Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

2005-01-1548

SAE TECHNICAL
PAPER SERIES

Opposed Piston Opposed Cylinder (opoc)

Engine for Military Ground Vehicles
Peter Hofbauer
FEV Engine Technology, Inc.

Reprinted From: Military Vehicle Technology

(SP-1962)

2005 SAE World Congress

Detroit, Michigan
April 11-14, 2005

400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001 U.S.A. Tel: (724) 776-4841 Fax: (724) 776-5760 Web: www.sae.org
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

The Engineering Meetings Board has approved this paper for publication. It has successfully completed
SAE’s peer review process under the supervision of the session organizer. This process requires a
minimum of three (3) reviews by industry experts.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise,
without the prior written permission of SAE.

For permission and licensing requests contact:

SAE Permissions
400 Commonwealth Drive
Warrendale, PA 15096-0001-USA
Email: permissions@sae.org
Tel: 724-772-4028
Fax: 724-772-4891

For multiple print copies contact:

SAE Customer Service

Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada)
Tel: 724-776-4970 (outside USA)
Fax: 724-776-1615
Email: CustomerService@sae.org

ISSN 0148-7191
Copyright © 2005 SAE International

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE.
The author is solely responsible for the content of the paper. A process is available by which discussions
will be printed with the paper if it is published in SAE Transactions.

Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for presentation or publication by SAE should send the
manuscript or a 300 word abstract to Secretary, Engineering Meetings Board, SAE.

Printed in USA
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

2005-01-1548

Opposed Piston Opposed Cylinder (opoc) Engine for Military

Ground Vehicles
Peter Hofbauer
FEV Engine Technology, Inc.

Copyright © 2005 SAE International

ABSTRACT Table 1: FTTS opoc Engine Goals and Expected Results

Subject Unit Goals Expected Notes to Expected

An extremely lightweight opposed piston opposed
Results
cylinder (opoc) Diesel engine is under development by
FEV Engine Technology under a Defense Advanced Rated hp 650 650 At 3800 rpm, at sea level
Research Projects Agency (DARPA) program. FEV and Power kW 484.7 484.7
Advanced Propulsion Technologies (APT) were asked Maximum ft-lb >900 1180 At 2200 rpm, at sea level
by the U.S. Army Tank Automotive Research Torque
N-m >1220 1600
Development and Engineering Center (TARDEC) to
modify this engine for heavy-truck applications. Engine lb <650 546 Dry, including Inter- and
Weight Oilcooler and Modular
Analyzing the two stroke scavenging, the side-injection kg <294.8 248 Displacement Clutch
combustion, and the structure of the key components Specific 1.19
hp/lb >1.00 Dry, at sea level
shows the potential of the opoc concept. It is predicted Power kW/kg >1.645 1.96
for the 465 kW (650 hp) opoc truck engine:
Engine cft <16.25 13.12 Including Inter- and Oil cooler
Box and Modular Displacement
x Specific power of the dry engine L=cdm <460 370 Clutch
Volume
~ 2kW/kg (1.2 hp/lb) Specific hp/cft >40 49.54 By installation box-volume
x Engine Height Volume kW/L >1.05 1.3
~ 40 cm (16 in)
H/W/L in 15.8/41/35 Including Inter- and Oil cooler
x Best Efficiency at two sweetpoints and Modular Displacement
cm 10/104/89
~ 206 g/kWh (0.339 lb/hph) Clutch

% >39 41.7 At 2500 rpm

Best
INTRODUCTION Efficiency lb/hph >0.362 0.339 At 1033 ft-lb and 516 ft-lb

g/kWh <220 206 At 1400 N-m and at 700 N-m

TARDEC requested APT/FEV to investigate whether the
opoc engine for the A160 helicopter, which is currently in
development under a DARPA program at FEV, is able to
provide the performance requirements of the Future These results are expected because of the attributes of
Tactical Truck System (FTTS) truck and other land the opoc engine:
vehicle applications. FE structure and thermal analysis
on critical components should be conducted to identify x Unprecedented power density
needs for design modifications, in order to suit the high x High efficiency
loads of these engine applications. x Intelligent simplicity

TARDEC established challenging goals for the FTTS
engine development program (see bolded numbers in
Table 1). The results of the first phase of this program
demonstrated the potential of the opoc engine concept
to meet and exceed these program goals. Table 1
summarizes the major program goals and the expected
results of the FTTS opoc engine.
With an optimized scavenging process, the special
design features of the opoc engine concept offer a
significant step towards the theoretical potential of the
two-stroke engine having double the power density of a
four-stroke engine. An estimated 90% scavenging
efficiency has been achieved with unique gas exchange
characteristics of the opoc engine and the use of APT’s
electric assisted turbocharger.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

The opoc engine runs with almost two times the engine crankcase must be solid and heavy with main bearings
speed (3800 rpm) along with a large cylinder stroke on both sides of each big conrod-end.
(167.53 mm), as a result of the split stroke of the
opposed piston structure. This also improves the power
density towards the theoretical potential of another factor
of 2.

A maximum thermal brake efficiency of >41% is

predicted with the opoc engine design. This high
efficiency is achieved through low friction (less parts, low
piston side force and almost no main bearing forces),
Figure 1: Opposed Piston Junkers Engine [JUMO 205]
low heat rejection (from the combustion process into the
combustion chamber walls) and modular displacement.

The opoc concept (Figure 3) offers the best combination

of two concepts: the opposed piston concept (e.g.
Junkers engine Figure 1) and the opposed cylinder
concept (e.g. VW water-cooled boxer engine Figure 2).

Compared to the opposed piston engine, it has only one

crankshaft instead of two. All forces go to this one
crankshaft and not to the main bearings and the
crankcase. In addition, it does not have a cylinder head,
compared to the opposed cylinder engine, which has
two cylinder heads. It is this intelligent structure that Figure 2: Opposed Cylinder Boxer Engine [VOLKSWAGEN -
makes the engine inherently simple, lightweight, Wasser Boxer]
compact and efficient. It is also this configuration that
makes the engine inherently self-balanced and modular It is predicted that the opoc engine under development
to enable the offering of an engine family with a wide (Figure 3) is capable of producing 650 hp at sea level
power range. and 450 hp at up to 15,000 ft, with the best thermal
efficiency of 41.7% at two sweetpoints. Major engine
The expected results from this TARDEC program are design parameters are shown in Table 2:
achieved with moderate engine parameters. The mean
piston speed of only 11.4 m/sec could be increased by Table 2: Major Engine Parameters
30% to the state-of-the-art of 15 m/sec. Further
improving the scavenging process (especially with Parameter Unit
electric assisted turbocharging) could also increase the Bore mm 100
BMEP above the calculated 1925 kPa. This shows the Stroke inner pistons mm 90
potential of further major improvements of the power Stroke outer pistons mm 80
density of the opoc engine, which can and will be Effective Stroke mm 167.53
achieved during the subsequent development phases. Number of cylinders # 4
Total engine displacement L 5.22
opoc ENGINE CONCEPT Rated engine speed rpm 3800
Mean piston speed m/sec 11.4
BMEP kPa 1925
The opoc concept is based on the opposed piston (op)
concept as shown in Figure 1.

The opoc concept is also based on the opposed cylinder
(oc) concept as in Figure 2.
Both concepts have the attribute of compact and flat
engines. As in all conventional engines, the torque is
created between the big conrod-ends and the main
bearings. The main bearings and the crankcase have to
handle all the gas- and mass-forces. For Diesel engines
with peak gas-pressures of >20 MPa (>2900 psi), the
The opoc engine was designed to be modular. Each
module is self-contained and delivers 325 hp (see Figure
4 and Figure 5). The modules are connected together
via the Modular Displacement Clutch, which
synchronizes the modules for achieving even firing when
both modules are functioning (see Figure 6).
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

OUTER PISTON INNER PISTON INNER PISTON OUTER PISTON

INTAKE EXHAUST INTAKE EXHAUST

INNER CONNECTING RODS OUTER CONNECTING RODS

CRANKSHAFT

END COVER END COVER

LEFT AND RIGHT ASSEMBLY
ASSEMBLY
CRANKCASE

INTAKE EXHAUST INTAKE EXHAUST

MANIFOLD MANIFOLD MANIFOLD MANIFOLD

Figure 3: Principal Components of the opoc Engine Module

OUTER PISTON
EXHAUST
OUTER
CONNECTING RODS
INNER PISTON
INTAKE

INNER PISTON
EXHAUST

OUTER PISTON
INTAKE
RIGHT CYLINDER

INNER
CONNECTING RODS
LEFT CYLINDER CRANKSHAFT

Figure 4: One Module of opoc Engine Design

 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

Figure 5: Core Engine Design with Key Components Presented

ELECTRICALLY
ASSISTED
TURBOCHARGERS

INTERCOOLERS

OIL PAN

MODULAR
DISPLACEMENT
CLUTCH

GENERATOR

Figure 6: Two Modules Connected with the Modular Displacement Clutch

 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018
A V-180o drive train configuration, as shown in Figure
7a, creates only first order unbalanced mass-forces.
These forces can be balanced by adding an outer V-180
drive train at a phase angle of 180o, as shown in Figure
7b. This configuration is 100% balanced if the stroke
multiplied with the reciprocating masses of the inner and
outer drive train is the same. In order to achieve
asymmetric timing, the piston that opens and closes the
exhaust port (exhaust piston) always has to travel in
front of the piston that opens and closes the intake port
(intake piston) by about 35 crank-angle degrees. The
timing is realized by using a split-throw crankshaft
design (Figure 8) so there is a phase of 35 degrees
between the throw of the exhaust piston and the throw of
the intake piston (see Figure 7c). In order to keep the
engine balanced, on the left side of the module the inner
piston travels over the exhaust port and the outer piston
travels over the intake port, while on the right side of the
module the inner piston travels over the intake port and
the outer piston travels over the exhaust port.
Figure 7: Balancing and Asymmetric Timing
Figure 8: Crankshaft with Split Throws for Intake and Exhaust
Pistons
In conventional engines, the side force of the piston onto
the cylinder bore is a major source of friction. This can
be minimized by keeping the ratio of the connecting rod
length to crankshaft throw radius (L/R) as large as the
packaging allows. Typically, this value L/R is around 3.2
for a conventional engine. The very long connecting rod
of the outer piston assembly assures a favorable L/R=11
for the outer half of the engine, which helps minimize
friction (see Figure 9). The outer connecting rod is
always under tension; therefore, there is no risk of
buckling. Consequently, a lightweight design can be
achieved. Further weight reduction is achieved by
utilizing titanium as the material for the outer connecting
rod.
The inner connecting rod employs a unique method to
increase L/R, while still providing a compact package
(see Figure 10). The rod uses a very large theoretical
pin diameter, but the outer web of the rod is cut away,
leaving only the inner load-carrying surface. This yields
an L/R of around 5, which is much larger than a
conventional pin would be in the same space. The
cutaway design is possible because the thrust vector is
always into the rod, unlike a conventional engine where
the rod is under tension during certain conditions.
Figure 9: Outer Connecting Rod
Figure 10: Inner Connecting Rod
The inner and outer pistons are designed with two parts:
a steel head and an aluminum skirt (See Figure 11).
This design results in a maximum stress-to-weight ratio
for the pistons.
ONE PIECE
ONE PIECE INNER PISTON PIN PISTON BRIDGE
PISTON OUTER PISTON
Figure 11: Inner and Outer Piston Design Configuration
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018
The engine has the cylinder bores offset above the
crankshaft centerline by 7.72 mm (see Figure 12). The
offset between the bores and the crankshaft centerline is
used to further reduce piston friction. It places the
connecting rods straight in line with the bore and
eliminates the side forces at the point when the load on
the connecting rod is the greatest near TDC.
7.72 mm
Figure 12: Cylinder Bore Offset Above Crankshaft Centerline
For a successful two-stroke concept, the following three
features are necessary: (1) Uniflow scavenging; (2)
Asymmetric port timing; and (3) Controlled boosting. The
engine is piston ported for gas exchange in both intake
and exhaust (see Figure 13a). A uniflow scavenging is
achieved with the intake and exhaust ports placed on
the two extreme sides of the cylinder. The asymmetry in
the split pin crankshaft allows the exhaust port to open
before the intake port and also to close before the intake
port closes. This is the ideal case for two-stroke
operation; however, it is unpractical to achieve with the
conventional ported two-stroke designs.
Figure 13a: Uniflow Scavenging
Figure 13b: Electrically Assisted Turbo
Figure 6 and Figure 14 show the two modules and the
parts that connect them. The housing for the Modular
Displacement Clutch also serves as the primary
connection between the modules. In addition, there is a
steel frame that attaches to the crankcase bolts of both
modules. The steel frame serves multiple functions. It
is the mounting point for the turbochargers and also the
means to mount the engine itself. More importantly, it
adds stiffening to the structure by assisting to tie the two
modules together.
The engine has been packaged for the minimum
installation space, while meeting all the critical engine
compartment dimensions. The complete engine is
shown in Figure 14. The opoc engine meets all the
dimensional requirements and the total installation
volume is smaller than the target values.
In addition, other major design features include:
x one electrically assisted turbocharger (Figure 13b) fit
with each module (two cylinders)
x two fuel injectors per cylinder
x dry oil sump with two-stage air/oil separation system
x exhaust pipes on the top with intake pipes below the
engine.
The installation schematics of the opoc engine in the
FTTS are shown in Figure 15.
Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

Figure 14: Engine Layout Design

(a) (b)

