Puppeteer

Author Topic: Upping the HP on a 6/1  (Read 39006 times)

Tom

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1746
  • Green power is good.
    • View Profile
Re: Upping the HP on a 6/1
« Reply #75 on: June 19, 2006, 09:00:21 PM »
Coming in here, but can anyone tell me if the Sayajeet numbers are using an AL or FE piston for the IDI figure. It makes a difference also what CR's are being used?
Tom
2004 Ashwamegh 6/1 #217 - ST5 just over 3k hours.

fattywagonman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 330
    • View Profile
Re: Upping the HP on a 6/1
« Reply #76 on: June 19, 2006, 09:37:59 PM »
Quote
You gave me numbers, but those numbers were hearsay. That means they are not just useless, but worse than useless, because the ONE SINGLE FACT you can say about those numbers is that you can NOT trust them.

Well most of the idian manufactures have similar number... they list them on their websites as the SFC for each particular model engine.. I don't think they all got together and said OK you use 176 and I'll use 175...  to me it looks like they did some testing to come up with the #'s if you don't trust them why don't you come up with your own #'s instead of finding fault with folks who are using them to  discuss fuel consumption..

 
Quote
I don't have to fire up my lister and take readings to prove anything, because I'm not the one arguing against the status quo, you lot are, you all think you are better engineers than lister and ricardo and so on, and you may well be, all you have to do is prove it.
I don't see anyone here but you who is contesting the data provided by the manufacturers... I have made the comment that IDI is less efficient than DI... I quoted the manufacture SFC for both .. are  you saying you don't think that IDI is less efficient? I always thought that was pretty common knowledge...

Quote
You think the lister can't be any better than the listeroid, you haven't owned a lister, so you have no basis for that assumption, you just think "hell, it's half a century old, so it must be crap and easy to improve upon", you don't stop and look at all the stuff around you that is that old and older, and still used, for no other reason that they got it right back then.

I know you love your old lister... and IMO it's a dam fine piece of machinery... If I was burning veggie or waste oil I would prefer the IDI even though it is less efficient.. but it does have other benefits... like more complete combustion which ="s fewer particulates.. now to go on and state that it is also likely better from an efficiency standpoint just isn't true.. I think the Indians took a fine design and improved it from an efficiency standpoint by making it DI.. oh and they also added tapered roller mains ans modern oil seals.. you may have issue with that statement but I believe it to be true.. I would add that if you think your old piece of iron is better than the new stuff the indians make  why don't you fire it up and prove it.. as for "you haven't owned a lister, so you have no basis for that assumption" I don't believe that you own a listeroid so I say touche'.. you also have nothing to compare your engine to..

mobile_bob

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2940
    • View Profile
Re: Upping the HP on a 6/1
« Reply #77 on: June 19, 2006, 09:39:11 PM »
This gets to be an amazing arguement to say the least, something like standing in a crowded room of 100 people
all discussing differing subjects, like politics, religion, and gay rights! :)

it gets hard to follow, and very easy to get lost, in the hooopla.

i would agree that it is going to be very near impossible to improve the basic lister design for most of us
mere mortals. we are stuck with what we got, and modifying in part of it is difficult if not impossible.
And to what end, if you can't accurately measure the before product, how you going to tell if you have a
meaningful improvement?

i think lister got it pretty damn right to begin with, and failing having alot of time, specialized machine work, specialized test
equipment and a butt load of money, one is likely not to improve on the original design in any significant way at least in thermal efficiency, fuel consumption, or emmissions.

But here again, i said i "think", and that is all most of you have going for you so far. that is "i think" or "i feel" or " i believe"
basically all being either "theory" " hypothesis" or "conjecture"

i am all ears to the first guy that comes up not only with his theory/hypothesis/conjecture, but a test stand using instrumentation and scientific procedure and analysis to publish actual supporting evidence.

even in the world of scientific investigation the reports are followed by conclusions that are carefully worded such as:

1  according to our findings..... it would appear.....

2. our testing has shown.....

3. more work has to be done.......

4. possibly the results we came up with were caused by something other than what we saw.....

and all sorts of other statements, indicating that perhaps their findings while showing promise may or may not be what
they have found.

only after others have documented similar results independantly does the scientific community accept something as "maybe" being fact.

up till now in this discussion all i see is a bunch of fairly intelligent folks kicking sand in each others face.

Guy: i like your anvil analogy, hard to improve on time proven technology to say the least as it applies to anvils, harder still to find suitable material to build one.

many old engines, such as Bugatti's et al. having roller or ball brg mains and rods, and a plethora of other inovative engineering feets are still hard to improve on today.  the biggest improvements came with improved metallurgy, not design.

makes you wonder what guys like them could have done with todays technology.

anyone got the time, space and inclination to set up a proper test bed to test an original and make mod's to retest and get
some useful feedback as to what actually works?

bob g
otherpower.com, microcogen.info, practicalmachinist.com
(useful forums), utterpower.com for all sorts of diy info

fattywagonman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 330
    • View Profile
Re: Upping the HP on a 6/1
« Reply #78 on: June 19, 2006, 09:41:07 PM »
HI Tom,
I think most pistons are AL and the comps are all in the 17-18 to 1 range
« Last Edit: June 19, 2006, 10:59:33 PM by fattywagonman »

fattywagonman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 330
    • View Profile
Re: Upping the HP on a 6/1
« Reply #79 on: June 19, 2006, 09:50:42 PM »
BTW I went to 6 different indian manufactures and compared SFC #'s... all are within 173-177 range for DI and about 195-198 for IDI..

oldnslow

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 150
    • View Profile
Re: Upping the HP on a 6/1
« Reply #80 on: June 19, 2006, 10:41:37 PM »
The original Lister design is as close to optimum as you can get by balancing cost and efficiency at time of manufacture.

