2-stroke diesel is the (near) future?

Sport Pilot wrote:

I think most of us know that torque is only a force and you need speed
(RPM) to develop power. More speed is more power. Or was there some
other point you are trying to make?



II think the point is that there are TWO ways that do an equally good
job of increasing power. More TORQUE is more power too.

Since power=K*Torque*RPM, the result is that if you hold the speed
constant and double the torque, you get double the power. There are
diesel engines in this world that develop 20,000 horespower at only 150
RPM. Naturally, the torque value is astronomical. No, they don't fly.
;-) They swim.

Steve wrote:
Sport Pilot wrote:

I think most of us know that torque is only a force and you need
speed
(RPM) to develop power. More speed is more power. Or was there
some
other point you are trying to make?



II think the point is that there are TWO ways that do an equally good

job of increasing power. More TORQUE is more power too.

Since power=K*Torque*RPM, the result is that if you hold the speed
constant and double the torque, you get double the power. There are
diesel engines in this world that develop 20,000 horespower at only
150
RPM. Naturally, the torque value is astronomical. No, they don't fly.

;-) They swim.

Why the obvious apple and orange comparision? I can show you a model
diesel engine of less than 1/2 cubic engine that turns about 10,000
RPM? So what. A large engine is going to turn less RPM because of its
rotation mass. You need to compare engines of equal size. The model
diesel engines will not turn as fast as the gas or methanol/nitro
engines because the fuel (ether and kerosene) will not burn as fast.
But they will put out more torque than the other two types, though only
marginally more than gasoline. This is because the fuel burns slower,
not because of the cycle, because all, the spark ignition gas engine,
the glow plug methanol/nitro engine, and the compression ignition
engine, are actually otto cycle engines.

Sport Pilot wrote:

Why the obvious apple and orange comparision?

To refute the statement that "more speed is more power."

You need to compare engines of equal size.

OK, Lets do it!

Dodge 5.9 Liter v8 gasoline engine: 230 horsepower at ~5000 RPM

Compared to:

Dodge/Cummins 5.9 Liter turbo-diesel engine: 325 horsepower at 2900 RPM


More speed is NOT more power any more than more torque at the same speed
is more power.

Steve writes:

Sport Pilot wrote:

Why the obvious apple and orange comparision?


To refute the statement that "more speed is more power."

You need to compare engines of equal size.


OK, Lets do it!

Dodge 5.9 Liter v8 gasoline engine: 230 horsepower at ~5000 RPM

Compared to:

Dodge/Cummins 5.9 Liter turbo-diesel engine: 325 horsepower at 2900 RPM


More speed is NOT more power any more than more torque at the same
speed is more power.

uh?

More torque at the same speed *is* more power.

power = torque * speed

Had the gas engine produced the same torque at 5000 rpms as the diesel
do at 2900, then it would have had about 560 hp at 5000.

Thomas

"Thomas Tornblom" -to-reply wrote in message
...
Steve writes:

Sport Pilot wrote:


More speed is NOT more power any more than more torque at the same
speed is more power.

uh?


Yeah, that was my reaction! (?) ;-)


More torque at the same speed *is* more power.

power = torque * speed

Had the gas engine produced the same torque at 5000 rpms as the diesel
do at 2900, then it would have had about 560 hp at 5000.

Thomas

Actually, the equation to calculate power (or horsepower (HP) in this case)
is HP = Torque X rpm / 5252.

Torque being a measurable force that turns the crankshaft and ultimately the
wheels, main rotor, or propeller (I just noticed that this is going to two
aviation and one automotive newsgroups). Horsepower is defined as a
"measurement" of work performed. By the equation, at least as it applies to
internal combustion reciprocating engines, you can't have HP without torque!
So, if you can increase the torque value at a given rpm, you'll increase the
power output at that rpm. Likewise, if you can maintain a given torque
value at a higher rpm, you'll produce more power in that case too. It
doesn't matter what kind of engine you're talking about or the fuel burned.
Gasoline, diesel, methanol, it makes no difference. The equation still
applies.

FWIW!
Fly/Drive Safe,
Steve R.

On Tue, 24 May 2005 21:54:29 GMT, Thomas Tornblom
-to-reply wrote:

Steve writes:

Sport Pilot wrote:

Why the obvious apple and orange comparision?


To refute the statement that "more speed is more power."

You need to compare engines of equal size.


OK, Lets do it!

