Winter Design Report: MECH 4010 & 4015 Design Project II

MECH
4010 & 4015

Design Project II
Winter Design Report
FSAE Engine Modifications

Team #17
Whitney Hurlbut
Kirk Fraser
Emerson Hawkins
Saad Mohamed
Greg Fitzpatrick
Submitted April 8th, 2014

to
Dr. Clifton Johnston
Table of Contents
Abstract ....................................................................................................................................................... 4
1 Background ........................................................................................................................................... 5
1.1 Team Background ........................................................................................................................... 5
1.2 Technical Background .................................................................................................................... 5
2 Design Requirements ............................................................................................................................ 6
3 Design Concepts .................................................................................................................................... 7
3.1 Considered Concepts ...................................................................................................................... 7
3.1.1 Crankshaft ............................................................................................................................... 8
3.1.2 Flywheel .................................................................................................................................. 9
3.1.3 Clutch .................................................................................................................................... 10
3.1.4 Connecting Rods .................................................................................................................... 11
3.1.5 Camshaft ............................................................................................................................... 11
3.1.6 Gearbox ................................................................................................................................. 12
3.1.7 Shiftdrum/Shiftforks .............................................................................................................. 13
3.2 Evaluated Concepts ...................................................................................................................... 14
3.2.1 Crankshaft ............................................................................................................................. 14
3.2.2 Flywheel ................................................................................................................................ 15
3.2.3 Connecting Rods .................................................................................................................... 16
3.2.4 Gearbox ................................................................................................................................. 16
3.2.5 Shift drums and Shift forks .................................................................................................... 21
3.3 Selected Concepts ........................................................................................................................ 22
3.3.1 Rotating Mass Reduction Comparison .................................................................................. 22
3.3.2 Gearbox alternatives comparison ......................................................................................... 23
4 Detailed Design ................................................................................................................................... 23
4.1 Crankshaft .................................................................................................................................... 24
4.1.1 Machining .............................................................................................................................. 24
4.1.2 Balancing ............................................................................................................................... 24
4.1.3 CAD Drawings ........................................................................................................................ 25
4.2 Flywheel ....................................................................................................................................... 25
4.2.1 Machining .............................................................................................................................. 25
4.2.2 Balancing ............................................................................................................................... 25
4.2.3 CAD Drawings ........................................................................................................................ 26
4.3 Gearbox ........................................................................................................................................ 26
4.3.1 Assembly ............................................................................................................................... 26
4.3.2 Shift drum & fork adjustments .............................................................................................. 27
4.3.3 CAD Drawings ........................................................................................................................ 27
4.4 Complete CAD Assembly .............................................................................................................. 27
5 Testing and Verification ...................................................................................................................... 27
5.1 Production Plan ............................................................................................................................ 28
5.1.1 Expenses ................................................................................................................................ 28
5.1.2 Planned Schedule .................................................................................................................. 29
5.1.3 Actual Schedule ..................................................................................................................... 29
5.2 Static Testing ................................................................................................................................ 30
5.2.1 Weight ................................................................................................................................... 30
5.2.2 Crankshaft Vibration Analysis ................................................................................................ 30
1
5.3 Dynamic Testing ........................................................................................................................... 32

5.3.1 Horsepower & Torque ........................................................................................................... 32
5.3.2 Throttle Response ................................................................................................................. 33
5.3.3 Acceleration .......................................................................................................................... 33
6 Results ................................................................................................................................................. 34
6.1 Testing .......................................................................................................................................... 34
6.1.1 Static Testing ......................................................................................................................... 34
6.1.2 Dynamic Testing .................................................................................................................... 37
6.2 Oil Analysis ................................................................................................................................... 48
6.2.1 Varian FTIR ............................................................................................................................ 48
6.2.2 Seta Flash Tester ................................................................................................................... 49
6.2.3 Spectrometer ........................................................................................................................ 50
6.3 Requirements ............................................................................................................................... 50
6.3.1 Completed ............................................................................................................................. 51
6.3.2 Outstanding ............................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
7 Discussion ............................................................................................................................................ 52
7.1 Conclusions .................................................................................................................................. 52
7.2 Recommendations ....................................................................................................................... 52
8 References .............................................................................................................................................. 53
Appendix A: Planned Schedule .................................................................................................................. 54
Appendix B: Actual Schedule ..................................................................................................................... 55
Appendix C: Sample Modal Data ............................................................................................................... 56
Appendix D: EIG Full Requirements ........................................................................................................... 57
Appendix E: CAD Drawings ........................................................................................................................ 58

List of Figures
Figure 1: Engine functional block diagram .................................................................................................. 6
Figure 2: Internal Engine Components and their corresponding mass share. ............................................. 8
Figure 3: CBR 600RR Crankshaft .................................................................................................................. 8
Figure 4: CBR 600RR Flywheel ..................................................................................................................... 9
Figure 5: Stock Honda CBR Clutch Center .................................................................................................. 10
Figure 6: Stock Honda Piston Assembly with Connecting Roads ............................................................... 11
Figure 7: Intake and Exhaust Camshafts .................................................................................................... 12
Figure 8: Stock Mainshaft assembly .......................................................................................................... 12
Figure 9: Stock Countershaft Assembly ..................................................................................................... 13
Figure 10: Stock Honda Shift Drum ............................................................................................................ 13
Figure 11: Stock Honda Shift Forks ............................................................................................................ 14
Figure 12: Output Torque vs. vehicle speed with Nova Racing Transmission ........................................... 20
Figure 13: Crankshaft balancing set up. ..................................................................................................... 25
Figure 14: Nova Racing gear set assembly. ................................................................................................ 26
Figure 15: Gearbox with aluminum spacers indicated .............................................................................. 27
Figure 16 Crankshaft torsional vibration diagram (Huneycutt, 2013) ....................................................... 31
Figure 17: Decreases in Rotating Mass ...................................................................................................... 35
Figure 18 Power curve with raw data for engine #1 .............................................................................. 38
Figure 19 Torque curve with raw data for engine #1 ............................................................................. 39
2

Figure 20 Exploded view of valve assembly ........................................................................................... 40

Figure 21 Power curve with interpolated results from engine #1 ......................................................... 40
Figure 22 Torque curve with interpolated results for engine #1 ........................................................... 41
Figure 23 Power curve with raw data for engine #2 .............................................................................. 42
Figure 24 Torque curve with raw data for engine #2 ............................................................................. 43
Figure 25 Power curve with interpolated results for engine #2 ............................................................. 44
Figure 26 Torque curve with interpolated results for engine #2 ........................................................... 45
Figure 27 Final power curves for both engines ...................................................................................... 46
Figure 28 Final torque curves for both engines ..................................................................................... 47
Figure 29: Oil Spectroscopy of the Varian FTIR tests with Royal Purple Oil. ............................................. 49
Figure 30: Seta Flash Tester from GasTOPS Ltd. ....................................................................................... 49
Figure 31: Oil Spectrometer results reading in ppm and particle size of <10m. ..................................... 50

List of Tables
Table 1: Gear Ratios of stock Honda Gearbox ........................................................................................... 17
Table 2: Gear Ratio Comparison to Nova Racing Transmission ................................................................. 20
Table 3: Stock Honda and Nova Racing combined gear set ....................................................................... 21
Table 4: Rotating mass reduction comparison .......................................................................................... 22
Table 5: Gearbox Alternative Comparison ................................................................................................. 23
Table 6: Summary of Expenses .................................................................................................................. 28
Table 7: Crankshaft Weight Analysis ......................................................................................................... 34
Table 8: Flywheel Weight Analysis ............................................................................................................ 34
Table 9: Gearbox Weight Analysis ............................................................................................................. 35
Table 10: Experimental and Theoretical Crankshaft Resonant Frequencies ............................................. 36
Table 11: Observed Vibration and Operating rpm .................................................................................... 37

Abstract
The Dalhousie Formula SAE Engine Internals Group (EIG) modified the engine internals of a Honda CBR
600 RR motorcycle engine for use in the 2014 Formula SAE car. As a strict rule in the Formula SAE series
of design and racing, all internal combustion engines are restricted to an air intake of 20mm in diameter.
This effectively limits the amount of power a given engine can produce. As the Dalhousie Formula SAE
team uses a stock Honda motorcycle engine, which is not restricted, the engine is over-designed for the
power the Formula team produces. The idea is therefore to not only reduce the mass of the engine, but
to reduce the rotating mass within it. A reduction in rotating mass will allow the engine to accelerate
faster, produce more power and torque thus accelerating the car faster. In the end, the Dalhousie
Formula SAE team is looking to place higher - a well-designed and faster car will help accomplish that.
A significant amount of mass was reduced in the engine. Of the 10.886 kg of all rotational components,
there was a 11.99% reduction, this is equivalent to 1.306 kg. In addition a lightweight and optimized
gearbox was designed and purchased. However, due to complications there has not been any conclusive
evidence that reduced weight inside a Honda CBR 600 RR can increase engine performance. The reason
for the lack of conclusive evidence is a result of poor engine rebuilding practice and a starved journal
bearing which the investigation is still on-going. There was a 3% increase on torque but that did not
meet the EIGs requirement of 5%.
It is recommended that further investigation into the journal bearing failure be performed. In addition,
gearbox testing should be pursued, as it did not see any testing due to schedule conflicts and engine
failures.

