Green Car Congress  
Go to GCC Discussions forum About GCC Contact  RSS Subscribe Twitter headlines

« GE Capital to provide financing for electric motorcycle maker Brammo | Main | MSU team develops consolidated bioprocessing platform for efficient production of ethanol and hydrogen from biomass with a microbial electrolysis cell »

Print this post

New lightweight aluminum piston from Federal-Mogul enables further downsizing of gasoline engines

10 July 2012

Advanced Elastoval II
The new Advanced Elastoval II piston. Click to enlarge.

Federal-Mogul Corporation has developed a lightweight, high-strength aluminium piston that enables engine manufacturers to increase the power density and efficiency of boosted, direct injected gasoline engines. The Advanced Elastoval II piston enters series production later this year in a new European passenger car, where it contributes to gains in fuel economy and reductions in CO2 emissions.

Specific power outputs in engines are likely to increase from current levels of around 95 kW/L to 130 kW/L to coming years. Peak combustion pressures will rise from 110 bar to 130 bar and even 160 bar in engines using alternative fuels such as E100, compressed natural gas (CNG) or others, Federal-Mogul notes.

Advanced Elastoval II_cutaway
Cutaway of the Advanced Elastoval II piston. Click to enlarge.

The new Advanced Elastoval II piston is lighter, delivers increased power outputs and can withstand the higher pressures that occur late in the combustion cycle of highly charged downsized engines.

The Advanced Elastoval II piston architecture is up to 20% lighter than previous generation pistons. Whereas previous wall sections measured 4mm, the latest piston achieves wall sections as thin as 2.5mm.

Any reduction in wall thickness requires the entire piston structure to be redesigned. Advances in piston design, analysis tools and testing at Federal-Mogul’s global development centers have led to a series of new features that achieve a better stress distribution, enabling a weight optimized design.

—Arnd Baberg, chief engineer product engineering, Federal-Mogul Powertrain Energy

The complex curved side panel forms of the Advanced Elastoval II piston are inclined in two planes and are closer together at the top to support the piston crown, using multiple weight-reducing pockets and crown reinforcing ribs. The piston pin bosses are curved towards the side panels and boss distance is reduced to the minimum possible. The piston’s design uses asymmetric geometries to enable maximum weight reduction.

All Federal-Mogul Elastoval pistons use different skirt widths for the thrust and non-thrust sides of the piston, to achieve the best compromise of light weight, superior NVH and scuffing performance.

Advanced Elastoval II reduces skirt width to 50% of bore diameter on the thrust face and just 45% of the bore on the non-thrust face without compromising NVH or increasing scuffing risk.

Several vehicle manufacturers are validating the Advanced Elastoval II piston, with the first scheduled for series production later this year.

July 10, 2012 in Engines, Fuel Efficiency, Manufacturing | Permalink | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c4fbe53ef0167685c0ec3970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference New lightweight aluminum piston from Federal-Mogul enables further downsizing of gasoline engines :

Comments

I can't wait until the whole world is running on and incented to improve batteries, electronics and electric motors every week the way we all fight for ICE today.

Imagine where EVs would be with this kind of effort.

@ DaveD. If you consider fuelcell as ev too, then the main problem remain the source of fuel for that fuelcell car. The price of it and the distribution of it.

For pure ev then the problem is not just the cost of the battery but his weight and size. There is limit to the added weight and size we can put in an ev to attain a certain range. Even if battery will sale at a very low price then you cannot easilly add as much of it as you might want. It's a deceptive road to attain a certain range, it's more and more costly and difficult and the car become a truck instead of a car like the biggest tesla model s at 100 000$.

So an ev powered by a fuelcell hydrogen or other fuel have just the problem of an infrastructure. The way to avoid the problem of an hydrogen infrastructure is to make the hydrogen into the car instead of having to rely
to an external pump. Hydrogen makers can be miniaturized and installed in hydrogen fuelcell cars.

With the near future arrival of mass produced more efficient EVs, ICE manufacturers are starting to do what they should have done 100+ years ago to increase the historically very low efficiency of the beast.

Similar efforts are required to reduce weight and wind resistance of car bodies by another 50% or more. That would benefit all ICE, HEV, PHEV and EV units.

