Previous in Forum: VRV & VRF Airconditioning systems   Next in Forum: Rotation Speed Fan
Close
Close
Close
13 comments
Rating: Comments: Nested
Anonymous Poster

Torque and RPM in a Car Engine

10/08/2010 4:14 AM

I know that this subject has been repeatedly posted on CR4 engineering and has been discussed in depth. Yet it seems to me that many salient facts have been missed out. The Universally and generally accepted relationship between torque and power generated, whether this is calculated in horsepower or kilowatts, uses the formula: P = torque x 2 pi x rpm/60000 for kilowatts power generated and Hp = torque x rpm/ 5252 for horsepower generated. Yet consider torque in an automobile engine is discretely generated (i.e., each power stroke generates a given amount of torque. Thus, the Internal Combustion piston engine is subject to the Laws of physics just like anything else.

In the initial phase energy is added to the process in the form of combustion of the compressed fuel/air mixture. The pressure inside the cylinder then rises to about 500 psi ( 35 Kg/cm2 ) the final force applied to the piston head depends upon the area of the cylinder. An 80mm dia bore will result in a pressure of 1758.4 Kgf being exerted on the piston head during the power stroke. So the first process is a process of addition.

The next three processes are to do with reduction. Take for instance the impulse. At 6000 rpm a four cylinder 4 stroke engine actually has 12000 power strokes. So the time allowed for each power stroke is just 1/200 of second or 0.005 seconds. Since Impulse = Force x time (i.e., the product of the force and the time for which it is exerted.) = 1758.4 x 0.005 = 8.792 Kgm.

When a force is applied to a lever attached to an axle (as for instance a spanner) at any angle other than a right angle the force (torque) it exerts, is proportionately reduced. As the piston moves down the cylinder it exerts force on the crank shaft at a continuously changing angle. It is possible to work out the exact figure by calculating the force exerted at each crank angle but this is time consuming ( anyone who likes, is welcome to try ) , a rough approximation would be that it averages out to the value of Sin 10 . So 8.79 x 0.173(i.e., Sin 10) = 1.52 Kgm. Torque.

Further the length of the lever determines the final amount of torque that is exerted This is represented by the throw of the crankshaft and is generally accepted as being half of the stroke ( which in turn is closely related to the bore) . Taking this example to be a square engine gives 0.04 x 1.52 = 0.06Kgm or 0.06 x 9.8 = 06 Nm. So the inescapable conclusion is that the initial force of 1758.4 Kgf exerted on the piston head results in a torque of only 0.6 Nm being exerted on the crank shaft. Any comments ?

Reply
Interested in this topic? By joining CR4 you can "subscribe" to
this discussion and receive notification when new comments are added.
Guru

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: City of Light
Posts: 3943
Good Answers: 183
#1

Re: Torque and rpm in a car engine.

10/08/2010 4:34 AM

Either you are the one who already put this question or you copied it from the precedent. I presume the 1st assumption is the right one. If you are not satisfied with the answers you obtained do not expect to get an other if you change the name or stay under "guest". The answers are NOT related to a person but to the question's content or the object of the discussion. Your problem is that you do not understand the piston-connecting rod -crankshaft transmission and some of the thermodynamic process in the cylinder. You also mix notions. If you would follow the previous recommendations you will find the flaws in your logic and it is better if you find them on your own it will give you a better feeling and a higher satisfaction.

Reply
Anonymous Poster
#2
In reply to #1

Re: Torque and rpm in a car engine.

10/08/2010 5:32 AM

Dude, this is a new take on torque, whatever you might have to say about the actual post you are referring to, it does have some good points. Torque in an engine is generated discretely (i.e, through individual power strokes). The number of cylinders in a multi-cylinder engine does determine the number of power strokes per revolution of the crank-shaft. So the present equation : Power = torque x 2 pi x rpm/60000 (in kilo watts.) quoted widely in this forum, is not accurate. It makes sense that torque should be denoted as torque per power stroke per second, since dyno readings are also based on measuring torque at a certain rpm over a period of time to calculate torque. (There are other methods of measuring torque as has been pointed out). If this is so, then the point about the impulse of each power stroke might also make sense. Exactly what previous answers are you referring to, is there anything wrong in stating that Force x time = impulse. In the context of the post (I presume you are referring to) the time taken for a 4 cylinder 4 stroke engine to complete 1 power stroke at 6000 rpm is 12000/60 or 0.005 seconds. (i.e., a 4 stroke 4 cylinder engine has 12,000 power strokes at 6000 rpm) Is there any way, in the laws of physics that this amount of power can be exceeded. The force on the piston head is available for only 0.005 seconds, it follows that the torque generated per power stroke at this rpm is only available ( at a maximum) for 0.005 seconds. What's the problem?

Reply
Guru

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: City of Light
Posts: 3943
Good Answers: 183
#3
In reply to #2

Re: Torque and rpm in a car engine.

10/08/2010 6:32 AM

Some basics to think about. Consider the presence of an energy accumulator also since it has an important role and the energy requirements to compress which will be deducted from the energy delivered during the active part of cycle. If you think that the post has good points this OK. Use the method to design an IC and then I shall take my hat off and say marvellous!

Dude

Reply
Anonymous Poster
#4
In reply to #3

Re: Torque and rpm in a car engine.

10/08/2010 7:20 AM

Consider the presence of an energy accumulator also since it has an important role and the energy requirements to compress which will be deducted from the energy delivered during the active part of cycle.