1 Background
The project background is split up detailing Dalhousie Formula SAE team background and overall
technical background in Sections 1.1 and 1.2 respectively.
1.1 Team Background

Formula SAE is an international student competition where universities from around the world design,
build and compete open-wheel race cars for an autocross style event. There is a 610cc limit on engine
displacement and a 20mm restriction on air intake diameter as part of the 2014 Formula SAE Rulebook
[6]
. This is enforced to keep the competitors safe and keep teams within performance boundaries. The
intake diameter restriction greatly reduces the amount of power and torque produced by the engine
compared to the stock intake. The engine is allowed to be modified in any way as long as the
displacement and intake diameter remains under the limit.
The Dalhousie Formula SAE team has been competing in the Formula SAE Michigan competition for four
years. This experience has allowed the team to learn how to build a reliable race car for this type of
competition. These years of experience have resulted in a linear increase in points at the competition,
and as such the team has advanced past the entry-level competitors. It is the intent of Dalhousie
Formula SAE to place amongst the top twenty teams. In 2013 the team ranked 40th overall scoring
points in every aspect of the event; this was the first year the team was able to score points in the
Endurance category. Optimizing the engine internals for the FSAE event is something that can help
Dalhousie Formula SAE team gain the competitive edge in Michigan. The changes can not only aid in car
performance in dynamic events, but also score additional design points during judging.
1.2 Technical Background

The Dalhousie Formula SAE team currently uses a stock Honda CBR 600RR motorcycle engine. This is an
inline four-cylinder, four-stroke, reciprocating internal combustion engine. The Engine Internals Group
(EIG) intends to modify the crankshaft, flywheel and gearbox in order to optimize the performance of
the engine. Since the ideal performance for a street motorcycle is not in line with that of a Formula SAE
style race car, some aspects of the engine will require modification to perform optimally for the FSAE
competition. It is important to note that the motorcycle produces 110 hp as the air intake is not limited,
however for the FSAE event, there is the 20mm restriction effectively making the stock CBR engine over
designed for its use.
By reducing the rotating mass of the crankshaft, flywheel and gears the throttle response, torque, power
and acceleration can be improved. In addition, because the expected speeds of a Formula SAE racecar in
this type of competition are much lower when compared to that of a street motorcycle, the stock gear
ratios can be optimized to improve the drivability and acceleration of the Formula SAE car.
Figure 1 shows a functional block diagram of the internal relationships of a Formula racecar engine. This
diagram has been simplified to emphasize parts that apply to this project specifically.

Figure 1: Engine functional block diagram
2 Design Requirements
The modified engine design shall meet all rules as outlined by the 2014 Formula SAE Rulebook; the
following are the main outcome requirements of the project:
1. Shall increase the throttle response of the engine by 10% from a baseline number of 0.427s
seconds.

2. Should increase the output torque of the engine by 5% from a baseline number of 53.7 Nm.

3. Should increase the overall horsepower output of the engine by 5% from a baseline number of
70.5 hp.

4. Shall decrease a 75 m acceleration time by 5% from a baseline of 4.797 seconds.
6

5. Shall decrease the overall combined mass of the crankshaft, flywheel and gearbox by 5% from a
baseline number of 10.87 kg

6. The crankshaft and flywheel shall be balanced to 0.5 g to minimize vibration.
For complete team requirements and specifications please see Appendix D.

3 Design Concepts
Optimizing the engine internals of a Honda CBR 600RR for use in Formula SAE consists of two major
components; reducing rotating mass and improving the drivability of the gearbox. Optimizing the
rotating mass and the gearbox of the engine increases the overall performance of the car. Therefore it
was important to modify the most effective engine components in order to meet our project
requirements. This section will address and evaluate various engine components that have been
considered throughout the design project.
3.1 Considered Concepts

The CBR 600RR engine has numerous heavy parts rotating at a max of 14,000 revolutions per minute
(RPM). Figure 2 shows all the possible components, along with their mass percentages, that can be
modified to improve the performance of the car. For each component there is a unique way in which the
rotating mass can be reduced.

Figure 2: Internal Engine Components and their corresponding mass share.
3.1.1 Crankshaft
An engines crankshaft (often abbreviated as crank) is the part of an engine that transforms the
reciprocating linear motion of the piston into rotational motion. On most engines it is necessary to put
counterweights to balance out the reciprocating mass of the pistons and connecting rods, allowing the
engine to run smoother with less vibration. This is true of the engine being used for this engine internals
project, the 2004 Honda CBR 600RR engine. Figure 3 shows the original crankshaft that was used in the
Formula SAE car:
Counter Weights
Figure 3: CBR 600RR Crankshaft
The counter weights add considerable mass to the crank, and although it helps to smooth out the engine
it requires more energy from combustion to bring the crank up to the desired RPM. Consequently this
slows down the acceleration of the engine. Therefore the EIG group decided to evaluate the feasibility of
reducing the counterweights of the crankshaft.
8

3.1.2 Flywheel
A flywheel is a mechanical device used to store rotational energy (see Figure 4). Flywheels have a
significant moment of inertia and thus resist changes in rotational speed. On the Honda CBR engine, a
flywheel is mounted onto the crankshaft to maintain constant angular velocity. While the pistons are
firing, they are applying a torque to the crankshaft to create rotation. When they are not firing, the
stored energy in the flywheel is used to resist quick deceleration of the engine. In general, flywheels are
used to make the operation of engine smoother when driving at low speeds; this creates a more relaxed
driving feel for the operator [1]. The flywheel has its greatest effect when attempting to maintain a
constant velocity and working against the resistance of road and air friction. Generally flywheels are
large to smooth out engine loads and the result is comfortable street driving. However, in racing, quick
acceleration is of more importance than comfort.

Figure 4: CBR 600RR Flywheel
In racing applications the driver is constantly adjusting the throttle from wide open to closed. The only
time the throttle is closed is when the driver is about to enter a turn, in which case the quickest
deceleration possible is desired. Thus, in general, the pistons are always firing when speed is desired
meaning there is little need for a flywheel to store mechanical energy.
A second function of the flywheel is as the rotational component of the engines electrical power system
that spins about the stator. The flywheel has magnets mounted within it that rotate about the stators
coil of wire. When rotating, this combination creates an AC current generator, which runs the electrical
system for the CBR motorcycle as well as charging its battery.
9

Therefore, since racing depends on the ability to accelerate and decelerate, the EIG decided to evaluate
the effectiveness of modifying the flywheel.
3.1.3 Clutch
The purpose of the clutch is to engage or disengage the engine and the car wheels from each other (see
Figure 5). It is disengaged when the car is stationary and the engine is running or when the gear ratios
are changed in the gearbox, commonly referred to as shifting. The original clutch represents a
considerable portion of the rotating mass within the engine (3%) and therefore reducing unnecessary
mass can improve the engines performance.

Figure 5: Stock Honda CBR Clutch Center
A possible alternative for the stock clutch was to replace it with a slipper clutch. While being lighter than
the stock clutch, the slipper clutch also increases drivability. A slipper clutch will slip in aggressive
down shifts until wheel speed matches engine speed. This advantage gives smoother shifting, quicker
downshifts and the ability to use the engine to slow the car rather than only the brakes. Along with the
clutch being smaller and lighter, the steel disks required for the slipper clutch are thinner than the stock,
thus further decreasing the weight.
However, due to the Dalhousie Formula SAE teams testing schedule, the clutch was already installed on
the baseline engine therefore cannot be considered a modification of the EIG.
10

3.1.4 Connecting Rods

The connecting rods, shown in Figure 6, are the links that attach the pistons to the crankshaft. Together
with the crank, they form a simple mechanism that converts reciprocating motion into rotating motion.
The existing connecting rods are formed out of steel however, ideal racing connecting rods are
preferably lighter and made from special alloys, such as titanium. This shows that there is potential to
improve the stock connecting rods and therefore the EIG group decided to further evaluate the
feasibility of reducing the mass of the connecting rods.

Figure 6: Stock Honda Piston Assembly with Connecting Roads
3.1.5 Camshaft
In an internal combustion engine, a camshaft is used to operate the inlet and exit valves of the cylinder.
The valves control the flow of the air and fuel mixture going in and coming out of the engine. During
rotation the cam lobes force the valves to open or close by pressing and releasing valve caps. The stock
Honda intake and exhaust camshafts are shown in Figure 7.
11

Figure 7: Intake and Exhaust Camshafts
The stock camshafts are hollow throughout leaving little room for reducing the rotating mass of the
structure. Additionally, the relation between the camshafts and the rotation of the crankshaft is of
critical importance. Any modification to the design of the camshaft will result in high technical risks and
therefore the concept of modifying the camshaft was not pursued.
3.1.6 Gearbox
The gearbox in any automobile is meant to allow for variable power delivery from the engine to the
output source. The gearbox consisting of several different sized gears, provide speed and torque
conversions from a rotary power source. The stock gearbox comes standard with six gears. Gear shifting
is sequential, with neutral being located between the 1st and 2nd gear. The CBR gearbox consists of a
main shaft and countershaft as shown in Figure 8 and Figure 9 respectively. The two shafts are
constantly meshed in the sequential gearbox.

Figure 8: Stock Mainshaft assembly
12

Figure 9: Stock Countershaft Assembly
Modifications to the gearbox directly impact the weight and performance of the vehicle. The EIG
determined that the gearbox represents around 30% of the total rotating mass in the CBR engine. As a
result, the group decided to evaluate the feasibility of optimizing the gearbox to achieve the maximum
possible performance output that will meet the Dalhousie Formula SAE teams requirements.
3.1.7 Shiftdrum/Shiftforks
The purpose of the shift drum and forks is to engage the required gear for transmission. A shift lever in a
car operates a ratchet mechanism that converts the force motion of the shift lever into a rotary motion.
This rotary motion turns the shift drum that consists of three tracks machined around its circumference.
The shift forks are attached to these tracks and as the drum rotates, the forks running in the tracks are
moved to select the required gear. Figure 10 and Figure 11 shows the existing stock Honda Shift drum
and Shift forks respectively.

