The Design of Formula SAE

Fuel and Lubrication Systems

Leonardus Simonis

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the degree of

BACHELOR OF APPLIED SCIENCE

Supervisor: Prof. M. Bussmann

Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering

University of Toronto

March 2008
Abstract

The purpose of this thesis is to design and produce a fuel system and a
lubrication system for the 2008 University of Toronto Formula SAE race car.
The main goal of the project is to design and manufacture upgraded and
reliable fuel and lubrication systems. The 2008 systems, based on previous
fabrications will seek to accomplish four new key design implementations:
1. Location and Size of the Fuel Tank
2. Oil Pan with Integrated Pickups
3. Rapid Prototyped Intake Runners
4. Engine Mapping for Fuel Economy
Included in this report is a literature overview which provides the motivation
and the necessary background for the understanding of how a fuel and
lubrication system works. Also, a background of Formula SAE and the
competition is covered. The key design features will be discussed in greater
detail. The design and manufacturing, results, evaluation, and
recommendations will be covered for each design feature.
This thesis is not primarily based on theory. The designs and concepts are
derived through experience, inference, and need as well. However, each
design objective has a clear benefit that can be characterized qualitatively or
quantitatively. This thesis should be of significant use for future Formula
SAE members in stimulating design concepts.
 i

Acknowledgements

I have several people I would like to thank for helping me and guiding me
with my thesis. First, I would like to thank my parents, sister, and Jessica
for all their support and encouragement throughout my university career. I
would also like to thank the University of Toronto and the Department of
Mechanical Engineering for allowing me to learn and mature as a student at
this great institution. As well, I would like to thank them for their support of
the Formula SAE Race team, which allowed me to gain valuable design,
manufacturing, hands-on, and testing skills. I would like to thank Professor
Markus Bussmann for his supervision during my thesis. I would like to
thank Axis Prototype for their generous sponsorship of the rapid prototyped
intake system. Finally, I would like to thank all my Formula SAE
teammates over the years for their support and teamwork. The project could
not have been done without them.
 ii

Table of Contents

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...................................................................................................................... I
LIST OF SYMBOLS ..............................................................................................................................III
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................... IV
LIST OF TABLES....................................................................................................................................V
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 1
2 LITERATURE REVIEW................................................................................................................ 2
2.1 MOTIVATION ................................................................................................................................. 2
2.2 BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................................. 3
2.2.1 Formula SAE and Competition................................................................................. 3
2.2.2 Rules .................................................................................................................................... 5
2.2.3 Automotive Fuel and Lubrication Systems .......................................................... 8
2.2.3.1 Fuel System ............................................................................................................................... 8
2.2.3.2 Oil System ................................................................................................................................ 11

3 FUEL AND LUBRICATION SYSTEMS KEY DESIGN FEATURES........................... 14

3.1 LOCATION AND SIZE OF FUEL TANK ................................................................................. 14
3.1.1 Design and Manufacturing ...................................................................................... 14
3.1.2 Evaluation ....................................................................................................................... 18
3.2 OIL PAN WITH INTEGRATED PICKUPS .............................................................................. 19
3.2.1 Design and Manufacturing ...................................................................................... 19
3.2.2 Evaluation ....................................................................................................................... 27
3.3 RAPID PROTOTYPED INTAKE RUNNERS .............................................................................. 29
3.3.1 Design and Manufacturing ...................................................................................... 29
3.3.2 Evaluation....................................................................................................................... 36
3.4 ENGINE MAPPING FOR FUEL ECONOMY .............................................................................. 39
3.4.1 Experimental Design and Testing.......................................................................... 39
3.4.2 Evaluation ....................................................................................................................... 43
4 RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................... 44
4.1 LOCATION AND SIZE OF FUEL TANK ..................................................................................... 44
4.2 OIL PAN WITH INTEGRATED PICKUPS .................................................................................. 44
4.3 RAPID PROTOTYPED INTAKE RUNNERS .............................................................................. 45
4.4 ENGINE MAPPING FOR FUEL ECONOMY .............................................................................. 46
5 CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................ 47
6 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 48
APPENDIX A – ENGINEERING DRAWING OF OIL PAN BLOCK ................................... 49
APPENDIX B – DIMENSIONS OF DRY SUMP PUMP........................................................... 50
APPENDIX C – 2008 DRY SUMP TANK....................................................................................... 52
APPENDIX D – 3D SYSTEMS DURAFORM PA DATA SHEET........................................... 53
APPENDIX E – EXHAUST GAS TEMPERATURE DATA ...................................................... 55
 iii

List of Symbols

Dh Hydraulic Diameter

A Area
p Wetted Perimeter

r Radius
l Length
w Width
P Pressure
E Young’s Modulus
t Thickness
δ Deflection

φ Equivalence Ratio

m fuel Mass of Fuel

mox Mass of Oxidizer

st Denotes stoichiometric ratio

 iv

List of Figures
FIGURE 1 - FILLER NECK & SIGHT TUBE RULE....................................................................................... 6
FIGURE 2 - ENVELOPE OF FUEL SYSTEM LOCATION REQUIREMENTS .................................................... 7
FIGURE 3 - FUEL SYSTEM ........................................................................................................................... 9
FIGURE 4 - DRY SUMP OIL SYSTEM AND OIL PATH ............................................................................... 12
FIGURE 5 - WET SUMP OIL SYSTEM AND OIL PATH .............................................................................. 13
FIGURE 6 - OVERSIZED AND POORLY PACKAGED FUEL TANK ............................................................. 14
FIGURE 7 - 2008 FUEL TANK PACKAGING .............................................................................................. 15
FIGURE 8 - 2008 FUEL TANK (CAD) ....................................................................................................... 16
FIGURE 9 - 2008 MANUFACTURED FUEL TANK ..................................................................................... 17
FIGURE 10 - 2008 FUEL TANK IN CAR..................................................................................................... 17
FIGURE 11 - EXTERNAL PICKUP AND LINES ........................................................................................... 19
FIGURE 12 - 2008 OIL PAN BLOCK (BOTTOM)........................................................................................ 20
FIGURE 13 - 2008 OIL PAN BLOCK (TOP) ............................................................................................... 20
FIGURE 14 - 2008 OIL PAN PLATE ........................................................................................................... 21
FIGURE 15 - O-RING GROOVE DESIGN DIAGRAM ................................................................................... 22
FIGURE 16 - OIL PAN FEA CONSTRAINTS AND 100 PSI PRESSURE LOAD .......................................... 25
FIGURE 17 - OIL PAN FEA RESULTS ....................................................................................................... 25
FIGURE 18 - 2008 OIL PAN BLOCK (BOTTOM)........................................................................................ 26
FIGURE 19 - 2008 OIL PAN BLOCK (TOP) ............................................................................................... 26
FIGURE 20 - COMPLETED OIL PAN .......................................................................................................... 27
FIGURE 21 - TORQUE CURVE: INTAKE RUNNER LENGTH VS. PLENUM VOLUME ............................. 30
FIGURE 22 - POWER CURVE: INTAKE RUNNER LENGTH VS. PLENUM VOLUME ............................... 30
FIGURE 23 - INJECTOR BOSSES RELATIVE TO INTAKE PORTS ............................................................. 33
FIGURE 24 - CAD MODEL OF INTAKE SYSTEM ...................................................................................... 34
FIGURE 25 - SLS PROCESS SCHEMATIC .................................................................................................. 35
FIGURE 26 - 2008 INTAKE RUNNERS....................................................................................................... 36
FIGURE 27 - RAPID PROTOTYPED INTAKE SYSTEM ON DYNAMOMETER ............................................. 37
FIGURE 28 - TORQUE CURVE: 2008 INTAKE SYSTEM VS. 2007 INTAKE SYSTEM.............................. 37
FIGURE 29 - POWER CURVE: 2008 INTAKE SYSTEM VS. 2007 INTAKE SYSTEM................................ 38
FIGURE 30 - FUEL ECONOMY RESULTS................................................................................................... 42
 v

List of Tables
TABLE 1 - O-RING GROOVE DESIGN TABLE ............................................................................................ 22
TABLE 2 - FUEL ECONOMY RESULTS....................................................................................................... 42
 1

