Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “CFR engine”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2023

Development of a Supercharged Octane Number and a Supercharged Octane Index

Gasoline knock resistance is characterized by the Research and Motor Octane Number (RON and MON), which are rated on the CFR octane rating engine at naturally aspirated conditions. However, modern automotive downsized boosted spark ignition (SI) engines generally operate at higher cylinder pressures and lower temperatures relative to the RON and MON tests. Using the naturally aspirated RON and MON ratings, the octane index (OI) characterizes the knock resistance of gasolines under boosted operation by linearly extrapolating into boosted “beyond RON” conditions via RON, MON, and a linear regression K factor. Using OI solely based on naturally aspirated RON and MON tests to extrapolate into boosted conditions can lead to significant errors in predicting boosted knock resistance between gasolines due to non-linear changes in autoignition and knocking characteristics with increasing pressure conditions. Here, a new “Supercharged Octane Number” (SON) method was developed on the CFR engine at increased intake pressures, which improved the correlation to boosted knock-limited automotive SI engine data over RON for several surrogate fuels and gasolines, including five “Co-Optima” RON 98 fuels and an E10 regular grade gasoline. Furthermore, the conventional OI was extended to a newly introduced Supercharged Octane Index (OI S ) based on SON and RON, which significantly improved the correlation to fuel knock resistance measurements from modern boosted SI engine knock-limited spark advance tests. This demonstrated the first proof of concept of a SON and OI S to better characterize a fuel’s knock resistance in modern boosted SI engines.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2025

Effects of Critical Compression Ratio on Rating Gasoline Knock Propensity

It is common practice in the automotive industry to explore the knock limits of fuels on an engine by a comparison of the knock limited spark advance (KLSA) at threshold knock intensity. However, the knock propensity of gasolines can be rated by changing one of three metrics on a variable compression ratio Cooperative Fuels Research (CFR) octane rating engine while holding the other two variables constant: knock intensity, spark timing, and critical compression ratio. The operational differences between the standard research octane number (RON) rating and modern engine operation have been explored in three parts. The first part focused on the effects of lambda and knock characterization. The second part studied the effects of spark timing. This third part explores the knock ratings of several gasolines by comparing the critical compression ratios at constant combustion phasing and knock intensity. The threshold knock intensity was based on the standard octane rating D1 pickup or by maximum amplitude of pressure oscillations (MAPO) measured by a piezoelectric cylinder pressure transducer. Several Fuels for Advanced Combustion Engines (FACE) gasolines, primary reference fuels (PRFs), and toluene standardization fuels (TSFs) were tested on a CFR octane rating engine with advanced data acquisition equipment and a piezoelectric cylinder pressure transducer. These tests deviated from the ASTM D2699 standard octane rating procedure. For each test fuel, the CFR engine was operated at stoichiometry at a constant combustion phasing (CA50) and the compression ratio was modified until a threshold knock intensity was realized. It was found that the chemical composition of the fuels affected the relationship of critical compression ratios between the D1 knockmeter and piezoelectric pressure transducer knock intensity thresholds, as well as the measured combustion maximum pressure rise rate and spark timing setting for constant CA50. For highly aromatic fuels tested at a constant MAPO knock intensity threshold, it was found that the maximum pressure rise rate was two to three times higher than that of highly paraffinic fuels with similar RON and the spark advance was several crank angle degrees less for constant combustion phasing.

Kolodziej, Christopher P↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Call To Action To Engage The Community To Meet The Challenges That Must Be Tackled To Make Electrified Aircraft Propulsion Real