Figure 10: Stock Honda Shift Drum
13

Figure 11: Stock Honda Shift Forks
The shift drum and forks are directly related to the gearbox and therefore any changes in the gearbox
would require some modification to the shift drum and forks. The modifications of these components
are decided once changes have been made to the gearbox transmission.
3.2 Evaluated Concepts

As mentioned previously, due to the technical constraints and the structure complexity of both the
clutch and camshafts the modification methods of these components were not further pursued.
However, modifications to the crankshaft, flywheel, connecting rods, gearbox and shift drums/forks
components were assessed. This section will evaluate this assessment and address the feasibility of
modifying each of the proposed components.
3.2.1 Crankshaft
The counter weights in a crankshaft are engineered in such a way to smooth out engine vibrations at low
RPM, but when accelerating the weight causes the engine to require more energy from combustion to
bring the crank up to the desired RPM as combustion forces are fighting against the rotational inertia of
the crank. Consequently this slows down the acceleration of the engine. In a racing application, such as
Formula SAE, it is desirable to remove as much as possible from the crankshaft in order to increase the
engines acceleration and throttle response.
However, the primary concern when reducing the crankshaft mass is introducing unwanted vibration.
Most engine vibration is a result of unbalanced forces inside the engine [1], which could arise with
inaccurate machining of rotating components.
14

The primary modification is to remove weight from the counter weights attached to the crankshaft. This
would require proper machining and balancing processes which are addressed in Section 4.1.
The advantages and disadvantages of modifying the crank are as follows:
Advantages:
Reduced rotating mass (Quicker throttle response, acceleration, torque)

Relatively easy machining for turning down the counterweights
Disadvantages:
May introduce unwanted vibration

Requires careful counterweight balancing

3.2.2 Flywheel
In the Formula SAE competition the engine runs between 6,000-14,000 RPM where the mass of the
flywheel is essentially insignificant. The rotating moment of inertia is only used to keep the engine
running smoothly (minimal vibration) at low speeds (<6,000 RPM). Therefore reducing the rotating
mass of the flywheel will help improve the acceleration of engine as less moment of inertia is required
to run the flywheel at high speeds. The method of reducing the rotating mass of the flywheel can only
be accomplished by minimizing the diameter of the flywheel. However it should be noted that the
flywheel would also have to be dynamically balanced to eliminate unwanted vibration caused by
machining inconsistencies.
The advantages and disadvantages of modifying the flywheel are as follows:
Advantages:
Reduced rotating mass (Quicker throttle response, acceleration, torque)

Relatively easy machining
Disadvantages:
Can cause unsteady engine vibration at low RPM

Machining could damage the stator magnet

15

3.2.3 Connecting Rods

As mentioned earlier, lightweight connecting rods are ideal for racing application. The mass of the
connecting rods could be reduced by drilling holes or thinning the edges of the shafts, however the
connecting rods have fluctuating forces acting on them (compression stroke vs. intake stroke), making a
modification to them produces a very high risk of failure. Therefore this type of modification was not
feasible. A safer way to reduce the mass of the connecting rods would be by replacing them with
titanium connecting rods, which can be purchased from performance shops. Titanium rods are used
where high strength and lightweight characteristics are desired.
The advantages and disadvantages of using titanium connecting rods are as follows:
Advantages:
Reduced reciprocating mass (increased throttle response, acceleration and torque)
Increased resistance to thermal stresses
Disadvantages:
Very expensive
Lower fatigue life than stock steel connecting rods

3.2.4 Gearbox
The transmission in the CBR engine was designed by Honda engineers with the everyday motorcyclist
in mind, those who use their motorcycle in both highway and city conditions. This design utilizes a very
broad range of the engines power band to create a relaxed ride and steady acceleration. As such, the
gear ratios (Table 1) have been selected to compliment the torque output of the engine in the mid-
range, to achieve flexibility when riding on the road. An engine tuned to ride on the track will produce
peak power within a narrower band at higher RPMs. If the gear ratios are not adjusted, the engine RPM
will drop below the ideal power band at each gear change, and the car will not accelerate as fast as it
could.

16

Table 1: Gear Ratios of stock Honda Gearbox
Gear
1
2
3
4
5
6
Total Reduction
Ratio
2.666:1
1.938:1 } 27.3%
1.611:1 } 16.8%
1.409:1 } 12.5%
1.260:1 } 10.6%
1.166:1 } 7.5%
56.3%
Note: The primary reduction from crank to transmission = 2.111

A number of different methods were evaluated to optimize the gearing in the CBR engine to best suit
the needs of Dalhousie Formula SAEs car.
3.2.4.1
Removing Gears 5 and 6
One solution to optimizing the gearbox is to remove unnecessary gears. In general, the stock CBR gears
5 and 6 are never used in the FSAE competition because there is physically not enough track for the
vehicle to ever reach the speeds these gears are typically used for. The typical courses in FSAE are tight
corner autocross-style races that focus more on acceleration and handling than on top speed. Even with
straight-a-ways on the course it is rare to ever exceed third gear. For this reason it is unnecessary to
have the fifth and sixth gears.
The simplest way the EIG can optimize the gearbox is to remove gears that are not needed. The major
advantage of removing these gears is that it would also create a reduction in rotating mass, which
should lead to quicker throttle response.
Therefore the advantages of removing gears are as follows:
Advantages:
Reduced rotating mass (Quicker throttle response, acceleration)

Minimal modifications.
Disadvantages
Does not optimize gear ratios
17

3.2.4.2
Removing Gears 1, 5 and 6
Similarly to Section 3.2.4.1, the benefits of removing three gears (1, 5 and 6) were investigated.
Removing first gear, as well as fifth and sixth, was based on the idea that first gear provides more torque
than is needed when starting the car from a dead stop. Currently in full-throttle acceleration, the wheels
loose traction until the car has reached a sufficient speed that the friction from the tires can overcome
the torque output from the engine. This loss in traction, or slip, leads to a slower acceleration of the car
as speed is lost to the slipping wheels. Ideally when accelerating at full throttle, the tires will turn at a
rate close to the slipping point but never go past it. Launch control modules utilize an engines Engine
Control Unit (ECU) to control tire slip. Launch control works by keeping the engine output at an optimal
point by cutting back engine ignition. However, the current Dalhousie vehicle does not have such a
system and therefore, the high-torque first gear will be assessed for removal.
The advantage of removing the first, fifth and sixth gear would come at the FSAE competition where the
Dalhousie Formula SAE car must complete a 75m acceleration event from a dead start. Theoretically,
with less slip, and less rotating mass it is possible for the car to do a faster acceleration run. Without
having first gear it would require the car to be started in second gear, which outputs less torque and
theoretically should allow for less tire slip.
The advantages of removing gears one, five and six, are as follows:
Advantages:
Reduced rotating mass (Quicker throttle response, acceleration).

Possibility for better acceleration time due to reduced tire slip.
Disadvantages
Does not optimize gear ratios.

Removal of first gear might lead to increase driving time below target power band at 10,000
RPM.

3.2.4.3 Moving Neutral position before first gear
The current gearbox has neutral between first and second gear. To shift into neutral it requires the user
to carefully feel for neutral by half shifting between one and two. Although rare, the driver can
accidentally shift into neutral, thinking that they are in second. As neutral is between first and second,
18

the shift time from one to two is slightly longer when compared with other gear changes (on the order
of milliseconds).
Therefore a solution to faster acceleration time (and drivability) is to move neutral below first gear,
eliminating the chance of accidentally shifting into neutral and longer shift times. This design change
would require a modification of the shift drum so that the new gearing arrangement can be
accomplished.
The advantages of changing the gearing arrangement are as follows:
Advantages:
Reduced risk of accidentally shifting into neutral when racing.

Quicker shifting time between first and second gear.
Disadvantages:
Risk of accidentally shifting down into neutral if driver loses track of which gear they are
switching from
Must have proper shift drum modification so there is not binding during gear change.

3.2.4.4 Replacing with Nova Racing Transmission
Nova Racing is an international company that offers a performance CBR 600RR transmission intended
for racing purposes [5]. Their transmission still incorporates six gears, but with shorter ratios in between
the gears. Due to these shorter ratios it allows for quicker car acceleration and operation within a
narrower power band. The idea behind their transmission matches the design goals of the Engine
Internals Group for optimizing the gear ratios for racing conditions. The Nova Racing gear set also has
additional holes drilled on gear faces for additional weight savings. This falls in line with the design
teams goal to also reduce rotating mass within the engine.
Like the stock Honda gear set the Nova Racing set includes six gears. The sixth gear in the Nova set
would theoretically bring the top speed of the car up to 140km/h. This speed is much faster than what
would be needed in competition so it is not useful to include in the gearbox. Therefore the sixth and
fifth gears would be taken out and replaced with a spacer.
The downside to using the Nova Racing transmission is that it has been optimized for a Honda CBR
600RR race bike with a different final drive ratio than what is used in the Formula SAE car. The final drive
19

includes the size of the rear sprocket, connected to the transmission sprocket by a chain, and the rear
wheels. The rear drive set up impacts the torque that the vehicle outputs at the wheels, and the vehicles
top speed. If the Nova Racing set is used in the car its shorter gear ratios will limit the top speed. Figure
12 and Table 2 illustrate some performance parameters of the Nova Racing gear set.
350
Output Torque vs. Vehicle Speed
Output Torque (Nm)
300
Gear 1
250
Gear 2
200
Gear 3
Gear 4
150
Gear 5
100
Gear 6
50
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140
Vehicle Speed (km/h)
Figure 12: Output Torque vs. vehicle speed with Nova Racing Transmission
Table 2: Gear Ratio Comparison to Nova Racing Transmission
Gear
1
2
3
4
5
6
Overall Reduction
Stock Ratio
2.666:1
1.938:1
1.611:1
1.409:1
1.260:1
1.166:1
2.286:1
% Drop

27.3%
16.8%
12.5%
10.6%
7.5%
56.3%
Nova Racing
2.666:1
2.133:1
1.833:1
1.631:1
1.500:1
1.409:1
1.888:1
% Drop

