Transcript Presentation

Lightweight Fuel Efficient
Engine Package
Team Introduction
P12221:
• Brittany Borella
• Evan See
• Chris Jones
• John Scanlon
• Stanley Fofano
• Taylor Hattori
Materials Reviewed
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project Description
Work Breakdown Structure
Customer Needs
Customer Specifications
Concept Development and Proposed Design
Current System Design Schematic
Project Plan
Risk Assessment
Project Introduction
• Background: Fuel efficiency is becoming increasingly more
important in Formula SAE competition scoring. In order to improve
the RIT Formula SAE Race Team’s score, an engine package is
desired that will be more fuel efficient while still producing a
competitive amount of power.
Points lost 2011
Percentage Scored (Detroit)
Design
Cost
Sales
Acceleration
Skidpad
Autocross
Endurance
Fuel
2009
67%
87%
96%
75%
76%
93%
100%
20%
2010
67%
89%
93%
80%
81%
86%
92%
52%
2011
83%
77%
90%
92%
85%
83%
N/A
60% est.
Detroit
Germany
Design
25
60
Cost
20
0
Sales
7
7
Acceleration
6
0
Skidpad
8
6
Autocross
25
18
Endurance
N/A
86
40
42
Fuel
Project Introduction
• Problem Statement: Develop a more fuel efficient and
powerful engine package to be used by the RIT Formula SAE
2012 car
• Previous Formula SAE Senior Design Projects:
–
–
–
–
Variable Intake System
Paddle Shift System
Data Acquisition System
Engine Control Unit
Objective and Scope
• Entire engine package able to provide the
following:
– Approximately 55 horsepower
– Operation in ambient temperatures up to 100°F
under racing conditions
– Reduction in fuel required by 60% compared to the
previous engine package over a similar run
• Well understood and documented development
process
Deliverables
• Engine Package
• Cooling System
• Engine Model and
CFD Analysis
• Wiring Diagram
• Engine Maps
– Power Output
– Fuel Economy
Assumptions and Constraints
• RIT Formula Team previously selected a single
cylinder engine – 2009 Yamaha WR450F
• Must comply with all Formula SAE rules
– Including, but not limited to:
• Use provided race fuel: 93 or 100 Octane Gasoline or
E85 Ethanol
• Spark Ignition
• Four Stroke
Work Breakdown Structure
Customer Needs
Customer Need
#
Importance
Description
Engine
CN1
1
The engine must reduce fuel consumption when compared to the previous
engine package
CN2
1
The engine must provide sufficient power output and acceleration
Control System
CN11
2
The control system must provide accurate fuel delivery and measurement
Cooling System
CN14
1
The cooling system must be able to allow the engine to operate in high
ambient temperatures under race conditions
Documentation and Testing
CN17
1
Documented theoretical test plan and anticipated results
CN18
1
Must provide a CFD analysis of the intake manifold, restrictor, and throttle
CN19
2
Must provide an accurate model of the engine in GT-suite
Engineering Specifications
Spec. # Importance
Source
Specification Unit of Marginal
(metric)
Measure
Value
Fuel
km/l
6.9
Consumption
Ideal
Value
Comments/Status
8.3
Want to use ~0.7 gal for the
22km run
S1
1
CN1
S3
1
CN2
Power Output
HP
45
55
S4
1
CN2
Torque
ft-lbs
31
35
S6
1
CN4,15
Reliability
km
50
100
Should be able to perform in
all Formula SAE events and
testing before major overhaul
S8
1
CN6
Weight
lbs
75
68
Engine weight
S9
1
CN8
Fuel Type
N/A
S12
1
CN14
Temperature
°F
220
200
E85 Ethanol-Gasoline Blend
or 100 Octane Gasoline
Cooling system must keep the
engine under 200 degrees in
ambient temperatures up to
100 degrees
Sensor List
Sensors Necessary For Dynamometer Testing
Parameter
Throttle Position
Manifold Air Pressure
Mass Air Flow
Inlet Air Temperature
Exhaust Gas Temperature
Air Fuel Ratio
Crank Reference Sensor
Cam Sync Sensor
Engine Coolant Temperature
Engine Oil Temperature
Engine Oil Pressure
Barometric Pressure
Ambient Air Temperature
Engine Crank Angle
Cylinder Pressure
Fuel Pressure
Fuel Inlet Flow Rate
Fuel Inlet Temperature
Fuel Outlet Flow Rate
Injector Duty
Spark Advance
Coolant Inlet Temperature
Coolant Outlet Temperature
Coolant Flow Rate
Knock
Qty.