1 Introduction

The Formula SAE competition is a student based design project. This series
of racing allows for a great deal of innovation and invention as the rules are
targeted toward safety rather than design restriction. Participation within
the design and production of a Formula SAE car exposes one to a great deal
of opportunity and experience. The project not only includes design and
fabrication, but also business, marketing, team work and interaction with
sponsors. The competition integrates all these factors into one.
Both the fuel and lubrication systems are fundamental elements of any
automobile. The main focuses of this thesis is to optimize certain facets
within each system by studying the systems earlier in the design phase and
making them more reliable, lighter, etc . The location and size of the fuel
tank will be addressed. An oil pan with incorporated oil pickups will be
implemented. Third, the intake runners will be rapid prototyped. Finally,
when all the subsystems are completed, the engine will be mapped for greater
fuel economy.
Within the report a number of topics will be discussed. First, the literature
review will provide pertinent background and terminology that will be
needed for this project. The design and manufacturing of the 4 key design
features will be the focus of the thesis. The problems with previous designs
will be mentioned and the resolution to these problems will be noted.
Necessary calculations, models, and analysis will be included to support the
arguments. The results and findings will follow, with a final evaluation and
conclusion.
 2

2 Literature Review

2.1 Motivation

The motivation behind the design of the 2008 University of Toronto Formula
SAE fuel and lubrication systems is to improve upon and optimize the
designs. The goal is to progress the design of the car and rectify previous
faults by looking at four different features within the fuel and lubrication
systems. More thought was put into the design and packaging of the fuel
tank, which will improve the handling of the car by lowering the center of
gravity and evening out the weight distribution. An oil pan with integrated
pick ups will allow for a more reliable system. Rapid prototyped intake
runners allow for a more versatile design. The runners can be a more
complex shape and allow the injector bosses to be incorporated into the
design. Lastly, the engine will be mapped to achieve better fuel economy.
Fuel economy scores have hindered the team in the past.
 3

2.2 Background

2.2.1 Formula SAE and Competition

Formula SAE is now in its 29th year as of 2008. There are eight competitions
around the world in Michigan, California, England, Germany, Australia,
Italy, Japan, and Brazil. The competition in Detroit, Michigan is the world’s
largest hosting 140 teams. A comment made at the competition last year
stated that there are close to 300 university teams in over 45 different
countries around the world. The objectives of the Formula SAE competition
are best described within its rules document:
“The Formula SAE Series competitions challenge teams of university
undergraduate and graduate students to conceive, design, fabricate and
compete with small, formula style, autocross racing cars. To give teams the
maximum design flexibility and the freedom to express their creativity and
imaginations there are very few restrictions on the overall vehicle design.
Teams typically spend eight to twelve months designing, building, testing
and preparing their vehicles before a competition. The competitions
themselves give teams the chance to demonstrate and prove both their
creativity and their engineering skills in comparison to teams from other
universities around the world” [1].
The vehicle design objectives can also be characterized through the rules as
well:
“For the purpose of this competition, the students are to assume that a
manufacturing firm has engaged them to design, fabricate and demonstrate a
prototype car for evaluation as a production item. The intended sales market
is the nonprofessional weekend autocross racer. Therefore, the car must have
very high performance in terms of its acceleration, braking, and handling
qualities. The car must be low in cost, easy to maintain, and reliable. It
should accommodate drivers whose stature varies from a 5th percentile
 4

female to a 95th percentile male. In addition, the car’s marketability is

enhanced by other factors such as aesthetics, comfort and use of common
parts. The manufacturing firm is planning to produce four (4) cars per day for
a limited production run and the prototype vehicle should actually cost below
$25,000. The challenge to the design team is to develop a prototype car that
best meets these goals and intents. Each design will be compared and judged
with other competing designs to determine the best overall car” [1].
Each competition is held over four days. The first two days are allocated for
registration, technical inspection, and presentations. A thorough inspection
of the car is done to see if all safety and design requirement are met.
The car must also pass a break test for which all four wheels must lock. A
noise test is also performed. The loudness of the car must not exceed 110 dB.
The final test is a tilt test. The car must not role when it is placed on a
platform and tilted to 60 degrees which corresponds to 1.7 G’s [1]. One
presentation to be completed is a cost presentation. A cost report is sent to
the judging committee prior to the competition costing out all the components
of the car. Other presentations include marketing, manufacturing, and
design. The marketing presentation deals with the fabrication of a
nonprofessional weekend autocross vehicle intended for market sales. The
manufacturing presentation is about automotive parts that usually bought by
a Formula SAE team. Finally, the design presentation is an in depth
scrutinizing of the vehicle by automotive professionals. This concludes the
static portion of the competition.
The dynamic part of the competition consists of skid pad, acceleration,
autocross, and endurance. Skid pad is a figure eight course. The driver
enters the course in the center then completes two turns to the left and two
turns to the right before exiting. The second turn for each direction is timed
and the two are averaged. The acceleration is a stand still start of 75 meters
which is timed. The autocross is a timed course lap. Two drivers are allowed
two runs at the circuit. The main event is held on the final day, which is the
 5

endurance race. For the endurance race, two drivers each complete 11 km of
the 22 km race. After 11 km (11 laps) the first drive must pit and shut off the
car. The drivers switch and the second driver must be able to restart the car.
The entire race is timed and in conjunction with fuel economy scores are
totaled.

2.2.2 Rules

There are several rules that pertain to the fuel and lubrication systems.
However, there are a not significant amount of rules that pertain to these
sections when compared to others. Here are a few rules that are pertinent to
the design of the fuel and lubrication systems:

Rule 3.5.2 – Fuels: The basic fuel available at competitions in the Formula
SAE Series is unleaded gasoline with an octane rating of 93 (R+M)/2
(approximately 98 RON). Other fuels may be available at the discretion of
the organizing body.
Rule 3.5.2.2 - Fuel Additives – Prohibited: No agents other than fuel
(gasoline or E85), and air may be induced into the combustion chamber. Non-
adherence to this rule will be reason for disqualification. Officials have the
right to inspect the oil.
Rule 3.5.3.1 - Fuel Tank Size Limit: Any size fuel tank may be used. The
fuel system must have a provision for emptying the fuel tank if required.
Rule 3.5.3.2 - Filler Neck & Sight Tube: All fuel tanks must have a filler
neck: (a) at least 38 mm (1.5 inches) diameter, (b) at least 125 mm (4.9
inches) vertical height and (c) angled at no more than 45 degrees (45°) from
the vertical. The 125 mm of vertical height must be above the top level of the
tank, and must be accompanied by a clear fuel resistant sight tube for
reading fuel level (figure 7). The sight tube must have at least 75 mm (3
inches) of vertical height and a minimum inside diameter of 6 mm (0.25
 6

inches). The sight tube must not run below the top surface of the fuel tank. A
clear filler tube may be used, subject to approval by the Rules Committee or
technical inspectors at the event.

Figure 1 - Filler Neck & Sight Tube Rule [1]

Rule 3.5.3.9 - Air Intake and Fuel System Location Requirements: All parts of
the fuel storage and supply system, and all parts of the engine air and fuel
control systems (including the throttle or carburetor, and the complete air
intake system, including the air cleaner and any air boxes) must lie within
the surface defined by the top of the roll bar and the outside edge of the four
tires (see figure 8). All fuel tanks must be shielded from side impact
collisions. Any fuel tank which is located outside the Side Impact Structure
required by 3.3.8 must be shielded by structure built to 3.3.8. A firewall must
also be incorporated, per section 3.4.10.1. Any portion of the air intake
system that is less than 350 mm (13.8 inches) above the ground must be
shielded by structure built to 3.3.8.
 7

Figure 2 - Envelope of fuel system location requirements [1]

Rule 5.7.3 - Fuel Economy (50 points): The car’s fuel economy will be
measured in conjunction with the endurance event. The fuel economy under
racing conditions is important in most forms of racing and also shows how
well the car has been tuned for the competition. This is a compromise event
because the fuel economy score and endurance score will be calculated from
the same heat. No refueling will be allowed during an endurance heat.
Rule 5.7.4 - Endurance Course Specifications & Speeds: Course speeds can be
estimated by the following course specifications. Average speed should be 48
km/hr (29.8 mph) to 57 km/hr (35.4 mph) with top speeds of approximately
105 km/hr (65.2 mph) [1].
 8