Technology risk reduction is essential, as it is necessary to demonstrate the potential of Electrified Aircraft Propulsion (EAP). However, more is needed for implementation. The industry is leading EAP by developing a diverse community of novel vehicles from short-haul, small, urban-focused electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) to regional air mobility (RAM) and hybrid-electric, single-aisle transport category airplanes. There are a variety of novel EAP technologies for each of these novel vehicles. And the industry is not only looking at novel technology to advance the state of the art. Instead, the industry is looking to certify these novel aircraft through their regulatory authorities, such as the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the European Union Aviation Safety Authority (EASA), Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), and Brazil’s Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (National Civil Aviation Agency, ANAC), as well as other regulatory authorities. The NASA Electrified Powertrain Flight Demonstration (EPFD) project has partnered with two industry partners to advance integrated MW-class powertrain system technology demonstration that includes an assessment of their regulatory and standards gaps in their technology. The EPFD has conducted a generic regulatory gap analysis of hybrid electric engines that aligns with the industry partners’ efforts. The EPFD regulations and standards team is integrated into the industry standards community. The international industry standards community is wrestling with critical key challenges to certification. While some certification elements are proprietary, several technology elements cut across company propriety in aircraft engines (US 14 CFR Part 33 and EASA CS-E, regulations that only reflect reciprocating and turbine engines). The approach that several of these regulatory authorities have taken is to collaborate to address their challenges. The Certification Management Team (CMT) consists of the EASA, FAA, TCCA, and ANAC, and they have begun to address common questions, such as the Loss of Power Control (LOPC) for electric engines. They have reached out to the standards community to seek answers. The industry standards development organizations (SDO) have also looked ahead to address current regulations and standards gaps. The ASTM has built key committees in its ASTM F44 General Aviation Committee and F39 Aircraft Systems Committee. The SAE has established the E-40 Electric Propulsion and AE-10 High Voltage committees.

Standards↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Call To Action To Engage The Community To Meet The Challenges That Must Be Tackled To Make Electrified Aircraft Propulsion Real

Technology risk reduction is essential, as it is necessary to demonstrate the potential of Electrified Aircraft Propulsion (EAP). However, more is needed for implementation. The industry is leading EAP by developing a diverse community of novel vehicles from short-haul, small, urban-focused electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) to regional air mobility (RAM) and hybrid-electric, single-aisle transport category airplanes. There are a variety of novel EAP technologies for each of these novel vehicles. And the industry is not only looking at novel technology to advance the state of the art. Instead, the industry is looking to certify these novel aircraft through their regulatory authorities, such as the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the European Union Aviation Safety Authority (EASA), Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), and Brazil’s Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (National Civil Aviation Agency, ANAC), as well as other regulatory authorities. The NASA Electrified Powertrain Flight Demonstration (EPFD) project has partnered with two industry partners to advance integrated MW-class powertrain system technology demonstration that includes an assessment of their regulatory and standards gaps in their technology. The EPFD has conducted a generic regulatory gap analysis of hybrid electric engines that aligns with the industry partners’ efforts. The EPFD regulations and standards team is integrated into the industry standards community. The international industry standards community is wrestling with critical key challenges to certification. While some certification elements are proprietary, several technology elements cut across company propriety in aircraft engines (US 14 CFR Part 33 and EASA CS-E, regulations that only reflect reciprocating and turbine engines). The approach that several of these regulatory authorities have taken is to collaborate to address their challenges. The Certification Management Team (CMT) consists of the EASA, FAA, TCCA, and ANAC, and they have begun to address common questions, such as the Loss of Power Control (LOPC) for electric engines. They have reached out to the standards community to seek answers. The industry standards development organizations (SDO) have also looked ahead to address current regulations and standards gaps. The ASTM has built key committees in its ASTM F44 General Aviation Committee and F39 Aircraft Systems Committee. The SAE has established the E-40 Electric Propulsion and AE-10 High Voltage committees.

Standards↗
NASA NTRS1946

Effect of Fuel Composition, Engine Operating Variables, and Spark-Plug Type and Condition on Preignition-Limited Performance of an R-2800 Cylinder