I think we are lucky to have originals, "clones of the standard" or "super" clones like the Satyajeet GM90 all available for purchase.

Personally, I like the Turbo one like on George B's site.  8) http://www.utterpower.com/turbo_6_1.htm
Mistakes are the cost of tuition.

fattywagonman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 330
    • View Profile
Re: Upping the HP on a 6/1
« Reply #81 on: June 19, 2006, 11:52:28 PM »
here's an interesting read on where diesel tech is going and some of the efficiencies DI vs IDI

http://www.memagazine.org/backissues/august97/features/diesel/diesel.html

kyradawg

  • Guest
Re: Upping the HP on a 6/1
« Reply #82 on: June 20, 2006, 12:05:31 AM »


Peace&Love :D, Darren
« Last Edit: August 03, 2006, 03:54:03 AM by kyradawg »

GuyFawkes

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1184
    • View Profile
    • stuff
Re: Upping the HP on a 6/1
« Reply #83 on: June 20, 2006, 12:14:53 AM »
here's an interesting read on where diesel tech is going and some of the efficiencies DI vs IDI

http://www.memagazine.org/backissues/august97/features/diesel/diesel.html

it's bollocks.

you know why?

it's like a magician, never ever watch the hand he wants you to watch, with these "articles" always look at what they don't write about.

Direct Injection beats indirect injection by 15%, yes it does, this has been known for 40 years, but, there are words missing, the whole sentence and the entire truth is

Direct Injection beats indirect injection by 15%, in small bore high revving diesel engines.

Just like

Dual overhead camshafts are much more efficient than pushrod motors

Yes they are, at high revs and smaller bores.

Direct injection is A LOT CHEAPER.

Leaving out the CS valve is A LOT CHEAPER
--
Original Lister CS 6/1 Start-o-matic 2.5 Kw (radiator conversion)
3Kw 130 VDC Dynamo to be added. (compressor + hyd pump)
Original Lister D, megasquirt multifuel project, compressor and truck alternator.
Current status - project / standby, Fuel, good old pump diesel.

GuyFawkes

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1184
    • View Profile
    • stuff
Re: Upping the HP on a 6/1
« Reply #84 on: June 20, 2006, 12:18:55 AM »
BTW, DI has worse emissions, esp NOx
--
Original Lister CS 6/1 Start-o-matic 2.5 Kw (radiator conversion)
3Kw 130 VDC Dynamo to be added. (compressor + hyd pump)
Original Lister D, megasquirt multifuel project, compressor and truck alternator.
Current status - project / standby, Fuel, good old pump diesel.

GuyFawkes

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1184
    • View Profile
    • stuff
Re: Upping the HP on a 6/1
« Reply #85 on: June 20, 2006, 12:24:03 AM »
BTW, the "new" engines getting more efficiency are HDI, high direct injection, not the same thing as DI, not just apples and oranges, but apples oranges and pears
--
Original Lister CS 6/1 Start-o-matic 2.5 Kw (radiator conversion)
3Kw 130 VDC Dynamo to be added. (compressor + hyd pump)
Original Lister D, megasquirt multifuel project, compressor and truck alternator.
Current status - project / standby, Fuel, good old pump diesel.

GuyFawkes

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1184
    • View Profile
    • stuff
Re: Upping the HP on a 6/1
« Reply #86 on: June 20, 2006, 12:25:06 AM »
anyone seriously intersted should read
  International Journal of Engine Research
ISSN: 1468-0874
DOI: 10.1243/146808704773564578
Issue:  Volume 5, Number 2 / 2004
--
Original Lister CS 6/1 Start-o-matic 2.5 Kw (radiator conversion)
3Kw 130 VDC Dynamo to be added. (compressor + hyd pump)
Original Lister D, megasquirt multifuel project, compressor and truck alternator.
Current status - project / standby, Fuel, good old pump diesel.