2.2.3 Automotive Fuel and Lubrication Systems

2.2.3.1 Fuel System

The fuel system and its components will be discussed as they occur along the
path of fuel flow. We begin with where the fuel is stored; the fuel tank. Fuel
tanks vary in size and shape according to their application. Fuel tanks are
generally made of steel or plastic and usually have baffles inside. A baffle is
a partition which reduces the sloshing of fuel in the tank.
The fuel pump is generally electric and located inside the fuel tank. It is
used to pump fuel from the tank to the engine under high pressure for a fuel
injected engine.
Next is the fuel filter. This device is used to remove dirt and other particles
from the fuel. Without a fuel filter, particles can cause damage to the fuel
pump and fuel injectors.
Fuel is metered using the injectors. The injectors are mounted using a fuel
rail. The fuel rail delivers the high pressure fuel to the injectors. An injector
is an electronically controlled valve. When the injector is initiated, an
electromagnet moves a plunger which in turn opens a valve. This allows the
pressurized fuel to be released through a tiny nozzle. The nozzle is designed
to atomize the fuel; to create a fine mist so that it can burn easily [2].
The amount of fuel delivered to the engine is controlled by the ECU
(Electronic Control Unit). The ECU uses a number of sensors to control the
amount of fuel it releases to the engine. These sensors include the mass
airflow sensor, which tells the ECU the mass of air entering the engine. The
oxygen sensor measures the amount of oxygen in the exhaust gas to
determine if the fuel mixture is rich or lean and makes adjustments. A rich
mixture is one that has excess fuel. Conversely, a lean mixture is one that
has excess air. The throttle position sensor monitors the throttle valve
 9

position, which determines the amount of air released into the engine.
Therefore, the ECU can make changes to the amount of fuel that is injected.
A manifold absolute pressure sensor is used to monitor the pressure of the air
in the intake plenum. Finally, the engine speed sensor measures engine
speed, which is a factor in calculating pulse width (the amount of time the
injector is open). Fuel injectors can all open at the same time or just before
the intake valve for its respective cylinder opens. The latter is called
sequential multi-port fuel injection and it is the most commonly used in
automobiles today [3].
The fuel is usually delivered at a pressure of 25 to 45 psi to the fuel rail from
the pump. The fuel pressure regulator is used to keep the pressure constant.
A spring loaded diaphragm controls a valve that opens when there is an
excessive pressure in the fuel rail [4]. The fuel is then returned to the fuel
tank.

Figure 3 - Fuel System

Most automobiles run on fuels of octane rating 87 to 94. When an engine is

on its compression stroke, a cylinder full of air and fuel is compressed into a
small volume before being ignited by a spark plug [5]. The amount of
 10

compression is called the compression ratio. The compression ratio is the

volume in the cylinder when the piston is at bottom dead center (the bottom
of the stroke) to the volume in the cylinder when the piston is at top dead
center (the top of the stoke). Typical values for an automobile compression
ratio range from 8:1 to 10:1. The octane rating indicates how much fuel can
be compressed before it spontaneously combusts. If the fuel ignites
prematurely, this causes the engine to “knock”, causing damage to the
engine. Lower octane ratings can handle lower compression before igniting
[5]. Using a higher octane rated fuel in a car that requires a lower octane
rated fuel causes the car to be less efficient. Not all of the energy in the fuel
is being used. This causes excess fuel to be wasted, resulting in increased
emissions [3].
The stoichiometric ratio is the calculated ideal ratio of air-to-fuel (AFR). At
this ratio theoretically all of the fuel will be burned using all of the oxygen.
For pure octane, the stoichiometric ratio is about 14.7:1. This means that for
each pound of gasoline, 14.7 pounds of air will be burned. For naturally
aspirated (fuel injected) engines powered by octane, maximum power occurs
when the AFR is about 12.5 [3].
Engine mapping is the process of modeling engine outputs as a function of
inputs. Outputs are torque, emissions, and fuel economy, whereas the inputs
are fuel flow rate, stoichiometric ratio, and the measure of oxygen in the
exhaust gas, etc [3]. When mapping a naturally aspirated engine the
stoichiometric ratio is set to 12.5:1 for maximum power. The stoichiometric
ratio can be increased to achieve better fuel economy, which will be explored
within the thesis; however the engine will run hotter. The amount of oxygen
in the exhaust determines whether the mixture is lean or rich as mentioned
earlier. Exhaust gas temperature (EGT) sensors are also used to determine
which cylinders of the engine are hot. This will give an indication as to which
cylinders need more fuel. The interface used when mapping an engine is a
large resolution matrix. The horizontal axis is RPM and the vertical axis is
 11

throttle position in percent or manifold absolute pressure. Each cell of the

matrix is filled in with the length of time the injector stays open. All these
parameters must be taken into consideration when mapping.

2.2.3.2 Oil System

There are two types of oil systems; wet sump and dry sump. Most production
cars have a wet sump oil system. The sump is located beneath the
crankshaft. Oil is stored in a deep pan at the bottom of the engine. In a wet
sump, the oil pump sucks oil from the bottom of the pan and pumps it
through the engine [6].
In a dry sump system (Figure 4), the oil is stored in an external oil tank
rather than in the oil pan. Two pumps are needed, one to pump oil to
lubricate the engine and the other to return oil to the tank from the sump.
Therefore, a very small amount of oil remains in the engine. A few
advantages of a dry sump system include: the oil pan can be shallower to
allow for the main mass of the engine to be placed lower in the car; therefore,
lowering the center of gravity and the oil tank can be any size and placed
anywhere on the car [6].
 12

Figure 4 - Dry Sump Oil System and Oil Path

The components of a wet sump oil system will now be explained in more
detail following the path of oil flow (Figure 5). The oil pan holds the oil in the
bottom of the engine. The pan is usually large and deep, to hold the required
four to six quarts of oil.
The internal oil pump sucks oil from the pan; the oil then travels through a
filter and an oil cooler before being distributed to certain components inside
the engine for lubrication.
The oil pressure created by the oil pump is retained at around 30 to 35 psi
allowing the oil to circulate thorough the engine. Low oil pressure or
pressure loss in the engine can cause great damage. If there is not enough oil
in the pan, the oil is too low a viscosity, there is a plugged oil filter, or the oil
pump is worn this can lead to low oil pressures.
 13

Figure 5 - Wet Sump Oil System and Oil Path

Engine motor oil is not only used for lubricating the components in an engine
such as the camshaft, piston, and gear train, but it also cleans, inhibits
corrosion, reduces friction and cools the engine by removing heat from
moving parts. Most motor oils are produced from petroleum. Over time the
oil breaks down becoming impure and requires replacing. However, synthetic
motor oils are the most popular today. They consist of artificially-synthesized
compounds and offer greater performance (higher tolerance to heat), but at
an increased cost [7].
 14

3 Fuel and Lubrication Systems Key Design Features

The main design objectives for the fuel and lubrication systems for the 2008
University of Toronto Formula SAE race car will be to produce reliable, well
packaged, and improved systems. An overview of past designs will be
discussed with the improvements and new concepts revealed. The results of
the new designs will be evaluated and quantified. A recommendation section
and conclusions will follow.

3.1 Location and Size of Fuel Tank

3.1.1 Design and Manufacturing

In an effort to improve on previous fuel tank packaging and design, more

thought was put into the process. Previously, the fuel tank has been located
on one side of the car and was usually a tall, oversized structure (Figure 6).

Figure 6 - Oversized and Poorly Packaged Fuel Tank

 15

This year, the goal was to locate the fuel tank low and central in the car
directly behind the driver (Figure 7). This allows for a lower center of
gravity. As well, with the tank located in the middle of the car it will not
have as great of an affect on the weight distribution causing one side to be
heavier than the other. With the fuel tank placed lower in the car there will
be a decreased C of G. By placing the fuel tank in the center of the car, it is
also expected that the weight distribution will be more even.

Figure 7 - 2008 Fuel Tank Packaging

The tank volume was determined to be about 6 L, 2 L less from last year.
This will in turn reduce the weight of the tank. The amount of fuel consumed
during the 2007 Formula SAE endurance event was measured to be 4.5 L;
therefore a 6 L tank size is sufficient. The fuel tank was modeled in CAD and
the design was tailored to the prearranged area for the tank.
 16

The volume achieved was 385 in3 or 6.3 L as shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8 - 2008 Fuel Tank (CAD)

The fuel tank is a simple shape that was easy to manufacture. Using the
CAD model, templates were created. Aluminum sheet of 0.050” thickness
was used to construct the tank. The tank consists of multiple bends and
welds. The fuel filter was modified and welded directly into the tank. The
filler neck is removable and satisfies Rule 3.5.3.2 (Figure 1 in Section 2.2.2).
The top of the filler neck is higher than the required 4.92” from the horizontal
plane.
 17

The manufactured fuel tank can be seen in Figure 9.

Figure 9 - 2008 Manufactured Fuel Tank

By allocating a space for the fuel tank in the early stages of packaging design,
the tank was able to be placed lower and central in the car and the geometry
was simpler, which reduced the manufacturing time by a significant amount
(Figure 10).