20.0%
14.0%
11.0%
8.0%
6.0%
47.0%
Advantages:
Optimized gear ratio for racing in Formula SAE

Lighter weight gears will help to reduce engine rotating mass

20

Disadvantages:
The Nova Racing gear set is expensive at a price of $800
Shift drum must be modified to work with eliminated fifth and sixth gears

3.2.4.5 Combing Gears stock Honda and Nova Racing Transmission
In another alternative method to completely changing out the stock transmission for the Nova Racing
set, a combination of gears from each set can be used. This would allow for more variation in the
gearing to try and select the best possible gear ratios out of 12 gears rather than six. The possible issue
the teams could run into here is mixing these different gear ratios may not allow the gears to mesh
properly. Table 3 shows an example of an optimized gear set that has a combination of stock and Nova
racing gear ratios.
Table 3: Stock Honda and Nova Racing combined gear set
Gear #
1
2
3
4
5
6
Gear Type
Stock
Nova Racing
Nova Racing
Stock
Stock
Stock
Gear Ratio
2.666
2.133
1.833
1.611
1.409
1.260
Advantages:
Optimized gear ratio for Formula SAE Competition

Less expensive than buying full Nova Racing Gear set
Disadvantages
Heavier than full Nova Racing Gear set

Risk of gears not meshing properly

3.2.5 Shift drums and Shift forks

As mentioned earlier, gear optimization would require some modifications to the shift drum and shift
forks. For instance, if the fifth and sixth gear were to be removed, the shift fork that was used to engage
the fifth and sixth gear will be removed, as it is not used anymore. This will minimize the unnecessary
mass of the shift fork in the transmission. Similarly, the shift drum would have to be modified so that the
shifter cannot travel beyond the fourth gear.
21

3.3 Selected Concepts

Once all the components have been evaluated and their advantages/disadvantages were known, a
comparison matrix was used to help identify the best options based off clearly defined criteria. This
section would present the method of selection that was used to identify the most effective design
concepts for the project.
The main evaluation criteria are:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Safety
Reliability
Performance
Cost
Drivability
For the two methods of optimizing engine internals, i.e. reducing single rotating mass components and
gearbox adjustments, separate comparison matrices were created. A weight value for each criterion was
assigned to describe the importance of that criterion with respect to the projects requirements. The
two methods are largely independent of each other and therefore can be analyzed separately.
3.3.1 Rotating Mass Reduction Comparison

The advantages of each rotation mass reduction solution are evaluated below in Table 4.
Table 4: Rotating mass reduction comparison

Safety
Reliability
Performance
Cost
Drivability

Safety
Reliability
Performance
Cost
Drivability

Weight
10
10
7
4
5
Totals

Weight
10
10
7
4
5
Totals
Crankshaft
Flywheel
Assigned Weighted Assigned Weighted
7
70
6
60
5
50
7
70
9
63
6
42
6
24
7
28
6
30
5
25

237

225
Ti Connecting Rods
Assigned Weighted
6
60
6
60
8
56
1
4
3
15

195
22
As the table indicates, the most effective components to modify were the crankshaft and flywheel.
Although the titanium connecting rods can potentially improve the performance of the engine, due to
its high cost and the teams budget constraints, the EIG decided not to modify the stock connecting
rods.
3.3.2 Gearbox alternatives comparison

The advantages of each Gearbox alternative are evaluated below in Table 5.
Table 5: Gearbox Alternative Comparison
Remove Gears 5 & 6
Remove Gears 1, 5 & 6
Moving Neutral

Safety
Reliability
Performance
Cost
Drivability

Safety
Reliability
Performance
Cost
Drivability

Weight
10
9
7
3
6
Totals

Weight
10
9
7
3
6
Totals
Assigned
Weighted Assigned Weighted
Assigned
6
60
6
60
7
8
72
8
72
5
7
49
4
28
6
7
21
6
18
5
3
18
3
18
6

220

196

Nova Racing
Stock Honda & Nova Hybrid
Assigned
Weighted Assigned
Weighted
10
100
5
50
8
72
4
36
8
56
10
70
3
9
4
12
8
48
8
48

285

216
Weighted
70
45
42
15
36
208
From Table 5 the clear winner was to replace the stock Honda gears completely with the Nova racing
gear set, while eliminating the fifth and sixth gear.
4 Detailed Design
The following sections describe the methods that were used to modify each of the selected
components. These components are the crankshaft, flywheel, gearbox and shift drum/forks.
23

4.1
Crankshaft
The goal of the crankshaft design is to reduce as much rotating mass in the counterweights as possible,
while still meeting the base design requirements of the crank. These requirements are:
The crank must remain structurally intact and withstand the torque delivered from the pistons.

The counter weights must be balanced so that during operation there is no imbalance causing
engine vibration and severely reduced engine performance.

The internal oil ports within the crankshaft must remain intact so that oil can be delivered to the
journal bearings on the crank.
These requirements were taken into consideration during the modifying process of the crankshaft. The
modifying process consists of two steps involving machining and balancing.
4.1.1 Machining
The stock radius of the counter weights is 61.13 mm from the central axis of the crankshaft. This
dimension was turned down to 47.6 mm using a lathe at Dalhousie University.
4.1.2 Balancing
Once the crankshaft was turned down, it was necessary to balance the counterweights to minimize
vibrations. The counterweights that are in the crankshaft are designed to balance the inertial forces in
the engine. This is why it is important to ensure that the crankshaft is balanced properly to avoid
vibration.
The balancing operation was performed by Nova Automotive in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia. This was free
of charge as a sponsorship deal with Dalhousie Formula SAE. The company is very experienced in
grinding and balancing crankshafts. The balancing technique was fairly simple. Mass from each
counterweight was removed by drilling holes one at a time while the crankshaft was on a balancer. The
balancer, shown in Figure 13, spins the crank to determine the points where material should be
removed. The balancer indexes the crank and shows the exact position and weight to be subtracted.
24

Figure 13: Crankshaft balancing set up.
4.1.3 CAD Drawings

Dimensioned CAD drawings of the original crankshaft and the modified crankshaft were designed and
can be found in Appendix E.
4.2
Flywheel
The goal of the flywheel design is to reduce as much rotating mass as possible, while still meeting the
base design requirements of the flywheel. These requirements are:
The flywheel must remain functioning and structurally intact.
The mass of the flywheel should be reduced to a point where it will not allow for excessive
engine vibration.
These requirements were taken into consideration during the modifying process of the flywheel. Similar
to the crankshaft, the modifying process of the flywheel consists of two main steps - machining and
balancing.
4.2.1 Machining
The mass of the stock flywheel is approximately 1.17 kg or 7% of the internal rotating mass. During the
machining process, the outer diameter of the flywheel was reduced by an amount of 1.524 mm (0.060)
using a lathe. The flywheel was only reduced by this amount in order to ensure that the magnetic rim on
the inner diameter of the flywheel remains structurally intact and charges the battery.
4.2.2 Balancing
After machining was done, the flywheel was also dynamically balanced to eliminate unwanted vibration
caused by machining inconsistencies. The balancing was also done by Nova Automotive in Dartmouth.
25

The flywheel was balanced using the same dynamic balancing machine as previously mentioned, while
attached to the modified crank.
4.2.3 CAD Drawings

Dimensioned CAD drawings of the original flywheel and the modified flywheel were designed and can be
found in Appendix E.
4.3
Gearbox
The design of the gearbox transmission was to replace the existing stock gear set with the Nova Racing
gear set. The Nova Racing gear set was assembled and the necessary adjustments to the shift drum and
shift forks were made.
4.3.1 Assembly
The new Nova Racing gears were assembled into the main shaft while removing gears five and six. The
meshing gears on the countershaft remained the same but counter gears five and six were removed.
Figure # shows the new Nova Racing gear set after assembly:

Figure 14: Nova Racing gear set assembly.
26

4.3.2 Shift drum & fork adjustments

Since gears five and six are not used anymore in the car it was necessary to ensure that the shifting
mechanism from gear four and beyond is blocked. This was done by removing the fourth indexing tooth
on the shift drum. The tooth is grabbed by the ratchet shifting mechanism that engages the shift drum,
rotating it to fifth gear. Additionally, to reduce the mass of the gearbox even further, the center shift
fork used to engage fifth and sixth, was removed. Aluminum spacers, shown by the red arrows in Figure
15, were inserted to replace the middle shift fork so that the gears in the box will stay in their correct
position.
Figure 15: Gearbox with aluminum spacers indicated
4.3.3 CAD Drawings

Dimensioned CAD drawings of the new gear transmission assembly were designed and can be found in
Appendix E.
4.4 Complete CAD Assembly

A CAD assembly of all the modified components in the engine was designed and can be found in
Appendix E.
5 Testing and Verification

In order to verify the modifications to the engine components would satisfy the EIG requirements, they
were subject to two types of testing plans Static and dynamic. Sections 5.1 describes the production
27

plan including the project budget and testing schedule for the project duration. Sections 5.2 and 5.3
detail the static and dynamic testing performed.
5.1 Production Plan

