My new build...may not clear the cowl....
05-27-2009, 07:20 PM
#1
My new build...may not clear the cowl.... I thought my 395 stroker was bad ***, but look at this bad boy!
Installing the "thin shell" crank bearings:
Dropping in the Crank (should I use a double roller chain?):
Pistons and Head Studs:
Assembled. Damn, how am I getting that in the SS?
Maximum power: 108,920 hp at 102 rpm
Maximum torque: 5,608,312 lb/ft at 102rpm
Real info:
The Wartsila-Sulzer RTA96-C turbocharged two-stroke diesel engine is the most powerful and most efficient prime-mover in the world today. The Aioi Works of Japan 's Diesel United, Ltd built the first engines and is where some of these pictures were taken. It is available in 6 through 14 cylinder versions, all are inline engines. These engines were designed primarily for very large container ships. Ship owners like a single engine/single propeller design and the new generation of larger container ships needed a bigger engine to propel them. The cylinder bore is just under 38" and the stroke is just over 98". Each cylinder displaces 111,143 cubic inches (1820 liters) and produces 7780 horsepower. Total displacement comes out to 1,556,002 cubic inches (25,480 liters) for the fourteen cylinder version.
Some facts on the 14 cylinder version:
Total engine weight: 2300 tons (The crankshaft alone weighs 300 tons.)
<img width="5" border="0" height="1">Length: 89 feet
<img width="5" border="0" height="1">Height: 44 feet
<img width="5" border="0" height="1">Maximum power: 108,920 hp at 102 rpm
<img width="5" border="0" height="1">Maximum torque: 5,608,312 lb/ft at 102rpm
Fuel consumption at maximum power is 0.278 lbs per hp per hour (Brake Specific Fuel Consumption). Fuel consumption at maximum economy is 0.260 lbs/hp/hour. At maximum economy the engine exceeds 50% thermal efficiency. That is, more than 50% of the energy in the fuel in converted to motion.
For comparison, most automotive and small aircraft engines have BSFC figures in the 0.40-0.60 lbs/hp/hr range and 25-30% thermal efficiency range.
Even at its most efficient power setting, the big 14 consumes 1,660 gallons of heavy fuel oil per hour.
A cross section of the RTA96C:
The internals of this engine are a bit different than most automotive engines.
The top of the connecting rod is not attached directly to the piston. The top of the connecting rod attaches to a "crosshead" which rides in guide channels. A long piston rod then connects the crosshead to the piston.
I assume this is done so the the sideways forces produced by the connecting rod are absorbed by the crosshead and not by the piston. Those sideways forces are what makes the cylinders in an auto engine get oval-shaped over time.
Crank & rod journals are 38" in diameter and 16" wide
Installing the "thin shell" crank bearings:
Dropping in the Crank (should I use a double roller chain?):
Pistons and Head Studs:
Assembled. Damn, how am I getting that in the SS?
Maximum power: 108,920 hp at 102 rpm
Maximum torque: 5,608,312 lb/ft at 102rpm
Real info:
The Wartsila-Sulzer RTA96-C turbocharged two-stroke diesel engine is the most powerful and most efficient prime-mover in the world today. The Aioi Works of Japan 's Diesel United, Ltd built the first engines and is where some of these pictures were taken. It is available in 6 through 14 cylinder versions, all are inline engines. These engines were designed primarily for very large container ships. Ship owners like a single engine/single propeller design and the new generation of larger container ships needed a bigger engine to propel them. The cylinder bore is just under 38" and the stroke is just over 98". Each cylinder displaces 111,143 cubic inches (1820 liters) and produces 7780 horsepower. Total displacement comes out to 1,556,002 cubic inches (25,480 liters) for the fourteen cylinder version.
Some facts on the 14 cylinder version:
<img width="5" border="0" height="1">Length: 89 feet
<img width="5" border="0" height="1">Height: 44 feet
<img width="5" border="0" height="1">Maximum power: 108,920 hp at 102 rpm
<img width="5" border="0" height="1">Maximum torque: 5,608,312 lb/ft at 102rpm
Fuel consumption at maximum power is 0.278 lbs per hp per hour (Brake Specific Fuel Consumption). Fuel consumption at maximum economy is 0.260 lbs/hp/hour. At maximum economy the engine exceeds 50% thermal efficiency. That is, more than 50% of the energy in the fuel in converted to motion.
For comparison, most automotive and small aircraft engines have BSFC figures in the 0.40-0.60 lbs/hp/hr range and 25-30% thermal efficiency range.
Even at its most efficient power setting, the big 14 consumes 1,660 gallons of heavy fuel oil per hour.
A cross section of the RTA96C:
The internals of this engine are a bit different than most automotive engines.
The top of the connecting rod is not attached directly to the piston. The top of the connecting rod attaches to a "crosshead" which rides in guide channels. A long piston rod then connects the crosshead to the piston.
I assume this is done so the the sideways forces produced by the connecting rod are absorbed by the crosshead and not by the piston. Those sideways forces are what makes the cylinders in an auto engine get oval-shaped over time.
Crank & rod journals are 38" in diameter and 16" wide
05-27-2009, 08:29 PM
#3
TECH Addict
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Orange County
Posts: 2,543
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
omg. Maximum torque: 5,608,312 lb/ft at 102rpm, that boggles the mind a little bit.
let's say the engine could rev up to 6000 like an f-body, the torque would be 329,900,705.9
let's say the engine could rev up to 6000 like an f-body, the torque would be 329,900,705.9
05-27-2009, 08:56 PM
#5
11 Second Club
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: corona
Posts: 568
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
that is amazing, but what i relly wanna see is the turbo and the rocker arms, i mean ****, the flywheel is bigger then the truck, i bet a rocker arm is as big as a smart car lol
