CGI for the Next gen Ecoboost engines

[Biker16]

bump up for Fusion ST

[jpd80]

China and India are now getting into casting and machining CGI.

[Versa-Tech]

Ford went to cast iron block in the 1.0 EB because they claim it warms up 50% quicker than Aluminum block.

Any move away from Aluminium will have to do with either this fact or cheaper supply of CGI blocks to Ford.

Pardon my ignorance, but how is it that a cast iron block warms up faster than an alloy block? Thermodynamically speaking, this doesn't add up.

[Versa-Tech]

Why wouldn't you reduce the capacity and keep using the same architecture?

Ford Europe has the Ecoboost 2.0 running reliably at 380 hp, after that they say the reliability starts to really drop off..

 

Downsizing only works so far and then it actually uses more fuel, that limit appears to be 2200 lb per liter.

I suspect that Ford will find customer satisfaction drops off well before that point, I'm thinking around 1800 lb per liter.

It is my understanding that 3 cylinder engines are inherently more balanced and have more desirable torque characteristics than 4 cylinders. Also, as engines continue to shrink, lessened packaging constraints allow for less conventional architectures to be used that simply wouldn't fit in a I4 setup.

[2b2]

not sure what it is, Versa-Tech

but

something about your posts makes me think '2' is perfect number

[Edstock]

It is my understanding that 3 cylinder engines are inherently more balanced and have more desirable torque characteristics than 4 cylinders. Also, as engines continue to shrink, lessened packaging constraints allow for less conventional architectures to be used that simply wouldn't fit in a I4 setup.

IIRC, Honda made a V-3 50 cc racing motorcycle engine. 1 cylinder was 25 cc, opposed by 2 - 12.5 cc cylinders. No idea why.

[Biker16]

Pardon my ignorance, but how is it that a cast iron block warms up faster than an alloy block? Thermodynamically speaking, this doesn't add up.

 

aluminum conducts heat better than iron but iron has greater thermal mass than aluminum.

 

super efficient engines need to run hotter, to minimize friction, but because they are more efficient they actually generate fewer BTUs than more wasteful engines, I.E. less energy wasted as heat.

 

technology like grille shutters and advanced engine cooling systems, are designed to cool but also the maintain even engine temps. this is when iron has an advantage over aluminum because it can hold on to the heat better than aluminum.

 

on my 2012 focus for example the car gets the Cat and Emission systems, hot within 5 mins in our 35 degree weather, but to actually get the engine up to a temp where I am not hemorrhaging MPss takes much longer usually 15-20 mins, unfortunately My commute is only 20 mins long. once at temp it runs really hot, my guess would be closer to 200+ degrees. I suspect the grille shutters and cooling system will keep it high under light load and cruising and cool it down under load and acceleration.

 

this is where the cooling technology has surpassed the engine block technology.

 

CGI would have multiple benefits over alloy engine blocks.

 

Also consider the impact of plasma spray on cylinder liners, this makes the warm up issue even worse because it dramatically reduces friction, plus it is so thin that it will increase the conductivity of an Aluminum engine block, which today use Iron cylinder liners.

I may be 10-15 years ahead but I can see the demise of the aluminum engine block as engine become more and more efficient.

 

I guess an alternative could be electric engine block heaters to aid in the warming up of the engine. :shrug:

Edited March 4, 2012 by Biker16

[jpd80]

It is my understanding that 3 cylinder engines are inherently more balanced and have more desirable torque characteristics than 4 cylinders. Also, as engines continue to shrink, lessened packaging constraints allow for less conventional architectures to be used that simply wouldn't fit in a I4 setup.

Have you ever driven an I-3?

Ihave, they run and sound like a burly V6 and definitely have a balance shaft. Compact size with Ecoboost makes it

a natural for replacing the 1.6. I-4 I'm betting it goes pretty good in a Focus and will surprise a lot of buyers...

 

And I saw the press release where Ford mentioned using Cast iron for reduced warm up, but can't find it.

I would prefer to say the weight diferece between a small casting like that in Iron vs Alloy probably doesn't

save much weight, I-3 may have some advantage with cylinder surface to water jacket volume/overall casting

size but I'm open to it being PR exercise to stop people whinging about no alloy block...

