Not a member yet? Why not Sign up today
Create an account  

  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
 
How to make a powerful and efficient engine?

#1
Hello! I'm trying to build an engine that's about as powerful as the Hercules2000 pre-fab but more efficient. I've already managed to build a monstrosity of an engine with 20 cylinders, 22 carburetors, 20 superchargers, and 46 turbochargers with a maximum power of 2200, but I'm only getting 87 power per unit of fuel at peak load. How can I make it more efficient without going below a maximum power of 2000?

The engine in question: [Image: 9ydDOyr.png]

Stats:[Image: jCGwSNh.png]

I've included the blueprint of the engine.


Attached Files
.blueprint   Engine.blueprint (Size: 41.11 KB / Downloads: 29)
Reply

#2
I see that you've made progress with using the in-line turbos, so good work there. Something helpful to know is that you can use normal turbos in exactly the same way as in-line turbos, they just give you a different orientation of connection points to work with. I've attached an engine which helps illustrate this for you.

Now onto the key to using in-line turbos. You need to funnel as much exhaust as possible through a turbo to get higher efficiency. Try to connect your pipes to produce a single continuous line for exhaust to go through your turbochargers and your efficiency will shoot up massively. In order to test the efficiency of an engine properly you also need to test it under max load to get an accurate reading. Put down a shield generator and put it on max settings to quickly use up power.

Now there is the Blueline engine that should still be around. Before exhaust was reworked to make pipes omni-directional it was about the best engine when it came to balancing size, efficiency, and power. After the rework it was still pretty good, but a few modifications dramatically increased its efficiency, let me see if I can attach my prefab of it.


Attached Files
.blueprint   V8 engine of Evil Brick.blueprint (Size: 34.53 KB / Downloads: 37)
.blueprint   1.blueprint (Size: 36.26 KB / Downloads: 40)
Reply

#3
(2017-12-18, 04:32 AM)Vorpalim Wrote: I see that you've made progress with using the in-line turbos, so good work there. Something helpful to know is that you can use normal turbos in exactly the same way as in-line turbos, they just give you a different orientation of connection points to work with. I've attached an engine which helps illustrate this for you.

Now onto the key to using in-line turbos. You need to funnel as much exhaust as possible through a turbo to get higher efficiency. Try to connect your pipes to produce a single continuous line for exhaust to go through your turbochargers and your efficiency will shoot up massively. In order to test the efficiency of an engine properly you also need to test it under max load to get an accurate reading. Put down a shield generator and put it on max settings to quickly use up power.

Now there is the Blueline engine that should still be around. Before exhaust was reworked to make pipes omni-directional it was about the best engine when it came to balancing size, efficiency, and power. After the rework it was still pretty good, but a few modifications dramatically increased its efficiency, let me see if I can attach my prefab of it.

For some reason, 1.blueprint does not want to load.
EDIT: Nevermind, turns out I had to put it in the Prefab folder instead of the constructables folder.
Reply

#4
If I posted the right one then you should be seeing a 5x5x7 engine that can be chained to itself. Did I give you the right one?
Reply

#5
(2017-12-19, 01:27 AM)Vorpalim Wrote: If I posted the right one then you should be seeing a 5x5x7 engine that can be chained to itself. Did I give you the right one?

Yes.

Also, I modified and load tested the engine I'm working on and got 148 power per unit of fuel at full RPM.[Image: BhxVAIJ.png]
Reply

#6
Very good. If you close the pipe of the Blue line engine just above the engine block so that the only exit is in the very back then the efficiency will shoot up to over 1000 PPF.
Reply

#7
About the Hercules 2000, I have a demonstration for improving the prefab by inline chaining on my engine platform.

As to your engine, do keep in mind that the size and shape are quite important factors for the utility of your engines.
Power per block (PPB) or power per bounding box (PPBB) displays the power density, or the engine power you get relative to the engine size. The ultra-efficient engines with 78KPPF are not actually used in any design simply because they output such little power for their sizes.
The shape determines how easy an engine can be fit into multiple designs. You would probably have to design your vehicles around the engine if the shape is rather irregular, while with regular (cuboid) engines one can just leave out a rectangular void and go on with the rest of the craft. Most engines on my engine platform are designed with this in mind (and because they look cleaner that way). That is also how PPBB mentioned above is calculated, the engine power relative to the smallest cuboid space containing the engine.

