New Federal-Mogul Piston Offers Improved Fuel Economy and Reduced Emissions for Heavy-Duty Vehicles
15 October 2010
|
|
| Magnum Monosteel piston features a cooling gallery that provides greater heat resistance and the strength to withstand modern engines’ higher cylinder pressures. Click to enlarge. |
Federal-Mogul has developed the next generation of the Monosteel piston, called Magnum Monosteel. The new design reduces piston mass by up to 7% and includes design features that reduce friction for improved fuel economy and lower emissions.
The key differentiator for the Magnum is its “double-band” piston skirt design—a first for modern diesel pistons, according to Federal-Mogul. The double-band skirt helps to reduce frictional drag and reduces the overall piston skirt area by 40%, making this design feature the primary contributor to the Magnum’s overall friction and mass reduction. Extensive engine testing has shown piston friction reduction of up to 17%, compared to conventional steel piston designs.
The Magnum’s double-band skirt also enables better hydrodynamic lubrication compared to conventional piston skirt designs. The improved lubrication allows greater piston stability as well as optimal ring pack performance and durability.
The original Monosteel and new Magnum Monosteel have patented dual friction-welded construction, which allows large cooling galleries for superior high temperature resistance and provides the strength to withstand the highest cylinder pressures found in modern commercial vehicle engines. Like the original Monosteel piston—of which more than 3.5 million pistons have been produced to date—the Magnum addresses the increasing thermal, mechanical, abrasion and corrosion challenges placed on heavy-duty diesel engines resulting from more exacting emissions regulations.
The Magnum Monosteel piston is in development testing with major global commercial vehicle and engine manufacturers in Europe and North America.
Federal-Mogul developed the Magnum piston at its Powertrain Energy technical center in Plymouth, Michigan—one of the company’s 18 globally-networked technical centers.
What is the net efficiency gain potential?
Posted by: HarveyD | 15 October 2010 at 08:11 AM
HD - that might be a little harder to measure for this. But when you are talking about more durable, longer lasting engines, there are gains in efficiency there. I think this sounds like a great new product that should be applied to new ICE's everywhere.
Posted by: ejj | 15 October 2010 at 08:15 AM
And it should not cost much more unless patent rights are exorbitant.
Posted by: HarveyD | 15 October 2010 at 09:18 AM
I pointed this out to a mechanic friend of mine and his response was "Another one? You wouldn't believe the number of 'friction reducing' piston designs people have come up with."
Let's remember that the *piston friction reduction of up to 17%* is only *compared to conventional steel piston designs* and we don't know if it's any better that any of the OTHER non-conventional piston designs we already have.
Posted by: ai_vin | 15 October 2010 at 12:58 PM
Steel pistons generally have lower friction than aluminum pistons and can take much higher pressures, so the basis for comparison is fair.
Of course all piston manufacturers work on concepts like this; they are clever, not stupid. Comparisons often tend to be against older competitor technology. Thus, improvements might appear bigger than they are. Anyhow, it is difficult to compare to technology still under development in the competitor's lab.
I would like to see steel pistons in light-duty diesel engines, i.e. who will be first? It could be a great leap in power density and a smaller gain in efficiency, which again could enable further downsizing and increased efficiency. This is on condition that the engine structure is further developed to cope with the increased cylinder pressures. In my calculations, that would be a 1.5-liter 3-cylinder engine at close to 200 hp, i.e. more than enough for a family car. For smaller cars, we are talking about 1-1.2 liter size but still more than 100 hp.
Posted by: Peter_XX | 16 October 2010 at 06:26 AM