Figure 15: Installation Schematics of the opoc Engine in the FTTS

 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018
GAS EXCHANGE Æ PERFORMANCE
If a two-stroke engine is considered, the gas
exchange/scavenging process must be optimized first.
GAS EXCHANGE SYSTEM
The first step to reach the engine performance goals is
to optimize the gas exchange system through
simulation.
The power output of an engine is directly proportional to
how often (engine rpm) a power stroke is produced and
how much fuel is burned in each power stroke to
produce shaft work. The speed of the injection system
(reloading and rate shaping), the combustion velocity of
the air/fuel mixture and the thermal loading of the
combustion chamber determine how often the power
stroke can be produced. Conversely, how much fuel
could be effectively burned per power stroke depends on
how much air could be delivered and trapped in the
cylinder and how efficiently the trapped air is utilized
(minimum relative air/fuel ratio with acceptable
emissions).
During the gas exchange process, the amount of air
delivered and trapped in-cylinder is dominated by the
interaction between the cylinder (piston motion and port
timing), exhaust/intake manifold design (pressure wave
actions) and the turbocharger (mean pressure difference
across the intake and exhaust ports which drives the
scavenging flow through). The purpose of this
simulation study is to seek the optimum match between
the engine cylinder, ports, manifolds and the
turbocharger, which will then define the design
parameters to realize the optimum match.
Engine performance simulation is used as the approach
to define the major design parameters to achieve the
performance goals. GT-Power was utilized to conduct
the simulation. However, due to the special features of
this two-stroke opoc engine, several other simulation
tools also have to be involved.
The simulation approach and simulation tools involved
are illustrated in Figure 16.
Performance Targets
Packaging Performance opoc
Optimization: Optimization: Kinematics:
ProE GT-Power MathCAD
Scavenging
Optimization:
StarCD
Figure 16: Engine Performance Simulation Approach and the
Tools Involved
The second step towards the development of the gas
exchange system was to define the system design,
based on the performance simulation results.
The basic design of the gas exchange system consists
of a single turbocharger and intercooler for each module.
The turbochargers are mounted in between the two
modules of the engine, on both sides of the modular
displacement clutch. Figure 17 shows the abstracted
gas exchange system of the engine.
The turbocharger itself is unique in that it is an
electrically assisted device. The shaft contains a high-
speed electric motor/generator, which can also add
power to the compressor. One of the key advantages of
the electrically assisted turbocharger is that it can be
used to provide scavenged air at engine start up. The
opoc design does not have either a crankcase scavenge
pump or an engine driven scavenge pump as is found
on all other two-stroke designs. This results in
considerable savings in weight, volume and complexity.
Figure 17: Turbocharger System with Intercoolers
Determining Displacement and Maximum Speed
Engine displacement volume and maximum speed are
driven by the maximum power requirement. A
compromise between the displacement volume and
maximum speed needs to be established. For a fixed
engine power output, a higher engine speed would
enable one to use a smaller engine displacement
volume for lighter engine weight. However, the
maximum viable engine speed is limited by the type of
fuel (combustion velocity), the available air/fuel ratio (to
ensure smoke targets) and the mechanical loading on
the piston and the crankshaft. According to FEV’s
experience, a maximum engine speed of 3,800 rpm is
selected for this application. After the rated engine
speed was defined, simulations of engine displacement
volume sweep were conducted. As a result, the
required minimum engine displacement data to satisfy
the TARDEC specified operational requirements is:
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018
x Engine bore and stroke: 100 mm/167.53 mm
x Total number of cylinders: 4 in two identical modules
x Total engine displacement (two modules): 5.22L
x Rated engine speed: 3800 rpm
x Compression ratio:
x 17.5:1 (geometric, from BDC to TDC)
x 13.2:1 (effective, from intake ports close to TDC)
Since the engine has two identical modules, in order to
reduce the simulation effort, only one module (2
cylinders) is studied, and the results for one module are
presented in this paper. The total engine power and
torque can be determined by applying a factor of 2 from
the single module results.
TURBOCHARGING CONCEPTS AND HARDWARE
SELECTION
A number of turbocharging options were studied:
x Option No. 1: One turbocharger for each cylinder
(potentially most compact packaging and lightest
weight turbocharger hardware)
x Option No. 2A: Two cylinders sharing one
turbocharger, utilizing a constant pressure turbine
concept (most difficult to package with heaviest
weight)
x Option No. 2B: Two cylinders sharing one
turbocharger, utilizing a pulse turbine concept
(moderate compact packaging and light weight)
For each of the turbocharging options, off the shelf
turbocharger hardware was selected for the
engine/turbocharger matching simulation. Intake and
exhaust manifold dimensions and port timings were
individually optimized for each of the options. The
following results are concluded for the selected
turbocharging options based on the simulation
investigations:
Option 1: One turbocharger for each cylinder
The identified turbocharger hardware for Option 1 is a
BorgWarner K04 turbocharger. GT-Power simulation
results indicated that the engine operational point at sea
level is already located close to the maximum speed line
of the turbocharger. The turbine speed usually increases
with higher altitude (due to lower air density). Therefore,
at an elevated altitude, the engine performance (power
output) has to be significantly reduced, otherwise the
turbocharger will reach an over-speed condition. The
K04 turbocharger cannot provide enough of a pressure
ratio for the high altitude conditions.
Other turbochargers that have a higher boost pressure
ratio capability than the K04 turbocharger might satisfy
the boost pressure requirement, although they are
unlikely to exist within such a small flow capacity range.
However, the one cylinder – one turbocharger concept
appears to work only with a close-to-constant exhaust
pressure (upstream of turbine) scenario because only
one pulse per cycle at the turbine entry significantly
reduces the turbine efficiency. The only solution would
be to dampen the fluctuation amplitude of the exhaust
pressure waves to approach a constant exhaust
pressure before the turbine. To do so, either very large
exhaust manifold dimensions (e.g. exhaust pipe of 200
mm diameter x 400 mm long with the volume in the
12.6L / cylinder range) or a very large turbine flow area
are required.
However, neither of the two solutions are acceptable for
a practical design of this application. This is because a
larger exhaust manifold diameter generates packaging
problems and also increases the system weight when a
thick pipe wall for the high gas pressure is taken into
account. It loses the potential advantage of lighter
turbocharger hardware weight.
Based on the information provided, the one cylinder –
one turbocharger concept was considered not
acceptable.
Option 2: Two cylinders sharing one turbocharger
Concept option 2A, which uses two cylinders sharing
one turbocharger, can work with a reasonable
(packaging and exhaust system weight wise) exhaust
manifold system design to realize a close-to-constant
pressure turbine concept. However, it requires
additional boosting assistance during engine start up to
create higher intake port pressure than the exhaust port
pressures for a positive scavenge flow. The power
requirement and duration for the assisted boosting
during engine start up could be significant, due to the
relatively large intake and exhaust system volumes
required for the constant pressure before the turbine.
Transient response to an engine load step is also slow,
due to the large exhaust system volume. The manifold
system will also be heavy because of the bulk manifold
dimensions required to realize the constant pressure
concept.
In contrast to a constant pressure turbine concept, the
pulse turbine concept 2B offers a smaller exhaust
system volume, which eases the packaging issue. It also
reduces exhaust system weight as well as the duration
for the assisted boosting during the engine start up
period.
The working principal of a pulse turbine is to utilize, to a
maximum extent, the kinematical energy of the burnt
cylinder gas during the exhaust blow-down period. To
take full advantage of the exhaust gas kinematical
energy and convert it into turbine shaft power to drive
the compressor, the exhaust system volume should be
small (which is also desirable for packaging and engine
start up). However, a small exhaust system volume
would generate large amplitude in exhaust pressure
fluctuations. The large amplitude exhaust pressure
wave could affect the engine breathing in both positive
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018
and negative ways. Matching of engine exhaust/intake
port timings with the manifold dimension and networking
becomes critically important to take advantage of the
positive influence of the pressure fluctuations and avoid
the negative influence. This topic will be further
discussed in the section regarding port timing and
manifold dimension optimization.
Exhaust Manifold Design with Twin Entry Turbine
The matching between the engine and the turbocharger
was optimized for a single scroll (single entry) turbine
from the viewpoint of lighter turbo weight and higher
dynamic turbine efficiency. However, only two scroll
(twin entry) turbines are in production in the BorgWarner
K27 turbo family. A single scroll turbine of similar flow
characteristics would involve a custom build and
significant increase in cost and lead-time. Based on this,
FEV made a decision to use the twin scroll turbine for
the prototype engine testing/development and planned
to investigate the feasibility and compromise between
development cost and weight reduction for a single scroll
turbine.
To assess the impact on engine performance of utilizing
the available two scroll turbine and to optimize the
connection configuration between engine exhaust
system and turbine inlet, a series of GT-Power
simulations were conducted.
Figure 18, Case #1 was the baseline (single scroll
turbine) and optimized for engine and turbo matching.
Case #2 shows the usual way of connecting the exhaust
manifolds to a twin scroll turbine. In this application,
each cylinder is connected to one scroll of the turbine.
Case #3 depicts the concept of joining the exhaust gas
flow from both cylinders first, then feeding both of the
turbine scrolls with the mixed exhaust gas flow from both
cylinders.
Case # 1 Single Entry Turbo
Two Entries Turbo with
Case # 2
separately exhaust pipe
Case # 3 Two Entries Turbo with
Combined exhaust pipe
Figure 18: Several Configurations Studied for Connection
Between Engine Exhaust System and Turbine
Figure 19 depicts the simulated engine and turbine
performance for the three connection configurations
shown in Figure 18 between the engine and turbine.
Case #1 is the baseline. A significant drop in engine
power is predicted with Case #2 if each cylinder is
feeding one scroll of the turbine. The drop of engine
power is caused by the drop of compressor boost
pressure, which results in less fuel to be injected under
the same Air/Fuel Ratio (AFR) criteria. While the drop in
the compressor boost pressure is the result of less
turbine power, the latter is caused by lower turbine
efficiency.
Turbine power extraction from the exhaust gas is directly
proportional to (1) the dynamic mass flow rate passing
through the turbine; (2) the dynamic turbine pressure
expansion ratio; and (3) the corresponding turbine
efficiency. With the single scroll turbine Case #1, the
exhaust gas flow rate experiences less change from the
mean level since the exhaust ports of the two cylinders
are joined together before entering the turbine. In the
two scroll turbine Case #2, the flow streams from the two
cylinders are separated. Each scroll experiences a large
pulsation of exhaust mass flow rate. In the blow down
period when the exhaust ports are open, a large flow
rate of exhaust gas rushes through the turbine while in
the rest of the cycle, the flow rate is relatively small.
Also, since the two cylinders are firing 180oCA apart, at
any instance, the gas pressure across the two scrolls
also experiences a significant difference.
Figure 20a depicts measured turbine efficiency of a
typical twin scroll turbine vs. the in-balance (difference)
of the gas pressures at the twin entries. As shown, the
turbine efficiency always peaks at pressure ratio of 1.0
(across the twin entries), and it drops when the gas
pressure at one entry is higher than the other. That is
why a twin scroll turbine always has lower efficiency
than a single scroll. Figure 20b depicts the typical
influence of instant gas velocity on turbine efficiency,
which applies to both single scroll and twin scroll
turbines. Figure 20b indicates that the turbine efficiency
peaks at a certain gas velocity, and too high or too low
of a gas velocity entering the turbine would reduce the
efficiency of a gas turbine. That is why a well-tuned
constant pressure turbo charging system has higher
efficiency than a pulsating pressure turbo charging
system.
However, twin scroll turbochargers are widely used in
V6/V8 Diesel engines and demonstrate superior
performance over single scroll turbochargers. The
advantages come from its utilization of the pulsating
pressure ratio, especially in the cylinder blow down
period when the instant gas pressure ratio across the
turbine is significantly higher than the mean value. In the
V6/V8 engines, exhaust gas from 3/4 cylinders, which is
directed to one scroll of the twin scroll turbine, ensures a
reasonable amplitude of the mean mass flow rate
through the turbine during the period other than the blow
down. Thus the efficiency does not drop too much. In the
meantime, this enables the utilization of the pulsating
pressure ratio in the blow down period.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

Engine power comparison Comparison of turbo efficiency

490
0.75
480

0.70
470

Turbo efficiency (-)

Power (kW)

460 0.65

450
0.60
440

430 0.55 Single entry (Case # 1)

Two entries (Case # 2)
420 Two entries (Case # 3)
Case # 1 Case # 2 Case # 3 0.50
-60 -30 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300
Crank angle (deg)

Comparison of mass flow rate

Comparison of turbo power
0.60
Single entry (Case # 1) 120

0.50 Two entries (Case # 2) Single entry (Case # 1)

Two entries (Case # 3) 100
Two entries (Case # 2)
Mass flow rate (kg/s)

0.40
Two entries (Case # 3)
80

Turbo power (kW)

0.30
60

0.20
40

0.10
20

0.00
-60 -30 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 0
Crank angle (deg) -60 -30 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300
Crank angle (deg)

Figure 19: Comparison of Simulated Engine and Turbine Performance Comparing Three Connection Configurations Between the Engine and
Turbine, Sea Level

1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
Efficiency (-)

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Velocity ratio: U/Cis (Turbine wheel tip speed / Gas velocity (-)

U: turbine wheel tip speed: 2S*r*N/60

pTE1 and pTE2 are the inlet pressures Cis: Isentropic expansion speed of gas: 2(ho1-h2s)0.5
at the two entries

(a) Turbine efficiency vs. pressure ratio of the two (b) Turbine efficiency vs. tip speed/gas velocity ratio
entries of a twin scroll turbine