Dodge 5.9 Liter v8 gasoline engine: 230 horsepower at ~5000 RPM

Compared to:

Dodge/Cummins 5.9 Liter turbo-diesel engine: 325 horsepower at 2900 RPM


More speed is NOT more power any more than more torque at the same
speed is more power.


One BIG factor is being forgotten here. The diesel is turboed. This
makes it roughly equivalent to an 8 liter engine at about 6psi boost.
Any combustion engine produces power in proportion to the amount of
air consumed. On a diesel it does not necessarily "consume" all the
air that goes through it - but the maximum power output is definitely
limitted by how much air can be put through it. A turbo can eisily
double the amount of air an engine pumps through it at a given speed.

Running an engine at double the speed also increases the amount of air
going through the engine - not quite double due to reduced volumetric
efficiency at speed.

Double the CFM gives double the horsepower, before factoring in
frictional losses and / or pumping losses.

A naturally aspirated diesel engine generally produces less HP per
unit of displacement, but more torque at low RPMs due in part to less
pumping loss (no air throttle)
uh?

More torque at the same speed *is* more power.

power = torque * speed

Had the gas engine produced the same torque at 5000 rpms as the diesel
do at 2900, then it would have had about 560 hp at 5000.

Thomas

wrote:


One BIG factor is being forgotten here. The diesel is turboed. This
makes it roughly equivalent to an 8 liter engine at about 6psi boost.
Any combustion engine produces power in proportion to the amount of
air consumed. On a diesel it does not necessarily "consume" all the
air that goes through it - but the maximum power output is definitely
limitted by how much air can be put through it. A turbo can eisily
double the amount of air an engine pumps through it at a given speed.

Running an engine at double the speed also increases the amount of air
going through the engine - not quite double due to reduced volumetric
efficiency at speed.

Double the CFM gives double the horsepower, before factoring in
frictional losses and / or pumping losses.

A naturally aspirated diesel engine generally produces less HP per
unit of displacement, but more torque at low RPMs due in part to less
pumping loss (no air throttle)

SOME diesels are turboed. Many are not. Some Diesels are normally
aspirated. Some are supercharged with geared chargers. Some are
turboed. It is by far an overgeneralization to claim that all Diesels
are supercharged, even more so to say they are all turbo-supercharged.

Don Stauffer wrote:




SOME diesels are turboed. Many are not. Some Diesels are normally
aspirated. Some are supercharged with geared chargers. Some are
turboed. It is by far an overgeneralization to claim that all Diesels
are supercharged, even more so to say they are all turbo-supercharged.

You forgot supercharged plus turbocharged
http://www.wilksch.com/


--
Pub: http://www.slowfood.fr/france
Philippe Vessaire Ò¿Ó¬

Don Stauffer wrote:

SOME diesels are turboed. Many are not. Some Diesels are normally
aspirated. Some are supercharged with geared chargers. Some are
turboed. It is by far an overgeneralization to claim that all Diesels
are supercharged, even more so to say they are all turbo-supercharged.

I believe that if you look at modern diesels currently being produced
and sold, you'll find virtually NONE rated at more than 50-60 horsepower
that are not turbo-supercharged. And equally few that are strictly
mechanically blown (the Detroit Diesel 2-strokes are no longer in
production). The VAST majority are, indeed, turbo-supercharged.

On Wed, 25 May 2005 09:37:53 -0500, Don Stauffer
wrote:

wrote:


One BIG factor is being forgotten here. The diesel is turboed. This
makes it roughly equivalent to an 8 liter engine at about 6psi boost.
Any combustion engine produces power in proportion to the amount of
air consumed. On a diesel it does not necessarily "consume" all the
air that goes through it - but the maximum power output is definitely
limitted by how much air can be put through it. A turbo can eisily
double the amount of air an engine pumps through it at a given speed.

Running an engine at double the speed also increases the amount of air
going through the engine - not quite double due to reduced volumetric
efficiency at speed.

Double the CFM gives double the horsepower, before factoring in
frictional losses and / or pumping losses.

A naturally aspirated diesel engine generally produces less HP per
unit of displacement, but more torque at low RPMs due in part to less
pumping loss (no air throttle)

SOME diesels are turboed. Many are not. Some Diesels are normally
aspirated. Some are supercharged with geared chargers. Some are
turboed. It is by far an overgeneralization to claim that all Diesels
are supercharged, even more so to say they are all turbo-supercharged.


The post being replied to was comparing a turbo cummins to a gas
engine.

Nobody ever said all diesels are turboed.