Seeking interest in diesel and biodiesel rule expansion for FSAE

[Mechanicaldan]

I was just wondering how many teams might be interested in running a diesel or biodiesel engine in a FSAE car, if the rules allowed it?

I know there aren't very many high performance small displacement diesel engines as available as motorcylce engines, but it would allow for some new innovation in FSAE.

Since Formula Hybrid is getting started, and since there has been a recent surge in alternative fuels, I was wondering if anyone else has thought about this?

If diesel/biodiesel was allowed, based on the engines available, maybe an increase in displacement would be allowed? Maybe up to 1600cc? Maybe up to 1000cc, with no restrictor? How about allowing turbocharging, no restrictor, and up to 1000cc?

There seem to be some small diesel engines available from Yanmar, Briggs & Stratton, etc that are under 1000cc.

[Mechanicaldan]

I was just wondering how many teams might be interested in running a diesel or biodiesel engine in a FSAE car, if the rules allowed it?

I know there aren't very many high performance small displacement diesel engines as available as motorcylce engines, but it would allow for some new innovation in FSAE.

Since Formula Hybrid is getting started, and since there has been a recent surge in alternative fuels, I was wondering if anyone else has thought about this?

If diesel/biodiesel was allowed, based on the engines available, maybe an increase in displacement would be allowed? Maybe up to 1600cc? Maybe up to 1000cc, with no restrictor? How about allowing turbocharging, no restrictor, and up to 1000cc?

There seem to be some small diesel engines available from Yanmar, Briggs & Stratton, etc that are under 1000cc.

[Mike Claffey]

On a similar note I would love to see E-85 offered at FSAE-A.

I love that FSAE is open for innovation in so many areas but I don't think there is much to be gained from adding diesel to the mix.

Do you have any links or numbers on power/weight/time to rebuild on these sorts of engines?

[Mechanicaldan]

http://www.sae.org/technical/papers/2004-32-0055

http://www.ferret.com.au/articles/ef/0c03d5ef.asp

http://www.yanmar.co.jp/english/products/industry/indusrial/tne/tne_series.htm

Main page: http://www.yanmar.co.jp/en/

HDT USA diesel motorcycles: http://www.hdtusa.com/

More diesel motorcycles:
http://www.gizmag.com/go/4273/

Briggs & Stratton: http://www.commercialpower.com/display/router.asp?DocID=80488 Check out the torque curve!

http://www.briggsandstratton.com/display/router.asp?DocID=75519

Maybe Briggs & Stratton would supply engines like they do to Baja SAE teams?

http://punsunengine.en.alibaba.com/product/50186533/510...Twin_Air_Cooled.html (http://punsunengine.en.alibaba.com/product/50186533/51075021/Diesel_engine/22HP_Diesel_Engine_with_V_Twin_Air_Cooled.html)

2007 Arctic Cat diesel ATV: http://www.roushaltfuels.com/drv/overview.htm

Kubota: http://www.kubota.com/f/products/rtv900.cfm

http://www.pembrokeshire4x4.co.uk/ProductDetail.asp?cat...y=Quad+Bikes&urn=374 (http://www.pembrokeshire4x4.co.uk/ProductDetail.asp?category=Quad+Bikes&urn=374)

Polaris diesel ATV: http://atv.off-road.com/atv/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=191059

Google brings up plenty of hits using diesel, v-twin, small, motorcycle, etc.

As for not being much to gain, I disagree. Our team benefited greatly when we decided to run E-85. Sponsorship money came pouring in. In four years our team went from a team not having a drivable car at competiton to placing 7th last year at FSAE. The same amount of sponsorship money from biodiesel could help a lot of teams that decided to take a similar route.

Then, there is just the wonderful design challenge to tackle, similar to the recent single cylinder installations, CVTs, and AWD formula cars.

There is lots to gain if the diesel/biodiesel option were made available.

There is a lot of work being done right now to clean up diesel engines and bring them back in volume to the US. Almost half the cars sold in Europe are diesel.

[NetKev92]

It may be worth looking at the equivalence formulas from ALMS to see what might be appropriate. There's also been a mess of protests and the displacement limit on diesels may get lowered. Audi's crying foul and complaining about how the world isn't fair, but they've been very quietly running a much higher grade diesel in ALMS than what most people initially though they were using. It looks like there wasn't enough control over the fuel type to be used and what would have been equivalent using typical gas-pump diesel may have given Audi a large power advantage with the rocket fuel they were actually running.

