New engine build Scania DC1601 for our semi truckpuller.

[Leiffi]

How high do you think Scania 114 engine can be revved without stretching conrods ? Same heavy 2 piece pistons as 12 and 16 liter engines but shorter stroke. Maybe 3500 rpm ?

 

[tall boy]

How high do you think Scania 114 engine can be revved without stretching conrods ? Same heavy 2 piece pistons as 12 and 16 liter engines but shorter stroke. Maybe 3500 rpm ?

I can not comment on this as we only run them up to 2900Rpm but we also run the 12.7L XPI 6 line to 2900Rpm having a full steel piston that a bit heavier as well but has a lot of improvement over the older engines on material used.

 

[tall boy]

The Truck Pulling season has ended ending up with a 4e and 5e place in the championship and I’m not so happy a bout that but we have to look ahead and the team is relay motivated to improve things.

On the MVJ3 (bonneted truck or torpedo) they have solved the clutch problems that cost us so many points.
The engine on the MVJ2 is up to specifications for the last 3 events making more power but on the last run the rain made the track to having no traction and this made a very interesting run.

My part for next year is engineering the engines. We are in the process of building a new engine and it will be a XPI commonrail version and we have most of the parts in already.
We have the fuelpump that’s is able to support 8,8Kn of torque.
As for the turbo set-up we going to move back to the centre line of the engine as for having very short runners to the turbine inlet getting more efficiency out of the turbo able to run a bigger turbine housing and so on.

The generation 3 V8 engine 16.4L displacement. Hope to make a set of cams that will be able to inject more fuel in less crank degrees. Also we have to modify the PDE injectors to support this all. Also this engine has the turbochargers on the centre line of the engine and the modification to this will be to jump up from a S400SX3 BorgWarner turbine group to the SX4 96/88 turbine going from a 1.15 A/R hoping to go to a 1.32 A/R.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_D9riDj3Q5c"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_D9riDj3Q5c[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rwnyfCvjTc"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rwnyfCvjTc[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCP1J8By9A4"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCP1J8By9A4[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKSpzDxGChI"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKSpzDxGChI[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eET90xvXgtQ"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eET90xvXgtQ[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOr8XJ3BcCI"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOr8XJ3BcCI[/ame]


The Off Road rally truck build is under a lot of pressure. In 11 days both trucks most be on they’re way to Morocco for field testing running some of the old Le Dakar stages with big dunes an I hope a lot of heat as well.
So far only one of the trucks has run so far and tomorrow I hope to install the last of all wiring and test all functions.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQFcoJuuIQY"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQFcoJuuIQY[/ame]

 

[TDIfreak]

As for the turbo set-up we going to move back to the centre line of the engine as for having very short runners to the turbine inlet getting more efficiency out of the turbo able to run a bigger turbine housing and so on.

Leiffi was right this time . Too much volume on those long runners.

We also moved to bigger BW housing and it works great.

 

[tall boy]

Leiffi was right this time . Too much volume on those long runners.

We also moved to bigger BW housing and it works great.

Well @ the time we build the gen2 engine we were planning for the possibility to jump over to 2x Holset HX82 and @ that time we could not fit them on the centre line of the engine as having no space so we had to move the turbochargers to the back of the engine to make them fit.

 

[tall boy]

Done the First field test with the Scania Rally Truck and it is looking promising.

Still have to clear some bugs out by moving some of the temp sensors on the engine radiator and maybe have to reconsider cooling fan control as we only get a reading on intake coolant temp to the ECU controlling 3 sets of fans and the engine dos not want to go up in temp a lot even running full power with 28C ambient temp.

Also had some fun finding out why the engine did not run that well giving the impression one cam was getting bad so we inspect the camshaft and lucky all was OK so it turned out we had the do the valve adjustment in a different procedure. Difference was only 0,2mm in clearage but with the cam profiles we use this makes the difference between white smoke and barking like an old Cummins M11 or pulling hard from low RPM and no smoke under power.

I’m still impressed with the new BorgWarner 472SX-E Turbo. It spools faster makes more boost and low end power and less EMP compared to the 476SX3 with the same configuration of engine.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoBxLkCtUpw"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoBxLkCtUpw[/ame]

 

[Leiffi]

Leiffi was right this time . Too much volume on those long runners.

Factory engineers designing truck engines are not stupid. I dont know why Scania went to old 140 style manifolds with new XPI V8:s ? Maybe because VGT turbine cant take strong pulses or maybe because Holset doesnt make big enough turbines for those VGT chargers ?

 

[jfaulkner]

Factory engineers designing truck engines are not stupid. I dont know why Scania went to old 140 style manifolds with new XPI V8:s ? Maybe because VGT turbine cant take strong pulses or maybe because Holset doesnt make big enough turbines for those VGT chargers ?

Then if length is an issue why don't they flip the heads around and route the exhaust into the valley where the turbo is?