Vorp has pointed out the way for efficient inline engines: gather first all the exhaust you can muster, before feeding them into inlines one after another. Inlines give 3.93x efficiency (and is multiplicative) whereas superchargers give 1.1x at most, so I would consider ditching superchargers for more efficient inline arrangement and piping worth it, for a more compact and regular-shaped engine.

That is all the verbal advice I can give at the moment, check out my engine platform if you want some examples on what I consider optimised engines for various sizes, power output and efficiencies, or how to chain inlines together.
[Image: 50157_s.png]
[Image: 50157_v.png]
Reply

#8
As for the question the topic title asks, the short version is simple enough. The ideal engine would theoretically have each carberator attached to 6 of some mix of 1+ turbos and 1+ cylinders. So 2 cylinders and 4 turbos, 3 and 3, etc.

In reality, especialy once you get to the point of 4 cylinders it starts getting to the point where it gets compacted enough to make piping difficult to do without increasing the boundary box size. It also gets harder to reach this idea without having difficulty actually cooling off the cylinders. Some of the highest power density engines thus have carbs connected to only 4 cylinders and 1 turbo simply because they can't do two of them due to either cooling concerns or because one side of the carburetor is touching the crank shaft or something. If you don't mind having a pipe on one face of the carb, then you can actually use a normal turbo as if it were an in-line one.

While they have fallen out of favor a bit, superchargers aren't bad to use though in higher power engines if you have some room but not enough for a full-on turbo. They take less space and don't need a pipe, and while they don't boost the engine anywhere near as much as a fully exhausted turbo, they can allow a high power engine to use a good deal less fuel while running at low RPMs (such as on a ship that turns off its shields when no enemies are around).

You can generally refer to engines as T_, based on the number of turbos per carburetor. A T3 engine thus has 3 turbos per carb (and ideally, 3 cylinders per as well).

Aside from the 6 Cylinder+Turbo per carb ideal, there are other things to consider as well. First, you want to have enough exhaust piped to a single location that you can then send it through all the turbos in a row. It maxes out at an efficiency multiplier a bit less then 4 per turbo, forget the exact number off hand. The more you try to compact an engine and maximize the PPBB for a particular T# engine, the more you may run into prototypes that simply run into some trouble having enough exhaust to actually get all of the turbos running at full power. This is particularly the case if you are like me and like to design extendable engines. Some of my designs suffer a bit if they are made with less than 2 middle segments, and in most cases when made with 0 middle segments they will only do a bit better at PPF than normal purely because the carbs at the very ends of the engine have an extra turbo on them compared to the rest of the engine (the PPBB of course suffers heavily).

Second, you theoretically want to minimize piping and have the turbos as close to each other as possible, pipe-wise. This has led me and others to often try to have turbos (usually in-line) that

There really is a bit of a difference in the "feel" of designing engines of different turbo counts sometimes. I honestly feel I work better with T3-T5 designs as opposed to T2 sometimes.

There are actually different building styles for engines, and I've noticed that you can come up with interesting designs depending on how you approach it.

One approach that seems to work with me for T3, T4, and T5 engines is to take a concept you are working on for one of the 3, and see if you can adapt the method used to make it into another. For instance, taking a T5 engine, and seeing if you can make a T4 with it instead by replacing a turbo with a cylinder.

Something I tried recently that actually resulted in a very good T5 and T4 engine was to actually start the design with the turbos. No crankshaft, no engine, no cylinders. Started with the in-line turbos themselves, trying to pipe them up together with as few pipes as possible and attaching a carburetor to them.
.
Your giant expensive powerful warship of doom can be destroyed by dropping an anvil on it. One day, I will finally have enough engines to actually make a ship without stopping to make more engines.
Reply



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)