[svtenthusiast]

 

1.6

hp 175@ 5700 RPM

Torque 177ft/lbs @ 1600-5000 rpm.

Compression Ratio 10.0:1

 

2.0

Horsepower (SAE net @ rpm) 240 @ 5,500 Torque (lb.-ft. @ rpm) 270 @ 3,000 Compression ratio 9.3:1

3.5

horsepower 365 @ 5550 rpm Torque (lb.-ft. SAE net @ rpm) 350 @ 1500-5250 rpm

In the future if ford wanted to Use HCCI [/url ] on future Ecoboost engines or even Throttleless engines, they may need Stronger engine blocks.

 

 

Good info.....does anyone know why the torque doesn't peak on the 2.0L in a wide RPM range like the other ecoboosts? Is it because they aren't limiting max peak torque output on the 2.0L?

[akirby]

Good info.....does anyone know why the torque doesn't peak on the 2.0L in a wide RPM range like the other ecoboosts? Is it because they aren't limiting max peak torque output on the 2.0L?

 

Yes.

[03 LS]

on my 2012 focus for example the car gets the Cat and Emission systems, hot within 5 mins in our 35 degree weather, but to actually get the engine up to a temp where I am not hemorrhaging MPss takes much longer usually 15-20 mins, unfortunately My commute is only 20 mins long. once at temp it runs really hot, my guess would be closer to 200+ degrees. I suspect the grille shutters and cooling system will keep it high under light load and cruising and cool it down under load and acceleration.

:shrug:

You should drive a Ford hybrid with your commute pattern. One "small" technique Ford uses on FFH is to keep engine running in cold weather until it's reached optimal operating temperature - by that I mean, during winter cold start, FFH will keep the engine running for the first 5-8 minutes, regardless of driving condition (acc, coasting, stopped), so the engine can reach the "high"(most effecient) temp as fast as possible. The neat thing FFH does during this period is to use the excess engine power to charge the battery so they will not go wasted say at a red light. This way, you can get back the mpg lost (in the first 5 min) by having more battery power assist in the next 10 minutes of driving.

 

Once I discovered this on my Milan Hybrid, I always pay extra attention to try to run down the battery reserve to < 50% on the last driving trip the night before, to maximize the benefit.

 

Downsizing only works so far and then it actually uses more fuel, that limit appears to be 2200 lb per liter.

I suspect that Ford will find customer satisfaction drops off well before that point, I'm thinking around 1800 lb per liter.

My unscientific, consumer view/satisfaction on EB limit is, at <=75mph cruising, an EB engine should be able to work in NA mode or in light boost mode, where fuel consumption is more like the I4 instead of the V6, to use EB20 as an example. If you can't do this for a certain vehicle, then you shouldn't use the said EB on said vehicle.

[Biker16]

Good info.....does anyone know why the torque doesn't peak on the 2.0L in a wide RPM range like the other ecoboosts? Is it because they aren't limiting max peak torque output on the 2.0L?

 

yes

the engine used on the escape, fusion and focus are limited to 250ft/lbs, primarialy due to thelack of traction from these lightweight vehicles.

 

the sytem allows for a Transient over-boost under certain conditions usually determined by the traction control system, that can boost the torque up to 270ft/lbs.

 

on heavier vehicles like the edge and explorer the engine is tweaked to deliver a that 270ft/lbs constantly.

 

This concept of torque curve shaping is crucial to the drivability of ford vehicles, and the reason why the fusion's turbo will never exhibt the nasty torque steer tendencies of the Sonata turbo.

[2b2]

Good info.....does anyone know why the torque doesn't peak on the 2.0L in a wide RPM range like the other ecoboosts? Is it because they aren't limiting max peak torque output on the 2.0L?

I've had a fixation that the 2.0EB didn't turn out near as good as hoped

(might've started by not offering the ExplorerAmerica's 280hp)

(and recently by the ecstatic Ford raves about the 1.0EB that I've never heard about the 2.0EB)

(plus rumors about a 2.3-2.5 4cyl coming soon)

however:

yes

the engine used on the escape, fusion and focus are limited to 250ft/lbs, primarialy due to thelack of traction from these lightweight vehicles...

 

...on heavier vehicles like the edge and explorer the engine is tweaked to deliver a that 270ft/lbs constantly...

