Measuring Engine Potential: The Importance of Area Under a Power Curve

  • Thread starter Thread starter ethies
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Area Curve Work
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the evaluation of engine performance, particularly the significance of measuring the area under power and torque curves compared to peak horsepower and torque figures. Participants explore the implications of these measurements in the context of vehicle acceleration and performance testing.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the area under the power and torque curves is a better measure of engine potential than peak figures, citing examples like the Porsche 911 Turbo and Dodge Viper.
  • One participant explains that integrating power over time yields work, while another introduces the concept of impulse as a measure related to momentum change.
  • There is a contention regarding the relevance of torque versus horsepower in evaluating engine performance, with some arguing that average horsepower over the RPM range is more critical.
  • Participants discuss the impact of engine placement and traction on vehicle acceleration, with examples from different cars illustrating these points.
  • Some participants express confusion about the definitions of impulse and its relationship to work and force over time.
  • A later reply emphasizes that specialized equipment, such as slipper clutches and higher-stall torque converters, can significantly affect performance by optimizing horsepower delivery.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the best metrics for evaluating engine performance, with no consensus reached on the importance of impulse versus horsepower or torque. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the optimal approach to measuring engine capability.

Contextual Notes

Some participants acknowledge limitations in their understanding of the relationships between power, work, and impulse, indicating a need for further clarification on these concepts.

ethies
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Peak horsepower and peak torque are frequently quoted as estimation of a vehichle's power. However in reading performance testing data I've seen many instances where this is highly misleading. The Porsche 911 Turbo (with some super special so and so package) produces less peak torque, less peak horsepower, and weighs more than a Dodge Viper. However, the 911 was quicker to 60, and quicker in the 1/4 mile. The reason for this was that while the Viper had higher peak horsepower and torque, the 911 spent more of its RPM band at higher torque and power levels without having a sharp peak (flatter power and torque curves). Wouldn't then the best measurement of overall engine potential be to measure the area under the power curve or the area under the torque curve? What would the integration of work or power be called? Thanks, Eric
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
integrating power on time gives you work, since power is defined as dW/dt
 
No. It's not mainly because of power considerations. Both of these vehicles have enough to break traction, however the Viper does so much more easily because it is RWD with a heavy engine in front. Compare the 0-30 times. The Porsche is way ahead. It pulls 0.98g acceleration (0-30mph in 1.4 sec), while the Viper is in the 0.6 to 0.7g range (0-60mph in 4.4sec). My little Toyota MR2, with 115 hp can almost keep up with the mighty Viper off the line because it has the engine weight placed optimally just ahead of the rear wheels.
 
Roughly speaking, power over time is work (the amount of energy you put into the system), and work over time is impulse (the change in momentum of the system).
 
Alright, krab, I'm sure that engine placement has a significant effect on the times; but having seen the torque and power curves, I know that the 911 is producing more horsepower than the Viper through most of its rpm band. If this particular example is troublesome simply think of two theoretical cars that have engines similar in nature to the viper and the 911 mounted similarly to each other. I probably should have thought that through better before asking the whole integration of dW/dt thing as power, but as Chen said (I didn't think of it this way) change in work over time is impulse (the change of momentum of the system) so wouldn't impulse be a usefull number for rating an engine's capability? Thanks all
 
and work over time is impulse (the change in momentum of the system)

I thought that force over time was impulse. Or maybe you have a different way of thinking about it involving work, and I just haven't thought it through deeply enough. I would be interested in seeing how you got that.
 
ethies said:
so wouldn't impulse be a usefull number for rating an engine's capability? Thanks all
No. Given optimal traction, the only real yardstick is horsepower. To get really precise, it is the average of the horsepower over the rpm range used. More gears is better because that allows one to stay closer to the hp peak. That which is called "torque" is actually torque at the crank. It has no relevance in the calculation.
 
Gza said:
I thought that force over time was impulse. Or maybe you have a different way of thinking about it involving work, and I just haven't thought it through deeply enough. I would be interested in seeing how you got that.
Obviously you're right, I mixed it up... :smile:
 
The average horsepower over time is one reason why the fastest drag racing cars in the world use specialized slipper clutches to allow their engines to spin at maximum horsepower and attempt to transfer as much of that as possible to the tires. Then the clutch is setup to slip most of the way down the track and the engine power is backed down to avoid spinning the tires once the clutch stops slipping near the end of the track.

At a more real-world level, guys with late-model Camaros can replace their torque converters in their cars with a higher-stall model and can instantly jump from a 13.5 to a 12.5 in the quarter mile. The higher stall allows the engine to maintain a higher average horsepower number from the higher average revs.

But the Porsche 911 Turbo has always done well for acceleration with AWD and the rear-weight bias to improve traction. Plus it handles well, go figure. :)

Cliff

P.S. In answer to the original question, publications like Popular Hot Rodding will score engine building competitors based on average horsepower and torque over specified RPM ranges.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
10K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
9K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K