 

[Leiffi]

Then if length is an issue why don't they flip the heads around and route the exhaust into the valley where the turbo is?

They have tried it, I've seen the prototype, but maybe it's the lack of space for all the EGR piping and coolers ? I think it also makes engine higher, not enough space under cab.

 

[tall boy]

Leiffi you still have a great imagination. Scania jumping away from the modular built on parts engineering there cyl heads the other way a round? Impossible in many ways to do this.

As for length on ex manifold, have a look how things are done on some industrial engines having the turbochargers on the front or back of the engine and if you get the chance have a look how things are done on the 2000 series commonrail MTU engines. Could be interesting trying to understand why they build a double walled manifold where the inner tube has open spaces in it.

140 style manifolds as all in one. Yes they used it up to the Euro 5 generation 1 V8 15.6L.
It’s a crappie manifold as they bend open just after cyl 4 and 8 and it’s unable to make decent power and yes most Scandinavians think it’s great as some are happy to make a bit over 1000Hp but fact is all pullers using the V8 Scania did have a good look @ our engine and start copying our older manifolds running them 2 by 2 making a lot of progress this way but must say the BFSC is a lot more as they run old style mechanical fuelpump on them making more exhaust volume.

VGT is mainly there to control EGR pressure in the system. A conventional turbocharger can do the same job as well and as a result the VGT was replaced by a conventional turbo on the NON EGR 13L XPI engines and customer satisfaction went up a lot as getting rid of the crappie Holset VGT chargers.

On the exhaust manifold part the discussion is going for some time if the V8 will stay for the future? Problem is fuel consumption on low and mid engine load keeping EGT up on the CAT and partial filter part. Having a low BFSC on your engine dos not make great heat production on the exhaust side so keeping things as short as possible will help but I also think that insulating the manifolds like Paccar dos on the MX11 and 13 Euro 6 or TIER 4 final engines can work as well.

 

[Leiffi]

Leiffi you still have a great imagination. Scania jumping away from the modular built on parts engineering there cyl heads the other way a round? Impossible in many ways to do this.

As for length on ex manifold, have a look how things are done on some industrial engines having the turbochargers on the front or back of the engine and if you get the chance have a look how things are done on the 2000 series commonrail MTU engines. Could be interesting trying to understand why they build a double walled manifold where the inner tube has open spaces in it.

140 style manifolds as all in one. Yes they used it up to the Euro 5 generation 1 V8 15.6L.
It’s a crappie manifold as they bend open just after cyl 4 and 8 and it’s unable to make decent power and yes most Scandinavians think it’s great as some are happy to make a bit over 1000Hp but fact is all pullers using the V8 Scania did have a good look @ our engine and start copying our older manifolds running them 2 by 2 making a lot of progress this way but must say the BFSC is a lot more as they run old style mechanical fuelpump on them making more exhaust volume.

VGT is mainly there to control EGR pressure in the system. A conventional turbocharger can do the same job as well and as a result the VGT was replaced by a conventional turbo on the NON EGR 13L XPI engines and customer satisfaction went up a lot as getting rid of the crappie Holset VGT chargers.

On the exhaust manifold part the discussion is going for some time if the V8 will stay for the future? Problem is fuel consumption on low and mid engine load keeping EGT up on the CAT and partial filter part. Having a low BFSC on your engine dos not make great heat production on the exhaust side so keeping things as short as possible will help but I also think that insulating the manifolds like Paccar dos on the MX11 and 13 Euro 6 or TIER 4 final engines can work as well.

140 manifold is 4-2-1, lots of volume like new XPI V8 manifold. 15,6 L used 143 style manifold, all to 1 which is best, for non-VGT type turbo at least.

No imagination, like I said, I've seen them.

6 cylinder engines are easy to make very compact manifold, and everyone is using them, even all out race engines.

 

[tall boy]

I’m back from 3 days of testing in the Moroccan desert with Semi Rally from Top Trucks and Dakar Speed.

I’m very happy with the result. The cooling system used is very good so from day one we got nothing to worry a bout. Also used day one for optimising the ECU settings and the XPI fuel injection system is very rewording clearing out smoke adding 15% more torque even lowering boost on the A engine with different cam and pistons. Difference between the B engines using OE parts only and the A version is 200Rpm difference in spool-up and there fore more low end power.

Day two of testing we used an old Dakar rally stage with a big dune on the start to run full power for as long as possible and all temperatures stay well within limits so no power reduction there. Also spend 140km on top of the engine sitting on the engineer seat during road travel on the truck with the B engine. This things pull to 100 mile/hour in no time @ 2457 Rpm only and speed limit is set to 140Kmh so we hit this @ 2149 RPM still having 93@ of max torque but @ low RPM you feel the engine hammering away on the drive train and all came to the conclusion we need a truck that’s is able to survive 10.000Km of rallying so we set the toque level flat as on a race truck you try to hit max toque as low in RPM as possible and start decreasing from that point not to hit the smoke limit or making smoke more up the RPM range so as a result the A engine runs 5% less fuel being more fuel efficient making the same power as the B engine having more low end power but same max torque and top end power but both engines can do more so we got options.