To properly test the engine components an accurate production plan was determined including all
expenses over the project duration. The expenses, planned and actual schedule are presented in this
section.
5.1.1 Expenses
The Dalhousie Formula SAE Team has been very generous as the primary sponsor for this project. The
funds for this project come from the research and development budget for the team and all results from
this project will belong to the team in the hopes that any data collected will be useful when designing
future iterations of the car.
Working with the Dalhousie Formula SAE Team has allowed us to use some of their resources, discounts
and connections to further the project. It can be seen in the summary of expenses in Table 6 that several
line items were of no cost to the project because they were donated to the team. Locally, Nova
Automotive balanced the crankshaft for free, having a value of $172.50. Royal Purple has been a long
time sponsor for the team providing free oil, and through the course of this project approximately 9
quarts of oil were used at $14.49 each.
Table 6: Summary of Expenses
Expense:
CBR600 RR Engine
Nova Racing CBR600 Racing Gearbox
Engine Bolts
Royal Purple Oil
Nova Automotive Crankshaft Balancing
Testing Safety Supplies
Total
Unit Price:
$ 1,060.51
$ 918.50
$ 7.82
$ 14.49
$ 172.50
$ 149.68
Quantity:
1
1
16
9
1
1
Total Value:
$ 1,060.51
$ 918.50
$ 125.12
$ 130.41
$ 172.50
$ 149.68
$ 2,556.72
Total Paid:
$ 1,060.51
$ 918.50
$ 125.12
$ -
$ -
$ 149.68
$ 2,253.81

The design team chose to use new oil every time the engine was rebuilt to avoid contamination. Luckily
the oil was donated by Royal Purple, but the school is only given a limited supply each year, so any oil
used for this project, takes away from the total oil supply of the Dalhousie Formula SAE Team.
28

Two of the biggest expenses for this project were the engine and racing gearbox, they account for 87.8%
of the total budget. The cost of the engine was non-negotiable and was actually purchased during
summer 2013 and given to the design team in September 2013. Purchasing the gearbox was an
investment for the team, the gearbox can be used on any engine regardless of any other modifications
and the design team did select the least expensive racing gearbox available. It is important to note that
both of these expenses are items that belong to the team and can be used in future years regardless of
any results from this project.
5.1.2 Planned Schedule

A big factor for a well-planned schedule is weather; the acceleration testing can only be done outside in
clear conditions, with dry pavement and excellent visibility. The team also requires a clear stretch of
about 100m to run the acceleration testing safely. Unfortunately there are few places in the Halifax
Regional Municipality that meet this requirement and are willing to work with the team. For these
reasons acceleration is one of the latest scheduled tests.
For the complete Gantt chart, please see Appendix A: Planned Schedule on page 54.
5.1.3 Actual Schedule

Since the majority of machining was done in the Machine Shop at Dalhousie University, almost all
machining was completed before the winter term began in January. The team was also very fortunate
that their gearbox coming from the UK arrived before the end of December, 2013. As a result, the EIG
started three weeks ahead of schedule. This ended up being crucial after some failed testing attempts.
The team was forced to rebuild the engine a total of three times this term, each time due to a different
complication. See the Dynamic Testing section on page 32 for more details on these complications.
Some partial horsepower and torque data was collected during each testing session, but without
running the car on the road neither throttle response nor acceleration could be collected. For this
reason, they currently show as blank on the Gantt chart, found in Appendix B: Actual Schedule on page
55.
29

5.2 Static Testing

For static testing, the engine internals were weighed and the effects on rotational mass before and after
modifications were analyzed. In addition, a vibration analysis was preformed on the crankshaft as it is
the heaviest and fastest rotating component in the engine. The EIG wanted to ensure no additional
vibration effects were introduced with the modifications.
5.2.1 Weight
The weight component of static testing encompasses much more than just the measured weight in
kilograms of each modified component. All the modified components in the engine are designed to
rotate at high speeds, specifically the crankshaft and flywheel, for this reason their moment of inertia is
crucial. The larger an objects moment of inertia, the more resistance it will have to changes in angular
velocity [4]. Decreasing the moment of inertia by strategically removing mass in these high-speed
components will yield a larger increase in engine output power than simply removing static mass. For
the purpose of this project, the moment of inertia is theoretically calculated.
The modifications can also be compared by their equivalent mass, this is a term used often in industry to
equate the difference between a static objects weight on a piece of machinery and a dynamic objects
weight on a piece of machinery. The equivalent mass is directly proportional to the mass of the object
and is theoretically calculated.
Lastly, the power requirement directly relates to the amount power required to drive an object of a
certain mass and geometry. Reducing this power increases the power available to go to the wheels. This
value is theoretically calculated and is directly proportional to the moment of inertia.
5.2.2 Crankshaft Vibration Analysis

The crankshaft torsional and resonant vibration tests are described in the following sections.
5.2.2.1
Torsional Vibration
There are two forms of vibration that can manifest within the crankshaft. The first being torsional
vibration. Torsional vibration is an expected response when operating a crankshaft at high RPMs. The
vibration creates a positive and negative deflection in the crankshaft; positive deflection matching the
30

primary direction of rotation for the crankshaft. The negative deflection is between 6-8% of the positive
deflection [3]. The oscillation between the negative and positive deflection is the vibration from the
crankshaft that can be detected by the driver. See Figure 16 for a detailed diagram of the expected
deflection on the crankshaft.
Figure 16 Crankshaft torsional vibration diagram (Huneycutt, 2013)
The negative deflection is too small in magnitude to ever cause failure within the system as it is directly
correlated to the positive deflection, hence any failure in the part will be from an excessive moment on
the crankshaft. The planned modifications to the crankshaft will not directly affect the strength of the
member, since the mass being removed is only coming from the lobes of the crankshaft. It is also
important to note that the crankshaft was designed to withstand torque from a stock street motorcycle,
which operates at 1.3 times the horsepower that the Formula SAE restricted engine is capable of
producing.
Lastly this research concluded that as the engine is optimized, the increased torque acting on the
crankshaft (which will have a reduced over all weight) will produce a proportional increase in vibration.
This will only effect how smooth the low-end (low RPM) drive is, which is not a primary concern when
designing a car for a high-speed racing environment.
Collecting data for torsional vibration also presents some complications, primarily is the safety concern
that the engine must be running while collecting data. Secondly, it is the hardware complications, most
sensors are magnetic, but the engine block is made of aluminum. The sensors could be attached with
wax, but it would melt as soon as the engine warmed up. Lastly, the sensors have a limited safe
temperature range that they can operate within; therefore special sensors would be required. For this
31

reason, the team decided not to collect experimental data for torsional vibration, but rely firmly after
extensive research that it will not be the source of any malfunction within the engine.
5.2.2.2
Resonant Vibration
The resonant frequencies of high-speed parts are always an area of concern. There are several published
reports on the vibration of crankshafts within gasoline internal combustion engines; all agree that the
lobes are the primary location that vibration will occur. The measured deflection from vibration
increases when approaching the furthest edges of the lobes. As the lobes are the locations where the
design team plans to remove mass, it will in-fact reduce vibration.
It is important to evaluate the primary resonant frequency of the modified and unmodified crankshaft
with respect to the operating frequency of the car. This can be done theoretically using SolidWorks and
also experimentally following the procedure for an industry standard bump test. These results are
compared to ensure validity and then compared against the operating frequency of the car, which can
be calculated using the max engine rpm.
5.3 Dynamic Testing

In order to measure the performance gains of the engine, many different dynamic tests were
performed. These tests included dynamometer testing and road testing of the car.
5.3.1 Horsepower & Torque

To test and verify the requirements of increased torque and horsepower, the engine was tested using an
engine dynamometer (hereafter referred to as a dyno). The Dalhousie Mechanical Engineering
Department has a PowerDyne Engine Dynamometer that was used to execute these tests and relay
engine performance data. Using this eddy current dyno, the data acquisition (DAQ) system returns
engine torque and horsepower at a given engine speed. The majority of the engine tuning and testing
was done in second gear because with this gear ratio the dyno is the most accurate for the given engine
speeds. Testing using the dyno was supervised by a faculty member at all times.
32

5.3.2 Throttle Response

The throttle response was measured using the vehicles onboard engine control unit (ECU), a MoTeC
m400, to trace engine speed (in RPM) versus the throttle position (% open). This data acquisition was
done by performing a step input on throttle position, and comparing the delay-time until the RPM
peaked. The data collected from the ECU was analyzed using MoTeC i2 software where graphs can be
easily made and interpreted. This test was done in first gear because the gear ratios were the same for
first on both gear sets causing the same inertia from the output sprocket.
5.3.3 Acceleration
The only method that the acceleration of the Formula SAE car can be accurately tested is by physically
test-driving the car. Test-driving will verify the requirement of improving the vehicles acceleration,
which will improve the teams standings during the SAE competitions Acceleration, Autocross and
Endurance events. Test-driving involves towing the vehicle to a pre-approved parking lot, setting up a
coned-off course and running the events as accurately as possible to replicate the competition. Just as
for the dyno tests, faculty supervision is required. In addition, team members with fire extinguishers are
placed accordingly around the event area.
The test relies completely on the time of the event and comparing to the baseline time. The time
difference between the stock engine and the modified engine determines the improvement in
acceleration. During these tests, the ECU data is also recording engine RPM and throttle position. This
can be used to analyse the test farther and verify throttle response in a different situation.

33

6 Results
The following sections detail the testing results and the results of the project requirements.
6.1 Testing
As previously mentioned, the testing was split up in two sections static and dynamic testing. Section
6.1.1 details the static tests where Section 6.1.2 details the dynamic tests.
6.1.1 Static Testing

The static testing involves the weight analysis and the vibration analysis respectively.
6.1.1.1
Weight
The results of the crankshaft, flywheel and gearbox modification, as outlined in Section 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3
respectively, are shown below in Table 7, Table 8 and Table 9. A description of the criteria and how
these results were collected can be found in Section 5.2.1.
Table 7: Crankshaft Weight Analysis
Criteria:
Mass
MOI
Equivalent Mass
Rotational Power Requirement
Crankshaft
Before
After
Units:
Modification: Modification:
6705
5852
kg
0.092
0.078
kgm
33.3
29.06
kg
2.2
1.9866
hp
Percent
Change:
12%
15%
12%
15%
Flywheel
Before
After
Units:
1168
1108
kg
0.039
0.033
kgm
9.5
9.0
kg
0.90
0.75
hp
Percent
Change:
5%
16%
5%
16%
Table 8: Flywheel Weight Analysis
Criteria:
Mass
MOI
Equivalent Mass
Rotational Power Requirement
34

Table 9: Gearbox Weight Analysis
Criteria:
Mass
Gearbox
Before
After
Units:
3013
2620 kg
Percent
Change:
13%
Note that the gearbox is not analyzed for moment of inertia, equivalent mass or rotational power
requirement. The majority of the gearbox operates at a much lower speed than the components inside
the engine due to the gear ratio. The significance of replacing the gearbox is for drivability, not increased
power. For this reason these values are not of great significance to this project and were not measured.
These results can be combined to show the overall decrease in mass of all modified components. This is
shown below in Figure 17.