GuyFawkes

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1184
    • View Profile
    • stuff
Re: Upping the HP on a 6/1
« Reply #87 on: June 20, 2006, 12:27:03 AM »
and the current issue come to that
 International Journal of Engine Research
ISSN: 1468-0874
Issue: Volume 7, Number 2 / 2006


        
Investigation of the Early Soot Formation Process in A Transient Spray Flame Via Spectral Measurements of Laser-Induced Emissions    pp. 93 - 101
     
T Aizawa and H Kosaka
   
 
        
Soot Formation in Diesel Fuel Jets Near the Lift-Off Length    pp. 103 - 130
     
L M Pickett and D L Siebers
   
 
        
Exhaust Tuning of Large-Bore, Multicylinder, Two-Stroke, Natural Gas Engines    pp. 131 - 141
     
J Adair, D Olsen, A Kirkpatrick
   
 
        
Flow and Mixture Distribution in a High-Speed Five-Valve Direct Injected Gasoline Engine    pp. 143 - 166
     
N Kampanis, C Arcoumanis, S Kometani, R Kato, H Kinoshita
   
 
        
The Use of Non-Parametric Regression to Investigate the Sensitivities of High-Speed Direct Injection Diesel Emissions and Fuel Consumption to Engine Parameters    pp. 167 - 180
     
Y Liu, F Lu, R D Reitz
   
 
        
Computational Fluid Dynamics Modelling of Residual Fuel Oil Combustion in the Context of Marine Diesel Engines    pp. 181 - 199
     
L Goldsworthy
   
 
--
Original Lister CS 6/1 Start-o-matic 2.5 Kw (radiator conversion)
3Kw 130 VDC Dynamo to be added. (compressor + hyd pump)
Original Lister D, megasquirt multifuel project, compressor and truck alternator.
Current status - project / standby, Fuel, good old pump diesel.

mobile_bob

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2940
    • View Profile
Re: Upping the HP on a 6/1
« Reply #88 on: June 20, 2006, 12:38:07 AM »
Guy:

i guess i would have to ask, what you call high rev and small bore?

seems like all of the US manufactures currently are producing direct injection engines as their main products.

i don't see fuel mileage decreasing as a result, but

then again perhaps you are correct on large bore very slow rpm engines, all is relative i guess.

would you call a 14 liter 6 cyl engine of approx 5.5 bore and 5 inch stroke rated at 1800rpm a small bore high rpm engine?

i dont work around what i would call monster bore engines that are used in ocean going ships, so perhaps those are the ones
you are referring to?

NOx emmisions are a problem i would agree, but i am not sure that the manufactures are going to go back to precup designs to lower those problems. Rather it would appear they are going full tilt toward DI and other methods to reduce NOx emmissions.

To others:

Even still how are most of us going to apply a technology to what we have existing in the listeroids?

i suppose someone here might fab up a 20,000 psi injection system to a DI listeroid with all the computer controls and sensors. maybe our friends in india are going to do it? ya right!

even if they did, what would we get?  An EPA compliant 6/1 that cost 3000 bucks? LOL

the reality is, if you have an original lister, fine, good job, enjoy it.
if not then get a listeroid by hook or crook and enjoy it, if you are so inclined take it down and blue print it. modify things like intake runners, exhaust runner, improve the lube system, install a tstat to keep the temp up to 190 degrees or so, and then enjoy it.

good god this is like trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear don't you think?

at some point if you want a ferrari, you buy a ferrari.

i for one am just tickled pink to have gotten mine before the ban wiped out stocks, and am saddened that there aren't more available.

for the money there just isn't anything else out there that fills the bill so nicely "as is".

perhaps instead of discussing how to up the power of a 6/1 the discussion should evolve into how to live with what it will produce by means of load management. That would be a useful direction in the discussion that most everyone could directly apply easily, at least far easier than modifying or turbocharging a lister/oid.

damn i love you guys :)
great fun it is coming here

bob g
otherpower.com, microcogen.info, practicalmachinist.com
(useful forums), utterpower.com for all sorts of diy info

fattywagonman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 330
    • View Profile
Re: Upping the HP on a 6/1
« Reply #89 on: June 20, 2006, 01:08:19 AM »
Hi Bob,
I've posted some easy to do things that improve the combustion on the DI listeroid or Petteroid.. it works.. no bull... and you don't need no 20K psi injection pressure..  so it's an easy DYI kind of improvement..
Quote
Direct Injection beats indirect injection by 15%, yes it does, this has been known for 40 years, but, there are words missing, the whole sentence and the entire truth is

Direct Injection beats indirect injection by 15%, in small bore high revving diesel engines.
I think Guy is a little confused... IDI has never been common on large engines.. only small ones and it was implemented to improve combustion and reduce noise from combustion knock.. .. DI has almost always been prefered in heavy apps where the diesel cycle is used because of better efficiency.. they didn't use DI  in smaller engines because they didn't have the parts to make it work.. now we have better injectors / pumps and the need for higher efficiency.. so the indians implemented DI combustion to the old lister.. Honestly I think Guy is pissed at the indians for messing arround with his beloved limey design.. IMO they made it better.. and IME you can make combustion more complete by modifiying the piston.. as for all the technical papers.. they are writen by folks with opinions.. and no mater how unbiased  the opinion of the author eventually make it's way onto the page.. I'm sure those papers are full of good info.. but saying that untill a guy reads them that his opinion is useless is a little over the edge.. 
BTW IDI engines make lots of Nox too.. Nox can be combated by retarding the timing, reciculating /  the exhaust, and cooling the intake charge..