FINAL PROJECT ME 431

Christian Gobert ME 431 May 5, 2015

Abstract
The objective of this project was to design a 610cc 4-stroke 4-cylinder
Formula SAE engine that maximized brake power at 7000 RPM. From an
initial engine design, four parameters: bore-stroke ratio; intake valve close
angle; intake length and air-fuel ratio were modified to achieve the desired
performance. A final engine design led to maximum brake power
increasing from 17.3 kW to 23.0 kW and peak brake power shifting from
4500RPM to7000RPM.

Gobert 1

Abstract:
The objective of this project was to design a 610cc 4-stroke 4-cylinder Formula SAE engine that
maximized brake power at 7000 RPM. From an initial engine design, four parameters: bore-stroke
ratio; intake valve close angle; intake length and air-fuel ratio were modified to achieve the desired
performance. A final engine design led to maximum brake power increasing from 17.3 kW to 23.0
kW and peak brake power shifting from 4500RPM to7000RPM.

Introduction:
The objective of this engine design was to develop a 4-cylinder 610cc Formula SAE engine with
maximum brake power in an operating range of 6000-8000RPM, preferably 7000RPM. This RPM
range was selected because a characteristics of racing engine is high operating RPMs, indicative
of gear ratio set-up and fuel mixture selection. In order to achieve the desired results four
parameters were test: bore-stroke ratio; intake valve close angle; intake length and air-fuel ratio.
When testing design features the focus was how each change affected the brake power output
performance in maximizing this value and shifting this value in the RPM range. Engine
modifications where tested over a RPM range of 1000 to 10000RPM.

Initial Design:
The initial design of the engine was based off the Kia engine from the SAE Paper 970917. Key
parameters for closed cycle efficiency, friction model, atmospheric conditions, piston dimensions
and timing were used from this Kia engine. Modifications to the valve dimensions, intake and
exhaust dimensions, and cylinder were taken from the Kia engine and then modified to meet the
requirements of a 610 CC 4 cylinder engine. Table 1 provides all of the engine characteristics that
were selected for the initial engine, with shaded regions denoting the tested parameters where
eventual improvements and modifications where applied.
The engine cylinder setup was chosen to be a standard inline 4-cylinder with a firing order of1-34-2. The bore to stroke ratio was selected to be 1 with a compression ratio of 10.5 as it was a good
baseline to test performance. The intake and exhaust valve dimensions were derived from the Kia
engine, simply a ratio reduction of the dimensions was conducted so that the valve dimensions met
the requirements of the intake and exhaust piping. The requirements of the intake pipes required
only a 20mm restrictor plate be open to the atmosphere. Three intake sections were developed;
open to the atmosphere is short initial intake connected to a cylindrical manifold that splits to four
intake pipes that taper down before reaching the cylinder. The dimensions of the intake design
chosen for the relative small design that allows for high operating speeds. The intake and exhaust
systems are tapered to maximize the rate of air-fuel mixture into and out of the cylinders. Special
attention was given to the Mach number in the intake and exhaust system as not to exceed .6 for
choked flow. The parameters chosen for the initial design are detailed in Table 1 with the engine
set up depicted in Figure 2. The initial engine design was tested and resulted in peak brake power
of 17.3 kW at 4500RPM.

Gobert 2

Table 1. Initial Parameters (Untested) of Formula SAE Engine

Note: Shaded parameters are to be tested
Engine Cylinder
Cylinder Count
Total Displacement Vd
Engine Configuration
Firing Order

4-stroke standard
4 cylinder
610 cm3
Inline-4
1-3-4-2

Compression Ratio
Bore
Stroke

10.5
57.91mm
57.91mm

Friction Model
Parasitic loss constant
Parasitic loss factor

4-stroke SI
1 bar
.0035 bar

Head

4-stroke, standard

Ignition Advance
Combustion Efficiency
Air-Fuel Ratio
Burn Delay
Ignition Duration
Wiebe A
Wiebe M
Fueling Option

-30CA
.85
14.6
10 CA
45 CA
6
2
Gasoline Carbureted/ Indirect fuel injection

Length

110mm

Piston Height
Piston Compression Height
Piston Wrist Pin Offset
Initial Piston Temperature

80mm
40mm
0mm
250C

Type
Open angle
Close Angle
Ramp Up Period
Ramp up Ratio
Ramp Down Period
Ramp Down Ratio
Max Lift Dwell
Peak Lift Offset