Figure 17: Decreases in Rotating Mass
6.1.1.2
Vibration
Vibration data was collected both experimentally and theoretically, the primary resonant frequencies
can be seen in Table 10.

35

Table 10: Experimental and Theoretical Crankshaft Resonant Frequencies
Frequency:
Experimental Resonant Frequency Trial 1:
Theoretical Resonant Frequency:
Unmodified
Crankshaft:
2126
2124
2121
2131
4412
Modified
Percent
Unit:
Crankshaft:
Increase:
2494
Hz
15%
2333
Hz
9%
2484
Hz
15%
2491
Hz
14%
4678
Hz
6%
The first observation is that regardless of whether the data was experimental or theoretical, all data
indicates that there is an increase in the resonant frequency between the unmodified and modified
crankshaft. This can be confirmed mathematically, by reducing the crankshaft and flywheel to two
masses connected by a spring. Knowing their moment of inertias before and after modification it can be
determined that the resonant frequency should increase by approximately 8%. This is fairly close to the
experimental and theoretical data collected.
The next observation is that the experimental data yields significantly smaller resonant frequencies than
the theoretical data. The theoretical data was collected doing simulations on SolidWorks, when
constraining the ends of the crankshaft the program uses infinitely stiff bearings, this is unrealistic and
explains why the frequency is significantly higher. For this reason, the average experimental resonant
frequency is taken to be the most accurate representation for the crankshaft. This yields a resonant
frequency of 2125 Hz for the unmodified crankshaft and 2451 Hz for the modified crankshaft.
These frequencies only have significance when compared to the observed vibration within the engine at
different operating rpms. It is crucial that the resonant frequencies remain significantly higher than any
possible observed vibration. The relationship between operating RPM and observed vibration can be
seen in Table 11.

36

Table 11: Observed Vibration and Operating rpm
Engine Speed
(rpm):
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
Vibration (Hz):
67
133
200
267
333
400
467
Since the revolution limiter inside the engine is set to 14,000 RPM, the highest possible observed
vibration is 467 Hz. This is only 22% of the unmodified crankshaft resonant frequency, and only 19% of
the modified crankshaft resonant frequency.
6.1.2 Dynamic Testing

All of the dynamic testing was successfully completed to get the baseline numbers, however after the
modifications the amount of testing was limited for various reasons outlined in this section.
6.1.2.1
Horsepower & Torque
There were many complications with the dyno setup that hindered our capabilities to record all the
necessary data. One of these complications involved drive chain alignment being very difficult to
maintain because the engine was tested in the car and had to be indirectly coupled to the dyno. This
was the reason the baseline horsepower and torque curves (Figure 18 & Figure 19) ended at lower
engine speed than anticipated. This was not a concern because from experience the peak values for
both parameters were obtained and the trend would not change at higher engine speeds. After
modifications to this engine, the dyno results were also cut short due to broken valves. The raw
horsepower and torque curves are shown from both of these dyno sessions in Figure 18 and Figure 19
respectively.
37

Design Project Horsepower

80.0
70.0
Power (HP)
60.0
50.0
40.0
#1 Baseline Nov 24/13

#1 Drop Valve Mar 5/14
30.0
20.0
10.0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
Engine Speed (RPM)

Figure 18 Power curve with raw data for engine #1
38

Design Project Torque

55.0

Torque (Nm)
50.0
45.0
40.0
35.0
30.0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
Engine Speed (RPM)

Figure 19 Torque curve with raw data for engine #1
The valves are located to the top end of the engine which was unaffected by the modifications the EIG
made. The cause of the issue was an assembly oversight; when the crankshaft and flywheel were
installed in the lower end of the engine there was some interference with the piston and a set of open
exhaust valves. In order to ensure the crankshaft can rotate properly, the camshaft covers were
loosened off slightly to close the open valves. As the engine block was moved around for other
assemblies, the covers were loosened and the shim, which sits in the cap and is covered by the lifter
(shown in Figure 20), was dislodged from its seat in the cap. This shim being out of place caused the
valve clearance between the camshaft and lifters to be lower than required specifications, leaving the
effected valves to be slightly open. At high engine speeds the open valves broke and caused damage to
the head and pistons.
39

Cap Shim Lifter

Figure 20 Exploded view of valve assembly
The higher end of the power and torque curves were interpolated using the data that was collected
before the valve broke. These expected results were made by taking the average percent increase of
the modified engine over the baseline engine for the 11 points before the issue and applying that
average increase to the baseline for the remainder of the curve. This gave a 4.3% increase in power and
a 3.2% increase in torque as shown in Figure 21 and Figure 22 respectively.

80.0
70.0
Power (HP)
60.0
50.0
40.0

#1 Engine Expected
30.0
20.0
10.0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
Engine Speed (RPM)

Figure 21 Power curve with interpolated results from engine #1
40


60.0

Torque (Nm)
55.0
#1 Engine Expected
50.0
45.0
40.0
35.0
30.0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
Engine Speed (RPM)

Figure 22 Torque curve with interpolated results for engine #1
With the issues encountered on this engine, the valve seats were heavily damaged in the head causing
the engine to be unusable. However, all of the modified components were unaffected so an alternative
testing procedure for these components was practiced. Using a combination of three broken engines
from over the years of Dalhousie Formula SAE, a second test engine was assembled with all of the
modified components included.
Although it is difficult to confidently compare the results from this engine to the baseline, which was a
different engine, due to timing and other constraints this was seen to be the only feasible option.
With so much unknown about the second test engine, it was tested with a trim on first. A trim is an
adjustment to the overall ignition advance for the entire ignition map on the engines ECU. The trim
essentially acts as a safety factor by changing the time of spark with respect to the four-stroke cycle to
ensure no cylinder knock is present which could lead to catastrophic failure. With the trim on an engine
it is not using the full capabilities of compressing the fuel and producing the most power. After the
entire range of engine speeds are run through with the trim on and the results recorded the trim is then
41

slowly removed and tested throughout the engine speeds for issues. The engine is then run again with
the trim off to get more accurate power and torque numbers. The drive chain misalignment issue came
up again during the early engine speeds which was temporarily resolved and the testing was resumed at
7000 RPM to ensure the peak was reached before another chain related problem could be encountered.
When the engine speed reached 11000 RPM a loss of oil pressure was recorded and unfortunately a
crankshaft journal bearing was starved of oil causing it to disintegrate. The power and torque results
from these two dyno tests are shown in Figure 23 and Figure 24 respectively.

80.0
70.0
Power (HP)
60.0
50.0
40.0
#2 Engine w/trim Mar 19/14
30.0
#2 Burnt Journal March 21/14
20.0
10.0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
Engine Speed (RPM)

Figure 23 Power curve with raw data for engine #2
42


60.0
Torque (Nm)
55.0

#2 Engine w/trim Mar 19/14
50.0
45.0
40.0
35.0
30.0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
Engine Speed (RPM)

Figure 24 Torque curve with raw data for engine #2
The issue of the journal bearing was encountered on the connecting rod of cylinder #3, for some
unknown reason it was not getting oil for an extended period of time and the journal completely
disintegrated, damaging the connecting rod and crankshaft. The oil is pumped to the main crankshaft
journals where the oil actually travels through a channel in the crankshaft out to the connecting rod
journal that was burnt. There was no modification in any way to this oil channel however it could have
had some debris in it causing the journal to be starved of oil or another issue. Again, there were no
concluding results as to the cause of this issue, however there was an oil analysis done in the attempt to
resolve what happened. This analysis can be found in Section 6.2.
Using both results from the second engine the expected results from the engine speeds that were not
tested without the trim on were calculated. These expected results were calculated by taking the
average percent difference between the trimmed results and the untrimmed results for the 11 points
that were measured both times and applying that average to the trimmed graph to calculate the
expected results for the points that were not measured without the trim on. The power and torque
results from this calculation are shown in Figure 25 and Figure 26 respectively. Although they are
43

different engines it is important to note that in Figure 26 the peak torque value is a 3% increase from
the baseline and that is a measured point from the dyno.

80.0
70.0
Power (HP)
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
#2 Engine Expected
10.0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
Engine Speed (RPM)

Figure 25 Power curve with interpolated results for engine #2
44


60.0
55.0

Torque (Nm)
#2 Engine Expected
50.0
45.0
40.0
35.0
30.0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
Engine Speed (RPM)

Figure 26 Torque curve with interpolated results for engine #2
Taking the power results and expected results from both engines and comparing them, as shown in
Figure 27, it cannot be confidently concluded that the modifications made to the engine did affect
power - further testing is required. The trend of the power curve did see an overall increase throughout
the different engine speeds for both engines; the peaks however did not consistently increase in both
cases.
45


80.0
70.0
Power (HP)
60.0
50.0

40.0

30.0
#1 Engine Expected
20.0
10.0
2000
#2 Engine Expected
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
Engine Speed (RPM)

Figure 27 Final power curves for both engines
The torque results and expected results are shown in Figure 28 and are more conclusive. In both
engines the overall trend was an increase in torque and both peak torque values increased from the
baseline number. It can confidently be said that the modifications made to the engine did affect the
output torque of the engine with a 3% increase.
46


60.0

Torque (Nm)
55.0
50.0

#1 Engine Expected
#2 Engine Expected
45.0
40.0
35.0
30.0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
Engine Speed (RPM)

Figure 28 Final torque curves for both engines
6.1.2.2
Throttle Response
The throttle response test was carried out for the baseline engine and was found to be 0.427 seconds
from a step input until the engine accelerated to maximum engine speed. Due to the sequence of
testing the first and second engine, these engines were not available for performing the throttle
response test. With another engine rebuild that happened late in the term, a third engine was
assembled using parts from many different broken engines. This engine has the modified flywheel and
gearbox in it however the modified crankshaft could not be used due to its condition at the time of
assembly. The crankshaft used in its place is a stock crankshaft out of another engine with some small
imperfections that is a concern moving forward until further testing can be done. The throttle response
test was set back due to unforeseen electrical issues with the car itself and is currently incomplete.