[Michael Royce]

Gentlemen,
Perhaps you should read the posting on this topic that has been on the official SAE website under Rules & Important Documents" since 2003 and which was last updated a couple of months ago. It states:
"Engines and Fuels for Formula SAE
3.5.1.1 of the Formula SAE Rules states that "The engine(s) used to power the car must be four-stroke piston engine(s) with a displacement not exceeding 610 cc per cycle."�
Also 3.5.2 of the same rules states that "During all performance events, the cars must be operated with fuel provided by the organizer at the event."� And for the Formula SAE Event (Michigan) "Fuels will include 94 and 100 octane unleaded gasoline, and E-85."� The fuels at the other events in the Formula SAE Series will be announced in the Collegiate Design Series Newsletter or via the individual competition websites. However, the principal fuels will be gasoline. E-85 may, or may not, be offered.

"The FSAE organizers keep getting questions on whether a team can use other types of engines or fuels. This includes rotary, 2-stroke, "6-stroke"� and turbine engines, or diesel fuel.

"This topic is discussed on a regular basis by the Rules Committee.

"The vast majority of FSAE rules are safety related. Hence, if we allow any alternative type of engine, the safety implications would have to be fully evaluated and the rules adjusted.
As far as fuels are concerned, at the Formula SAE event in Michigan, the organizers and the fuel supplier already provide three (3) different types of fuel. Offering a fourth, or fifth for one or two, or even a handful or cars, is a complication we do not wish to undertake. In either case, if we were to allow alternative engines or alternative fuels, the questions of equivalency would have to be addressed (again).

"While the Committee's philosophy is to allow the teams as much design freedom as possible, for a combination of safety and logistical reasons, these particular rules will not change in the foreseeable future.

Michael Royce,
Chairman,
FSAE Rules Committee.
Last Revised 10-10-2006"

[Mike Claffey]

Mechanicaldan, thanks for all the links. I still don't see how these engines are useful in fsae when they are in the 50-100kg range, delivering less than 50hp. (for the 500-1000cc stuff)

I'd love to see some sort of powerplant like what is proposed for the new f1 regs (turbo biodesiel ~1.something litre) small enough for our class, but that type of racing engine just does not exist. If theres a team out there that wants to make one, well good luck to them, but I'll bet it won't be the best way to use your manpower.

[the fat LION]

it would be pretty interesting to see some of the other engine types allowed in teh competition, namely rotaries and diesel. while not many of those engines meet rules now, that doesnt mean its going to stay that way. I think there would be a lot to learn if other types of engines could be used. Although i have to agree with not allowing the 2 stroke, mostly b/c thats going the way of the dinosaur.

[Nima]

If two-stroke engines could be used there is a light engine:
It is 90 horsepower and 500cc with 35 kg weight.
http://www.2si.com/images/Sport%208.gif
www.2si.com (http://www.2si.com)

Another in 4-stoke...
http://www.maxsym.com/gp500-600/images/GP600_white.JPG
http://www.maxsym.com

[Janke]

I have 2 things to say. Diesel is a relatively safe fuel compared to petrol. it has a much higher flash point but i suppose there is other concerns that i'm not thinking of. Second, 2-strokes are not going the way of the dinosaur. There are plenty of diesel 2 stroke engines powering tankers. there's also companies looking at direct injection for 2-stroke motorcycle engine(I think anyways. It's getting late). One of uwa's spoinsor in fact http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif:P

Cheers

[NetKev92]

It sounded more from the sanctioning body post that it's the nuissance issue. Your judges and track marshalls at an FSAE event are normal people with day jobs that volunteer to come out and help you have a few events a year. Unless the guy in charge of fuel steps up and says he wants to take on some extra work, it may not happen.

It could be interesting, but it seems a bit like being different just for the sake of being different. Besides, if you're all buying engines instead of building them, who cares what engines you buy? It's just a black box that makes the car go.

[Mechanicaldan]

All,

Thanks for the discussion, as this was the point of the post. Knowledge is power!