Figure 20: Typical Turbine Efficiency vs. Pressure In-balance of the Two Entries of a Twin Scroll Turbine and Instant Tip Speed/Gas Velocity
Ratio
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018
This application is a two-stroke, two-cylinder per turbine
case. If each cylinder is connected to one scroll of the
twin scroll turbine (Case #2), the power gain from
utilizing the pulsating pressure ratio in the blow down
period cannot make up the power loss due to the
efficiency drop during the rest of the cycle. This is
because the gas velocities are too low during this period.
Therefore, Case #2 in Figure 19 has lower turbine power
than the single scroll turbine in Case #1.
On understanding the reason that Case #2 has worse
engine and turbine performance than Case #1, a
solution is proposed to reduce the pulsation of exhaust
gas flow before entering the twin turbine scrolls to
recover the turbine efficiency. By connecting the two
exhaust ports together before entering the turbine
scrolls, as shown in Case #3 of Figure 19, the two
scrolls of the twin entry turbine are fed with exhaust gas
of the same instant pressure and mass flow rate
pulsation. The instantaneous pressure ratio is balanced
between the two scrolls (which peaks the turbine
efficiency in Figure 20a), and the gas mass flow rate
pulsation is optimized for the best compromise between
pulsating energy recovery and turbine efficiency drop.
Simulation results indicate that, as shown in Figure 20,
the turbine efficiency is restored to the case of a single
scroll turbine with comparable engine power output.
Electrically Assisted Turbocharger
For two-stroke turbocharged engines without crankcase
scavenging, assistance to provide the intake boost
pressure is necessary to start the engine before the
turbine receives enough energy from the exhaust gas to
drive the compressor. Among several existing concepts
of adding power to crank the turbocharger during engine
starting, the Electric Assisted Turbocharger (EAT)
concept provides an easy to control and more flexible
means to assist the turbocharger whenever it is desired.
Apart from the functionality to start up the engine, the
EAT concept offers three additional advantages:
x At full load conditions, adding electric power to the
turbocharger would increase the intake boost
pressure, improve the scavenging process and
increase the trapped mass of intake air. Therefore,
more fuel can be burned to produce higher engine
power.
x At light load conditions, when maximum engine
power is not required, adding electric power to the
turbocharger would enable the single module to
cover more points than without it. At the same
power level, running a single model instead of two
can significantly increase the engine fuel economy.
x At a transient state when the engine needs to
increase torque output, adding electric power to the
turbocharger would increase the intake boost
pressure much faster and result in a faster engine
transient response.
Figure 21 depicts the simulated engine at full load
conditions and the corresponding BSFC, comparing
cases with and without the use of an EAT. Adding 2.4
kW of electric power to the turbocharger compressor
could significantly increase the engine torque and power
output. For example, at 2000 rpm, the engine power
has been increased by 180 hp (from 265 hp to 445 hp)
with the input of electricity of 3.2 hp, which indicates a
power-amplifying factor of 56:1. The engine’s maximum
power capacity has also been increased to over 700 hp.
These maximum power increments are for limited time
only, due to the limitation of electric motor temperature
concerns.
The engine/turbocharger behavior under transient
process (change of engine speed and load conditions) is
also very important because it determines how fast the
engine can change load (e.g. to reach the full power).
Typical transient process simulation results for a 1,500
rpm load step are shown in Figure 21. It is indicated that
adding EAT power to the compressor can significantly
speed up the engine transient response to load
requirements. Utilizing an average EAT power input of
2.4 kW, the turbo accelerates much faster together with
a faster rise of the intake boost pressure. More fuel
could be burned, and the engine can increase load
output from 3.2 bar to 10 bar BMEP in approximately 0.5
seconds. This is about 3 to 4 times faster compared
with the time required without the assistance of the EAT.
Engine Torque Shaping with Electric Assisted
Turbocharger (EAT)
In an automotive application, the shape of the engine full
load torque curve significantly affects the drivability of
the vehicle. One of the important parameters used to
judge the drivability of a vehicle is the full load torque
reserve, defined as the peak torque over the torque at
the rated speed. The greater the torque reserve is, the
better the vehicle drivability will be.
Figure 22 depicts the predicted engine torque curves
with and without EAT assist. Different levels of EAT
power input (0.5 kW, 1.0 kW, 1.5 kW, 2.0 kW & 2.5 kW)
were studied. As shown, engine full load torque can be
significantly improved with EAT power input, especially
in the low speed range. When increasing EAT power
input from 0 kW to 2.5 kW, the incremental gain in
torque is very small in the high-speed range (3000 rpm
to 3800 rpm). However, at the speed range from 1000
rpm to 2500 rpm, the incremental gain in torque is
encouraging, with the maximum percentage of the
increment reaching close to 50%.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

C omparison of Turbo speed w ith or W /O E -boost C omparison of Air/Fuel R atio w ith or W /O E -boost

90000 45

40
80000
35
W /O E-B oos t
70000 30 W ith E-B oos t

Air/Fuel Ratio (-)

W /O E -B oos t
Speed (rpm)

W ith E -B oos t 25
60000
20

50000 15

10
40000
5

30000 0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0

Tim e (se c) Tim e (se c)

C omparison of B oost P ressure w ith or W /O E -boost C omparison of B ME P w ith or W /O E -boost

2.0 12

10
1.8

8
Pressure (bar)

1.6

BMEP (bar)
W /O E -B oost W /O E -B oost
6
W ith E -B oost W ith E -B oost
1.4
4

1.2
2

1.0 0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
Tim e (se c) Tim e (se c)

Figure 21: Transient Process Simulation Results, with and without EAT, 1500 rpm Load Step

900 breathing. Larger pressure differences between the

intake and the exhaust ports during the scavenging
800 process (when both ports are open) promote a positive
scavenging flow and expel the burnt gas quickly and
700
T o r q u e (N -M )

easily. Negative pressure differences (i.e. higher

600
500
400
300
1000
Figure 22: Effect of EAT on Engine Performance at Various Engine
Speeds, single module
PORT TIMING AND MANIFOLD
DIMENSION/NETWORK
Due to the nature of reciprocating piston movement and
the compressibility of gas, pressure waves are
generated in the engine exhaust and intake manifold
systems. The amplitude of pressure fluctuation is
associated with the port timing (cylinder pressure) and
the diameters of the manifold network. The phase of the
pressure wave is mostly influenced by pipe length and
connection where pressure waves are reflected. The
existence of pressure waves can improve or harm the
engine scavenging process and affect the engine
exhaust than the intake port pressure) cause a reverse
flow from the exhaust port back to the intake port
through the cylinder.
Heat Transfer: OPOC Heat Transfer: Conventional
EAT=2.5 KW + OPOC EAT=1.5KW +OPOC Pressure fluctuations in the exhaust system before the
EAT=2.0KW + OPOC EAT=0.5 KW + OPOC
EAT=1.0KW + OPOC turbine will affect the turbine performance as well as the
turbine efficiency changes with the instant pressure ratio
1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 across it. An ideal situation for the turbine would be to
Engine Speed (rpm) have most of the exhaust gas flow passing the turbine
under higher turbine efficiency. The turbine
performance (shaft power to drive the compressor) of a
pulse turbine system depends very much on how the
pressure fluctuations (gas kinematical energy) are
utilized.
The steps towards optimized engine port timing,
manifold dimensions and the network are to tune the
pressure waves in the manifold system, both amplitude
and phasing, into the most favorable conditions. The
goals of the optimization are:
1. To create the largest pressure difference between the
intake and exhaust ports during the gas exchange
process when both ports are open.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018
2. To utilize the gas kinetic energy to the greatest extent
at the turbine entry.
The two goals often do not converge into one set of
design parameters for all the engine operating
conditions. The optimization process is to achieve the
best compromise for most of the important engine
operation conditions. The optimization process is
conducted though systematic sweeps of the major
design parameters. Figure 23 illustrates the exhaust
manifold design parameters studied, as an example of
the optimization process.
Figure 23: Exhaust Manifold Design Parameters Studied
Engine Torque Shaping via Optimizing Port
Heights/Timings
Selection of port heights is critical for engine
performance of two-stroke engines because it affects
timing, duration, scavenging overlap and time-area value
of the ports. Due to the fact that the frequency, phasing
and amplitude of pressure wave fluctuations in the
manifold system change with engine speed (and load),
different port heights will significantly affect the engine
full load torque shape. A matrix of both the
intake/exhaust port heights was studied across the
entire engine range:
x Baseline (optimized for another engine of different
application): Intake port height: 18.4 mm, Exhaust
port height: 26.08 mm
x Intake port heights sweep: 16.4 mm, 17.4 mm, 18.4
mm, 19.4 mm & 20.4 mm, with fixed exhaust port
height of 26.08 mm
x Exhaust port heights sweep: 24.08 mm, 25.08 mm,
26.08 mm, 27.08 mm & 28.08 mm, with fixed intake
port height of 18.4 mm
Effect of Intake Port Heights on Engine Torque Profile
The influence of intake port heights on the engine torque
profile is shown in Figure 24.
800
750
700
650
Torque (NM)
600
550
Hin=20.4mm
500 Hin=19.4mm
450 Original, Hin=18.4 mm
Hin=17.4mm
400
Hin=16.4mm
350
300
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 400 0
Speed (r/min)
Figure 24: Influence of Intake Port Heights on Engine Torque,
single module
The simulation results show that intake port height has a
strong influence on the engine torque output. Engine
torque shape could be significantly improved via
optimizing the intake port heights w/o EAT assist. A
higher intake port (longer opening duration) results in
higher torque at the medium to low speed range but
lower torque output in the high speed range. A lower
intake port height (shorter opening duration) shows the
opposite results, lower torque at low speed and higher
torque at high speed.
These characteristics are just the opposite of four-stroke
engines and seem contrary to common knowledge. In
four-stroke engines, the exhaust/intake valve overlap is
usually small and the exhaust system has limited
influence on the gas exchange process. The intake
valve opening duration affects the engine volumetric
efficiency (trapped air mass) through the closure timing.
Before the intake valve is fully closed, if the cylinder
pressure is higher than the intake port pressure, which is
usually the case at lower engine speeds, a later intake
valve closure will result in fresh charge back flow into the
intake port and a reduction in trapped fresh air. At high
engine speeds, gas dynamics in the intake system are
stronger, and a positive pressure wave will come to the
intake port late. The dynamic intake port pressure wave
would result in a positive pressure difference from port to
cylinder to form a “ram” supercharging effect, and a later
intake valve closure would utilize the “ram” effect to the
full extent. Therefore, in four-stroke engines, a longer
intake valve duration (later closure) will increase engine
volumetric efficiency at high speed but cause it to
decrease at low speed.
Gas exchange in two-stroke engines, opoc being one of
those, is different. It does not have a separate exhaust
stroke but a very large port timing overlap for
scavenging. Therefore, the gas exchange process
depends not only on the relative amplitude of pressure
waves across the intake port near and at the intake port
closure, but also the exhaust port pressure has an
important role since the port timing overlap is significant.
To understand the reasoning that in the opoc engine a
longer intake port height shows higher torque at low
speed but lower torque at high speed. Two typical
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

cases (engine speed of 3800 rpm and 2000rpm) are power decreases with an increased intake port height at
analyzed in the following text. an the engine speed of 3800 rpm. When reducing intake
port height, the back flow to the intake chamber is
Figure 25a shows the gas mass flow rate across the reduced, boost pressure increases and more fresh air is
intake port comparing two intake port heights at an trapped (Figure 25b). At a constant A/F ratio, more
engine speed of 3800 rpm. As shown, a longer intake power is produced.
port height (earlier opening and later closure)
significantly increased the back flow (negative flow rate The situation is different at the engine speed of 2000
at intake port) from cylinder to the intake port at port rpm, as shown in Figure 25c. The cylinder has enough
opening. That is because the earlier intake port opening blow down time, and at intake port opening, the cylinder
timing increased the exhaust/intake port overlap, and at pressure is already lower than the intake port pressure.
this high speed, the cylinder gas blow down time (to the No backflow to the intake port is observed. Therefore,
exhaust port) is not enough. The cylinder pressure is earlier intake port opening time (higher intake port
higher than the intake port pressure, and an earlier height) increases the positive scavenging period. As a
opening of intake port (longer intake port height) gives a result, more fresh charge enters the cylinder and engine
lower volumetric efficiency, less fresh charge trapped, volumetric efficiency increases. This produces more
lower turbine power (because of less mass flow through turbine power and boost pressure, as shown in Figure
the turbine) and lower boost pressure (which aggravates 25d.
the problem), as shown in Figure 25b. The turbocharger
3800 rpm 3800 rpm
0.5
75 4.0

0.4
I n ta k e M a s s F l o w R a te (K g / S e c )

70 3.5

B o o s t P re s s u re (b a r) & T ra p p e d
Hin=20.4mm(Intake)
0.3

F re s h M a s s (K g /S e c )
Hin=17.4mm(Intake) 65 3.0
0.2 T C P o w e r (K W )
60 2.5
0.1

55 2.0
0
Turbo_Power
-0.1 50 1.5
Boost Pressure
Trapped Fresh Mass
-0.2 45 1.0
80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 16 17 18 19 20 21
Crank Angle Degree Intake Port Height (mm)

(a) (b)

2000rpm
2000 rpm
0.25
40 5.0
Hin=20.4mm(Intake)
0.2 Turbo_Power
Hin=17.4mm(Intake) 35 4.5
I n ta k e M a s s F l o w R a te (K g / S e c )

Boost Pressure

B o o s t P re s s u re (b a r) & T ra p p e d
0.15 Trapped Fresh Mass
30 4.0
0.1 F re s h M a s s (K g / S e c )
T C P o w e r (K W )

25 3.5
0.05
20 3.0
0
15 2.5
-0.05
10 2.0
-0.1
5 1.5
-0.15
0 1.0
80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 16 17 18 19 20 21
Crank Angle Degree Intake Port Height (mm)

(c) (d)