Dimensioned
6 deg BTDC
46 deg ABDC
40
.2
40
.2
0
0

Count
Stem Diameter
Manifold Diameter
Port Diameter
Inner Seat Diameter
Outer Seat Diameter

2
5mm
15mm
12mm
13.5mm
14.5mm

Cylinder

Friction

Head
Close Cycle

Connecting Rod
Piston

Valves
Intake
Timing

Dimensions

Gobert 3
Seat Angle
Max Lift

45DEG
3.6mm

Type
Open Angle
Close angle
Ramp Up Period
Ramp up Ratio
Ramp Down Period
Ramp Down Ratio
Max Lift Dwell
Peak Lift Offset

Dimensioned
50 BBDC
10 Deg ATDC
40
.2
40
.2
0
0

Count
Stem Diameter
Manifold Diameter
Port Diameter
Inner Seat Diameter
Outer Seat Diameter
Seat Angle
Max Lift

2
5mm
20mm
22.5mm
25mm
27mm
45DEG
8.1mm

Exhaust
Timing

Dimensions

Manifolds, Pipes, Dimensions

1st Intake Pipe(AmbientManifold)
Count
Length
Entrance Diameter
Exit Diameter

1
60mm
20mm
20mm

Shape
Length
Diameter

Cylinder
50mm
20mm

Count
Length
Entrance Diameter
Exit Diameter
1st Exhaust Pipe(CylinderManifold)
Count
Length
Entrance diameter
Exit Diameter
Exhaust Manifold
Shape
Length
Diameter
2nd Exhaust Pipe(ManifoldAmbient)
Count
Length
Entrance Diameter
Exit Diameter

4
100mm
20mm
15mm

Intake Manifold

2nd Intake Pipe(ManifoldCylinder)

4
150mm
20mm
25mm
Cylinder
50mm
25mm
1
75mm
25mm
25mm

Gobert 4

Figure 2 Engine Setup

Figure 3: Brake Power vs Engine Speed Initial Design

18

BrakePower in kW

16
14
12
10
8
6
4
0

2000

4000

6000

EngineSpeed RPM

Modifications and Enhancements:

8000

10000

Gobert 5

Listed in Table 4 are the parameters tested to improve the engine; the objective of the tests were
to increase peak performance and move the peak performance into the operating range of 6000 to
8000 RPM. Four tests were performed in the following order: bore-stroke ratio; intake valve close
angle; intake length and air-fuel ratio. Each investigation into a parameter displays the effect that
an engine modification had on the brake power vs engine speed curve. Each test concluded in an
optimum parameter value selected that was then applied to the engine and present for the remaining
tests.

Table 4. Test Procedure

1st Test Cylinder Modifications
Bore to Stroke Ratio 1
B=57.91mm S=57.91mm
Bore to Stroke Ratio 1.25
B=62.37mm S=49.90mm
Bore to Stroke Ratio 1.5
B=66.2mm S=44.2mm
2nd Test-Intake @ BS ratio=1.5
Close Angle
50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100 (ABDC)
3rd Test- Intake Length @BS ratio=1.5 ;Intake Closure=100(ABDC);Exhaust closure=50(BBDC); Spark
Timing = -30 CA
Intake length
100mm 75mm 50mm
4th Test AF Ratio @BS ratio=1.5;Intake Closure=100(ABDC);Exhaust closure=50(BBDC); Spark Timing
= -30 CA; Intake Length=
AF Ratio
10.6 11.6 12.6 13.6 14.6 15.6

1st Test Bore to Stroke Ratio:

Gobert 6

Large values of bore to stroke ratios are common in performance race vehicles while small bore
to stroke ratios are common in hauling vehicles; shorter strokes can operate at high engine speeds.
Therefore testing on this engine involved increasing the bore to ratio from 1 to 1.25 and then 1.5.
The expected performance would be highest with 1.5 BS ratio and testing concluded that
assumption. Figure 4 displays the result of testing and that the 1.5 BS ratio increased performance
from 17.3 kW to 17.9. The BS ratio did not have as much of an effect on engine performance until
the remainder of tests were concluded; because only the BS ratio was changed the remaining
untested engine parameters had not been fully optimized at this point.

