Custom-built engine/gearbox unit for Testarossa

Hi Team,

Since many years, I have designed a very particular internal combustion engine - I am a professional rocket engine designer but also do internal combustion engines in my spare time. I have a prototype for a new kind of internal combustion engine that I would like to turn into something real.

The engine is nothing like a typical internal combustion engine - I use basically all my experience from constructing rocket engines - the heads and cylinders are 3D-printed (Inconel and other exotic materials), the engine does not have oscillating valves. The valve train moves continuously without any oscillations just like a turbopump. I have recently asked a Patent attorney to hand-in a patent on the design after he insisted to try it since it has a few features that are quite disruptive. I will not describe the disruptive features but will give all the insight I can here. He thinks chances are good that it will work - but let us wait and see.

The first prototype will not be trimmed for fuel efficiency or emissions - and the design target is 1000kW. I would like to package it up to fit into a Testarossa - I love the subframe and there is enough space in my view.

Question:
Does anyone have drawings/dimensions/CAD data of that subframe? I do virtually everything in CAD (computer aided design) at this point. I

Thanks!

PS: The engine is a 180-degree V-design. I have a V14 design for a friend who wanted to put it into a LeMans car but this has stopped since he got really sick. The engine is modular, which means that a single 2-cylinder unit will be built and tested first to confirm reliability and power. The design then simply uses many of these units to make up an engine. There is no long crankshaft - only individual crankshafts. Sort of the idea of the Porsche 916 on the "next level". That V12 had two crankshafts. Fundamentally, it makes no sense to transmit torque through a crankshaft, and therefore, this design features a "top shaft" onto which all 2-cylinder units drive. That top shaft is a hollow tube for maximum stiffness and strength at the lowest weight. The issue with long crankshafts is that the entire block twists - in some cases more than 1 degree. This, in some cases, is why dragster engines often have run-in crankshaft bearings after just a few passes. It is not the load of the combustion cycle, but the distortion of the block and the crank that "fight each other" because they do not run true to each other after a block distortion of 1 degree in rotation. Unfortunately, the "center line" around which the block distorts under torque is not in the centerline of the crank bearings. The solution is very expensive but actually rather simple: divide the crank up into individual units and use a driveshaft that has no individual crank throws.

Image Unavailable, Please Login

(the Testarossa layout would be different, gearbox would be mounted below engine and I would use 6x units for 12x cylinders)

Last but not least I am not trying to earn money here - just want to cover the expenses at this point. This might change if it really takes-off and investors join. I had investors interested but the investment details were not interesting and I refused.

Would really appreciate support to move this ahead!

 

Good for you trying to do something different.

The crankshaft does have an important function and that is rotating mass, this is needed to a certain extent for drivability, and shares the duty with the fly wheel or torque converter.

Interested why the boxer layout was selected over the v layout?

 

This stuff is really cool. And I hope you succeed.

 

Hmmmmm,

 

Do I smell a potential scam, strange diction, sentence construction...

I did not know the "professional rocket engine designer" title existed - I wonder if it's on his business card?

Perhaps we have the incarnation of von Braun here...

 

0 relevance between rockets which is chemistry and bernoullis theorem and internal combustion reciprocating design. I mean none.

Post progress as it should be interesting to follow, but it smells fishy for sure.

Had investors but you refused the money and instead try crowd funding here? Why not use Kickstarter?


Sent using FerrariChat.com mobile app

 

Yes, and his V14 "sick friend" is also very suspect...I suggest to move this elsewhere.

 

If this is in CAD I would love to see the isometric view. Can you produce that? [emoji848]

Sent using FerrariChat.com mobile app

 

Wow - lots of negativity here! Come on guys, give me some love! Thought you guys had some decency - sounds like a Dodge forum!

Yes of course I can produce an isometric view - CAD is very early at this point. This is the LeMans car - I will try to build it no matter what but unfortunately doing this as a 1-man show at this point.

Image Unavailable, Please Login

The reason for this topic is that I need help - does somebody have the dimensions of the Testarossa sub-frame? That is really the first thing I need and the reason for this post!

Thanks team and hope to get ahead with this!

 

Here some images of the motorcycle engine I have designed and built - not yet completed.

CAD:

Image Unavailable, Please Login

Prototype:

Image Unavailable, Please Login

I wish I had more time!!!!

 

Bernoulli`s theorem is very simple to explain: it basically means that total pressure along a streamline (if the boundary condition is inviscid, i.e. if there is no friction) is constant, and you either have static or dynamic pressure. If you measure both (with a Pitot tube or simply a tube sticking into the flow) you measure both and hence, you measure the same everywhere along the streamline no matter what the local cross-section is. You cannot really use it in rocketry much - as the systems are tuned to the last percentages of performance and hence, viscosity needs to be considered. You can use it for low-velocity air flows like heating air flows in the cabin...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernoulli's_principle

Anyway, thanks for your post. I do strongly disagree with what you have written though!