Figure 25: Influence of Intake Port Heights on Performance of Intake and Exhaust Systems
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018
Effect of Exhaust Port Heights on Engine Torque Profile
The simulation results of exhaust port heights on engine
torque profile are shown in Figure 26.
800
750
700
650
Torque (NM)
600
550
500
450
400
350
300
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Engine Speed (r/min)
Figure 26: Influence of Exhaust Port Heights on Engine Torque
Shape, single module
The influence of exhaust port heights has shown the
opposite impact on the intake port. A higher exhaust
port (longer duration) produces lower torque in the low
speed region but higher torque in the high speed region.
The reason is that: (1) in the high speed region,
increasing the exhaust port height also increases the
blow down time, which results in a lower cylinder
pressure when the intake ports are open; thus back flow
into the intake is reduced and cylinder trapped mass is
increased; and (2) in the low speed region where no
back flow into the intake port exists, an increased
exhaust port height only causes loss of piston expansion
work, which reduces the engine torque output. Figure 27
depicts this process.
A 19.4 mm intake port height, instead of the 18.4 mm
(as in the baseline) is the best compromise for a
desirable engine torque curve and peak power. The
baseline engine exhaust port height of 26.08 mm is
close to the optimum, and no change is necessary.
SCAVENGE PROCESS OPTIMIZATION WITH CFD
ANALYSES
The engine performance results shown in the previous
sections were simulated under an assumed engine
scavenging (air/burnt gas exchange) process. The
quality of the trapped in-cylinder gas after the
scavenging process can only be confirmed by a 3-
Dimensional CFD simulation of the scavenging process.
FEV utilizes StarCD to conduct the 3-D CFD studies and
to optimize the exhaust/intake manifold design as well
as the port timings in conjunction with the 1-D GT-Power
performance simulation. The 1-D GT-Power simulation
provides engine performance predictions and boundary
conditions (e.g. pressure boundary conditions at the
exhaust and intake ports) for the 3-D simulation. The 3-
D simulation in return provides the scavenging
performance to correct the 1-D simulation assumptions.
The parameters to optimize the scavenging process
include:
x Delivery ratio
Hex=28.08mm
x The in-cylinder trapped gas mass
Hex=27.08mm x The scavenging efficiency (gas purity)
Original, Hex=26.08mm
x History versus time of gas flow passing through the
Hex=25.08mm
Hex=24.08mm
ports and distribution of burnt gas and fresh air in
the cylinder space
3500 4000 x In-cylinder swirl number induced by the intake flow
The CFD scavenging analyses were also conducted
interactively with the CAD package design studies. An
idealized intake and exhaust port design from a CFD
scavenging point of view may demand significant
package volume and would be difficult to realize in a
practical engine. Therefore, intensive CAD/CFD loops
have been conducted to achieve the smallest package
design without deteriorating the engine performance.
Several typical exhaust and intake port designs studied
are shown in Figure 28. The scavenging performance
prediction of each option is depicted in Table 3.
Figure 28 and Table 3 show the first viable design
(baseline) that achieved a scavenging efficiency of
74.1% and a trapped fresh air mass of 1.69 grams. Both
the scavenging efficiency and trapped air mass were
significantly increased by adapting a symmetric intake
and exhaust manifold, as shown in case number 20,
which avoids the in-balance of flow between the two
halves of ports. Both the scavenging efficiency and
delivered air mass were further improved by reducing
the intake port centerline offset from 20 mm in case
number 20 to 15 mm in case number 28. Using a
symmetric manifold increases the difficulty of packaging
the design.
Figure 29 illustrates snap shots of the scavenging
process simulation results for the optimized
exhaust/intake manifold design (case number 33 in
Table 3). The portions of the illustration colored darkest
gray (or dark blue if color) highlight the intake air as it is
being drawn into the cylinder. The areas highlighted in
medium gray (red) show the burnt gases as they are
being scavenged out of the cylinder through the exhaust
manifold. The light gray (yellow, green, and light blue)
illustrates a mixture.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

2000 rpm 3800 rpm

24 2.4 70 4.0

22 2.2 65 3.5

B o o s t P re s s u re (b a r) & T ra p p e d
B o o s t P r e s s u r e (b a r ) & T r a p p e d

F re s h M a s s (K g /S e c )
20 2.0

F r e s h M a s s (K g / S e c )
60 3.0

T C P o w e r (K W )
T C P o w e r (K W )

18 1.8
55 2.5
16 1.6
50 2.0
14 1.4
Turbo_Power Turbo_Power
45 Boost Pressure 1.5
12 Boost Pressure 1.2
Trapped Fresh Mass Trapped Fresh Mass
10 1.0 40 1.0
23.5 24 24.5 25 25.5 26 26.5 27 27.5 28 28.5 23.5 24 24.5 25 25.5 26 26.5 27 27.5 28 28.5
Exhaust Port Height (mm) Exhaust Port Height (mm)

(a) (b)

2000 rpm
3800rpm
0.2
0.5
Hex=28.08(Intake) Hex=28.08(Intake)
0.4
I n ta k e M a s s F l o w R a te (K g / S e c )

0.15

In ta k e M a s s F lo w R a te (K g /S e c )
Hex=25.08(Intake) Hex=25.08(Intake)

0.3

0.1
0.2

0.05 0.1

0
0
-0.1

-0.05 -0.2
80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280

Crank Angle Degree Crank Angle Degree

(c) (d)

2000 rpm 3800rpm

0.3
0.8
0.25
E x h a u s t M a s s F l o w R a te (K g / S e c )

Hex=25.08mm(Exhaust) Hex=25.08mm(Exhaust)
E x h a u s t M a s s F l o w R a te (K g / S e c )

0.6
0.2 Hex=28.08mm(Exhaust)
Hex=28.08mm(Exhaust)

0.15 0.4

0.1
0.2
0.05
0
0

-0.2
-0.05

-0.1 -0.4
80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Crank Angle Degree Crank Angle Degree

(e) (f)

Figure 27: Influence of Exhaust Port Height on Performance of Intake and Exhaust Systems
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

Table 3: Summary of StarCD Simulation Results of Scavenging

Process for all the Manifold Designs

Case Scavenging Air Swirl ratio

number efficiency Trapped @ IPC
Model Name
(mass based)
- % grams -
Unsymmetrical exhaust & intake 15 74.1 1.69 0.91
manifold, intake ports offset =30mm

Symmetrical exhaust & intake manifold, 20 84.3 2.10 0.67

intake ports offset = 20 mm, and
symmetrical exhaust & intake pipes
Symmetrical exhaust & intake manifold, 28 87.5 2.24 0.48
intake ports offset = 15 mm, and
unsymmetrical exhaust & intake pipes
Symmetrical exhaust & intake manifold, 33 90.1 2.38 0.52
Figure 28: Selected Intake (bottom portion of figure) and Exhaust intake ports offset =15 mm, Left side
cylinder
(top portion of figure) Manifold Designs Studied in 3-Dimensional
StarCD Scavenging Simulations

CA=135 deg CA=155 deg

CA=180 deg CA=200 deg

CA=220 deg CA=240 deg

Figure 29: Typical Star-CD Simulation Results of In-Cylinder Scavenging Process: Sea Level, 3,800 rpm, 450 hp and Ȝ=1.68
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

At CA=135°, the intake port is just cracked open. Due to STRAIGHT FLOW ROW SWIRL GENERATING ROW
the higher cylinder pressure than intake port pressure, a
slight reverse flow from the cylinder back into the intake
port is observed. At a CA of 155q, the cylinder pressure
drops enough and the fresh air starts to enter the
cylinder. As the crank angle proceeds, more and more
fresh air enters the cylinder, expels out the burnt gas
into the exhaust port and conducts the positive
scavenging. The angle of the intake air entering the
cylinder, as well as the swirl intensity of the in-cylinder
gas, is critical for the mixing of fresh air and the burnt
gas. Since the density of the air is greater than the burnt
gas (due to lower temperature), a swirl that is too strong
would result in fresh air moving towards the cylinder
walls and trapping the burnt gases in the core of the
swirl without an effective scavenge. Conversely, a swirl
that is too weak would promote a velocity vector that is
too high along the cylinder centerline and produce
strong mixing between the fresh air and the burnt gas.
The swirl intensity must be optimized for the best INTAKE MANIFOLD EXHAUST MANIFOLD
scavenging process. Figure 29 illustrates the optimized
results of several iterations of intake port design and Figure 30: Intake and Exhaust Port Configuration and Orientation
timing optimization. As observed, there is very little
mixing between the fresh air and the burnt gas, and the The intake manifold has been designed to enhance the
burnt gas is scavenged out of the cylinder very airflow toward the intake piston (instead of towards the
effectively as shown at the 220q and 240q CA (intake exhaust ports as in the normal practice of two-stroke
port closure point) timing. At the end of the scavenging engine designs) while also providing a good airflow
process, the following results are obtained: coefficient. In addition, it has been integrated with the
engine coolant jacket in order to minimize the parts and
x Delivery ratio of the process = 1.7 (referenced to 1 provide good packaging possibilities. Based on CFD
bar, 298qC standard condition) simulations, two-inlet (symmetric) intake manifolds were
x In-cylinder trapped mass = 2.38 g preferred versus a one-inlet (asymmetric) intake
x The scavenging efficiency (gas purity) = 85.6% (un- manifold (see Figure 31).
swept burnt gas portion: EGR = 14.4%, smaller than
the assumed 20% EGR used in GT-Power 1- CFD simulations have also indicated a preference for
Dimensional simulation) using a two-outlet (symmetric) exhaust manifold (see
x In-cylinder swirl number induced by the intake flow: Figure 32). This option has been chosen to be the final
0.52 (ideal for air/fuel mixing) design path.

The intake port is formed by two rows of slots (see

Figure 30). The first row is the swirl row, which is closer
to TDC and is opened first by the intake piston. The
second row is the straight flow row, which doesn’t
generate swirl but provides an orientation of the flow
toward intake piston. The slots were preferred rather
than round holes because they provide a larger overall
flow area, which is important for good scavenging.

Figure 31: Symmetric/Asymmetric Intake Manifold Designs

Figure 32: Symmetric/Asymmetric Exhaust Manifold Design

 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

OPTIMIZED ENGINE PERFORMANCE AND ratings and operation speeds. However, the shape of the
COMPARISON WITH OTHER ENGINES torque curve clearly shows the torque reserve for
judging the vehicle drivability. As shown, without EAT
Engine Design Target and Definition assistance, the torque reserve of the opoc engine is
lower than the V6 heavy-duty engine. However, with the
O O2 EAT power input at a maximum 2.5 kW at the low
2.0 engine speed, the opoc engine has the equivalent
1.9 torque reserve and has a wider engine speed span; i.e.
1.8 the peak torque is located at an even lower engine
1.7 speed, which is considered more desirable for vehicle
1.6 drivability.
O O2

1.5
1.4 110
1.3 100
1.2
90
1.1

Relative Torque (%)

80
1.0
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 70

Engine Speed (rpm) 60

50
Figure 33: Air/Fuel Ratio of Full Load Curve at Various Engine 40 OPOC
Speeds Conventional Heavy Duty Diesel
30 A160 Torque W/O EAT
A160 Torque (Conventional)
The engine full load torque versus speed curve is 20
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
strongly dependent on the air/fuel ratio of the engine. To
Relative Engine Speed (%)
make it a fair comparison across different cases, the
air/fuel ratio is pre-determined as the boundary condition
Figure 35: Comparison of Achieved opoc Engine Torque with the
and is shown in Figure 33. The reason behind the Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Torque
selected A/F ratio curve is the desire to maintain the
peak cylinder pressure below 180 bar at all the speeds. The other predicted full load engine performance
parameters are shown in Figure 36.
Engine Performance Prediction

850 5.4
800 4.8
750 4.2
EAT Power (Kw)

700 3.6
Torque (N-M)

650 3
600 2.4
550 1.8
500 1.2
Torque
450 0.6
EAT Power(KW)
400 0
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Engine Speed (rpm)

Figure 34: Simulated Full Load Torque Curve and EAT Boost
Figure 36: Predicted E0ngine Performance at Full Load, single
Control Curve, single module
module

Considering the influence of EAT is small at high speed

ranges, and also a continuous EAT power input might be COMBUSTION
limited by the capacity of the electric battery, EAT is not
used in the high-speed ranges. Figure 34 shows the COMBUSTION CHAMBER LAYOUT
predicted full load engine torque curve with different EAT
power inputs at different speeds. The combustion chamber is configured with two piston
crowns. The shape of the intake side of the combustion
Figure 35 compares the torque shape of the opoc chamber is different from the shape of the exhaust side
engine, with and without EAT power input, to a V6 four- of the combustion chamber to enhance the flow of the
stroke heavy-duty Diesel engine. Relative torque and intake air during the scavenging process. As seen in
speed curves are shown because the two engines Figure 37, the angle of the first row of the intake ports is
comparatively have different displacements, power the same with regard to the angle of the intake piston
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

crown combustion chamber area. Regarding the

exhaust piston, the profile of the exhaust piston crown The layout of the combustion chamber combines the
around the combustion chamber is designed to enhance advantages of modern conventional DI Diesel engines
the exhaust flow. with the layout of the opoc engine. The inlet piston is
designed for an advantageous scavenge process. The
PISTONS AT BDC
exhaust piston realizes a maximum depth with a
minimum distance between the nozzle tip and the
combustion chamber (cutouts at the border). Therefore,
the outlet piston bowl is oval-shaped, while the inlet bowl
is a symmetrical round-shaped design (see Figure 39).

PISTONS AT TDC

Figure 37: Combustion Chambers at TDC and BDC Piston

Positions

Development of the combustion chamber has

concentrated on the mixture formation, which includes
injector spray pattern, swirl level and piston bowl
configuration. The development of this unconventional
combustion system is based on the knowledge of Figure 38: opoc Combustion Chamber Layout (D3.3)
modern DI Diesel engines in order to achieve
comparable performance and emission targets.

Regarding mixture formation, the main aspects of a

conventional combustion system are:

x Swirl-based system (based on flow and mixture

formation)
x Comparably deep and compact piston bowl in the
middle of the combustion chamber
x Nozzle tip in the center of the combustion chamber
x Spray orientation in the direction of the piston
x Flexibility with regard to the number of nozzle holes
and hole diameters
x Sprays from low charge density (center of bowl) to
high charge density (outer bowl region)
In comparison, the opoc requires a side injection
configuration with the boundary conditions of (see Figure
38):
x Swirl-based system (based on scavenge process
and mixture formation)
x Flat piston bowl
x Nozzle tip at the border of the combustion chamber
x Spray orientation rotated 90°, compared to a
conventional system
x Number of nozzle holes and hole diameter restricted
by bowl geometry
x Sprays from high charge density (outer region) to
low charge density (center of chamber)
Figure 39: Design of Outlet and Inlet Piston Crowns (D4.1)
Examining conventional combustion systems of DI
Diesel engines, a fuel spray orientation in the direction of
the piston is favorable from a mixture formation point of
view. This effect is due to a more homogeneous
distribution of the injected fuel, which follows the piston
motion.
The uniqueness of the opoc combustion system is the
use of side injection. In order to achieve a
homogeneous mixture, it is necessary to find an
optimum of charge movement (influenced by swirl
number), spray geometry and fuel injection (influenced
by nozzle geometry and injection parameters). The
opoc engine utilizes a combustion chamber that is quite
flat, due to the stroke-to-bore ratio and the compression
ratio. Relative to mixture formation, this means that an
inclination of the sprays in the direction of the piston is
restricted by the chamber geometry. Conversely, it is
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

necessary to reach the lean areas of the chamber with

the injected fuel.