Michael - Thanks for the response. It's great to know that those involved in organizing the FSAE events are brousing this forum. As, already pointed out though, diesel does have a higher flash point than gasoline or ethanol making it a safer fuel for the people distributing the fuel at competitions. Fuel properties: http://cta.ornl.gov/bedb/biofuels/ethanol/Fuel_Property...soline-No2Diesel.xls (http://cta.ornl.gov/bedb/biofuels/ethanol/Fuel_Property_Comparison_for_Ethanol-Gasoline-No2Diesel.xls) There have already been some changes to the rules regarding safely attaching fuel rails. What other safety point am I missing? Yes, there would be the additional work required to change rule 3.5.2, and rule 3.5.1.1 if a larger displacement diesel engine were necessary to provide equivalent power. As far as logistics and "a complication we do not wish to undertake", correct me if I'm wrong, but the fuel supplier is doing the work. I can't imagine it being that much more difficult to bring out a drum or two of diesel / biodiesel. You would just have to tell them to supply diesel and/or biodiesel.

With as big as FSAE has gotten, has anyone contacted Exxon, BP, Shell, Chevron, etc to be a supplier and sponsor of the FSAE events? I would guess that the National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition and the National Biodiesel Board and other alternative fuel representative could get one of their fuel manufacture members to get involved. I would think it would be good for their publicity, and a good tax deduction.

What would be really helpful is to know specifically the reasons why the rules were not changed for diesel / biodiesel in the past. If there have been serious discussions on trying to make the rules as fair as possible for diesel engines, then a lot of the work has already been done. Can I get a copy of any of the meeting notes?

I'm a big lover of 2-strokes, and yes DI 2-strokes are cleaner, but they are dinosaurs. I've owned two '85 Yamaha RZ350s, a '92 Yamaha YZ250, and worked at Mercury Marine due to their DI 2-stroke outboards. Emission regulations around the world are forcing manufacturers to go the 4-stroke route. Isn't the point of the Clean Snomobile SAE competition to try to clean up the exhaust emisions of snowmobiles and other off highway vehicles? Honda made an announcement that they would completely stop manufacturing of all their 2-stroke engines after 2007.

Mazda has a wonderful rotoray engine, but unless someone can supply some links of a rotorary engine that would be somewhat practical in an FSAE car, besides completely designing and manufacturing one from scratch, I don't see rotoraries as an easy option for FSAE.

Yes, the engines I provided links to are on the heavy side, but all diesels are generally heavier than a gasoline equivalent due to having to be stonger for a higher compression ratio. Now, almost all those engines are NA, but FSAE allows super and turbocharging. So, what we don't know is how equivalent the power output would be of one of those engines if they were turbocharged. The nice part is that a few of these examples have transmissions attached to them. Adding a turbo to one of the diesel engines, and lets start comparing dyno charts.

I'm trying to drive this change because of the change that is happening inside and outside the auto industry. Renewable fuels are expanding very quickly due to necessity. Diesels are HUGE in europe due to high fuel prices and their better fuel efficiencies, and that same point is coming to the USA. Audi has had a wonderfully successful diesel racecar. Correct me if I'm wrong, but one of the main points of the R10 was to show Americans how fast and clean diesels can be. It was to change our UGLY attitude toward diesels that was driven home from the bad diesels of the 80s. Americans have already jumped on board BIG time with diesel pickups, and it won't be that hard of a sell for GM, Ford, Chrysler, Audi, VW Honda, Toyota, and others when it comes to reintroducing diesel cars.

Oh, and let's not forget a really BIG change that happened recently. All the diesel fuel in the USA is now, finally, low sulfur.

So what specifically needs to be addressed to change the rules to allow diesel/biodiesel? Flash points of fuel? BTU/volume? Displacement based on available engines? There is no throttle, so I guess restrictors and sizing would need to be agreed upon. Would it be possible to order the intake system as head, restrictor, turbo? Or, would the rule need to stay head, turbo, restrictor?

Regards,

Dan De Clute-Melancon

[Ben Beacock]

I like the idea of diesel in competition. Unfortunately it is not just the 2 rules it impacts. Since there is no throttle, there is would likely have to be additional rules on fuel shutoff solenoids. I'm not sure of the status of some of the newest small diesel engines but I beleive some of them are even direct injected/electronically controlled which presents problems similar to the throttle-by-wire rules issues.
Also, fuel pressures are significantly higher which is not really accounted for in the rules.