Figure 4: Brake Power vs Engine Speed

BS Ratio=1

Bs Ratio=1.25

BS Ratio=1.5

18

16

BrakePower in kW

14

12

10

4
0

2000

4000

6000

EngineSpeed RPM

8000

10000

Gobert 7

2nd Test Intake Valve Close Angle:

This tests goal was to find the optimum intake valve close angle as the early timing from the initial
engine design was not optimal for the desired performance characteristics. The testing included
increasing the intake valve close angle from 50 ABDC to 100 ABDC in increments of 10, with
the results displayed in Figure 5. 100 ABDC was selected as the final design parameter because it
not only increased brake power output, 17.9 kW to 20.8kW, but shifted the peak further into the
desired RPM range of 6000 to 8000 RPM. The valve timing chosen corresponded to the maximum
amount of air that could be forced into the cylinder. Timing events that occur to late allow for the
piston to push fuel-air mixture out of the cylinder while early timing would not maximize the
amount air-fuel mixture that can be forced into the cylinder. The engine modification resulted in
the intake valve close angle changing from 46 ABDC to 100 ABDC.

Figure 5: Brake Power vs Engine Speed

Intake Closure 50 ABDC

Intake Closure 60 ABDC

Intake Closure 70 ABDC

Intake Closure 80 ABDC

Intake Closure 90 ABDC

Intake Closure 100 ABDC

25

BrakePower in kW

20

15

10

0
0

2000

4000

6000

EngineSpeed RPM

8000

10000

Gobert 8

3rd Test Intake Length:

To shift the peak in the brake power curve the use of a shorter intake was tested, three intake
lengths were tested: 50mm, 75mm, and 100mm. The results of the intake modification on engine
performance are displayed in Figure 6; where the 50mm intake length had the most impact on
performance; shifting the curves peak to 7000rpm. The resultant change on the engine design was
a change of intake length from 100mm down to 50mm. The shorter intake pipe was also examined
to ensure choke flow did not occur, analysis provided a maximum Mach number of .58, below the
predicated choke flow threshold of .6. Below 50 mm the intake pipe was too short to allow for
maximum resonance and dampening of pressure waves to occur in the intake pipe and was
therefore the shortest pipe length tested.

Figure 6: Brake Power vs Engine Speed

100mm Intake Length

75mm Intake Length

50mm Intake Length

25

BrakePower in kW

20

15

10

0
0

2000

4000

6000

EngineSpeed RPM

8000

10000

Gobert 9

4th Test Air to Fuel Ratio:

The final modification to the engine was to modify the engines air to fuel ratio. Since this was the
last modification to be made a wide range of AF Ratios were examined, AF ratios tested included:
10.6, 11.6, 12.6, 13.6, 14.6 and 15.6. The effect each AF ratio had on brake power output is
illustrated in Figure 7; reducing the AF ratio to a fuel lean value of 12.6 maximized brake power
output, therefore the final engine design was altered from 14.6 to 12.6. A fuel lean mixture is more
optimal at high RPMs since the time available for combustion is lower than it would be at lower
RPMs; larger AF ratios will lead to longer burn duration times to achieve peak pressure in the
combustion chamber while smaller AF Ratios will lead to smaller burn durations to achieve peak
pressure in the combustion chamber. The 12.6 AF ratio has a corresponding burn duration time to
achieve peak pressure in the combustion chamber at a desired operating speed of 7000RPM.

Figure 7: Brake Power vs Engine Speed

AF Ratio 10.6

AF Ratio 11.6

AF Ratio 12.6

AF Ratio 13.6

AF Ratio 14.6

AF Ratio 15.6

25

BrakePower in kW

20

15

10

0
0

2000

4000

6000

EngineSpeed RPM

8000

10000

Gobert 10

Final Performance Characteristics

The final changes from initial design to final design are highlighted in Table 8 and the
subsequent change in brake power output vs engine speed is displayed in Figure 9. The overall
modifications shifted the brake power peak from 4500 RPM to 7000 RPM and increased the
brake power peak value from 17.3 kW to 23.0 kW. The larger bore to stroke ratio, larger intake
valve close angle, shorter intake length and smaller air to fuel ratio are indicative of high output
engines with high operating speeds.
Table 8. Engine Modifications
Engine Parameter
BS Ratio
Intake Valve Closure
Intake Length
AF Ratio

Initial Design Value

1
46 ABDC
100mm
14.6

Final Design Value

1.5
100 ABDC
50mm
12.6

Figure 9 : Brake Power vs Engine Speed

Final Engine Design

Initial Engine Design

25

BrakePower in kW

20

15

10

0
0

2000

4000

6000

EngineSpeed RPM

8000

10000

Gobert 11