Compared to conventional DI Diesel combustion

systems where the fuel spray is injected in the middle of
the combustion chamber (low charge density), the opoc
combustion system has to handle the injection into the
high charge density areas at the border of the chamber
and has to reach the middle of the chamber with the
injected fuel. st
Figure 40: 1 Layout; 4-Hole Arrangement (D4.1)
To reach the center of the chamber it is necessary to
realize a high kinetic energy level of the fuel droplets
because of the high side forces on the droplets caused
by the swirl. So it is decisive to have relatively big
droplet diameters and/or low swirl levels compared to
conventional DI Diesel engines.

The first layouts of the spray geometry tried to realize a

fuel spray in the direction of the piston and a
homogenous distribution of the fuel in injector plane.
Therefore, the greatest possible number of fuel sprays Figure 41: 2
nd
Layout; 3-Hole Arrangement (D3.1)
were chosen, leading to quite small nozzle holes. The
number of holes in the nozzle are limited by the
geometric arrangement of the holes in the nozzle tip
(problems for manufacturing and durability) and the
minimum actuation time of the injector. The Hydraulic
Flow Rate (HFR or HD) should be in a certain range in
order to guarantee short injection timings (very long
timings lead to high soot emissions) and the function of
the injector (very short timings lead to fuel quantity
fluctuation).

Development of the fuel spray arrangements can be

seen in Figure 40 through Figure 44. In order to make
the different layouts more transparent, a nomenclature rd
Figure 42: 3 Layout; 4-hole arrangement (D4.2)
that directly indicates the number of holes in the nozzle
tip and the design is included in the caption (e.g. D4.1
=> 4 sprays, layout 1).

OPTIMIZATION OF AIR-FUEL MIXTURE FORMATION

(CFD)

Two main parameters were assessed in evaluating the

quality of air/fuel mixture formation, wall-fuel contact and
air utilization. The definitions of the parameters are:
Air Utilization
Volume fraction with equivalent
n Vi th
x
ratio ĭ>0.6 AU ¦ , I t 0.6 Figure 43: 4 Layout; 3-hole arrangement (D3.2)
x Indicator of volume used by
i Vtotal
vaporized fuel
Wall-Fuel Contact
x Area fraction with fuel contact n Ai ,contact
(ĭ>1), weighted with equivalence Aw ¦ Ii ,I t 1
x
ratio ĭ
Indicator of wall areas, wetted by
i Atotal
rich air-fuel-mixture

th
Figure 44: 5 Layout; 3-hole arrangement (D3.3)
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

The results of the first four-hole nozzle arrangement 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400
0.5
(D4.1; Figure 40) shows the influence of hole diameter,
swirl level and spray/nozzle geometry in the mixture
formation. Low swirl (SW) and high flow rates (HD) 0.4
show a favorable effect on the formation. In addition to
these parameters, Begin of Injection (BOI) also

Air Utilization [-]

influences the mixture formation behavior. Later BOI 0.3

leads to higher wall-fuel contact due to the closer

position of the piston to the sprays of fuel. This effect is
0.2
a general trend with all arrangements based on the
piston motion of this engine.
OPOC 4- hole; D1; SW 1,0; HFR 500
0.1 OPOC 4- hole; D2; SW 0,5; HFR 500
The inclination of fuel sprays in the direction of the OPOC 3- hole; D1; SW 0,5; HFR 500;
OPOC 3- hole; D2; SW 0,5; HFR 500;
piston (four-hole D4.1) leads to a comparable high wall- OPOC 3- hole; D3; SW 0,5; HFR 500;
fuel contact. The contact is due to the small spacing 0.0

between the bowl surface and the fuel spray. BOI EOI TDC

Further investigations were made with an arrangement Figure 45: Air Utilization Results
of three nozzle holes. The goal is to utilize a larger
nozzle hole diameter with the same hydraulic flow rate to 0.6
reach the center of the chamber and to achieve a lower OPOC 4- hole; D1; SW 1,0; HFR 500
deviation of fuel created by the swirl. The first layout of OPOC 4- hole; D2; SW 0,5; HFR 500
0.5 OPOC 3- hole; D1; SW 0,5; HFR 500;
this arrangement is shown in Figure 41. In comparison OPOC 3- hole; D2; SW 0,5; HFR 500;
to the four-hole nozzle, the D3.1 arrangement has (from OPOC 3- hole; D3; SW 0,5; HFR 500;

weighted wall contact [-]

the side view) a symmetrical spray pattern. The spray in 0.4
piston direction is not realized, due to the high wall-fuel
contact and its disadvantages in air utilization. 0.3

The CFD results of the three-hole injector show

0.2
significant advantages in comparison to the four-hole
arrangement (Figure 45 - Figure 47). The air utilization
is on a higher level, which indicates a better mixture 0.1
between the air and the injected fuel. In the derivation of
the air utilization (Figure 47), a higher gradient of the 0.0
utilization is visible. This indicates a faster formation of 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 410 420 430
the injected fuel with the air, which has a positive CA [°]
influence on the combustion behavior (soot emission).
The weighted wall-fuel contact in the three-hole Figure 46: Wall-Fuel Contact Results
arrangement is lower than that in the first four-hole
design. In comparison to other engines investigated, the OPOC 4- hole; SW 1,0; HFR 500; old
0.018
main level of the wall fuel contact (which is mainly OPOC 4- hole; SW 0,5; HFR 500; new
OPOC 3- hole; D1; SW 0,5; HFR 500;
responsible for soot emission) is quite low. 0.016 OPOC 3- hole; D2; SW 0,5; HFR 500;
OPOC 3- hole; D3; SW 0,5; HFR 500;
0.014
Further investigations were made with a new layout of a
0.012
four-hole arrangement, based on the achieved results.
D Phi / D A

The idea behind this second four-hole design was to

[1/°CA]

0.010

realize more fuel sprays without the negative influence 0.008

of wall-fuel contact. For this reason, the inclination of
the sprays in piston direction was modified. The results 0.006

show an improvement compared to the first four-hole 0.004

design, but it did not reach the three-hole results. 0.002
Therefore, the next optimizations were concentrated on
the three-hole design. 0.000
330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400

CA [°]
In the first three-hole arrangement (D3.1), the simulation
shows a contact between the two middle sprays. The
Figure 47: Deviation of Air Utilization
contact is due to the fact that these sprays are located
on the same line (see Figure 48). In order to avoid this
unfavorable effect, the middle sprays were inclined by 5
degrees in the next series of layouts (D3.2 and D3.3).
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

As can be seen from Figure 49 and Figure 50, the

sprays are more concentrated in the center space of the
chamber. In the layouts D3.2 to D3.3, the outer sprays
were inclined additionally by 7° (14° => 20°). Due to the
combustion chamber design, the sprays had to be more
flat in order to avoid additional wall-fuel contact (side
view Figure 42). The CFD results from this last
arrangement show the expected spread, which is more
tangential in the combustion chamber, as can be seen in
Figure 49 and Figure 50 (arrows). The latest calculated
configuration (D3.3) would be the first layout used later
for engine runs, due to the following parameters:

x Low wall-fuel contact

x High air utilization
x No mixture contact between middle sprays
x Best mixture distribution in the chamber Figure 48: CFD Results of the D3.1 Layout

The gas exchange process and engine performance

were simulated and optimized using the 1-Dimensional
code, GT-Power. However, the scavenging efficiency,
in-cylinder un-swept EGR and the trapped gas
concentration were simulated using the 3-D CFD tool.
The burn rate (heat release rate) curve used in the 1-D
GT-Power model was derived from measured cylinder
pressure traces of a conventional two-stroke Diesel
engine. How close or how different that the combustion
progress in the opoc engine is from the conventional
Diesel engine (used in the 1-D GT-power simulations as
input data) is a very interested concern, and it will affect
the engine performance prediction accuracy. To confirm
that, the combustion process in the opoc engine was
simulated using the 3-D CFD tool, Star-CD, for all the
different injection nozzle geometry and orientations
discussed previously. A typical comparison of
measurements for the conventional Diesel engine and Figure 49: CFD Results of Layout D3.2 @ TDC
the simulation results of the opoc engine are depicted in
Better distribution due to
Figure 51. It is clearly shown that, utilizing the selected higher spray inclination
injection nozzle arrangement, the combustion progress
in the opoc engine is very close to that of the
conventional engine used as input data for the 1-D GT-
Power simulations. As a result, the simulated cylinder
pressure traces are reasonably close between the 1-D
and 3-D simulation results with very close IMEP and
ISFC numbers.

For the test bench investigations, a matrix will be

developed to test and optimize for various injection
nozzle geometries and orientations.

Figure 50: CFD Results of Layout D3.3 @ TDC

 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

In-cylinder heat transfer between the combustion gas

Combustion progress and the combustion chamber walls depends on (1)
1.2 exposed heat transfer area between the combustion gas
1.1 and the surrounding combustion chamber walls; (2)
Combustion progress Xo (-)

1.0 temperature difference between the combustion gas and

0.9 the surrounding walls; and (3) the surface heat transfer
0.8 coefficient which depends heavily on the in-cylinder gas
0.7 motion. Therefore, in-cylinder heat loss can be reduced
0.6
by (1) reducing the heat transfer area, which is usually
0.5 Measured in a conventional 2-stroke
0.4 diesel engine (used for 1-D GT-Pow er
determined by cylinder displacement; (2) elevating the
0.3 simulation) combustion chamber wall surface temperature to reduce
3-D CFD simulation results of opoc
0.2 engine
the temperature difference between the combustion gas
0.1 and the surrounding walls; and (3) reducing the in-
0.0 cylinder gas velocity for a lower heat transfer coefficient.
330 360 390 420 450 480 510
o
Crankangle ( CA) Traditional Low Heat Rejection (LHR) engines reduce
the in-cylinder heat loss by elevating the combustion
chamber wall temperature to reduce the temperature
difference between the combustion gas and the walls.
Comparison of cylinder pressure The increase of combustion chamber wall temperature is
140 achieved by utilizing materials of high thermal strength
130 1-D GT-Pow er and low thermal conductivity, such as ceramics, to
120 simulation
increase the thermal resistance of the combustion
Pressure (bar,abs.)

110 3-D Star-CD

100 simulation
chamber walls. In this approach, although the in-cylinder
90 heat loss can be effectively reduced, higher wall
80 temperatures heat up the fresh intake charge more and
70
60
this usually results in lower volumetric efficiency. Less
50 air is trapped in-cylinder, and engine power density is
40 reduced. In turbocharged engines, the reduced engine
30
20
power density can be compensated for by higher boost
10 pressure, resulting from increased exhaust gas
0 temperature. Overall, the potential of improving engine
330 360 390 420 450 480 510 thermal efficiency is limited in conventional LHR
o engines. Additionally, the manufacturing cost of bonding
Crankangle ( CA) the ceramic material onto the metal layer of the
combustion chamber walls and durability issues of the
Figure 51: Comparison Between 1-D GT-Power and 3-D CFD ceramic layer limit the practical application of this
Simulation Results method to conventional ceramic LHR engines.