1
2
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Acquisition System
MoTeC M400
MoTeC M400
MoTeC M400
MoTeC M400
NI PCI-6034E
MoTeC M400
MoTeC M400
MoTeC M400
MoTeC M400
NI PCI-6034E
NI PCI-6034E
MoTeC M400
NI PCI-6034E
NI PCI-6034E
NI PCI-6034E
NI PCI-6034E
NI PCI-6034E
NI PCI-6034E
NI PCI-6034E
MoTeC M400
MoTeC M400
NI PCI-6034E
NI PCI-6034E
NI PCI-6034E
Required Range Warning Limit
0-100
0-110
0-60
0-100
>80
0-950
>850
.7-1.3
0-120
0-150
0-800
95-105
0-50
0-360
0-5000
0-70
0-2.4
0-70
0-2.4
0-100
0-50
0-120
0-120
0-70
>90
>130
<140
>40
>60
>90
>90
>90
Y
Units
%
kPaa
g/s
C
C
Lambda
Method
Rotary Potentiometer
Pressure Transducer
Cold Wire MAF
Thermistor
K-Type Thermocouple
O2 Sensor
Magnetic Pickup
Inductive Proximity
C
Thermistor
C
Thermistor
kPag Pressure Transducer
kPaa Pressure Transducer
C
Thermistor
dATCD Encoder
kPaa Piezo Pressure Transducer
kPag Pressure Transducer
lpm Turbine Flow Meter
C
K-Type Thermocouple
lpm Turbine Flow Meter
%
MoTeC Parameter
dBTDC MoTeC Parameter
C
K-Type Thermocouple
C
K-Type Thermocouple
lpm Variable Area or Turbine
Y/N Knock Tube
Engine Management System
• ECM: Motec M400
• Custom fuel maps for
each event
• Controls various
auxiliary devices
• Built-in data acquisition
System Design Schematic:
Engine
Concept Development and
Proposed Design - Engine
Naturally Aspirated 450
Single
Forced Induction 450 Single
Naturally Aspirated 550 VTwin
Forced Induction 550 V-Twin
Naturally Aspirated 500 I2
Forced Induction 500 I2
Naturally Aspirated 600 I4
Forced Induction 600 I4
Weight
5
5
5
5
4
3
3
3
Forced Induction 250 Single
Fuel Efficient
Reliable
Light
Practical
Driveable
Powerful
Serviceable
Complexity
Ease of
calibration
Inexpensive
Attractive
Sound
Totals:
Naturally Aspirated 250
Single
Requirements
Possible Engine Packages
1
0
1
-1
1
-1
1
1
1
-1
1
0
0
0
0
-1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
-1
0
-1
1
0
1
1
1
0
-1
-1
0
-1
0
1
0
-1
0
1
-1
1
1
-1
1
0
-1
0
-1
1
0
0
0
-1
0
0
-1
1
1
1
1
0
-1
0
-1
0
0
1
0
-1
3
1
-1
1
-1
1
-1
1
-1
1
-1
2
1
-1
0
-1
0
-1
1
0
1
0
1
-1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
16
-3
33
0
14
-19
14
-11
16
-12
Concept Selection and Proposed
Design – Cooling System
Single Radiator
Twin Radiator
Fan
No Fan
Surge Tank
No Surge Tank
Electric pump
Weight
5
5
No Oil Cooler
Mechanical pump
Light
Effective high speed
Effective low
speed/off
CG Height
Complexity
Serviceable
Cost
Oil Cooler
Requirements
Possible Cooling System Designs
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
-1
0
1
1
0
1
0
-1
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
4
3
3
2
0
0
0
-1
-2
1
1
0
1
14
0
1
0
1
10
1
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
-1
-3
1
1
0
0
17
0
0
0
-1
3
1
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
-1
2
0
0
0
1
2
System Design Schematic:
Cooling System
Concept Selection and Proposed
Design – Fuel Choice
93 Octane Gasoline
100 Octane Gasoline
E85 Ethanol/Gasoline
Possible Fuel Choices
Power potential
5
0
1
1
Knock Protection
4
0
1
1
Energy Content
4
1
1
0
Corrosivity
3
1