The preignition characteristics of the R-2800 cylinder, as effected by fuel consumption, engine operating variables, and spark plug type and condition, were evaluated. The effects on preignition-limited performance of various percentages of aromatics (benzene, toluene, cumene, xylene) in a base fuel of triptane were investigated. Two paraffins (triptane and S + 6.0 ml TEL/gal) and two refinery blends (28-R and 33-R) were preignition rated. The effect of changes in the following engine operating variables on preignition limit was determined: inlet-air temperature, rear spark plug gasket temperature, engine speed, spark advance, tappet clearance, and oil consumption. Preignition limits of the R-2800 cylinder using Champion C34S and C35S and AC-LS86, LS87, and LS88 spark plugs were established and the effect of spark plug deterioration was investigated. No definite trends in preignition-limited indicated mean effective pressure were indicated for aromatics as a class when increased percentages of different aromatics were added to a base fuel of triptane. Three types of fuel (aromatics, paraffins, and refinery blends) showed a preignition range for this cylinder from 65 to 104 percent when based on the performance of S plus 6.0 ml TEL per gallon as 100 percent. The R-2800 cylinder is therefore relatively insensitive to fuel composition when compared to a CFR F-4 engine, which had a pre-ignition range from 72 to 100 percent for the same fuels. Six engine operating variables were investigated with the following results: preignition-limited indicated mean effective pressure decreased, with increases in engine speed, rear spark plug gasket temperature, inlet-air temperature, and spark advance beyond 20 F B.T.C. and was unaffected by rate of oil consumption or by tappet clearance. Spark plugs were rated over a range of preignition-limited indicated mean effective pressure from 200 to 390 pounds per square inch at a fuel-air ratio of 0.07 in the following order of increased resistance to preignition: AC-LS97, AC-LS88, Champion C358, AC-LS86, and Champion C34S. Spark plug deterioration in the form of cracks in the porcelain had been broken away from the center electrode and were retained in the spark plug cavity, the preignition limit was decreased as much as 57 percent. When the broken pieces had been removed, the preignition limit increased from that of the undamaged porcelain as the weight of removed porcelain was increased.

Pfender, John F.↗
DOE OSTI2024

Software Quality Assurance Plan ANSYS LSDYNA Version 2023R1

ANSYS Inc. develops and markets engineering simulation software and services used in the aerospace, automotive, manufacturing, electronics, biomedical, energy, defense, and many other industries. ANSYS is dedicated to engineering simulation and is the world’s leading software provider. ANSYS was founded in 1970 and is headquartered in Canonsburg, Pennsylvania. ANSYS provides an engineering analysis tool combining structural, thermal, computational fluid dynamics, acoustic and electromagnetic simulation capabilities. ANSYS LS-DYNA is the most used explicit simulation program capable of simulating the response of materials to short periods of severe loading. Its many elements, contact formulations, material models, and other controls can be used to simulate complex models with control over all the details of the problem. ANSYS LS-DYNA has a vast array of capabilities to simulate extreme deformation problems using its explicit solver. Engineers can tackle simulations involving material failure and look at how the failure progresses through a part or through a system. Models with large amounts of parts or surfaces interacting with each other are also easily handled, and the interactions and load passing between complex behaviors are modeled accurately. Using computers with higher numbers of CPU cores can drastically reduce solution times. In addition, many consulting firms and hundreds of universities use ANSYS for analysis, research, and educational purposes. ANSYS is recognized worldwide as one of the most widely used and capable programs of its type. ANSYS has successfully passed over 100 customer quality system audits against American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) NQA-1 and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, since the company was founded, over 60 of which have been since 1997. ANSYS has successfully passed over 100 International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 9001 assessments. ANSYS design analysis software is the first created within a quality system with ISO 9001 certification, which is the internationally accepted quality standard. Product development, testing, maintenance, and support processes also meet the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC’s) quality requirements, as they have for nearly four decades. ANSYS staff perform more than 60,000 software verification tests before releasing each new product. ASME NQA-1-2012 (Subpart 2.7 is specific to software) is the industry- and NRC-accepted approach (consensus standard) for meeting 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, requirements.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
NASA NTRS2019

Certification Rules and Standards Review

This report characterizes the certification practices for electric propulsion systems by modeling changes to current engine and propeller certification practices (14 CFR 23, 33 and 35 and means of compliance in standards developed by ASTM Committee F39 and F44). Industry technology paths are varied, so this report focuses on insights from the NASA X-57 Maxwell Distributed Electric Propulsion flight demonstrator system technology project. There are 122 sections of the regulation reviewed, where 28 needed tailoring or revision. A second report will examine the regulations to the X-57 system development products. A final report will describe a general regulatory gaps method for new vehicle concepts.

Schlickenmaier, Herbert↗