THERMAL ANALYSIS AND COOLING The opoc engine achieved LHR through a different
approach because two opposed pistons generate
INFLUENCE OF LOW HEAT TRANSFER (LHT) OF cylinder swept volume. The reduced heat rejection of the
OPOC ENGINE ON ENGINE PERFORMANCE opoc engine can be explained using two different
theoretical approaches:
The engine in-cylinder heat transfer process directly
affects engine thermal efficiency (amount of fuel 1st Theoretical Approach
combustion energy converted into shaft power), thermal
load of the cooling system (to carry away the rejected Under the conditions of same swept volume (same
heat through the combustion chamber walls to maintain cylinder bore diameter and stroke) and same engine
a certain combustion chamber wall temperature), speed (rpm), each of the opoc pistons moves at half the
exhaust gas temperature and turbine power generation speed of a conventional, one-piston-per-cylinder engine.
which affects engine boost pressure. Less in-cylinder Under this condition, the opoc engine has the equivalent
heat loss from combustion gas would (1) improve in- heat transfer area of a conventional engine but only half
cylinder thermal efficiency, (2) reduce thermal loading of of the piston speed. This reduces the in-cylinder gas
the cooling system, (3) increase exhaust gas energy and velocity at the centerline axis and, therefore, reduces the
turbine power to provide higher boost pressure for heat transfer coefficient between the combustion gas
higher engine power output. Depending on the means and cylinder walls, especially if a slow in-cylinder gas
used to reduce in-cylinder heat loss, engine volumetric motion (slow swirl or tumble) is used for the combustion
efficiency could potentially decrease or be maintained system. Figure 52 compares the opoc engine cycle with
with almost no change. a two-stroke and four-stroke conventional engine.
Considering the two-stroke cycle of the opoc engine, a
heat loss reduction of 33% is achieved in comparison to
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018
a four-stroke conventional engine due to the reduced
piston speed.
4-Stroke
2-Stroke
OPOC
OPOC
same displacement
½
same displacement
piston speed;
1/2 piston speed;
double power/cylinder
double power/cylinder
33% lessheat
33% less heat transfer
transfer
Figure 52: opoc Engine Heat Losses in Comparison with
Conventional Engine of Same Swept Volume and Same Engine
Speed
In order to evaluate the advantages in a Low Heat
Rejection (LHR) engine, detailed modeling of engine gas
dynamics (in the gas exchange system) and
thermodynamics (in-cylinder) was conducted using GT-
Power code. The approach taken was divided into two
steps: (1) to conduct the comparison on a V6 four-stroke
heavy-duty Diesel engine in which a calibration engine
simulation model is available; and (2) to carry over the
unique features of the opoc engine to the in-cylinder
heat transfer simulation of the truck engine.
In conducting the comparison simulation, all the other
parameters were kept constant. The only difference is
the in-cylinder heat transfer coefficient, resulting from
the lower gas speed of the opoc engine.
Figure 53 compares the influence of gas motion on in-
cylinder heat transfer and engine performance between
a conventional engine and the opoc (same cylinder bore
and swept volume), simulated on the V6 heavy-duty
Diesel engine. With the opoc piston motion profile, under
identical AF ratio, a nearly 33% reduction of in-cylinder
heat loss was achieved, compared to the conventional
piston profile (i.e. the direct in-cylinder heat loss was
reduced from 15% of fuel combustion energy to about
10% in the opoc engine case) as shown in Figure 53(a).
A small portion of the saved gas thermal energy goes
directly to piston expansion work and most of it is
transferred to the exhaust gas as increased gas
temperature (Figure 53(b)). As a result, turbine power is
increased and so is the compressor boost pressure
(Figure 53(c)). At the same AF ratio, more fuel can be
injected and engine IMEP (Figure 53(d)) is thus
increased.
Figure 54 shows a similar comparison, specifically on
the opoc engine. In one case, the reduced heat transfer
in the opoc engine, due to the slow gas motion, was
used (see Heat Transfer: OPOC). In the other case, the
heat transfer was assumed as in a conventional engine
(see Heat Transfer: Conventional). Similar to the heavy-
duty four-stroke engine results, on the opoc two-stroke
engine, when compared with conventional piston
movement and gas speed, almost 33% of heat loss to
the combustion chamber walls was reduced across the
entire engine speeds studied (Figure 54(a)). Part of this
saved thermal energy was converted to increase
turbocharger power and boost pressure (Figure 54(b)).
More fuel can be delivered while keeping the A/F ratio
constant (Figure 54(c)). As a result, more power and
torque will be produced (Figure 54(d)).
2nd Theoretical Approach
Under the conditions of same swept volume (same
cylinder bore diameter and stroke) and same piston
velocity, the opoc engine runs at double the engine
speed (rpm) and four times the power output/cylinder as
that of a four-stroke engine. Figure 55 shows a
schematic of the opoc engine cycle in comparison to a
conventional four-stroke and two-stroke engine. A 41%
in-cylinder heat loss reduction is observed with the two-
stroke opoc engine in comparison to a two-stroke
conventional engine running at half the engine speed.
To evaluate this concept, simulations were conducted to
compare the opoc engine and an assumed conventional
engine of same total displacement but with a speed
factor of two. The simulation comparisons were
conducted on the opoc two-stroke cycle with same
intake boost pressure/exhaust back pressure and same
fuel injection quantity per firing cycle.
Figure 56 summarizes the simulation results. In the
comparison, the opoc engine is running at a speed of
3800 rpm, while with the same piston speed, the
assumed conventional engine is running at a speed of
1900 rpm. Therefore, the two engines in comparison
have the same piston speed. Since the two engines
have the same displacement, same in-cylinder heat
transfer area and same heat transfer coefficient, the in-
cylinder heat transfer rate is very close (will be the same
if the gas temperature is identical). However, the
conventional engine has double of the heat transfer time
per firing cycle. Therefore, the in-cylinder heat loss
referenced to the fuel combustion energy is almost two
times that of the opoc engine. A 41% in-cylinder heat
loss reduction (reference to fuel combustion energy) is
observed with the opoc engine. In an ideal case, the
opoc engine would have a heat loss reduction of 50%.
However, because it runs at higher speed and the gas
exchange time is only half the conventional case,
volumetric efficiency of the opoc engine is reduced, and
it runs at a slightly low AFR and higher gas temperature,
which increases the direct in-cylinder heat loss.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

20
18 Heat Transfer: OPOC Heat Transfer:Conventional
16
14

Heat T ran sfer (% )

12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Engine Speed (rpm)

(a) (a)

4
Heat Transfer:OPOC Heat Transfer:Conventional
3.5

Boost P ressure (bar)

3

2.5

1.5

1
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Engine Speed (rpm)

(b)
(b)

140
Heat Transfer:OPOC
130
Heat Transfer:Conventional
F u el M ass In jected (m g )

120

110

100

90

80

70

60
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Engine Speed (rpm)

(c)
(c)

800
750 Heat Transfer:OPOC
700 Heat Transfer:Conventional
650
T o rq u e (N-M )

600
550
500
450
400
350
300
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Engine Speed (rpm)

(d) (d)

Figure 53: Comparison of In-cylinder Heat Loss and Engine Figure 54: Simulation Results of Reduced In-cylinder Heat Loss
Performance, Heavy Duty Diesel Engine Between Conventional on Engine Performance
and opoc Piston Motion.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

4-Stroke
x To provide in-cylinder heat flux information for the
CAE analysis of thermal stress
x To provide information on heat flux for sizing the
intercooler, water pump, oil pump, etc.
2-Stroke
The thermal balance analysis was based on GT-Power
simulation results of gas temperature and mass flow rate
OPOC
across the system. The approach and assumption used
OPOC
same displacement
same displacement
and piston speed;
in this analysis is:
and piston
4 times speed;
power/cylinder
441%
times
lesspower/cylinder
heat transfer
41% less heat transfer
x Thermal loading of intercooler - determined from the
calculated compressor air mass flow rate and
Figure 55: opoc Engine Heat Losses in Comparison with desired temperature drop across the intercooler
Conventional Engine of Same Swept Volume and Same Piston
x Thermal loading of oil flow - assumed 100% of
Speed
engine friction power + 65% of heat flux through
pistons
Due to the significant in-cylinder heat loss reduction in
the opoc engine, part of the gas thermal energy, which x Thermal loading of coolant flow - assumed cylinder
would be otherwise lost to cylinder walls, is converted liner heat flux + 35% piston heat flux + exhaust
into piston work directly. As a result, even with the same manifold heat loss (assumed 10% of exhaust gas
fuel injection quantity, the engine IMEP increases in the energy loss at port) + oil cooler
opoc engine, the engine power is slightly more than two x Water temperature drop in radiator - 8 to 10ºC (FEV
times (mostly due to running at double the speed) and experience)
the BSFC is also reduced. It should be noted that the x Oil temperature drop in oil cooler - determined from
accuracy of brake power and BSFC prediction is the required oil flow rate and heat flux to be taken
influenced by the assumption of engine FMEP. In this away
comparison, the same FMEP level is assumed for the
opoc engine running at 3800 rpm and the conventional
engine at 1900 rpm. This is possibly a viable assumption In the above assumptions, the assumed 10% loss of
because (1) the two engines run at same piston speed; exhaust gas energy at the port is an estimation, and
(2) although the opoc engine has two sliding pistons in there was no measurement data for similar engines
each cylinder, each piston only strokes half of the available in FEV’s database for confirmation. The 10%
distance; (3) the piston side forces are lower in the opoc energy loss came from an estimated 70oC temperature
engine; and (4) the opoc engine has fewer moving drop of the exhaust gas (the mean exhaust gas
components than a conventional engine. temperature leaving cylinder is in the range of 1000oK
when it leaves the cylinder, referenced to the intake air
Direct in-cylinder heat loss Power
temperature of 298oK). The actual temperature drop of
20
18
300
exhaust gas depends on the cooling passage design
and coolant water flow rate through the port. Accurate
16 250
14
Heat loss (%)

200
Power (kW)

simulation of exhaust gas energy drop through the ports

12
10 150
8
6
4
100 is difficult, and this assumption can only be confirmed by
2
0
50
experimental data.
0
Conventional, 1900 r/min OPOC, 3800 r/min Conventional, 1900 r/min OPOC, 3800 r/min

IMEP BSFC
Figure 57 depicts the thermal balance analysis results of
20
19
240

220
the engine at rated speed, i.e. 3800 rpm. The heat flux
18
17 200 information in each component can be used to size the
BSFC (g/kwh)
IMEP (bar)

component for heat transfer area and coolant flow rate.

16 180
15
14 160
13
12
140 The assumed engine Friction Mean Effective Pressure
11
10
120

100
(FMEP) used in this analysis is lower than that of
Conventional, 1900 r/min OPOC, 3800 r/min Conventional, 1900 r/min OPOC, 3800 r/min conventional Diesel engines. The reason is because (1)
this engine does not have a valve train; and (2) due to
Figure 56: Simulation Comparison of opoc vs. Conventional the nature of the opoc engine, each piston moves with
Engine, Same Cylinder Displacement, Same Fuel Injection half the speed of a single piston engine with the same
Quantity stroke. The accuracy of this assumption, however,
requires confirmation with engine test data.
THERMAL BALANCE ANALYSIS OF THE SYSTEM

FEV conducted a thermal balance analysis of the

system for the rated speed, i.e. 3800 rpm. The purpose
of conducting this analysis is:
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

Fuel combustion energy: 599 kW (100%)

Intercooler heat flux: 48.0 kW
'T=127oC (201 to 74oC)
Mass flowrate=324 g/s Direct in-cylinder heat loss to coolant
water(Liner+35% piston+Ex. Port) : 53.7 kW (9.0 %)
Turbo

Shaft Power: 252 kW (42.0 %)

Intercooler Engine

To lubrication oil (FMEP+65% piston loss):

35.5 kW (5.9%)

To exhaust gas: 258 kW (43.1%)

FMEP assumed: 1 bar @ 3800 r/min

Figure 57: Thermal Balance Analysis at Rated Speed, 3800 r/min

THERMAL ANALYSIS
Table 6: Heat Distribution in the Pistons
Thermal FE analysis has been performed on the opoc
engine cylinder liner and piston. Prerequisites for the Piston with cooling duct-
measured-
actual component thermal analysis is the determination
Heat flux into piston 100%
of the heat flux from the combustion process as well as
to oil 65%
Dissipated
the heat dispersion in the piston. heat flux
via piston rings to cylinder
29%
via skirt to cylinder
According to the LHR engine study, the heat flux from to crank case atmosphere 6%
the combustion process into the cylinder liner is
approximately 7.5 kW, into the exhaust piston 7.1 kW
and into the intake piston 5.7 kW. The total heat flux into COOLING SYSTEM LAYOUT
the cylinder liner is in addition to the gas-side heat flux,
heat from the piston over the piston rings and the piston The development of the cooling system layout included
skirt. The heat balance inside the pistons and liners are the determination of the parameters of the system. One
shown in Table 4, Table 5, and Table 6. of the primary parameters that needed to be established
was the pressure drop within the engine coolant jacket.
Table 4: Heat Flux into the Cylinder Liner
To determine the coolant pressure drop of the engine
coolant jacket, a calculation model of the complete
Heat flux into cylinder [kW]
coolant jacket has been build. The model contains all
From gas side 7.48
the geometries of the coolant passages within the
From intake piston via rings 1.43
engine. In Figure 58, the transfer of the real geometries
From intake piston via skirt 0.23
into the model is depicted.
From exhaust piston via rings 1.78
From exhaust piston via skirt 0.28
Heat flux in total 11.2

Table 5: Heat Flux into the Pistons

Heat flux [kW]

Fraction of heat flux [%]
Piston/exh. Piston/int.
Heat flux into piston 100 7.1 5.73
to oil 65 4.62 3.72
Dissipated
heat flux

via piston rings to cylinder 25 1.78 1.43

via skirt to cylinder 4 0.28 0.23
to crank case atmosphere 6 0.43 0.34
Figure 58: Transfer of the Coolant Jacket into a One-Dimensional
Model

The results show a pressure loss of approximately 0.8

bar at a flow rate of 135L/min for each cylinder and a
distribution with a relatively even flow. Figure 59
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

graphically illustrates the results. On the left-hand side

of the illustration, the pressure losses are rated in bar,
and on the right-hand side, the flow distributions in L/s
are shown.

1.84 2.25
0.12
0.13
0.16
0.12
0.14
0.09
0.16
0.08
0.16
0.09
0.16
0.14
0.15 0.16
0.16
0.15
1.68 0.15 0.17
0.9 0.18
0.15
0.17
1.52 0.14
1.52 0.16
0.10 0.15
0.09 0.15
0.10
1.02
0.14
0.15 Figure 61: Cooling System Layout
1.21 0.13
1.58 1.21
1.52 2.25
0.13 1.52

Boundaries: Coolant 50% glycol/ 50% water, coolant temperature 90°C,

CYLINDER/COOLANT JACKET DESIGN
coolant volume flow rate 135 l/min for each cylinder

The cylinder integrates intake and exhaust ports. The

Figure 59: Pressure Loss and Flow Distribution initial design can be seen in Figure 62. The intake ports
are formed with at least two rows of holes, which are
The next step was to propose the first cooling system drilled at an angle to provide the best scavenging. In
layout for the two modules. The system is designed in addition, the exhaust ports have a rectangular shape to
such a way that each module is self-sufficient. A sketch provide maximum flow area. Around the middle position
of the system is shown in Figure 60. This design was of the liner is the top dead center area of the cylinder. A
chosen because it allows for an optimized water pump special groove has been designed to increase the
layout for each module. strength of the cylinder while providing a large contact
area for cooling purposes.
Figure 61 shows the cooling system components on one
module. The connections are made with hoses routed
externally. We anticipate a weight savings compared
with passages cast into the engine components. The
pump is located above the module and has two outlet
volutes to send the water to the two cylinders of the
module. On both cylinders, the water flows from just
inboard of the intake scroll to just outboard of the
exhaust scroll. The coolant path for the module enters
the cylinders low and exits high. This is done to
minimize the concern of trapping steam anywhere in the
system. The thermostat is mounted as high as is
practical in the package and close to the coolant pump.
There is a bypass line from the thermostat to the coolant
pump inlet as well.