1
0
Cost
3
1
-1
0
Innovative
2
-1
-1
0
8
11
9
Requirements
Weight
Project Plan
Project Plan
Risk Assessment - Technical
ID
Risk Item
Effect
Cause
L
S
I
Action to Minimize Risk
Owner
Technical Risks
1
Engine Dynamometer
not reliable
Dynamometer
control system
not reliable
2
2
4
3
Engine
Cooling system
Insufficient Cooling of
Overheats/damag undersized or
the Engine
e to engine
inefficient
2
3
6
Unable to accuractly
Inaccurate
predict airflow through
Improper CFD
4
theoretical model
the intake manifold,
analysis
of engine
restrictor, and throttle
2
2
4
2
3
6
5
Unable to accurately
predict fuel
consumption and
power output
8 Air:Fuel Ratio too lean
Unable to
characterize
engine torque
Inefficiencies in
the engine
package
Improper
Engine
Modeling
Damage to
engine
Ratio leaned
out too far in
order to
increase fuel
economy
2
3
6
Be familiarized with the
Dynamometer control
programs. Attempt to
characterize the
Stanley Fofano ,
Dynamometer and create
Phil Vars
an accurate control system
in case the original is
inefficient.
Correctly analyze cooling
Evan See,
system to maximize
Brittany Borella
efficiency
Accurately control initial
assumptions and
conditions in order to
Taylor Hattori
create the most accurate
model possible
Verify engine model with
dynamometer testing in
Jon Scanlon
correlation with fuel flow
sensors.
Slowly change the air fuel
mixture in order to realize
effects before another
change is made
Chris Jones,
Jon Scanlon
Risk Assessment - Management
ID
Risk Item
Effect
Cause
L
S
I
Action to Minimize Risk
Owner
Project Management Risks
10
Outside contracted
Insufficient
Outside Contracting
work won't be able
funding
work is expensive
to be paid for
11
Actual engineering in
Actual Senior
Inconsistant
the project given more
Design
Team
priority than Senior
deliverables do not
Priorities
design paperwork and
get met
deliverables
1
1
Formula team
Project not
does not have a Poor time management
12 completed on
1
complete engine
and planning
time
package
13
Engine Dyno
Parts are
long lead parts not
testing and on car
ordered too
identified and ordered
testing cannot be
late
on time
completed on time
1
1
Use funds wisely and try to do as
much in house testing as possible.
When outside testing is necessary, Brittany Borella
try to take advantage of
sponsorships.
1
1
Project Manager(s) in charge of
keeping track of all deliverables, for
the class and the actual engine
Evan See,
design, and making sure they are Britttany Borella
being taken care of by everyone on
the team
3
Lead engineer will make sure that
sufficient time is put into all engine
3 systems so that all components are
properly tested and prepared for the
final engine package
2
2
1
Long lead time parts ordered as
soon as identified - early in MSD1
Jon Scanlon
Jon Scanlon
Action Items for Detailed Design
• Well Documented Testing Plan
• BOM and 3D Model of Key Cooling System Components,
Intake and Exhaust
• Preliminary Engine Model
• Wiring Diagram
• Baseline Engine Maps
– Power Output
– Fuel Economy
General Questions and
Comments?