47

6.1.2.3
Acceleration
Similar to the throttle response test, the acceleration test was carried out for the baseline engine and
found to be 4.797 seconds for a 75 meter run. Due to the sequence of the testing the acceleration test
was not completed for the first or second engine. The third engine with the modified flywheel and
gearbox is available for testing however due to the weather cannot be completed, as the only space
available for the test is outside.
6.2 Oil Analysis

Following the destruction of the journal bearing in the second engine, there was no apparent reason
why this occurred. For this reason, the EIG brought three oil samples to GasTOPS Ltd. In Burnside, Nova
Scotia to perform an analysis in hopes of determining a cause. One clean sample, one from the dropped
valve engine and one from the disintegrated journal engine were all analyzed. The following tests
describe the sample techniques used and their subsequent results.
6.2.1 Varian FTIR

The first test performed on the oil samples was the Varian FTIR, or Fourier Transform Infrared
Spectroscopy. The chart shown in Figure 29 is an overlay between the clean and contaminated oil
samples from the failed engines. The FTIR tests the quality of the oil in hopes to determine if the oil was
degraded or if there are certain contaminants. Working with the technicians at GasTOPS Ltd. the key
areas to observe are those indicated on the chart Water vapour, carbon dioxide, hydro-carbons and
alcohols. Unfortunately, there are no discrepancies between the two charts and therefore this test was
inconclusive.

48

Figure 29: Oil Spectroscopy of the Varian FTIR tests with Royal Purple Oil.
6.2.2 Seta Flash Tester

The second test involved the Seta Flash Tester, as shown in Figure 30. This is a qualitative test as
opposed to a quantitative one like the FTIR test. The flash tester heats up a sample of oil to a certain
temperature above a suspicious compound. The EIG was concerned with fuel in the oil and heated the
oil sample just below the oils flashpoint (204 oC) so that any fuel in the sample would have collected
near the top of the ceramic cylinder (Flash point of 91-octane is ~13 oC). An open flame is then
introduced to the sample in hopes the fuel fumes ignite, thus confirming fuel in the sample.
Unfortunately, this test was also inconclusive for the oil samples tested.
Figure 30: Seta Flash Tester from GasTOPS Ltd.
49

6.2.3 Spectrometer
As a final attempt to determine any information about the disintegrated journal, the oil samples were
run through a spectrometer to determine the metals and other compounds within the oil. Figure 31
presents the spectrometer analysis of particles less than 10 m is size. It reports the concentrations as
parts per million (ppm). As expected there is a large increase in iron (Fe) and aluminum (Al) as they are
common elements in an aluminum and steel engine. There were increases in sodium (Na) that were
suspicious but were deemed contaminates as a result of sampling. In addition the silicon (Si) spikes are
indicative of dirty oil that the oil filter did not catch. Unfortunately, neither the GasTOPS technicians nor
any EIG members were able to conclude anything from this test.
Figure 31: Oil Spectrometer results reading in ppm and particle size of <10m.
6.3 Requirements
Throughout the course of this project the design team was able to meet a select number of the initial set
out requirements. For various reasons not all of these requirements were met and completed in time for
the project due date. The primary reason for the outstanding requirements was a series of engine
failures, resulting in the team being unable to fully test the performance parameters. The failures were
all a direct result of improper assembly of an engine and an undetermined lack of lubrication of a journal
bearing of another engine. Both cases the engine failed to a point where it would no longer function.
50

6.3.1 Completed
While not all requirements were met, the design team was still able to meet the requirements set out
that did not require extended run-time of a rebuilt engine.
Of the main requirements, the EIG completed the following:
Shall decrease the overall combined mass of the crankshaft, flywheel and gearbox by 5% from a
baseline number of 10.886 kilograms.
The crankshaft and flywheel shall be balanced to 0.5 g to minimize vibration.

For the first requirement, the combined mass of the crankshaft, flywheel and gearbox was successfully
reduced by 5%. The final weight reduction achieved was 11.99%, bringing the total weight of the system
to 9.580 kilograms.
The second requirement to have the crankshaft and flywheel balanced to 0.5 g was also accomplished.
After removing the specified amount of material from each piece, they were then brought to Nova
Automotive in Dartmouth to be balanced. Nova successfully balanced both the crankshaft and flywheel
to within 0.1 g.
6.3.2 Incomplete
The incomplete requirements for this project were ones that required a fully functioning engine to be
running for an extended period of time in order to obtain the appropriate data. After performing three
engine rebuilds, the design team was unable to produce a functioning engine that could be tested to
meet the performance requirements sought out for the engine. After extensive investigation the reason
for the engine failures was not due to the engineered modifications of the engine components, but
rather the inexperience of the team to successfully rebuild an engine.
The list of outstanding requirements is:
Shall increase the throttle response of the engine by 10% from a baseline number of 0.427s
seconds. (Incomplete)
Should increase the peak output torque of the engine by 5% from a baseline number of 53.7
Nm. (Incomplete)

51

Should increase the peak horsepower of the engine by 5% from a baseline number of 70.5 hp.
(Incomplete)
Shall decrease a 75 m acceleration time by 5% from a baseline of 4.797 seconds. (Incomplete)

As stated, the reason the team could not claim to have met these requirements is because two rebuilt
engines with the modified components were unable to be tested due to other component failures. In
the testing plan, the throttle response and acceleration were intended to be tested on the engine after
engine tuning was completed. Since the project was never able to complete the tuning stage before the
engine failure, throttle response and vehicle acceleration were never tested.
7 Discussion
The overall conclusions and recommendations for the EIG design project are found in Section 7.1 and
Section 7.2 respectfully.
7.1 Conclusions
From the results of the Dalhousie Formula SAE Engine Internals Group design project, there has not
been any conclusive evidence that reduced weight inside a Honda CBR 600 RR can increase engine
performance. The reason for the lack of conclusive evidence is a result of poor engine rebuilding
practice and a starved journal bearing which the investigation is still on-going. There was a 3% increase
on torque but that did not meet the EIGs requirement of 5%. However a significant amount of mass was
reduced in the engine. The EIG wanted 5% off the original 10.886 kg of all components but obtained
11.99% weight savings translating to 1.306 kg.
7.2 Recommendations
It is recommended that the EIG continue to pursue this project especially to determine the lubrication
failure on crankshaft journal #3. Provided that the modifications did not affect this, a new lightweight
crankshaft should be made and tested with strict testing criteria. Furthermore, the lightweight and high
performance gearbox should be tested at any time, as it is not dependent on a modified crankshaft or
flywheel. The gearbox alone has potential to increase ranking for the Dalhousie Formula SAE at
competition due to its effect on vehicle performance.
52

8 References
1. Bell, A. Graham. Four-stroke Performance Tuning. Newbury Park, CA: Haynes North
America, 1998. Print.
2. Chabot, L. and Oliver Yates. Noise and Vibration Optimisation of a Gasoline Engine. n.d.
21 November 2013.
3. Huneycutt, Jeff. Circle Track - Crankshaft Tech. n.d.
http://www.circletrack.com/techarticles/crankshaft_tech_terminology/. 27 November
4. Idris, Momin Muhammed Zia Muhammed and Dr. H. Vinayak. "Optimization of
Crankshaft using Strength Analysis." International Journal of Engineering Research and
Applications (2013): 252-258. Vol 3 Issue 3.2013.
5. Nova Racing Transmissions. Advertisement. Honda CBR600 RR Race Gearbox. N.p., 2012.
Web. 02 Nov. 2013. <http://www.novaracing.co.uk/honda-cbr600rr-03-06.htm>.
6. SAE International. 2014 Formula SAE Rules. Tech. N.p.: n.p., 2013. Online.