Figure 62: Early Cylinder Design

Additional work on the cylinder design includes

Radiator

implementing the cooling passages, implementing the

injector sleeve and determining the amount of material
that is needed for the area between the intake/exhaust
TC ports.

Implementation of the coolant jacket, turbocharger air

Radiator

intercooler and exhaust manifold design are impacted by

the results of the design simulation program. Design
and selection of these components was determined
TC based on design simulation.

In addition to the intake and exhaust ports, the cylinders

also have a special cooling helix in the top-dead-center
Figure 60: Proposed Layout of the Cooling System for Two (2) (TDC) area. In addition, the exhaust port bridges have a
Engine Modules connection for cooling liquid flow in order to achieve the
appropriate cooling in the exhaust port area.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

On the outer side of the cylinder, there are special slots Based on the first layout, it was determined that the
to enable the connection between the outer piston pin cooling of the exhaust port area could be improved by
and outer connecting rod (see Figure 63). The slots modifying the coolant jacket.
have a wide circular-shaped area at one end to enable
the assembly of the outer piston pin to fit into the outer The assumed coolant temperature and heat transfer
piston. The other end contains a narrow rectangular coefficient (HTC) of the coolant are based on experience
area to allow the movement of the outer piston pin while and were made in comparison with other engines that
there is still a large contact area between the outer have a similar specific power output (power/engine
piston rings and the cylinder. The outer portion of the displacement), as shown in Figure 64. The design of the
cylinder also contains the mountings for the injectors coolant jacket causes significant differences in flow
and the grooves for the flow of coolant. At top-dead- velocities of the coolant. Dividing the coolant jacket into
center (TDC) are two bosses located for mounting the five different HTC zones illstrates the local flow
fuel injectors. The direction of the coolant flow is from velocities. Figure 65 explains the five zones that were
intake towards exhaust ports. created. The zones are dependent upon the coolant
flow rate within the coolant jacket. The thermal
FEV performed a thermal analysis of the cylinder liner. boundary conditions on the gas side are delivered from
The FE model, which is shown in Figure 63, is based on process simulation and are described in Figure 66. The
a CAD-Model and is generated with HYPERMESH. The temperature values and HTC have been averaged as a
model consists of 22,000 hexahedra elements and function of cylinder length to make it useful for FEA. The
34,000 nodes. ABAQUS/Standard-6.3 was used for the results are shown in Figure 67. To verify the gas
calculation. boundary conditions, the heat flux of the thermal
analysis will be compared with the calculated heat flux
To define the coolant boundary conditions, the coolant delivered by process simulation.
jacket is defined in a model, as shown in Figure 65.

Figure 63: Latest Cylinder and Coolant Jacket Design

100000

90000

80000
HTC=720W /m ²K
70000 HTC=840W /m ²K
HTC=6000W /m ²K
HTC [W/m²K]

60000

50000

40000

30000

20000

10000

0
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170
W all Tem perature [°C]

Figure 64: Thermal Boundary Conditions - Heat Transfer Coefficient of Coolant

 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

Figure 65: Boundary Conditions at the Coolant Jacket

Figure 68: Temperature Distribution in Liner (A)

(1.25e+02 ºC)

(2.00e+02 ºC)
(2.75e+02 ºC)

Figure 66: Thermal Boundary Conditions (Gas Side) (1.25e+02 ºC)

Temperature [K]

2500
Exha ust Sid e
Figure 69: Temperature Distribution in Liner (B)
Inta ke Sid e
2000

Inta ke Sid e PISTON RESULTS

Temperature [K]

1500

Baseline Piston
1000

500 The baseline opoc piston design was a composite type

with a steel crown and an aluminum skirt. Due to the
0
0 90 180 270 360
originally expected high heat flux into the pistons, the
Crank Angle [deg] crown design included cooling bores filled with sodium.
The effect of sodium cooling bores is to improve the heat
Figure 67: Thermal Boundary Conditions - Gas Temperature transfer from the top land area to the oil shaker room
under the crown and thus reduce the top piston ring
The temperature distribution is evaluated in Figure 68 temperature. The baseline piston concept is shown in
and Figure 69. The highest values are reached in the Figure 70.
combustion chamber with a peak value of 324°C at the
injector boss. This value exceeds the scatter band of
conventional four-stroke engines. The results can be
defined as not critical with regards to the piston design
(CGI piston crown) and the location of the TDC of the
top piston rings. The peak temperature of 324°C
appears at the injector boss. The wall temperature of
the liner at TDC is about 300°C. This temperature
appears in a very narrow strip (approx. 5 mm). There is
no oil in this area during operation. Therefore, the peak
temperature stated is not critical with regards to oil
coking.

Figure 70: Baseline Piston Concept

 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

The baseline piston temperature distribution on the top

Temperature
on the crown is shown in Figure 71. The maximum [ °C ]
temperature of 580 to 600qC at the combustion bowl rim
is very high and can lead to hot corrosion. The
temperatures in the top ring groove as well as on the oil
cooling side of the crown exceed the limit (Figure 72). A
temperature of 275qC should not be exceeded to avoid
oil coking and subsequent high risk of piston ring
sticking.

Temperature
[ °C ]

Figure 73: Variant 1: Piston with Aluminum Crown

Modified aluminum piston with double ring carrier

After analyzing the baseline piston with steel crown and

aluminum crown, the piston concept was modified. A
calculation of the baseline piston without sodium cooling
bores revealed only a small temperature increase.
Therefore, the sophisticated sodium cooling concept
was replaced by a more conventional cooling channel
Figure 71: Baseline Piston Crown Top Temperature Distribution
piston design. The first analysis was made on a single
piece aluminum piston with a L-shape steel ring carrier
Temperature (Figure 74).
[ °C ]
Figure 75 shows the temperature distribution of the
modified piston with the steel double ring carrier and the
oil cooling ring channel. The temperatures reach critical
values of almost 600qC at the combustion bowl rim and
about 400qC in the aluminum at the interface to the steel
ring carrier.
L shape steel double
ring carrier
Oil cooling
7.13 kW
ring channel

Piston material
AlSi12CuMgNi

Figure 72: Baseline Piston Ring Groove Temperature Heat flux piston
rings into liner in
total 2.32 kW

Heat flux into

Heat flux piston cooling oil 4.02 kW
Piston design with an aluminum crown skirt into liner in
total 0.57 kW
Single piece
Next, a piston design with an aluminum crown was aluminum piston
body and skirt
analyzed. The higher thermal conductivity of aluminum Heat flux into crank case
reduces the temperatures dramatically (Figure 73). The atmosphere 0.22 kW

temperature behind the top ring groove and on the oil

cooling side is close to the limit in the area of 250 to
Figure 74: Modified Piston 1: Aluminum Piston with Double Ring
280qC. The combustion sided crown temperature is on Carrier
an acceptable level of around 350 to 400qC. Based on
this analysis step, aluminum was chosen as the
preferred crown material. However, a steel ring carrier is
necessary in the top ring groove to avoid excessive
groove wear.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

Temperature [ °C
[ °C ] 592 °C (GGG60) Modified aluminum piston with insulated single ring
]
carrier and aluminum bridge between ring carrier and
cooling channel
408 °C (Al)

369 °C
Figure 78 shows a piston modification, which includes
an aluminum bridge towards the insulated ring carrier
close to the oil channel. The temperature distribution of
this piston configuration is shown in Figure 79. The
maximum crown temperature at the combustion bowl rim
is reduced to 385qC.

Piston material between

Material of piston ring carrier and oil channel
Figure 75: Modified Piston 1: Aluminum Piston with Double Ring ring carrier GGG60
(Mahle S60)
Carrier Temperature Distribution 7.20 kW Insulating
Titanium layer

Modified aluminum piston with insulated single ring Piston material

AlSi12CuMgNi
carrier Heat flux piston
rings into liner in
total 2.68 kW
As a subsequent step, another piston concept was
Heat flux into
analyzed regarding the temperature distribution. The L- Heat flux piston cooling oil 3.74 kW
skirt into liner in
shaped steel double ring carrier was replaced wth a total 0.56 kW

single ring carrier using an insulating titanium shim on

the top ring carrier flank (Figure 76).
Heat flux into crank case
atmosphere 0.22 kW
Cooling oil next
Material of piston to ring carrier
ring carrier GGG60 Insulating
(Mahle S60) 7.37 kW Titanium layer

Figure 78: Modified Piston 2: Aluminum Piston with Insulated Ring

Carrier and Aluminum Bridge Between Ring Carrier and Cooling
Channel
Heat flux piston
rings into liner in
total 1.99 kW
Temperature [°C ][ 385 °C
Heat flux into
Heat flux piston cooling oil 4.71 kW °C ]
skirt into liner in
total 0.47 kW

Heat flux into crank case

atmosphere 0.20 kW 321 °C

Figure 76: Modified Piston 2: Aluminum Piston with Insulated Ring

Carrier

Figure 77 shows the temperature distribution of the

modified piston with the insulated ring carrier and the oil
cooling ring channel. In comparison to the L-shape
double ring carrier, the temperatures dropped Figure 79: Modified Piston 2: Aluminum Piston with Insulated Ring
significantly, but the maximum temperature at the Carrier and Aluminum Bridge Between Ring Carrier and Cooling
aluminum combustion bowl rim still reaches very high Channel Temperature Distribution
values of about 450qC.
CAE ANALYSIS
Temperature [ °C ]
[ °C 451 °C
]
Computer Aided Engineering (CAE) techniques were
used throughout the design phases of the engine
development program to insure a structurally sound
389 °C engine design that could meet the aggressive
performance and weight targets. Multi-Body System
(MBS) analysis was used to understand the kinematic
and dynamic behavior of the operating engine and to
calculate loads acting on the engine components. The
calculated loads were used in Finite Element (FE)
analyses to predict deflections, stresses and buckling
and fatigue safety factors of the engine components.
Figure 77: Modified Piston 2: Aluminum Piston with Insulated Ring Figure 80 illustrates the interaction of the MBS and FE
Carrier Temperature Distribution
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

analyses. Several loops through the CAE process, in shows the forces at bearing locations 1 and 2 along the
conjunction with design and performance simulation piston motion axis (x-direction). Because of the
activities, were completed until the structural design of balancing of the inertia forces, the forces in the x-
the engine was fully optimized and the design targets direction are very small. The lower plot shows the
achieved. The following sections provide examples of bearing forces out of the plane of piston motion (y-
the CAE work conducted. direction).

MBS – Model
Kinematic of OPOC crank train
… 240
TDC - left 1000 rpm
1500 rpm
Geometry 200 2000 rpm
Forces 2500 rpm
3000 rpm
160 3500 rpm
3800 rpm
Accelerations

Pressure [bar]
Mass and Inertia FEA – Model
120
of component or assembly

Layout 80

Material Properties
40
Combustion Pressure
0
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360
Deflection Stress Fatigue Life Crank Angle [°]
Safety Factor

Figure 80: CAE Analysis Process Figure 82: Combustion Pressure Curves (1000 to 3800 rpm)

MBS ANALYSIS 18000

Fx_1 [N]
Figure 81 shows the MBS model of the rotating 12000 Fx_2 [N]
Sum_X [N]
components of the opoc engine design. The model was
6000
used to simulate engine speeds from 1000 rpm to 3800
rpm. In addition, a 20% over-speed condition (4560
Force [N]

0
rpm) was evaluated. Figure 82 shows the corresponding
combustion chamber pressure traces used in the -6000
simulation. The peak pressure of 180 bar for this
-12000
application is nearly constant in the range from 2000
rpm to 3500 rpm. In the over-speed condition where -18000
there is no fuel injection or combustion, the peak 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360
compression pressure of the trapped air inside the Crank Angle [°]
combustion chamber reaches about 30 bar.

Piston Motion Axis (a)

Outer Piston Main Bearing 2 y
(Exhaust)
Inner Piston
18000
Fy_1 [N]
(Intake) z Fy_2 [N]
x 12000 Sum_Y [N]

Inner Piston 6000

(Exhaust)
Force [N]

0
Outer Piston
Outer Conrod (Intake)
-6000
Crankshaft
-12000

Crankshaft Axis -18000

Rotation
Inner Conrod 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360
Main Bearing 1 Crank Angle [°]
Bridge

(b)
Figure 81: opoc Engine MBS Model
Figure 83: Crankshaft Main Bearing Forces at 2000 rpm
Predicted crankshaft main bearing forces for 2000 rpm
are shown in Figure 83. Each plot shows three curves: Figure 84 shows a summary of the maximum magnitude
the solid line is the force at main bearing 1; the dash line of the crankshaft main bearing forces over the engine
is the force at main bearing 2; and the dash-dot line is speed range from 1000 rpm to 3800 rpm. The results
the sum of the two bearing forces. The upper plot
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018
show that a single crankshaft bearing has to react to a
maximum force of approximately 6500 N. The low main
bearing forces demonstrate one advantage of the opoc
engine configuration. For a conventional Diesel engine
under firing conditions, main bearing forces would be on
the order of 45,000 N. The analysis reveals that the
forces for the opoc design are almost 85% lower than in
a conventional combustion engine.
10000
Main Bearings:
Max #1
8000
Max #2
6000
Force [N]
4000
2000
0
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Engine Speed [rpm]
Figure 84: Crankshaft Main Bearing Forces (Max. Magnitude)
An explanation for the relatively low main bearing forces
is provided in Figure 85, which illustrates the left side of
the opoc engine at the crank angle position with the
maximum combustion forces (~10° after TDC) at 2000
rpm. The forces coming from the right side of the engine
at this crank angle position are small and are not shown.
The combustion forces act on the inner and outer
pistons. The inertia forces from the piston assemblies
work against the combustion forces. The resultant forces
are transferred along the connecting rods to the journal
forces. By separating these forces into their global
components and summing them up, it becomes clear
that the force in the x-direction is small because of the
canceling effect of the inner and outer pistons, while the
y-component is small because of the small angle
between the connecting rod and the piston motion axis.
Inertia Forces
Combustion Forces
~ 93000 N
~ 11000 N
Outer Piston Assembly
Figure 85: Unbalanced Main Bearing Forces at 2000 rpm
The MBS analysis results were used to define the loads
used in the subsequent FE analyses of the crankshaft
and connecting rods. The following engine speeds were
evaluated:
x 2000 rpm (maximum combustion load, low inertia
load)
x 3800 rpm (moderate combustion load, moderate
inertia load)
x 4560 rpm (minimum combustion load, maximum
inertia load)
As an example, Figure 86 through Figure 88 show the
reaction forces on the crankshaft journals along the axis
of the connecting rods for 2000 rpm, 3800 rpm, and
4560 rpm, respectively. The solid lines show the force
along the inner connecting rod, the dash and dash-dot
lines show the force along the outer connecting rods. A
3500 3800 positive force value indicates compression; a negative
force value indicates tension. The plots also include a
maximum force value and its approximate crank angle if
the maximum is off the scale of the plot. The following
abbreviations are used in the plot legends: IPI – inner
piston intake, OPE – outer piston exhaust.
Figure 86 shows that the inner connecting rods are
always under compression while the outer connecting
rods are always under tension at 2000 rpm. Increasing
the engine speed, and therefore the inertia load, and
reducing the combustion load, as is the case for 3800
rpm (Figure 87), the connecting rods see both
compressive and tensile loads.
At the 20% over-speed condition, we see maximum
inertia loads and no combustion forces, although there is
still compression inside the combustion chamber. As
seen in Figure 88, this condition results in an oscillation
between compressive and tensile loads of roughly the
same magnitude. However, the peak loads are much
lower than the peak loads at 2000 or 3800 rpm.
Global Coordinate System
Y
Inner Piston Assembly
Inner Conrod
Rotation X
~ 16000 N
Outer Conrod
Fy ~ 4500 N
Fx ~ 600 N
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