Figure 10 - 2008 Fuel Tank in Car

 18

3.1.2 Evaluation

The results of locating the fuel tank low and central in the car were evaluated
to see if the assumptions were correct. First, the weight of the 2007 and 2008
fuel tanks including filler neck were compared. The 2007 tank weighs 1.7 kg
and is 7.75 L in volume. The 2008 tank weighs 1.4 kg and is 6.3 L in volume.
Therefore, a lighter tank was achieved. However, the difference in weight is
not as significant as was originally thought due to the fact that a heavier
removable filler neck was need for the 2008 tank in order to be packaged
properly.
The recorded center of gravity for the 2007 car with a full tank of fuel is
10.5”. The left to right weight distribution of the 2007 car is 55% to 45%.
The 2008 car was not completed in time to conduct a center of gravity or left
to right weight distribution test. However, with the positioning of the fuel
tank, it should theoretically lower the C of G and create a more even weight
distribution of the car.
 19

3.2 Oil Pan with Integrated Pickups

3.2.1 Design and Manufacturing

The oil system for the 2008 car will continue to be a dry sump. In past years,
the oil pan had external pickups and lines that were welded (Figure 11).

Figure 11 - External Pickup and Lines

This year’s oil pan was designed with integrated pickups. The dry sump
pump will also mount directly to the oil pan. The pan will be made of two
parts: the block which will include the pickups and the plate which will cover
the block (Figures 12, 13, and 14).
 20

Figure 12 - 2008 Oil Pan Block (Bottom)

Figure 13 - 2008 Oil Pan Block (Top)

 21

Figure 14 - 2008 Oil Pan Plate

The new oil pan design will insure a greater reliability, as external features
on previous pans were prone to leaking. This qualitative improvement
cannot directly be quantified. However, a car that leaks during dynamic
events at competition will be pulled from the track. This year’s pan will also
help to lower the C of G, as it will be thinner due to the integrated pickups.
However, the weight of the pan will increase. When designing a race car
there are always compromises. In our case, a small increase in weight, but
lower center of gravity and greater reliability is the compromise.
The oil pan was designed with all the necessary features situated internally.
There is the inlet, the internal oil pump pickup, oil pressure relief outlets,
internal pickups, and pickup holes for the dry sump pump (Figure 12).
The dry sump pump mounts to the surface of the pan. It will be fastened
using bolts. O-rings must be used to seal the pump face to the surface of the
pump mount (Figure 13). The O-ring groove design is based on a standard O-
ring of thickness 0.070” and inner diameter of 0.876”. According to the ‘O’
Series O-ring groove design table (Table 1), the required dimensions for the
groove width and depth are 0.094” (“D”) and 0.052 (“C”) (Figure 15)
respectively.
 22

Figure 15 - O-ring Groove Design Diagram [10]

Table 1 - O-ring Groove Design Table [10]

The height of the dry sump pump mount was determined by locating the
internal pump shaft that is used to run the dry sump pump. Using
dimensions of the dry sump pump from the manufacture (Appendix B) the
pump was aligned with the internal pump shaft. The height of the dry sump
pump mount was found to be 0.732”.
The external pickups on previous cars were connected to the dry sump pump
using round 0.625” diameter tubing. For the internal pickup troughs (Figure
12) which are rectangular, a hydraulic diameter equivalency calculation was
needed to achieve the trough dimensions. The circular duct hydraulic
diameter and the rectangular duct hydraulic diameter are set equal to each
 23

other to insure that the flow rate within the rectangular duct remains the
same as the previous tubing.
The hydraulic diameter is defined as:

4A 4 × Area
Dh = = = 4 Rh [11]
p perimeter ( wetted )

For a circular duct the hydraulic diameter is:

4 A 4πr 2
Dh = = = 2r [11]
p 2πr

For a rectangular duct the hydraulic diameter is:

4A 4(lw) 2lw
Dh = = = [11]
p 2l + 2 w l + w

Therefore, the equivalency calculation using the length of the trough to be

0.625” is as follows:
Dh circular = Dh rec tan gular
2lw
2r =
l+w
2(0.625) w
2(0.3125) =
0.625 + w
1.25w
0.625 =
0.625 + w
1.25w = 0.390625 + 0.625w
0.625w = 0.390625
∴ w = 0.625

Therefore, the internal rectangular troughs can be 0.625” by 0.625”. A

similar calculation was done to find the dimensions of the internal pump
 24

pickup trough. In 2007 the steel braided line connecting the tank to the oil
pan was -12AN, which has a bore diameter of 0.75”. If the duct length is to
be constant at 0.625”, the width of the internal pump pickup trough will be
1.06”. Since the pickup troughs are 0.625” in width it was decided that the
overall thickness of the oil pan would be 0.75”.
When the design of the pan was completed a finite element analysis was
conducted on the oil pan to assess the contact pressure between the surfaces
of the block and the plate. This was done to ensure that the pressure
between the two was great enough to cause a closed seal. The finite element
analysis showed that only bolting the plate to the oil pan block would not
create a force great enough for a closed seal. Therefore, the plate was welded
to the block creating a closed seal.
Another FEA was run to detect the stresses in the pan due to the static
pressure forces created by the pressure relief valve. The pan was cut in half
to run the analysis more quickly. The half of the pan used is subjected to the
pressure load. For the analysis, the pan was held fixed at each bolt hole in
the Y direction and in rotation. At one hole the pan was fixed in the X and Z
directions as well. This simulated the oil pan being fixed to the bottom of the
engine and in the x-direction which is parallel to the length of the car.
Typical oil pressures reach 40 psi. A 2.5 safety factor was used in the FEA,
therefore a 100 psi pressure force was used (Figure 16).
 25

Figure 16 - Oil Pan FEA Constraints and 100 psi Pressure Load

Several design and FEA iterations were needed. The oil pan’s wall
thicknesses were varied in order to keep the von Mises stresses under the
safety factor of 100 psi. The final design FEA results can be seen in Figure
17.

Figure 17 - Oil Pan FEA Results

 26

An engineering drawing of the oil pan block (Appendix A) was sent out for
CNC machining upon design completion. The final product can be seen in
Figures 18 and 19.

Figure 18 - 2008 Oil Pan Block (Bottom)

Figure 19 - 2008 Oil Pan Block (Top)

The oil pan plate was created using a template of the block bottom. It was
traced on 0.125” thick aluminum plate, cut, and filed. The inlet boss (centre
of Figure 20), two pressure relief bosses (centre bottom of Figure 20), and oil
pan plate were welded to the oil pan block. The inlet was tapped and the
 27

fitting (left of Figure 20) was inserted. Finally, the O-rings were inserted and
the dry sump pump (right of figure 20) was mounted to the oil pan.

Figure 20 - Completed Oil Pan

3.2.2 Evaluation

The dry sump oil pan block was designed at a height of 0.75” and the plate at
0.125”. When assembled the oil pan is 0.875” thick. The 2007 oil pan with
welded external pickups is 1.25” in height; therefore the engine is able to be
placed lower in the 2008 car allowing for a lower C of G.
The weight of the 2007 oil pan including external pickups and lines is 0.86
kg. The weight of the 2008 oil pan is 1.3 kg. As assumed the 2008 oil pan
increased in weight, but is thinner.
Another positive attribute of the oil system is the decrease in size and
effectively weight of the 2008 dry sump tank (Appendix C). The 2007 tank
weighs 0.72 kg, while the 2008 tank is 0.56 kg. This helps offset the increase
in weight of the oil pan.
 28

Once the car begins testing on track, the qualitative reliability characteristic
can be evaluated more closely. However, with integrated pickups, the 2008
oil pan should be less prone to leaks.
 29

3.3 Rapid Prototyped Intake Runners

3.3.1 Design and Manufacturing

A brand new feature was the design of the intake plenum and runners in a
Computer Aided Design program to have them rapid prototyped. The
definition of rapid prototyping is:
“Rapid prototyping takes virtual designs from computer aided design (CAD)
or animation modeling software, transforms them into thin, virtual,
horizontal cross-sections and then creates each cross-section in physical
space, one after the next until the model is finished [8]”.
The focus of this thesis is the design of the intake runners. Before designing
the 2008 runners, many dimensions and parameters had to be determined.
This was accomplished through extensive engine dynamometer testing. A
preliminary intake system including restrictor, plenum, and intake runners
was designed to be adjustable. Both plenum volume and runner length were
to be varied. This preliminary modular design was rapid prototyped and
used for dynamometer testing. Inserts were used to vary volumes and
lengths. Plenum volumes of 1.5 L and 3 L were tested against runner lengths
of 8.5”, 9.5”, and 11.5”.
The dynamometer testing showed that the 3 L plenum and 9.5” runner
length was the optimal design (Figures 21 and 22).
The values in the legend of the graphs represent runner insert length,
plenum insert length, and exhaust used. For runner insert length, a 1
represents a runner length of 8.5”, a 2 represents 9.5”, and a 4 represents
11.5”. For plenum insert length, 0 represents 1.5 L and 4 represents 3 L. For
the exhaust, 06 signifies the 2006 exhaust and 07 the 2007 exhaust.
 30