Much more should be done to accelerate mass production of improved performance lower cost batteries required for affordable future EVs by 2020 or so.

@AD,
To produce H2 on board a vehicle, you will need to carry the additional weight of water and the additional volume that this water will require. A 4-kg H2 fuel capacity will require 36 kg of water at 36 liter capacity, or nearly 10-gallon tank of water. Additionally, you will need the extra weight and space requiremment of the electrolysis equipment. The additional weight and space and cost will be unacceptable. The electrolysis equipment won't be cheap when placed in a car and only used at very limited rate. When placed in a central area, electrolyzers will be used much more often that can much better recoup the investment cost. Furthermore, small electrolyzer will not be as efficient as a larger-size electrolyzer.

Imagine where EVs would be with ONLY this kind of effort.

Without the $5k incentive on each vehicle, without the exemption from highway road tax, without the carpool lane "passes", etc.

Nowhere.

WHAT?

To produce H2 on board a vehicle, at the 30 hp rate you will need to maintain an average speed, you need a 40+ hp powerplant and generator to power the electrolyzer.

Never mind the weight of all that PLUS the electrolyzer, fuel for the powerplant, water for the electrolyzer and the H2 tank.

The result would be a small, very heavy, REALLY, REALLY expensive ICE with an electro/H2 transmission.

Well, maybe only expensive before the susidies kick in.

An electric automobile requires about 200 Watt-hours per mile or less a 10 kW-hour battery would give a range of 50 miles. An electric flywheel, as used in race vehicles, could give super acceleration from a battery designed to give range not power. The average vehicle use per day is less than 40 miles. An average speed of 20 miles per hour would require a range extender of 4 kW or about 5 hp max for infinite travel range in city traffic when the battery range is exceeded upon rare occasions. The range extender could burn liquid ammonia if zero carbon emission was required.

It has been demonstrated in a standard automobile that the Artemis hydraulic hybrid system save a lot of fuel, half the fuel in city driving, but all automobile makers are ignoring this cheap system for small improvements in engine economy. ..HG..

@TT,
What AD has in mind is a FCV that gets its energy from an electricity socket. In other words, use the electrolyzer-H2 tank-FC stack as a kind of battery. This can overcome the initial infrastructure problem associated with H2-FCV.

Of course, this is not practical because to produce H2 on board a vehicle, you will need to carry the additional weight of water and the additional volume that this water will require. A 4-kg H2 fuel capacity will require 36 kg of water at 36 liter capacity, or nearly 10-gallon tank of water. Additionally, you will need the extra weight and space requiremment of the electrolysis equipment. The additional weight and space and cost will be unacceptable. The electrolysis equipment won't be cheap when placed in a car and only used at very limited rate. When placed in a central area, electrolyzers will be used much more often that can much better recoup the investment cost. Furthermore, small electrolyzer will not be as efficient as a larger-size electrolyzer.

The beauty of an H2-fill-up infrastructure is the ability to for quick recharging of a H2-vehicle, similar to a quick-charging station for BEV's. When one considers that BEV's will need quick-charging stations to become practical for the majority of people, then the infrastructure issue of H2-Vehicles is not any different.

@Harvey D
"With the near future arrival of mass produced more efficient EVs, ICE manufacturers are starting to do what they should have done 100+ years ago to increase the historically very low efficiency of the beast."

That's an extremely ignorant statement. Even 50 years ago, we didn't have the metallurgy to do what they're doing now in downsizing, let alone fuel injection and electronic controls.

ICE technology has improved to the point now that a 3-cylinder engine can put out horsepower and torque equivalent to a V12 of 100 years ago, all while using far less fuel.

EVs have only had a few years to develop so far. Sure, they were around 100 years ago too, but they were clunky, short-ranged, heavy, and were generally open-bodied converted horse carts. They died out then because they would never be able to compete until technology made huge strides. Now that it has, hoping that they'll proliferate the market in large numbers in only a decade is naive at best.

First, they have to get much, much cheaper. Second, they have to become a lot more convenient. Third, they have to be proven for reliability and longevity.

Until those three things happen, the majority of consumers aren't going to accept BEVs or any other type of EV. That's just reality.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Green Car Congress © 2014 BioAge Group, LLC. All Rights Reserved. | Home | BioAge Group