2
30000
acceleration ( R ˜ Z ), the translational and rotational
24000
18000
acceleration of the CG-locations of the connecting rod
12000 pieces and the loads applied to them can be determined.
6000 129453 N
Force [N]

0
-6000 -64933 N
-12000 M
-18000 IPI
OPE 1
-24000 OPE 2
-30000
R
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 Z
X
Crank Angle [°]
x
CG R Z2
CG
Figure 86: Crankshaft Journal Forces Along the Axis of the CG
CG
Connecting Rods at 2000 rpm CG
CG
CG
Connecting Rrod
30000
24000
18000
Figure 89: Inertia Load Distribution of a Connecting Rod
12000
6000 97071 N FE ANALYSIS
Force [N]

0
-6000 -49236 N
-12000 FE analysis was conducted for the rotating components
-18000 IPI and assemblies of the opoc engine, including the
OPE 1
-24000 OPE 2 crankshaft, inner connecting rod and outer connecting
-30000 rod/bridge assembly. Loads from the MBS analysis
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360
were applied to calculate deflection, stress, buckling
Crank Angle [°]
safety factors and fatigue safety factors. Several design
iterations were evaluated with the objective of achieving
Figure 87: Crankshaft Journal Forces Along the Axis of ohe satisfactory structural integrity while minimizing the
Connecting Rods at 3800 rpm
weight of the components. Several examples follow to
30000
demonstrate the analyses conducted and typical results.
24000
18000 Crankshaft
12000
6000 31543 N Figure 90 shows the FE model of the crankshaft. The
Force [N]

0 model was refined locally in areas of anticipated high

-6000 -30603 N stress to insure accurate stress predictions. The
-12000 connecting rod forces were applied to the crankpin
-18000 IPI
OPE 1 journals. In addition, at each operating speed, the
-24000 OPE 2 appropriate rotational velocity was applied to produce a
-30000
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 centrifugal load on the crankshaft.
Crank Angle [°]

Figure 88: Crankshaft Journal Forces Along the Axis of the

Connecting Rods at 4560 rpm

The combustion and inertia loads were applied

separately in the FE analyses of the connecting rods.
The accelerations of the connecting rods predicted by
the MBS simulation were used to define the inertia loads
acting on the rods. The acceleration at any point along
the rod is different in both magnitude and direction due
to the combination of reciprocating and rotational motion
of the rods. Therefore, the inertia load varies along the
length of the rod. The connecting rods were divided into
several pieces and the inertial loads applied at the
center of the individual pieces. Figure 89 shows an Figure 90: Crankshaft FE Model
illustration of the methodology used for this procedure.
 ) and the journal
Based on the piston acceleration ( X Figure 91 shows the effective Von Mises mean stress
distribution at 3800 rpm. Figure 92 shows the
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018
corresponding effective Von Mises alternating stress
distribution. As expected, the results indicate two
locations with high mean and alternating stresses.
Location one (outer journal - inner web) has a maximum
compressive mean stress of 120 MPa and an alternating
stress of 270 MPa, while location two (the fillet of the
inner journal and the inner web) has a maximum tensile
mean stress of 90 MPa and an alternating stress of 210
MPa. Fatigue safety factors for the two locations were
calculated using this information. Considering the
fatigue properties of the selected material, the final
design of the crankshaft resulted in fatigue safety factors
at locations one and two above 1.5, which was
considered acceptable.
The deflection of the crankshaft under maximum load
was also considered to be acceptable. Crankshaft
normal modes were calculated and found to be well
above the potential excitation orders of the engine.
1
2 condition to be cycling between the maximum
Figure 91: Von Mises Mean Stress Distribution at 3800 rpm
1
2
Figure 92: Von Mises Alternating Stress Distribution at 3800 rpm
Inner Connecting Rods
Figure 93 shows the FE model of the inner connecting
rod and piston assembly. The sliding contact between
the piston and connecting rod was included in the
model. Appropriate boundary conditions were applied,
based on the theoretically permissible motions of the
assembly. Combustion and piston inertia loads were
applied to the piston. The connecting rod inertia load
was distributed to several sections of the connecting rod
as discussed previously.
Figure 93: Inner Connecting Rod/Piston FE Model
At 3800 rpm, the inner connecting rod is under
compression throughout most of the combustion cycle.
However, due to the inertia loads at this high speed, a
small tensile load is seen over a portion of the cycle.
Figure 94 shows the Von Mises stress distribution under
the maximum compressive and tensile loads. Peak
stresses under the compressive load are in the 350 to
400 MPa range. Assuming the worst-case fatigue
compression and maximum tensile load cases,
calculations of the mean and alternating stress
distributions shown in Figure 95. Considering the
material properties for titanium, the inner connecting rod
design resulted in both yield and fatigue safety factors
above 1.5 at 3800 rpm.
Max Compression Max Tension
c c
d d
Figure 94: Inner Connecting Rod Von Mises Stress at 3800 rpm
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

Mean Stress Alternating Stress

c c

d d

Figure 95: Inner Connecting Rod Mean and Alternating Von Mises
Stress at 3800 rpm

The maximum compressive load, which occurs at 2000 Figure 96: Outer Connecting Rods/Bridge Assembly FE Model
rpm for the inner connecting rod, was used to calculate
buckling safety factors. The factor of safety for the first
buckling mode was predicted to be 14.5, which was well
above the minimum allowable buckling safety factor of 5.

Outer Connecting Rods/Bridge Assembly

Journal end
Figure 96 shows the FE model of the outer connecting Bridge moves in
rotates
rod and bridge assembly. Due to the long length of the vertical direction
outer connecting rods, the possibility of a rod
extensional natural frequency being excited by
combustion excitation was a concern. Therefore, a
natural frequency calculation was performed. The
model used for this calculation included the mass and
inertia of the piston, which was constrained to move
along the cylinder axis. The bridge was allowed to
Figure 97: Outer Connecting Rod/Bridge – 775 Hz Mode Shape
rotate relative to the piston about the bridge axis.
Constraints were applied to the connecting rod cap that
prevented radial motion but allowed rotation of the rod [MPa] [MPa]
relative to the crank pin. The first extensional mode that
could be excited by combustion loading occurs at 775 2 2
Hz, as shown in Figure 97. The dominant combustion 1 1
excitation acting on the piston/bridge assembly is first
order of the crankshaft rotation. Even at the 20% over-
speed condition (4560 rpm), this mode would not be
excited by frequencies below the tenth harmonic.
Therefore, resonances were not considered to be a
concern for this design.

In a similar manner to the inner connecting rods, fatigue

safety factors were calculated for the outer connecting
rod/bridge assembly. Figure 98 shows the effective
mean and alternating Von Mises stress distributions at
3800 rpm. High stresses were initially seen in two local Mean Von Mises Stress Alternating Von Mises Stress
areas as indicated in Figure 98. Local design changes
were implemented, which resulted in acceptable fatigue Figure 98: Outer Connecting Rod/Bridge – Effective Mean And
safety factors. Alternating Von Mises Stress Distribution at 3800 rpm

The potential for buckling of the outer rods was also

evaluated. The first buckling mode is shown in Figure
99. At 3800 rpm, the first buckling mode has a factor of
safety of 16, which is well above the target of 5.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

REFERENCES

1. Hofbauer, P: “Stroke of genius opoc takes two”,

Engine Technology International, June 1999.
2. Hofbauer, Peter: “Internal combustion engine with a
single crankshaft and having opposed cylinders with
opposed pistons”, U.S patent n. US 6,170,443, B1,
Santa Barbara, 1999.
3. Junkers, Prof. Hugo: “Anordnung der Einspritzdüsen
bei Verbrennungskraftmaschinen mit zwei
gegenläufigen Kolben”, German patent n. 288507,
Aachen, 1912.
4. Ricardo, Sir Harry Ralph: “Brennkraftmaschine mit
Kompressionszündung und gegenläufigen Kolben
mit dazwischen angeordneter
Verbrennungskammer”, German patent n. 577234,
st
Figure 99: Outer Connecting Rod/Bridge – 1 Buckling Mode London, 1929.
5. “Two Stroke Engines and Emissions”, SP-1327,
CONCLUSION Society of Automotive Engineers, ISBN 0-7680-
0147-1, 1998.
Based on the simulation results and design studies, the 6. Bartsch, C.: “Modernste Dieseltechnik TDI: Die
following conclusions can be made: Entwicklung der Direkteinspritzung”, Motorbuch
Verlag, Stuttgart, 1998.
From a thermodynamic point of view, the DARPA A160 7. Blair, G., Lassanske, G., Sheaffer, B.: “Two-stroke
engine can be modified to satisfy the required torque engines technology and emissions”, PT-69, Society
characteristics for the TARDEC FTTS truck engine. of Automotive Engineers, ISBN 0-7680-0126-9,
1998.
The predicted engine performance confirmed that the
8. Caproni, Aeroplani: “Zweitaktbrennkraftmaschine mit
engine could produce over 650 hp and 1600 Nm.
gegenläufigen Kolben”, German patent n. 650185,
1934.
The Electrical Assisted Turbocharger (EAT) is an
9. Bönsch, Helmut Werner: “Gemischansaugender
effective means to improve engine performance and the
desired torque shaping. Doppelkolben-Zweitaktmotor mit Luftverlagerung”,
German patent n. 906633, 1949.
A torque curve requirement of a truck engine with high 10. Notemeyer, Friedrich: German patent n. DE 195 03
torque at medium engine speed causes high gas forces. 443 C1, 1996.
The over-speed requirement of 20% results in high 11. Nippon Soken Inc., Nishio, Aichi: “Gegenkolben-
inertia forces. These load cases cause critical high Zweitaktbrenndraftmaschine mit
stresses and deflections of the rotating components. Gleichstromspülung”, German patent disclosure n.
The crankshaft design from the DARPA A160 engine is DE 28 39 051 A1, 1978.
generally acceptable. Design changes are required for 12. Barret, Paul: “Asymetrische Gegenkolben-
the connecting rods to counter the higher mechanical Brennkraftmaschine”, German patent disclosure n.
loads. These design changes will increase the weight of DE 30 19 192 A1, 1980.
the connecting rods, thus affecting the forces on the 13. Steinke, Harry: “Doppelkolben-2-Takt-
crankshaft. In addition, the rotating components require Verbrennungsmotor mit innerer Reinluf-
re-design for the truck engine application. Kraftstoffgemischobildung”, German patent
disclosure n. DE 39 40 027 A1, 1990.
The thermal analysis on the aluminum cylinder liner 14. Fiat, “Zweitaktbrennkraftmaschine mit gegenläufigen
resulted in acceptable surface temperatures, which are Kolben und parallelachsig neben den
comparable to high production engines. Tribology or oil Arbeitszylindern angeordnetem
degradation problems, due to the surface temperatures Drehkolbenverdichter”, German patent n. 453538,
,are not expected. The piston thermal analysis resulted 1927.
in high crown surface, top ring groove and oil cooling 15. “opoc opposed-piston, opposed cylinder engine”,
surface temperatures. An aluminum crown seems to be Propulsion Research Institute.
the most promising concept. Additional optimization to 16. “Submarine Main Propulsion Diesels Navpers
the cooling gallery will be done in cooperation with the
16161”, Training manual, The Fleet Type Submarine
piston supplier.
Online Main Propulsion Diesels; Editor: Richard
Pekelney, June 1946.; http://www.maritime.org/fleet
The author intends to report the test results of the opoc
sub/Diesel/
engine at the 2006 SAE World Congress.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Saturday, July 28, 2018

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author is reporting for the team from FEV/APT,

which carried out the work for the DARPA and TARDEC
programs on which this paper is based. The author
would especially like to thank the following team
members:

Adrian Tusinean
Lixin Peng
Michael Franke
Kevin Fuqua
Chou Lee
Jing Ping Liu
Hua Huang
Lurun Zhong
Brian Campbell
Wulf Roever
Amir Ghasemi
Sara Wesolowski

CONTACT

Prof. Dr.-Ing. Peter Hofbauer

Executive Vice President
FEV Engine Technology, Inc.
4554 Glenmeade Lane
Auburn Hills, MI 48326
Ph: 248-373-6000
Fax: 248-370-8646
hofbauer@fev-et.com
http://www.fev-et.com