 

if it's a vehicle weight issue then

won't/shouldn't the Explorer (also the Taurus 2.0EB and Falcon 2.0EB) get tunes with higher power ratings? ...at least eventually?

[Biker16]

I've had a fixation that the 2.0EB didn't turn out near as good as hoped

(might've started by not offering the ExplorerAmerica's 280hp)

(and recently by the ecstatic Ford raves about the 1.0EB that I've never heard about the 2.0EB)

(plus rumors about a 2.3-2.5 4cyl coming soon)

 

I feel the same way. the issues of the Compression ratio being so low, reliatve to the 1.0 or 1.6, and the economy being less than we would have expected.

 

Like I said before, the balance between the economy and emmisions, cost them performance.

 

new head for starters, rinforced bottom end, for seconds, and the CGI block for 3rds.

 

new head would allow for vertical injector placement, which better disapates heat, integrated exhaust mainfold, lowers the Exhaust temps before the turbo, and EGR.

 

raise the Comprssion ratio.

 

overall rasing that theshold when the Fuel is being dumped to prevent detonation.

 

however:

 

if it's a vehicle weight issue then

won't/shouldn't the Explorer (also the Taurus 2.0EB and Falcon 2.0EB) get tunes with higher power ratings? ...at least eventually?

 

you may want to look into the Gearing being used in each application.

 

all EB 2.0 vehicles in north america use the same transaxle, the 6f35

 

 

trasient overboost is a period of a few seconds when boost is increased, uping torque temporarly

 

but.....

 

the taurus uses a 3.07 final drive ratio while the edge uses a 3.51 ratio.

 

the effect of the Final drive would be to reduce or increase load on the engine. in a honking CUV like th edge and explorer, this reudce the load on the engine at crusing speeds, making it easier to meet the economy/emmissions balance the engine needs, this would allow for transient overboost to become constant.

 

while on lower drag vehicles you run a lower drive ratio, increasing load on the engine, and possibly preventing contiuous overboost.

 

 

it jsut a theory.

 

 

 

FWIW the fusion is using a 3.21 and 3.36 final drive ratio, i would imagine for perfomance not for economy.

[jpd80]

Forgive my ignorance but I thought the Euro Ecoboost engines already have vertical direct Injectors,

it's only the V6 that has the injectors on the side of the combustion chamber..

 

And any engine with 10:1 compression and 16 psi of boost up its ass on 87 without grenading is doing just fine, just ask GM..

[svtenthusiast]

yes

the engine used on the escape, fusion and focus are limited to 250ft/lbs, primarialy due to thelack of traction from these lightweight vehicles.

 

the sytem allows for a Transient over-boost under certain conditions usually determined by the traction control system, that can boost the torque up to 270ft/lbs.

 

on heavier vehicles like the edge and explorer the engine is tweaked to deliver a that 270ft/lbs constantly.

 

This concept of torque curve shaping is crucial to the drivability of ford vehicles, and the reason why the fusion's turbo will never exhibt the nasty torque steer tendencies of the Sonata turbo.

 

So if it is torque limited, why isn't it a "flat" max at 250ft/lbs in a broad RPM range like the other ecoboosts?

[Biker16]

So if it is torque limited, why isn't it a "flat" max at 250ft/lbs in a broad RPM range like the other ecoboosts?

 

Because the natural torque curve would peat out at 270 but the ECU flattens the torque curve akin to taking the top off of a mountain.

 

It is the the power of the ECU that allows for all this to work, it can balance boost, EGR, spark, injector plume, size duration, A/F mixture, and thousands of other factors, and adapt everything over 15 times a second.

[Versa-Tech]

aluminum conducts heat better than iron but iron has greater thermal mass than aluminum.

 

super efficient engines need to run hotter, to minimize friction, but because they are more efficient they actually generate fewer BTUs than more wasteful engines, I.E. less energy wasted as heat.

 

technology like grille shutters and advanced engine cooling systems, are designed to cool but also the maintain even engine temps. this is when iron has an advantage over aluminum because it can hold on to the heat better than aluminum.

 

on my 2012 focus for example the car gets the Cat and Emission systems, hot within 5 mins in our 35 degree weather, but to actually get the engine up to a temp where I am not hemorrhaging MPss takes much longer usually 15-20 mins, unfortunately My commute is only 20 mins long. once at temp it runs really hot, my guess would be closer to 200+ degrees. I suspect the grille shutters and cooling system will keep it high under light load and cruising and cool it down under load and acceleration.

 

this is where the cooling technology has surpassed the engine block technology.

 

CGI would have multiple benefits over alloy engine blocks.

 

Also consider the impact of plasma spray on cylinder liners, this makes the warm up issue even worse because it dramatically reduces friction, plus it is so thin that it will increase the conductivity of an Aluminum engine block, which today use Iron cylinder liners.

I may be 10-15 years ahead but I can see the demise of the aluminum engine block as engine become more and more efficient.

 

I guess an alternative could be electric engine block heaters to aid in the warming up of the engine. :shrug:

Which is the answer I expected. The block material is not the problem, the heat exchange system is. There are relatively simple solutions to this that have been used in race engines for decades...

[jpd80]

Which is the answer I expected. The block material is not the problem, the heat exchange system is. There are relatively simple solutions to this that have been used in race engines for decades...

Nothing is ever simple and every change has to be thoroughly researched. Interesting that Ecoboost now incorporates

exhaust manifold on the head casting, presumably to cool the exhaust charge for increased EGR rates in the engine.

[Biker16]

Which is the answer I expected. The block material is not the problem, the heat exchange system is. There are relatively simple solutions to this that have been used in race engines for decades...

 

such as?

[jpd80]

Which is the answer I expected. The block material is not the problem, the heat exchange system is. There are relatively simple solutions to this that have been used in race engines for decades...

 

From Ford UK:

 

Engineers at Ford's Dunton Technical Centre in the UK were responsible for developing the new EcoBoost 1.0-litre as a cornerstone of the ambitious EcoBoost petrol engine family. Technically advanced, it is a super-efficient three-cylinder engine that delivers the same performance as a four-cylinder, but with much higher fuel economy and lower emissions. To achieve this, engineers at Dunton, Essex, Ford's global centre of excellence for small-capacity engines, focused on improving thermal efficiency and reducing friction of the engine's internal moving parts, especially during warm-up. That is when an engine emits higher levels of CO2 and other pollutants. The new engine introduces many new technologies that could be part of the DNA of future Ford engines.

[lfeg]

Nothing is ever simple and every change has to be thoroughly researched. Interesting that Ecoboost now incorporates

exhaust manifold on the head casting, presumably to cool the exhaust charge for increased EGR rates in the engine.

 

 

You want to keep exhaust temperature up pre turbo. That is one reason for integral exhaust manifolds. Fewer paths for heat loss. As the exhaust temperature (pre turbo) goes down, the energy available for the turbo to recover goes down.

[svtenthusiast]

Because the natural torque curve would peat out at 270 but the ECU flattens the torque curve akin to taking the top off of a mountain.

 

It is the the power of the ECU that allows for all this to work, it can balance boost, EGR, spark, injector plume, size duration, A/F mixture, and thousands of other factors, and adapt everything over 15 times a second.

 

 

Appreciate info but I think you are missing what I am asking.

 

 

You confirmed what I said in my question it's flat at 250lb-ft. So why is the rating not listed at an constant 250lb-ft let's say between 3,000RPM-5,000RPM for example, like they rate the other Ecoboosts?

[akirby]

Appreciate info but I think you are missing what I am asking.

 

 

You confirmed what I said in my question it's flat at 250lb-ft. So why is the rating not listed at an constant 250lb-ft let's say between 3,000RPM-5,000RPM for example, like they rate the other Ecoboosts?

 

I think the difference is the peak torque in the 3.5L is probably closer to 400 ft/lbs limited to 350 as opposed to the 2.0 peaking at 270 but limited to 250. The 3.5 reaches 350 ft/lbs at low rpm - the 2.0 reaches 250 at higher rpm so the flat top is narrower.

[Biker16]

You want to keep exhaust temperature up pre turbo. That is one reason for integral exhaust manifolds. Fewer paths for heat loss. As the exhaust temperature (pre turbo) goes down, the energy available for the turbo to recover goes down.

 

this is true but we are not trying to max out psi, the engine could not handle that much boost, to the extra heat would be wasted. cooling the EGR allows for psuedo lean burn and better economy. which is the primary reason for Ecooboost.