Hey! What do you know, energy accumulators, this is a new one on me! Look leaving energy accumulators aside for the moment. Just answer (a) how many power strokes are there at 6000 rpm in a 4 cylinder 4 stroke engine? (b) Do you think the power stroke has any bearing at all on the amount of torque generated? Next, if the power stroke is responsible for torque generated by the engine, how much impulse does each power stroke have ? Or put more simply does each power stroke in a 4 cylinder 4 stroke engine have just 0.005 seconds to complete its stroke. If so, do not Newton's Laws hold good OR are we looking at power accumulators? Please explain in detail so that I am not left in the dark.

Reply
Guru
Technical Fields - Technical Writing - New Member Engineering Fields - Piping Design Engineering - New Member

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Richland, WA, USA
Posts: 21017
Good Answers: 795
#6
In reply to #4

Re: Torque and rpm in a car engine.

10/09/2010 1:24 PM

Here is an exercise: Identify the energy accumulator in nick name's suite of drawings.

When analyzing the torque by geometry and pressure, don't forget to subtract the opposite torque from the compression stroke, and to consider friction losses in all four strokes.

__________________
In vino veritas; in cervisia carmen; in aqua E. coli.
Reply
Anonymous Poster
#7
In reply to #6

Re: Torque and rpm in a car engine.

10/11/2010 10:07 AM

Hi Tornado,

I think that what OP is getting at is that the flywheel and the different strokes (compression, exhaust, intake etc.,) are already well known ! His main focus seems to be on the impetus of a single power stroke and the torque that it generates. And yes, to a certain extent I agree with him, after all torque is dependent on time. A given amount of torque takes a given amount of time to bring a wheel up to a given speed. Increase the amount of time over which the torque acts and you will need less torque, or alternatively, increase the amount of torque itself and you will need less time. So yes I agree torque when applied to car engines should be torque per second.

Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Van Nuys, CA
Posts: 563
Good Answers: 33
#8
In reply to #7

Re: Torque and rpm in a car engine.

10/12/2010 3:28 AM

"So yes I agree torque when applied to car engines should be torque per second."

Incorrect. Torque is force, horsepower is work (force over distance).

Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
Anonymous Poster
#12
In reply to #8

Re: Torque and rpm in a car engine.

10/13/2010 9:00 AM

Pantaz

Please don't make the mistake, that so many posters make, namely to hold such strong opinions about a post that you obviously have not read or understood. Of course toque and horsepower (power) are different. AND get your facts right!! Power is not equal to work!

Reply
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Van Nuys, CA
Posts: 563
Good Answers: 33
#13
In reply to #12

Re: Torque and rpm in a car engine.

10/13/2010 1:11 PM

"Please don't make the mistake, that so many posters make, namely to hold such strong opinions about a post that you obviously have not read or understood. Of course toque and horsepower (power) are different. AND get your facts right!! Power is not equal to work!"

Well, "Guest", perhaps you should not be so touchy (i.e., marking my answer "off topic"). If you feel I erred in my reply, why don't you provide a correction?

  Exactly what "strong opinions" did I express? I simply stated my disagreement with one sentence of your response. 

If you want to get pedantic, then I did make a mistake using the word "work" to describe "horsepower". By definition, horsepower is a unit of measurement. (See, James Watt.) Work is defined as force (in this case, torque) acting on an object in the direction of motion. Power, in mechanics, is defined as the rate of doing work.

Back to the original problem with message #7: Torque is NOT dependent on time (or motion). It is possible to apply torque to an object for infinite time without effecting its motion. It's the same thing as pressing your hand against a wall -- you are applying force, but there is no motion, thus no work is done. 

Reply
Guru

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: City of Light
Posts: 3943
Good Answers: 183
#10
In reply to #7

Re: Torque and rpm in a car engine.

10/12/2010 4:04 AM

Why ask for what you already have ? Torque is Force x length, power is Force x length / time. For all engines the engine power is know and what you ask for is POWER !

Quite interesting how notions are misunderstood and misused. I am sincerely asking myself where are the BASICS engineers should know even if they left school many years ago. Can you give an answer ?

Reply
Anonymous Poster
#11
In reply to #10

Re: Torque and rpm in a car engine.

10/13/2010 8:53 AM

Nick,

With all due respect OP has already answered your question. Yes, the basic premises are true BUT and it is a big BUT, torque in a car engine is dependent on the number of power strokes. Nothing else. IF the present equation for denoting hp Namely: hp = torque(ft. Lbs) x 2 pi/5250 does not take this simple fact into account it is wrong.

Reply
Guru
United Kingdom - Member - Indeterminate Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: In the bothy, 7 chains down the line from Dodman's Lane level crossing, in the nation formerly known as Great Britain. Kettle's on.
Posts: 32175
Good Answers: 839
#5

Re: Torque and RPM in a Car Engine

10/08/2010 10:24 AM

Hint: If the engine is running at idle, and there is no load on the driveshaft, then the torque in the engine will be just enough to overome the friction of the bearings within the engine, and no more......

__________________
"Did you get my e-mail?" - "The biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place" - George Bernard Shaw, 1856
Reply
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Van Nuys, CA
Posts: 563
Good Answers: 33
#9

Re: Torque and RPM in a Car Engine

10/12/2010 4:01 AM

"I know that this subject has been repeatedly posted on CR4 engineering and has been discussed in depth. Yet it seems to me that many salient facts have been missed out. ..."

I recommend "Internal Combustion Engine in Theory and Practice" by Charles Fayette Taylor, for a more thorough understanding of this subject.

Reply
Reply to Forum Thread 13 comments
Copy to Clipboard

Users who posted comments:

Anonymous Poster (5); nick name (3); pantaz (3); PWSlack (1); Tornado (1)

Previous in Forum: VRV & VRF Airconditioning systems   Next in Forum: Rotation Speed Fan

Advertisement