 

So the dimensions of this thing basically:

Image Unavailable, Please Login

Found this one on ebay:

https://www.ebay.de/itm/401656849757

Its in Sacramento, California, USA. Anyone there who is also in this forum? I will probably get it. Are they all the same for all Testarossa models? Where can I read up more on the frame and the assembly, integration work, etc. What "does the car need" from this sub-frame to function?

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

How is the crank made? That's a mighty long crank.
One thing you could do is go to the nearest Ferrari recycler, maybe Redbay motors and have a look at the sub frames and tale measurements there?
https://redbaycars.com/Parts/flat-12/ferraritestarossa.html

I know Judd motor are V10. LMP2 has engine spec but LMP1 does not but this does not sounds like an LMP1 car. Is there an engine spec for the class your thinking about?

I'm sure a V6 turbo would make more power, let alone a V8 with 2 turbos the size of dinner plates, not clear on why NA 14 cylinder unless it just because and that's a good enough reason!

 

There was a lot of interest in rotary valve trains some time ago -- so may be hard to convince an Examiner that you have invented something that hasn't been disclosed before. If you go here:

https://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/search-adv.htm

and type something like "abst/rotary and abst/valve and abst/engine and abst/combustion" in the Query box that will get you some prior patents to look at. Of course, you know your own idea best so you may have some other terms in mind that you could search for in the prior patent Abstracts, Claims , or Descriptions/Specifications. One thing I've found is that being able to specially describe in your Patent Application how your invention differs from the prior existing patents, and why it's "new and novel", goes a long way in helping to convince the Examiner that it is a "new and novel" idea.

 

I'll bet the native English speaking style is strange to Germans as well - let's remember this is a global forum.

Stefan I applaud your efforts and wish you success. I personally know quite a few aerospace engineers who are into cars on the side. It's my local tribe. Your explanation of decoupling the cranks from each other and using a power transmission tube makes sense

One question, what is the advantage of 3d printing from inconel? I don't see extreme high temperatures for the block and heads unless you are perhaps restricting cooling for higher thermal efficiency. Are there geometric features you need that require 3D printing? A lighter alloy may allow for higher power/weight ratio if you're interested in that. Of course you'll want the center of gravity somewhere reasonable and you already know lightness counts when the block is above the gearbox.

A copy of the workshop manual may answer many of your questions regarding integration steps and interfaces from that subframe to the rest of the car.

After you make the flat-12 version for the Testarossa, please consider making a boxer for the Boxers

Good luck and keep us posted!

 

There is no long crank in this engine which is why the engine can be so long. This engine only works with a turbo or compressor - but let me go step by step here.

 

Thanks - the patent is not on the valve train, also the engine can use a cylindrical rolling drum as the valve which I want to consider. Thanks for the link! Let me see where this will go. Patent attorney was positive and I hope I have a chance here! Lots of applications these days so I agree chances are small .... but I am trying!!!

 

Inconel prints can feature wall thicknesses of 1mm without too much issues. The cooling channels are finned and it all cannot be machined or cast. The engine concept has significantly higher thermal loads in the head and valves, so aluminium is not an option from our analyses.

OK - does anyone have any input on that Testarossa sub-frame? Is the 1990 frame the same as the 1991 frame?

 

Doubt anyone has one laying around, Redbay cars can't be that far from you and have a look at the sub frame and take measurements there?
https://redbaycars.com/Parts/flat-12/ferraritestarossa.html

You can also xref the part numbers online to verify they are the same, chances are they are identical as far as mount/motor dimensions go, maybe other changes for suspension or coolant tank etc but the engine is the same thus the critical dimensions would be the same. Easy to check online.

 

The rear sub frame of the TR is the same from 1986 until 1991. There will be a differance however in the rear most section for bumper mounting depending on country. But as far as engine mounting and chassis install points..they will be identical.

 

This is chassis diagram for 512TR...should be more or less like TR.

Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Awesome - really appreciated. I was told that there were changes from Testarossa to TR - does anyone know the specifics concerning the subframe?

I am somewhat surprised that the GT40 kitcar scene is so huge (many manufacturers like https://race-car-replicas.com/rcr-40-mki-mkii) but I havent found any Testarossa kitcars. You could "revamp" them through a kitcar with basically all the lastest tech...

Anyway, thanks for the post!

 

The chassis (especially the rear) was redesigned on the 512tr ..so definitely big difference in the rear of the testarossa and the 512tr

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

 

Interesting - any insight into why and what changed?

 

The sub frame was removed and a permanent structure was made ..the engine sits lower (main purpose) to handle better

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk