and so will not be apparent in a PV diagram ?
(but useful in a race engine where combustion speed slightly lags expansion ?, does it happen in F1 ?)


ideal DI appears to offer faster initial combustion and need less ignition advance
although DI contributes via the compression process to enhancing useable CR, improved combustion speed detracts from that ?
the paper suggests to me that leaner mixtures are inherently liable to inconsistent combustion (at high rpm)
Last edited by Tommy Cookers on 25 Dec 2012, 19:42, edited 1 time in total.

user001
user001
-2
Joined: 29 Sep 2012, 15:55

Re: Preventing abnormal combustion

Post

pgfpro wrote:
Tommy Cookers wrote:
Edis wrote:Toyota's RVX-09 for instance had a compression ratio of 13.6:1, and other F1 engines should have similar compression ratios.
F1 engines doesn't really have any problems with engine knock due to their very high speeds. The time available for the end gases to self ignite during combustion is so short that knock isn't a problem.
does anybody have evidence that this generation of 18000 and/or higher rpm engines with their fast-burning fuel combusts fast enough such that essentially all the heating takes place at or very close to TDC ?
ie is the thermal efficiency is as good as the CR suggests, or otherwise ?
TC a very good read about flame speed and rpm up to 18000rpm. Enjoy:)
http://ltces.dem.ist.utl.pt/lxlaser/lxl ... 12.2_6.pdf
exceptional paper, thanks!

riff_raff
riff_raff
132
Joined: 24 Dec 2004, 10:18

Re: Preventing abnormal combustion

Post

Tommy Cookers wrote:''......and the ignition timing seems very advanced (over 60deg btdc ?), even with the help of knock sensing ?.....presumably some combustion is happening before tdc.....the paper suggests to me that leaner mixtures are inherently liable to inconsistent combustion......
TC- With every SI engine, there is some ignition advance required. And there is always some combustion occurring prior to TDC. The optimum amount of ignition advance at any operating point is determined by the engine's "max brake torque" (MBT) as measured on the dyno. It is also correct that lean mixtures tend to be more susceptible to misfire and unstable combustion in an SI engine.

As for flame front velocity, deflagration type combustion in a quiescient chamber volume with a homogeneous, stoichiometric A/F mixture produces a fairly constant flame speed that propagates outward from the ignition point with a spherical surface shape. But the extremely high radially-inward flow velocities and turbulence produced in the end-gas mixture around the quench regions at piston TDC, create a very high mixing rate at the flame front, which increases the combustion rate. Basically, the combustion process proceeds relatively slow from the point of ignition and through most of the combustion chamber volume, and then rapidly increases when the flame front encounters the high velocity and turbulence from the quench flows.
"Q: How do you make a small fortune in racing?
A: Start with a large one!"

autogyro
autogyro
53
Joined: 04 Oct 2009, 15:03

Re: Preventing abnormal combustion

Post

The effect turbulance and velocity of the induction flow has on flame path and ignition advance begins the moment the inlet valve(s) open

Tommy Cookers
Tommy Cookers
650
Joined: 17 Feb 2012, 16:55

Re: Preventing abnormal combustion

Post

riff_raff wrote:
Tommy Cookers wrote:''..........presumably some combustion is happening before tdc......
TC- With every SI engine, there is some ignition advance required. And there is always some combustion occurring prior to TDC. The optimum amount of ignition advance at any operating point is determined by the engine's "max brake torque" (MBT) as measured on the dyno. It is also correct that lean mixtures tend to be more susceptible to misfire and unstable combustion in an SI engine.
As for flame front velocity, deflagration type combustion in a quiescient chamber volume with a homogeneous, stoichiometric A/F mixture produces a fairly constant flame speed that propagates outward from the ignition point with a spherical surface shape. But the extremely high radially-inward flow velocities and turbulence produced in the end-gas mixture around the quench regions at piston TDC, create a very high mixing rate at the flame front, which increases the combustion rate. Basically, the combustion process proceeds relatively slow from the point of ignition and through most of the combustion chamber volume, and then rapidly increases when the flame front encounters the high velocity and turbulence from the quench flows.
I should have said that IMO the paper shows in the PV plots evidence of combustion before tdc

based on your post quoted above, my impression is that the new DI will not be a game-changer in F1
because it can't further improve combustion speed relative to current F1 rpm ?
but 2014 F1 will run around 11000 rpm, at this rpm combustion speed is inherently a better match to piston motion anyway ?

so the main benefit of DI to F1 is in helping 2014 F1 to a very high CR despite the turbocharging ?

autogyro
autogyro
53
Joined: 04 Oct 2009, 15:03

Re: Preventing abnormal combustion

Post

Tommy Cookers wrote:based on your post quoted above, my impression is that the new DI will not be a game-changer in F1
because it can't further improve combustion speed relative to current F1 rpm ?
A new design of the combustion chamber can though.
Last edited by Steven on 27 Dec 2012, 23:00, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Fixed quotes

riff_raff
riff_raff
132
Joined: 24 Dec 2004, 10:18

Re: Preventing abnormal combustion

Post

Tommy Cookers wrote:I should have said that IMO the paper shows in the PV plots evidence of combustion before tdc

based on your post quoted above, my impression is that the new DI will not be a game-changer in F1
because it can't further improve combustion speed relative to current F1 rpm ?
but 2014 F1 will run around 11000 rpm, at this rpm combustion speed is inherently a better match to piston motion anyway ?

so the main benefit of DI to F1 is in helping 2014 F1 to a very high CR despite the turbocharging ?
TC- every SI engine has some combustion occurring before TDC. The trick is to get the best balance of negative work produced by the pressure rise BTDC and the positive work produced by combustion ATDC. All other things being equal, the optimum ignition advance will always vary with mean piston speed.

With regards to DI, it will provide benefits in intake charge density and intake charge temperatures through fuel latent heat effects.
"Q: How do you make a small fortune in racing?
A: Start with a large one!"

olefud
olefud
79
Joined: 13 Mar 2011, 00:10
Location: Boulder, Colorado USA

Re: Preventing abnormal combustion

Post

riff_raff wrote:With regards to DI, it will provide benefits in intake charge density and intake charge temperatures through fuel latent heat effects.
I’m not disagreeing; just wondering why incompressible fuel cooling by evaporation differs when it occurs in the cylinder rather than partially in the intake port –dry flow aside.

autogyro
autogyro
53
Joined: 04 Oct 2009, 15:03

Re: Preventing abnormal combustion

Post

The amount of air in the cylinder is larger with DI, because with port injection the fuel displaces some of the air before it is compressed in the combustion chamber.