Day 3 again and old Dakar rally stage with very fast rio or dry rivers and very large dunes and the end comment of the top driver no more changes to the software on arrival so job well done. Problem on day two was the INV valve on the hi pressure pump is to slow on hi RPM or the driver to fast on the accelerator opening the safety valve on the commonrail so had to make some modification to the software on fuel pressure control predicting what the drivers is going to do being faster as the driver on the control side of things. It’s like paying cat and mouse and I won. LOL.

S472SX-E. best S400 turbo so far. Moves a ton of air EMP stays very close to MAP even in hi RPM low comp discharge temp and it easy out performs the S476SX turbo even running 44 C centigrade @ 90Kpa ambient press as compared to 100Kpa @ sea level 25C intake temp as where we do most of the testing being part of the Netherlands.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JydlywK3Gec"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JydlywK3Gec[/ame]

 

[Leiffi]

What do you think is the reason why Scania is using only 1400 bar railpressure in these new non-EGR engines ? Sounds stupid when the system is made for 2400 bar or actually 3000 bar max pressure. Something to do with NOx emissions ?

 

[56cummins]

Thanks for posting your projects!

 

[tall boy]

What do you think is the reason why Scania is using only 1400 bar railpressure in these new non-EGR engines ? Sounds stupid when the system is made for 2400 bar or actually 3000 bar max pressure. Something to do with NOx emissions ?

Reducing NOX means having control over your combustion and more and smaller nozzle holes and more fuel pressure is one of them so is your find fact or fiction? Looks 3000Bar plus fuel systems will become the standard, as California law demand a further NOX reduction over time.

 

[Leiffi]

Reducing NOX means having control over your combustion and more and smaller nozzle holes and more fuel pressure is one of them so is your find fact or fiction? Looks 3000Bar plus fuel systems will become the standard, as California law demand a further NOX reduction over time.

Fact, maximum request from ECU is 1400 bar in 450 hp Euro6. Maybe they lengthen injection period to keep cylinder pressure down for lower NOx ?

This engine has very high compression ratio of 20:1

 

[tall boy]

Fact, maximum request from ECU is 1400 bar in 450 hp Euro6. Maybe they lengthen injection period to keep cylinder pressure down for lower NOx ?

This engine has very high compression ratio of 20:1

I don’t know where you get your information from but fact is CR is 17.3:1 same as any other XPI 12.7L used from road transport and 1400Bar must be a part load request. Maybe put some more time and effort into understanding new engine development and get to know what it’s all about.

If we start engineering things we can not assume things on what parts are used and what a outcome can be on a CR of an engine for example. Part of a success story is putting effort into finding the parts needed even making sure manufacturing is not cutting corners in the process as last time making a proposal machining the dome shape of a piston just a bit different as for less work faster manufacturing. Lowering BFSC can be a boring thing.

 

[Leiffi]

From Scanias specsheet and railpressure live from diagnostic.

 

[tall boy]

From Scanias specsheet and railpressure live from diagnostic.

Ok Could be but @ that moment what was the load factor/DPF/temp in the after treatment (Oxi cat/practical filter) and so on? It’s not like it will do what you want on demand. It got it’s own agenda on things maintaining emission levels and yes it’s not uncommon that a fuel system is only run on low pressure. It’s not like a manufacture is jumping over to a other fuel system due to this.

There is one good thing going on as the demand for off highway spec increases for on highway applications so now manufactures have to come up with new lower cost products able to deliver a load more fuel than previous fuel systems and there is a load of completion on that part as well so pricing will be lower in the future I hope and we can have more fun making more power.

 

[Leiffi]

Ok Could be but @ that moment what was the load factor/DPF/temp in the after treatment (Oxi cat/practical filter) and so on? It’s not like it will do what you want on demand. It got it’s own agenda on things maintaining emission levels and yes it’s not uncommon that a fuel system is only run on low pressure. It’s not like a manufacture is jumping over to a other fuel system due to this.

There is one good thing going on as the demand for off highway spec increases for on highway applications so now manufactures have to come up with new lower cost products able to deliver a load more fuel than previous fuel systems and there is a load of completion on that part as well so pricing will be lower in the future I hope and we can have more fun making more power.

I think pre-cat temp was something like 600 degrees, max pressure was reached around max hp rpm, at max torque it was even lower.

What I was thinking is that do these engines have bigger injectors to make 450 hp at that low pressure ? Injector part number is different from other xpi engines. If railpressure is for example doubled, will fueling also double ?

Very potential engine, at 1100 rpm at max stock boost smoke limited torque value is about 3800 Nm, so there's lot of extra air if those calculations are right.