53

Appendix A: Planned Schedule
Planned Schedule
ACTIVITY
Dec
Week 1
Jan
2
Feb
6
Mar
Apr
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Class Deliverables
Detailed Design Report
Pre-Fabrication Design Review
Design Poster
Final Presentation
Requirements Verification Report
Logbooks
Web Page
Peer Assessment
Faculty Advisor Assessment
Final Design Report
Part Arrival and Manufacturing
Crankshaft
Turn down trial crank
Balance trial crank
Turn down final crank
Balance Final crank
Install in engine
Shifting
Modify shiftdrum
Transmission
Turn down dog gears
Assemble transmission
Fly Wheel
Turn down fly wheel
Assemble in engine
Testing
Weight
Crankshaft
Fly Wheel
Transmission
Acceleration
Throttle Response
Output Torque
Horsepower

54
Appendix B: Actual Schedule
Actual Schedule
ACTIVITY
Dec
Week 1
Jan
2
Feb
6
Mar
Apr
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Class Deliverables
Detailed Design Report
Pre-Fabrication Design Review
Design Poster
Final Presentation
Requirements Verification Report
Logbooks
Web Page
Peer Assessment
Faculty Advisor Assessment
Final Design Report
Part Arrival and Manufacturing
Crankshaft
Turn down trial crank
Balance trial crank
Turn down final crank
Balance Final crank
Install in engine
Shifting
Modify shiftdrum
Transmission
Turn down dog gears
Assemble transmission
Fly Wheel
Turn down fly wheel
Assemble in engine
First Engine Assembly
Second Engine Assembly
Third Engine Assembly
Testing
Weight
Crankshaft
Fly Wheel
Transmission
Acceleration
Throttle Response
Output Torque
Horsepower

55
Appendix C: Sample Modal Data

From Point 3 on the crankshaft, with the cover off. The first graph is the unmodified crankshaft, the
second graph is the modified crankshaft, and the third graph is a comparison.
56

Appendix D: EIG Full Requirements

Done Component
Type
Requirement
Torque
Performance
5% increase from baseline
Horsepower
Performance
Throttle response
Performance
Acceleration time
Performance
Internal rotating mass
Weight
5% decrease overall from baseline
Crankshaft
Balancing
Shall be balanced within 0.5 g for vibration
Flywheel
Balancing
Shall be balanced within 0.5 g for vibration
Crankshaft
Dimensions
Shall fit inside the stock crankcase
Crankshaft/Clutch
Dimensions
0 tolerance on gear misalignment
Transmission shafts
Dimensions
Maintain OEM dimensions for installation
Transmission shafts
Dimensions
0 tolerance on gear misalignment
Top Speed
Performance
Choose desired top speed for gear ratios
Shift Drum
Functionality
Should not allow shift into removed gears
Torque
Measurement
Obtain baseline and final values
Horsepower
Measurement
Throttle response
Measurement
Acceleration time
Measurement
Crankshaft
Modeling
A detailed CAD model should be made
Flywheel
Modeling
Transmission shafts
Modeling
57

Appendix E: CAD Drawings

58

383.25
R56.00
ISO VIEW SCALE 1:4
98.30
Dalhousie University
PROJECT:
FSAE Engine Interals Design

SURFACE
1.6
Pm
DRAWING:
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED:

DWN BY:
UNITS: mm
UNITS: in
ANGLES
MATERIAL:
X.XX +/- .10
X.XXX +/- .005
X.X +/- .20
X.XX +/- .01 +/- 0.5
X
+/- .50
X.X +/- .02
DATE: January
CBR 600 RR Crankshaft
B00#:
SIZE
Kirk Fraser
CAST STEEL
6, 2013 UNITS: mm
534262
QTY:
SCALE:
1
1:3
REV
SHEET 1 OF 2
R44.45
383.25
ISO VIEW SCALE 1:4
PROJECT:

SURFACE
1.6
Pm
DRAWING: CBR 600 RR Crankshaft Modified

DWN BY:
UNITS: mm
UNITS: in
ANGLES
MATERIAL:
X.XX +/- .10
X.XXX +/- .005
X.X +/- .20
X.XX +/- .01 +/- 0.5
X
+/- .50
X.X +/- .02
DATE: Jan
B00#:
SIZE
Kirk Fraser
CAST STEEL
11, 2014
UNITS: mm
534262
QTY:
SCALE:
1
1:3
REV
SHEET 1 OF 1
126.22
PROJECT:
46.94
Engine Internals Design

SURFACE
1.6
Pm
Flywheel
DRAWING:

DWN BY:
UNITS: mm
UNITS: in
ANGLES
MATERIAL:
X.XX +/- .10
X.XXX +/- .005
X.X +/- .20
X.XX +/- .01 +/- 0.5
X
+/- .50
X.X +/- .02
DATE: Nov
B00#:
SIZE
Gregory Fitzpatrick
Steel
22, 2013
UNITS: mm
QTY:
SCALE:
614102
1
1:2
REV
SHEET 1 OF 1
46.94
123.17
PROJECT:
Engine Internals Design

SURFACE
1.6
Pm
Modified Flywheel
DRAWING:

DWN BY:
UNITS: mm
UNITS: in
ANGLES
MATERIAL:
X.XX +/- .10
X.XXX +/- .005
X.X +/- .20
X.XX +/- .01 +/- 0.5
X
+/- .50
X.X +/- .02
DATE: Dec
B00#:
SIZE
Gregory Fitzpatrick
Steel
1, 2013
UNITS: mm
QTY:
SCALE:
614102
1
1:2
REV
SHEET 1 OF 1
19.60
252
PROJECT:
FSAE Engine Gearbox
DRAWING:

DWN BY:
UNITS: in
ANGLES
SURFACE UNITS: mm
MATERIAL:
X.XX +/- .10
X.XXX +/- .005
1.6
Pm
X.X +/- .20
X.XX +/- .01 +/- 0.5
X
+/- .50
X.X +/- .02
DATE: 20th
Main Shaft Assembly
B00#:
Saad Mohamed
Steel
Nov 2013 UNITS: mm
564759
SIZE
QTY:
01
SCALE:
1:2
REV
SHEET 1 OF 1
19.60
252
PROJECT:

SURFACE
1.6
Pm
DRAWING: Nova Racing MainShaft Assembly B00#:

DWN BY:
Saad Mohamed
UNITS: mm
UNITS: in
ANGLES
MATERIAL:
Steel
X.XX +/- .10
X.XXX +/- .005
X.X +/- .20
X.XX +/- .01 +/- 0.5
X
+/- .50
X.X +/- .02
DATE: 10/01/2014 UNITS: mm
564759
SIZE
QTY:
SCALE:
1:2
REV
SHEET 1 OF 1
24
250
PROJECT:
FSAE Engine Gearbox

SURFACE
1.6
Pm
DRAWING:

DWN BY:
UNITS: mm
UNITS: in
ANGLES
MATERIAL:
X.XX +/- .10
X.XXX +/- .005
X.X +/- .20
X.XX +/- .01 +/- 0.5
X
+/- .50
X.X +/- .02
DATE: 20th
Counter Shaft Assembly
Saad Mohamed
Steel
Nov 2013 UNITS: mm
B00#:
564759
SIZE
QTY:
SCALE:
01
1:2
REV
SHEET 1 OF 1
24
250
PROJECT:
DRAWING:
Nova Counter Shaft Assembly

DWN BY: Saad Mohamed
UNITS: in
ANGLES
SURFACE UNITS: mm
MATERIAL: Steel
X.XX +/- .10
X.XXX +/- .005
1.6
Pm
X.X +/- .20
X.XX +/- .01 +/- 0.5
X
+/- .50
X.X +/- .02
B00#:
564759
SIZE
QTY:
SCALE:
1
1:2
REV
SHEET 1 OF 1
PROJECT:

SURFACE
1.6
Pm
DRAWING:
B00#: B00564759
Engine Assembly

DWN BY:
Saad Mohamed
UNITS: mm
UNITS: in
ANGLES
MATERIAL: Steel
X.XX +/- .10
X.XXX +/- .005
X.X +/- .20
X.XX +/- .01 +/- 0.5
X
+/- .50
X.X +/- .02
SIZE
QTY:
01
SCALE:
1:2
REV
SHEET 1 OF 1

Winter Design Report: MECH 4010 & 4015 Design Project II

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Winter Design Report: MECH 4010 & 4015 Design Project II

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MECH

4010 & 4015

Winter Design Report

FSAE Engine Modifications

Submitted April 8th, 2014

5.3 Dynamic Testing ........................................................................................................................... 32

Figure 20 Exploded view of valve assembly ........................................................................................... 40

1.1 Team Background

1.2 Technical Background

3.1 Considered Concepts

Figure 3: CBR 600RR Crankshaft

3.1.4 Connecting Rods

3.2 Evaluated Concepts

Reduced rotating mass (Quicker throttle response, acceleration, torque)

May introduce unwanted vibration

Reduced rotating mass (Quicker throttle response, acceleration, torque)

Can cause unsteady engine vibration at low RPM

3.2.3 Connecting Rods

Table 1: Gear Ratios of stock Honda Gearbox

Note: The primary reduction from crank to transmission = 2.111

Removing Gears 5 and 6

Reduced rotating mass (Quicker throttle response, acceleration)

Does not optimize gear ratios

Removing Gears 1, 5 and 6

Reduced rotating mass (Quicker throttle response, acceleration).

Does not optimize gear ratios.

Reduced risk of accidentally shifting into neutral when racing.

Output Torque vs. Vehicle Speed

Output Torque (Nm)

Vehicle Speed (km/h)

Optimized gear ratio for racing in Formula SAE

Optimized gear ratio for Formula SAE Competition

Heavier than full Nova Racing Gear set

3.2.5 Shift drums and Shift forks

3.3 Selected Concepts

3.3.1 Rotating Mass Reduction Comparison

3.3.2 Gearbox alternatives comparison

Remove Gears 5 & 6

Remove Gears 1, 5 & 6

Figure 13: Crankshaft balancing set up.

4.1.3 CAD Drawings

The flywheel must remain functioning and structurally intact.

4.2.3 CAD Drawings

4.3.2 Shift drum & fork adjustments

Figure 15: Gearbox with aluminum spacers indicated

4.3.3 CAD Drawings

4.4 Complete CAD Assembly

5 Testing and Verification

5.1 Production Plan

5.1.2 Planned Schedule

5.1.3 Actual Schedule

5.2 Static Testing

5.2.2 Crankshaft Vibration Analysis

Figure 16 Crankshaft torsional vibration diagram (Huneycutt, 2013)

5.3 Dynamic Testing

5.3.1 Horsepower & Torque

5.3.2 Throttle Response

6.1.1 Static Testing

Table 8: Flywheel Weight Analysis

Table 9: Gearbox Weight Analysis

Table 10: Experimental and Theoretical Crankshaft Resonant Frequencies

Table 11: Observed Vibration and Operating rpm

6.1.2 Dynamic Testing