Intake Runner vs 3L Plenum Volume - Torque vs RPM - Cali Intake Cam

45

40

35

1_4_07_run 1
Torque [ft-lbs]

1_4_07_run 2
2_4_07_run 1
30
2_4_07_run 2
4_4_07_run 1
4_4_07_run 2

25

20

15
4500 5500 6500 7500 8500 9500 10500 11500
RPM

Figure 21 - Torque Curve: Intake Runner Length vs. Plenum Volume

Runner Length vs 3L Plenum Volume - Power vs RPM - Cali Intake Cam

80

70

60

50
Power [hp]

1_4_07_run 1
40 2_4_07_run 1
4_4_07_run 1

30

20

10

0
4500 5500 6500 7500 8500 9500 10500 11500
RPM

Figure 22 - Power Curve: Intake Runner Length vs. Plenum Volume

 31

The pink power curve represents the 9.5” runner length, 3 L volume, and
2007 exhaust. The most power is generated when this combination is used.
Another member on the team designed the plenum. The 2008 plenum was
designed as a conical shape with the 4 intake runner holes central; this
allows for equal air distribution to each intake port.
Using this plenum the intake runners were designed. The plenum was
placed in the full car CAD model and the runners were developed to meet the
plenum. The runners were designed such that runners at port 1 and 4 are
together and runners at ports 2 and 3 are together. The runners have
multiple bends and are a unique geometric shape in order to connect them to
the plenum. This was one of the main factors to have the intake system
rapid prototyped. Rather than bending aluminum tube, any shape can be
manufactured in much less time and effort. Due to packaging constraints the
achieved runner length was 10”. This was very close to the 9.5” target and
deemed acceptable. The outside diameter of the runners is 1.5” to meet up
with the intake ports.
The stiffness of the runners is another important parameter. Therefore, the
thickness of the runners must be determined. The goal was to run a finite
element analysis on different runner thicknesses, however the complex
geometry of the runners did not allow for a complete meshing of the part.
Also, it was an objective to make the rapid prototyped runners lighter than
the aluminum runners. It was determined that a 0.125” wall thickness was
needed to keep the runner weight slightly below that of the aluminum
runners. To determine if this thickness would produce a rapid prototyped
runner that was as stiff as or close to that of aluminum, a deflection of a
cylinder subject to radial loading calculation was done on a 10” long, 1.5”
diameter, and 0.125” thick cylinder. The radial load used was 14 psi;
atmospheric pressure.
 32

The deflection equation is:

3/ 2 −3 / 4
 6.5 × P  r  l
δ =    
 E × t  t  r

Therefore, the deflection of a cylinder made of the rapid prototyped material

which has an elastic modulus of 230 000 psi (Data Sheet, Appendix D) is:

3/ 2 −3 / 4
 6.5 × P  r  l
δ =    
 E × t  t  r
3/ 2 −3 / 4
 6.5 × 14  0.75   10 
=    
 230000 × 0.125  0.125   0.75 
= 0.0067"

The deflection for a 10” long, 1.5” diameter, and 0.065” thick aluminum
cylinder is 0.0007”. The rapid prototyped material will not deflect that much
more than an aluminum cylinder, therefore the thickness of 0.125” was used
for the runner design.
Another main factor for having the runners rapid prototyped is that the
injector bosses can be incorporated into the design. The injectors will be
directed at the intake ports for increased fuel atomization (mixing of fuel and
air).
 33

Figure 23 shows the positioning of the injector bosses directed straight at the
intake ports.

Figure 23 - Injector Bosses Relative to Intake Ports

The final step in the intake runner design was to decide how to connect the
runners with the plenum. It was decided that a flange would be created
around the bottom of the plenum and a half circle flange would be created on
each runner pair (Figure 26). The plenum and two runner pairs would bolt
together.
 34

The final CAD design of the plenum and intake runners is shown in Figure
24.

Figure 24 - CAD Model of Intake System

The CAD model was sent to our rapid prototype sponsor for manufacturing.
Manufacturing the intake system out of aluminum components takes a great
deal of time and manpower. By having the intake system rapid prototyped,
this reduces the manufacturing time required by the team. This allows for
the development of other systems and components for the car.
The intake plenum and runners are made of DuraForm PA (Polyamide)
created by 3D Systems (Data Sheet, Appendix D), which is a type of nylon.
This material was chosen because it can withstand a high temperature, it is
 35

stiff, and it can be used for functional use. The manufacturing process of this
material is called Selective Laser Sintering (SLS), defined as:
“An SLS machine consists of two powder magazines on either side of the work
area. The leveling roller moves powder over from one magazine, crossing over
the work area to the other magazine. The laser then traces out the layer. The
work platform moves down by the thickness of one layer and the roller then
moves in the opposite direction. The process repeats until the part is
complete. [9].”

Figure 25 - SLS Process Schematic [9]

 36

The rapid prototyped final intake runners are shown below in Figures 26.

Figure 26 - 2008 Intake Runners

3.3.2 Evaluation

When the 2008 rapid prototyped intake system arrived back, the intake
runners were compared to the 2007 design. The weights of runners 1 and 4
and runners 2 and 3 respectively were 0.282 kg and 0.273 kg. This is a total
weight of 0.555 kg. The weight of 4 aluminum runners with welded injector
bosses is 0.612 kg. Therefore, the 2008 rapid prototyped runners are lighter
than those of aluminum.
The new rapid prototyped intake system was also put on the dynamometer
and the results were compared to the 2007 system (Figure 27).
 37

Figure 27 - Rapid Prototyped Intake System on Dynamometer

The results of the dynamometer testing are shown in Figures 28 and 29.

2008 Intake vs 2007 Intake - Torque vs RPM

44

42

40

38

07_07_stock
36
Torque [ft-lbs]

07_07_cali run 1
07_07_cali run 2
34 08_06_run 1
08_06_run 2
32 08_07_ run 1
08_07_run 2

30

28

26

24
4500 5500 6500 7500 8500 9500 10500 11500
RPM

Figure 28 - Torque Curve: 2008 Intake System vs. 2007 Intake System
 38

2008 Intake vs 2007 Intake - Power vs RPM

75

70

65

60

55

07_07_stock
Power [hp]

50
07_07_cali run 2
08_06_run 1
45
08_07_run 1

40

35

30

25

20
4500 5500 6500 7500 8500 9500 10500 11500
RPM

Figure 29 - Power Curve: 2008 Intake System vs. 2007 Intake System

The conclusive outcome from the dynamometer testing is in fact that the
2007 system is better than the 2008 system. However, due to packaging
constraints the 2008 exhaust system cannot be the same length as the 2007
exhaust system. Therefore, more dynamometer testing will be conducted
once the 2008 exhaust is finished to see if the 2008 intake system can be
utilized. Due to timing, these results are not included.
The general pros of having the intake system rapid prototyped are the
versatility of the design and the quick manufacturing time. The runners are
able to be designed as any shape and the injectors are able to be directed at
the intake ports. A FSAE team able to have an intake system rapid
prototyped is of great value. With more development in the years to come the
rapid prototyped intake system design and process can be optimized.
 39

3.4 Engine Mapping for Fuel Economy

3.4.1 Experimental Design and Testing

The reason for engine mapping to increase fuel economy is that at the
Formula SAE competition points are allocated toward fuel economy during
the endurance race (Rule 5.7.3). Previously engine mapping for fuel economy
was not done and at competition, the University of Toronto’s fuel economy
performance scores have been low.
The parameter that will be changed to increase fuel economy is the air-to-fuel
ratio (AFR), also known as the stoichiometric ratio. The parameters that will
be monitored closely are exhaust gas temperatures (EGT), injector pulse
width, and the amount of oxygen in the exhaust gas.
The AFR for pure octane is 14.7:1. To determine the AFR for maximum
power of a fuel injected system an equivalence ratio is used. The equivalence
ratio is the ratio of fuel-to-oxidizer ratio to the stoichiometric fuel-to-oxidizer
ratio [3]. The equation is:

(m fuel mox )
φ=
(m fuel mox )st

The mass based fuel-to-oxidizer ratio of octane (atomic mass of carbon,

hydrogen, and oxygen are 12, 1, and 16 respectively) is:

mC8 H18 1 ⋅ (8 ⋅ 12 + 18 ⋅ 1) 114

= = 3.5625
mO2 1(2 ⋅ 16 ) 32
 40

However, the amount of octane burned is not equal to the amount of oxygen.
To compare it to the equivalence ratio the stoichiometric reaction of octane
and oxygen must be looked at:

