Does anyone recognise this equation (Indicated mean pressure)?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter bsodmike
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mean Pressure
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around an equation related to indicated mean pressure in the context of internal combustion engines. Participants explore the meanings of various variables in the equation, which appears to be derived from thermodynamics but is specifically applied to engine performance. The conversation includes attempts to clarify definitions and relationships between the variables involved.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Mike seeks clarification on the equation for indicated mean pressure, specifically the variables q_C and \epsilon_{\text{Vi}}.
  • Some participants propose that \epsilon_{\text{Vi}} likely refers to volumetric efficiency, indicating how well the cylinder fills.
  • Others suggest that q_C represents the heating value of the fuel, with a specific value of 42.5×10^6 being used.
  • There is a discussion about \lambda_{\text{tot}} being the fuel equivalence ratio, which compares the actual fuel-air mix to the stoichiometric mix.
  • One participant notes that the equation is not commonly presented in this form and is usually simplified to work per cycle over volume displaced.
  • There is uncertainty regarding the specific context of the equation, with some participants indicating it relates to internal combustion engines rather than general thermodynamics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of certainty regarding the definitions of the variables, with some agreeing on certain interpretations while others remain uncertain or propose alternative explanations. The discussion does not reach a consensus on the meanings of all variables.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge that the equation may not be standard in thermodynamics and that the definitions of some variables depend on specific contexts, such as internal combustion engines. There are unresolved questions about the exact nature of q_C and \epsilon_{\text{Vi}}.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for individuals interested in the thermodynamics of internal combustion engines, particularly those seeking to understand the relationships between various performance metrics and efficiencies.

bsodmike
Messages
82
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I have been reading some online papers and have been struggling with the following equation as the author seems to introduce it without much detail. Since my background is primarily in electronic engineering, it is quite possible that this could be one of the elementary equations in thermodynamics.

[tex]P_i=\dfrac{q_C}{\lambda_{\text{tot}}\alpha_{\text{st}}}\rho_C\epsilon_{\text{Vi}}\eta_i[/tex]

What I know:
[tex]P_i[/tex]: indicated mean pressure; This is OK!

[tex]\alpha_{\text{st}}[/tex]: the ideal air-to-fuel ratio for gasoline; values vary between 14.3 and 14.8. This is also defined as the "stoichiometric air-fuel ratio"

[tex]\rho_C[/tex]: compressor air density; This is OK! Standard value of 1.2 kg/m^3 is used.

[tex]\eta_i[/tex]: Indicated efficiency, 0.38 is being used; This is OK!

Variables I have no idea about:
[tex]q_C[/tex]: A value of [tex]42.5\times10^6[/tex] is being used; have no idea.

[tex]\lambda_{\text{tot}}[/tex]: relative air ratio, it seems 1.8 is a typical value for constant-pressure (pulse factor = 1) turbochargers??!?

[tex]\epsilon_{\text{Vi}[/tex]: no clue! A value of 0.97 has been used. Seems it is a percentage of sorts, an efficiency may be. The subscript "i" is typically used to indicate the word 'indicated' but "Vi" is not making much sense.

Summary: Have you seen this equation before? Please let me know what [tex]\epsilon_{\text{Vi}[/tex] and I would greatly appreciate if you can confirm the other variables and my guesses/suggestions.

Cheers
Mike!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I have split the variables above into two sections: (1) the variables I have figured out and are certain of and (2) the variables that continue to elude me.

The two driving me up the wall are [tex]q_C[/tex] and [tex]\epsilon_{\text{Vi}}[/tex]. Really would be glad if someone could help. Thanks!
 
Indicated mean effective pressure.

evi is probably volumetric efficiency (hew well the cylinder fills)
Qc is the heating value of the fuel.
lambda is the fuel equivilance ratio. its the ratio of fuel air mix to stoichiometric fuel air mix. (another way of noting how ruch or lean the engine is running)

The equation is not commonly seen looking like that (its usually in a simplified form work per cycle / volume dispaced). In this case the auther has simply expanded it to include all the basic variables.

mep is not really a pressure per se. It's a method of characterising how well an engine is performing regardless of displacement. The higher the mep the better.This isn't general thermodynamics if its the equation I am thinking of. It's to do with internal combustion engines. What book is it?
 
Last edited:
xxChrisxx said:
evi is probably volumetric efficiency (hew well the cylinder fills)
Qc is the heating value of the fuel.
lambda is the fuel equivilance ratio. its the ratio of fuel air mix to stoichiometric fuel air mix. (another way of noting how ruch or lean the engine is running)

The equation is not commonly seen looking like that (its usually in a simplified form work per cycle / volume dispaced). In this case the auther has simply expanded it to include all the basic variables.

Is Qc the same as heat of combustion? This page lists a HHV value for diesel of 44.8 MJ/kg; considering the equation I've seen uses 42.5 MJ/kg, it explains the 10^6 factor!

xxChrisxx said:
This isn't general thermodynamics if its the equation I am thinking of. It's to do with internal combustion engines. What book is it?

You're right; I did look up some books and found equations in terms of work per cycle/volume displaced. It was an undergraduate draft report I was perusing, rather than a book. Referencing books didn't help of course for the reason you mentioned.

Thanks a lot for your explanation... I am very bad at letting things 'go' if I cannot understand something, and this would have continued to nag away at me :)

Cheers
Mike.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
23K
Replies
9
Views
9K