2C8 H 18 + 25O2 → 16CO2 + 18 H 2 O

Therefore, the mass based stoichiometric fuel-to-oxidizer ratio of octane is:

 mC8 H18  2 ⋅ (8 ⋅ 12 + 18 ⋅ 1) 228

  = = 0.285
 mO  25(2 ⋅ 16 ) 800
 2  st

The equivalence ratio of octane is then:

(m fuel mox ) 3.5625

φ= = = 12.5
(m fuel mox )st 0.285

The AFR that has been used in the past for the endurance race has been close
to 12.5:1. This value is used for maximum power; therefore a large amount of
fuel is used during the race. The value of 12.5:1 will be used as the test
starting point.
Before beginning to map the race engine on the dynamometer some
preliminary parameters had to be determined. By increasing the AFR, the
engine will run lean (more air than fuel) and hotter. When monitoring
exhaust gas temperature, it was decided that the maximum temperature
would be 700˚C. This is due to the fact that aluminum has a melting point
around 660˚C and thermal stresses to the block of the engine should be
avoided. However, the hot exhaust gases are only in the combustion cylinder
for a very short time, therefore running the EGT at 700˚C will not damage
the material.
 41

If the engine is run too hot there are also two phenomena that may occur,
which will damage the engine: detonation and pre-ignition.
Detonation is “the spontaneous combustion of the end-gas (remaining fuel/air
mixture) in the cylinder chamber. It always occurs after the normal
combustion is initiated by the spark plug. The initial combustion at the
spark plug is followed by a normal combustion burn. The end-gas in the
cylinder chamber spontaneously combusts due to an increase of heat and
pressure” [12].
Pre-ignition is “the ignition of the mixture prior to the spark plug firing.
Anytime something causes the mixture in the cylinder chamber to ignite
prior to the spark plug event it is classified as pre-ignition” [12].
When detonation occurs a ‘knocking’ in the engine can be heard. The engine
can be run for a significant amount of time during detonation before damage
occurs. However, it is very difficult to detect pre-ignition and it will cause
immediate engine failure. By not running the engine hotter than 700˚C, any
damages to the engine will be avoided, which would be devastating to the
development of the Formula SAE car.
The RMP range that the car mainly drives in during a race is around 5500 to
9000. The fuel economy testing was designed to hold the engine at 5500,
8000, and 9000 RPM until steady-state was reached. Each of these RMP
values were run at different air-to-fuel ratios stating with 12.5:1 and working
up to an AFR that would not cause the exhaust gas temperature to exceed
700˚C. The EGT was logged using the program LabVIEW Measurment. The
average exhaust gas temperature was calculated in Excel (Appendix E).
Other AFR values tested were 14.5:1 and 15:1. The fuel map was re-mapped
for each AFR value. The dynamometer computer program (DTA Swin)
outputs the fuel used in L/hr. It does this by using the time the fuel injectors
are open and a sensor in the intake which measures mass airflow. The value
in L/hr was recorded when steady-state was achieved.
 42

The results of the engine mapping for fuel economy are shown in Table 2 and
Figure 30:

AFR RPM Fuel Consumption (L/hr) Average EGT (˚C)

5500 9.8 635.9
12.5:1 8000 19.5 624.3
9000 21.2 649.2
5500 8.2 672.7
14.5:1 8000 14.5 652.6
9000 15.6 686.3
5500 7.1 635.8
15:1 8000 11.9 644.72
9000 12.4 684.1
Table 2 - Fuel Economy Results

RPM vs. Fuel Consumption at Serval AFR

25

20
Fuel Consumption (L/hr)

15
12.5:1
14.5:1
15:1
10

0
5500 8000 9000
RPM

Figure 30 - Fuel Economy Results

The AFR was able to be raised to 15:1, without causing any harm to the
engine. Therefore, it is safe to run the engine at an AFR of 15:1 and much
 43

less fuel will be consumed. When comparing the fuel used at 9000 RPM, an
AFR of 12.5:1 produces a fuel usage of 21.2 L/hr, whereas an AFR of 15:1
produces only 12.4 L/hr. This is a difference of 8.8 L/hr. Therefore, the
endurance fuel map which is a matrix of RMP vs. Throttle position was
created with an AFR of 15:1. The injector pulse width or the amount of time
the injector stays open was decreased in each cell, increasing the amount of
air in the mixture, resulting in a higher AFR.

3.4.2 Evaluation

The engine mapping for fuel economy was successful. The University of
Toronto Formula SAE Race Team now has a fuel economy map that will save
them fuel during the endurance race. This map will be tested on track when
the car is complete and evaluated further based on performance and lap time.
During competition last year 4.5 L of fuel were used during the endurance
race. Running the 15:1 AFR map will decrease the amount of fuel used,
however it could cause lap times to be slower. Therefore, the on track testing
will reveal what AFR to use in the compromise of fuel economy and lap time.
However, the main goal for creating and testing an engine map specifically
for fuel economy is fuel will be saved, correlating to a higher point score in
this section of the competition.
 44

4 Recommendations

Several recommendations can be made for future Formula SAE members to

consider or research on the four key design elements of the 2008 fuel and oil
systems.

4.1 Location and Size of Fuel Tank

A big step was made in the packaging and design of the 2008 fuel tank.
However, due to running a full composite chassis, the filler neck had to be
made removable causing it to be heavier than intended. Depending on the
design of the 2009 FSAE car, more attention should be paid to the filler neck
design if the car is similar to 2008.

4.2 Oil Pan with Integrated Pickups

The engine sits parallel to the ground in the 2008 FSAE car. The oil pan was
designed with the integrated pickups both at one end of the pan. The pickups
are situated to the rear of the pan facing toward the front of the car, therefore
when the car is accelerating forward, the oil will travel to this region.
However, when the car is under breaking the oil will travel to the front of the
pan. The total breaking time is a lot less than the total forward acceleration
time of the car; however it would be beneficial to design one of the pickups
toward the middle of the pan facing toward the rear of the car. This will
ensure that oil is being scavenged while the car is under breaking.
 45

4.3 Rapid Prototyped Intake Runners

A great deal of work went into the design of the first iteration of the rapid
prototyped intake system; both the intake plenum and runners. Due to this
being a totally new objective, this process was a learning experience. It was
difficult to determine what thickness the parts should be for the intake
system to be stiff enough because this was a new material. The 2008 intake
system was designed to be over-built. The thickness of the parts is greater
than they need to be. Now that more is known about the material the weight
of the rapid prototyped system can be reduced by decreasing the thickness of
the parts.
There are also other rapid prototype materials that are similar to the
DuraForm PA, but may work better for our application. The material is
DuraForm EX. Our sponsor was not able to provide us with this material,
but it would be beneficial to find a company that has this material.
DuraForm EX has the injection molded toughness of polypropylene and ABS,
and it has a greater impact resistance. The Young’s Modulus is also greater
than that of the DuraForm PA. By using DuraForm EX the thickness of the
parts could again be decreased, allowing the parts to be lighter.
 46

4.4 Engine Mapping for Fuel Economy

With a completed engine map tuned for fuel economy using the
dynamometer, advanced tests can be run on track. The maximum AFR
reached on the dynamometer was 15:1 because when mapping on the
dynamometer the engine remains at a constant RPM which causes the engine
to run hot. When testing on track the AFR can be increased slightly higher
because the engine sweeps through RMP ranges and does not run as hot. By
testing on track the balance between fuel economy and lap time performance
can be optimized.
 47

5 Conclusion

Great strides were made in the 2008 design of the fuel and lubrication
systems. These new designs and concepts are a basis for future FSAE
development. By taking a close look at the fuel and lubrication systems, an
analysis was done to determine which components should be improved.
Creating new designs for the first time does not always produce perfection.
While working on this thesis, other useful concepts were thought of after
having a design finalized. However, the designs are of substantial
improvement over previous years. This thesis allows for future iterations
and provides design recommendations for upcoming FSAE members. Four
key design features were developed to improve the packaging, reliability, and
performance of the 2008 car. The location and size of the fuel tank, an oil pan
with integrated pickups, rapid prototyped intake runners, and engine
mapping for fuel economy were the four design concepts studied.
As with any design, compromises must be made. This fact remains when
considering these four designs. The oil pan is heavier, but is more reliable
and allows the engine to be placed lower in the car. The engine map will save
fuel, but running the engine leaner may affect the power and overall lap
times. Regardless, the four design features outlined in this thesis are an
immense step forward for the design of the 2008 FSAE car. The designs and
concepts can be used by any team as a design model and baseline.
 48

6 References

[1] Formula SAE RULES

[2] Nice, Karim. “How Fuel Injection Systems Work.” Howstuffworks. 2007.
09 Nov 07 <http://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-injection3.htm>.
[3] McVea, Dr. William Mark. The Basics of Internal Combustion Engines
Seminar.
[4] Technical Articles. “Fuel Pressure Regulator.” 09 Nov 07
<http://www.type2.com/bartnik/reg.htm>.
[5] Brain, Marshall. “What does octane mean?” Howstuffworks. 2007. 09 Nov
07 <http://auto.howstuffworks.com/question90.htm>.
[6] “Why do some engines use a dry sump oil system?” Howstuffworks. 2007.
10 Nov 07 <http://auto.howstuffworks.com/question331.htm>.
[7] Harley, Mike. “Synthetic Motor Oils.” J.D. Power and Associates. 2007. 10
Nov 07 <http://www.jdpower.com/articles/article.aspx?ID=208>.
[8] “What is Rapid Prototyping?” Wohlers Associates, Inc. 2005. 06 Nov 2007.
<http://wohlersassociates.com/rapid-prototyping.html>.
[9] “Rapid Prototyping, SLS.” Efunda Engineering Fundamentals. 2007. 06
Nov 2007.
<http://www.efunda.com/processes/rapid_prototyping/sls.cfm>.
[10] “Grove Design for O-rings.” Hi-Tech Seals Inc. 2007. 08 Nov 2007.
<http://142.179.166.227/hitechseals/oringgroovedesign.asp>.
[11] White, Frank M. Fluid Mechanics, Fifth Edition. McGraw Hill: New
York, 2003.
[12] Cline, Allen W. “Engine Basics: Detonation and Pre-ignition”. Streerod
Stuff of Ohio Inc. 2007. 07 Jan 2008.
<http://www.streetrodstuff.com/Articles/Engine/Detonation/index>.
[13] “DuraForm LS Materials: Datasheets.” 3D Systems. 2005. 23 Nov 2007.
< 3dsystems.com/products/solidimaging/lasersintering/datasheets.asp>
 49

Appendix A – Engineering Drawing of Oil Pan Block

 50

Appendix B – Dimensions of Dry Sump Pump

51
 52

Appendix C – 2008 Dry Sump Tank

 53

Appendix D – 3D Systems DuraForm PA Data Sheet

54
 55

Appendix E – Exhaust Gas Temperature Data

Fuel Economy Test (AFR = 12.5)
RPM TPS Torque EGT 1 EGT 2 EGT 3
7974.919 100 84.225072 627.463 626.498 612.4592
7974.919 100 84.124123 627.463 626.498 612.4592
7974.919 100 84.434195 627.9299 626.6848 613.5175
7974.919 100 84.729848 627.9299 626.6848 613.5175
7974.919 100 84.740671 628.5214 627.5875 613.144
7974.919 100 84.477465 628.5214 627.5875 612.5837
7974.919 100 83.976296 628.6771 627.5875 612.5837
7974.919 100 83.82847 628.6771 627.7743 612.8638
7974.919 100 84.365693 628.6771 627.7743 612.8638
7974.919 100 84.621684 628.5837 627.8677 612.3347
7974.919 100 83.82847 628.6771 628.179 613.5175
7974.919 100 84.715428 628.7704 628.6771 613.5175
7974.919 100 83.889767 628.7704 628.6771 613.7043
7974.919 100 83.936634 629.4864 628.6771 613.7043
7974.919 100 84.434195 629.4864 628.9261 612.4903
7974.919 100 84.437803 629.4864 628.9261 612.4903
7974.919 100 84.250314 629.8911 629.2062 614.0467
7974.919 100 83.965484 629.8911 629.2062 614.0467
7974.919 100 84.18542 630.7626 630.1712 612.5526
7974.919 100 84.408963 631.3229 630.3891 612.5526
7974.919 100 84.524332 631.9144 630.7938 613.144
7974.919 100 83.723914 631.9144 630.7938 613.144
7974.919 100 84.477465 632.3502 631.7587 614.5759
7974.919 100 84.304396 632.0389 631.7587 614.5759
7974.919 100 84.81278 632.0389 632.0389 613.5798
7974.919 100 83.864525 632.0389 632.0389 613.5798
7974.919 100 84.614469 632.2568 632.4747 614.6381
7974.919 100 84.762295 632.2568 632.4747 614.6381
7974.919 100 84.008743 632.7238 632.6926 614.7626
7974.919 100 85.487007 632.7238 632.6926 614.7626
AVGERAGE EGT 630.0415 629.4366 613.4117
AVGERAGE TOTAL 624.2966
5516.485 100 62.837112 638.6693 634.8405 622.9805
5516.485 100 63.186847 639.105 634.8405 622.9805
5516.485 100 62.584724 639.105 635.8677 622.5136
5516.485 100 62.627989 639.105 635.8677 622.5136
5516.485 100 62.469345 639.3229 636.9261 623.4163
5516.485 100 62.786633 639.3229 636.9261 623.4163
5516.485 100 62.599144 639.9455 637.5798 624.1012
5516.485 100 62.970514 639.9455 637.5798 624.1012
5516.485 100 63.208482 640.1012 638.5759 624.1012
5516.485 100 62.638806 640.1012 638.5759 625.0039
5516.485 100 62.898404 641.0973 638.5759 625.0039
5516.485 100 62.653231 641.0973 638.9183 626.7471
 56

5516.485 100 62.793842 641.0973 638.9183 626.7471

5516.485 100 63.49692 641.0973 639.3229 628.9261
5516.485 100 62.613569 640.9728 639.6342 628.3969
5516.485 100 63.10392 641.4086 639.6342 628.3969
5516.485 100 62.736158 641.4086 640.2257 627.8365
5516.485 100 63.039021 641.4086 640.2257 627.8365
5516.485 100 62.73976 641.6265 640.6304 628.2413
5516.485 100 62.725341 641.6265 640.6304 628.2413
5516.485 100 63.323856 642.4047 640.8483 629.2062
5516.485 100 63.298619 642.4047 640.9417 629.4241
5516.485 100 62.999358 642.8716 641.2529 629.2374
5516.485 100 62.707313 642.9961 641.8132 629.0506
5516.485 100 62.469345 642.7471 642.3735 629.6732
5516.485 100 62.548669 643.0584 642.3735 629.6732
5516.485 100 63.093103 643.463 642.965 629.8288
5516.485 100 62.887587 643.463 642.965 629.8288
5516.485 100 63.150793 643.1206 642.6226 629.8288
5516.485 100 62.404445 643.1206 642.6226 630.4202
AVGERAGE EGT 641.2405 639.5025 626.9224
AVGERAGE TOTAL 635.8885
8994.269 100 76.848172 640.4747 638.856 621.9844
8994.269 100 77.731533 638.3891 638.856 621.9844
8994.269 100 77.15104 642.5292 642.3735 632.3502
8994.269 100 77.403423 642.5292 642.3735 632.3502
8994.269 100 77.140228 650.965 649.8755 633.4708
8994.269 100 76.988794 650.965 649.8755 634.5603
8994.269 100 76.498437 662.9805 659.8677 638.5136
8994.269 100 76.426328 663.7276 660.0545 638.2957
8994.269 100 76.923889 663.7276 660.0545 638.2957
8994.269 100 77.032053 664.8171 660.7393 638.2957
8994.269 100 77.078931 664.8171 660.7393 639.8521
8994.269 100 77.475532 665.5331 660.7393 639.8521
8994.269 100 77.205122 665.5331 661.0506 640.6304
8994.269 100 77.10777 665.5331 661.0506 640.6304
8994.269 100 77.089743 666.965 661.2374 641.9377
8994.269 100 78.1065 666.965 661.2374 641.9377
AVGERAGE EGT 657.2782 654.3113 635.9339
AVGERAGE TOTAL 649.1744

Fuel Economy Test (AFR = 14.5)

RPM TPS Torque EGT 1 EGT 2 EGT 3
7974.919 100 84.308004 646.607 647.2918 625.4397
7974.919 100 84.81278 645.8288 646.9805 625.4397
7974.919 100 84.967811 645.8288 646.9805 627.5253
7974.919 100 84.318816 645.5798 646.9805 627.5253
7974.919 100 84.582022 645.5798 646.9805 626.965
7974.919 100 84.315219 645.5798 646.9805 626.965
 57

7974.919 100 84.308004 645.0506 646.8871 626.8716

7974.919 100 84.102488 645.0506 646.8871 626.8716
7974.919 100 84.603657 644.8016 646.7004 626.8716
7974.919 100 84.351274 644.8016 646.7004 625.8444
7974.919 100 84.935364 644.7393 646.7004 625.8444
7974.919 100 84.719036 644.7393 646.2957 625.7198
7974.919 100 84.390936 643.7743 646.2957 625.7198
7974.919 100 84.582022 643.7743 646.1712 626
7974.919 100 84.437803 643.7743 646.1712 626
7974.919 100 84.264734 642.5603 644.8016 623.7276
7974.919 100 84.246707 615.7899 621.4241 605.4241
7974.919 100 84.603657 615.7899 621.4241 605.4241
7974.919 100 84.881282 675.6187 673.1595 652.895
7974.919 100 85.19857 675.6187 673.9689 652.2101
7974.919 100 84.246707 681.6265 678.6381 658.249
7974.919 100 85.094013 681.6265 678.6381 660.5526
7974.919 100 84.466642 684.1168 680.5681 662.3891
7974.919 100 84.639711 685.3308 681.7821 662.3891
7974.919 100 84.383721 685.3308 681.7821 665.1595
7974.919 100 84.326031 687.0117 681.7821 665.1595
7974.919 100 83.929419 687.0117 682.8093 667.9922
7974.919 100 84.44141 687.0117 682.8093 667.9922
7974.919 100 84.538762 697.1284 687.1984 673.1907
7974.919 100 85.011081 697.1907 687.572 672.5681
AVGERAGE EGT 659.1424 658.6454 639.6975
AVGERAGE TOTAL 652.4951
5516.485 100 64.711983 669.642 667.0272 651.4319
5516.485 100 64.54613 668.9261 667.0272 651.4319
5516.485 100 63.702436 668.6148 666.6226 650.9027
5516.485 100 64.236052 668.6148 666.6226 650.9027
5516.485 100 63.359911 668.8638 666.3424 651.8988
5516.485 100 63.774545 668.8638 666.3424 651.8988
5516.485 100 63.987271 669.2062 666.498 653.9222
5516.485 100 64.019723 669.7977 667.8988 655.2918
5516.485 100 64.48123 669.7977 667.8988 655.2918
5516.485 100 64.48123 672.5059 671.0739 659.6187
5516.485 100 64.340613 672.5059 671.0739 659.6187
5516.485 100 63.713253 676.9883 675.4008 659.6187
5516.485 100 63.778153 707.1829 695.9144 682.5292
5516.485 100 63.565427 704.5992 694.2335 682.5292
5516.485 100 63.49692 700.5837 690.3424 672.4436
5516.485 100 63.291409 700.5837 690.3424 672.4436
5516.485 100 63.80339 695.0739 685.393 667.7743
5516.485 100 63.706043 695.0739 685.393 667.7743
5516.485 100 63.093103 690.0623 681.035 664.537
AVGERAGE EGT 680.9203 675.9201 661.1505
AVGERAGE TOTAL 672.6637
8994.269 100 76.541707 670.3268 670.0778 647.5408
 58

8994.269 100 77.471935 671.572 670.8871 649.1907

8994.269 100 77.677441 671.572 670.8871 649.1907
8994.269 100 77.601734 673.9689 673.6265 649.1907
8994.269 100 77.497167 673.9689 673.6265 653.8911
8994.269 100 77.425058 678.3268 673.6265 653.8911
8994.269 100 76.783278 678.3268 678.8871 660.1168
8994.269 100 76.804913 678.3268 678.8871 660.1168
8994.269 100 77.767588 684.3969 685.144 667.4319
8994.269 100 77.086135 684.3969 685.144 667.4319
8994.269 100 77.161852 717.642 706.9027 709.7354
8994.269 100 77.4503 718.0156 708.179 703.572
8994.269 100 77.010429 718.0156 708.179 703.572
8994.269 100 77.497167 717.1751 707.5564 703.572
8994.269 100 77.100566 717.1751 707.5564 696.2568
8994.269 100 77.039268 714.0623 707.5564 696.2568
8994.269 100 77.389003 714.0623 704.6615 688.0389
8994.269 100 76.786885 714.0623 704.6615 688.0389
AVGERAGE EGT 694.1885 689.7804 674.8353
AVGERAGE TOTAL 686.2681

Fuel Economy Test (AFR = 15)

RPM TPS Torque EGT 1 EGT 2 EGT 3
8034.88 100 84.070041 616.0701 612.3658 598.2646
8034.88 100 84.44141 617.3463 614.8249 598.2646
8034.88 100 84.300789 621.7665 621.642 604.3969
8034.88 100 85.18415 621.7665 621.642 604.3969
8034.88 100 85.032716 623.4163 623.1673 604.3969
8034.88 100 84.235894 623.4163 623.1673 605.0195
8034.88 100 85.84035 625.1284 624.7238 608.8483
8034.88 100 85.122853 628.7704 628.5526 612.6148
8034.88 100 85.267072 645.2996 643.4941 630.9494
8034.88 100 85.050743 645.2996 643.4941 630.9494
8034.88 100 79.581167 670.6693 659.7743 651.8988
8034.88 100 80.626764 673.0039 661.2374 651.8988
8034.88 100 80.525804 673.0039 661.2374 655.9455
8034.88 100 79.299934 675.712 661.2374 655.9455
8034.88 100 78.441815 683.1517 666.5914 673.4397
8034.88 100 78.142555 683.5875 666.1245 673.4397
8034.88 100 72.979443 684.3969 662.1712 665.2841
8034.88 100 73.080403 684.6459 663.0117 668.1168
8034.88 100 67.931717 686.2646 668.179 679.3541
8034.88 100 66.132557 687.6031 669.5486 677.6732
7974.919 100 83.88616 615.0428 610.6537 596.6148
7974.919 100 84.250314 616.0701 612.3658 598.2646
7974.919 100 84.390936 657.4397 652.895 638.0156
7974.919 100 84.78393 657.4397 652.895 641.6887
7974.919 100 73.4698 684.3969 662.4202 662.8249
 59

7974.919 100 72.903737 684.3969 662.1712 665.2841

AVERAGE EGT 653.2733 644.2149 636.6842
AVERAGE TOTAL 644.7241
5516.485 62.837112 638.6693 634.8405 622.9805
5516.485 63.186847 639.105 634.8405 622.9805
5516.485 62.584724 639.105 635.8677 622.5136
5516.485 62.627989 639.105 635.8677 622.5136
5516.485 62.469345 639.3229 636.9261 623.4163
5516.485 62.786633 639.3229 636.9261 623.4163
5516.485 62.599144 639.9455 637.5798 624.1012
5516.485 62.970514 639.9455 637.5798 624.1012
5516.485 63.208482 640.1012 638.5759 624.1012
5516.485 62.638806 640.1012 638.5759 625.0039
5516.485 62.898404 647.0973 638.5759 625.0039
5516.485 62.653231 647.0973 638.9183 626.7471
5516.485 62.793842 647.0973 638.9183 626.7471
5516.485 63.49692 647.0973 639.3229 628.9261
5516.485 62.613569 640.9728 639.6342 628.3969
5516.485 63.10392 641.4086 639.6342 628.3969
5516.485 62.736158 641.4086 650.2257 627.8365
5516.485 63.039021 641.4086 640.2257 627.8365
5516.485 62.73976 641.6265 640.6304 628.2413
5516.485 62.725341 641.6265 640.6304 628.2413
5516.485 63.323856 642.4047 640.8483 629.2062
5516.485 63.298619 642.4047 640.9417 629.4241
5516.485 62.999358 642.8716 641.2529 629.2374
5516.485 62.707313 642.9961 641.8132 629.0506
5516.485 63.323856 642.7471 642.3735 629.6732
AVERAGE EGT 641.7995 639.261 626.3237
AVERAGE TOTAL 635.7948
8994.269 77.601734 673.9689 673.6265 649.1907
8994.269 77.497167 673.9689 673.6265 653.8911
8994.269 77.425058 678.3268 673.6265 653.8911
8994.269 76.783278 678.3268 678.8871 660.1168
8994.269 76.804913 678.3268 678.8871 660.1168
8994.269 77.767588 684.3969 685.144 667.4319
8994.269 77.086135 684.3969 685.144 667.4319
8994.269 77.161852 717.642 706.9027 709.7354
8994.269 77.4503 718.0156 708.179 703.572
8994.269 77.010429 718.0156 708.179 703.572
8994.269 77.497167 717.1751 707.5564 703.572
8994.269 77.161852 671.572 670.8871 649.1907
AVERAGE EGT 691.1777 687.5538 673.476
AVERAGE TOTAL 684.0692