Flat plane crank

Author
Discussion

xain

Original Poster:

261 posts

284 months

Friday 26th July 2002
quotequote all
Hi all,
I know it's only the AJPs that have flat plane cranks, but I'm just curious about why they're supposedly better for racing.

Also, do they have some wierd firing order, like on Ducattis where there are two firings, then a long pause, then two firings (apparently to improve the impulse recovery in the tyres). Do 4 cyls fire at once, followed by the other 4 or some such?

I know these beasts have a different exhaust note to the Rover unit, and I wondered what was actually going on in them.

Cheers
Jon

2 Sheds

2,529 posts

291 months

Friday 26th July 2002
quotequote all
There were a few flat plane cranks for Rover V8 produced, and were certainly used, there must have been doubts about the strength of the rover block though. its like linking two 4 cylinder engines together , 2 cylinders firing simultaneously.

JonRB

76,106 posts

279 months

Friday 26th July 2002
quotequote all
The trouble with flat-plane cranks, as both Lotus and TVR have dound out, is that they just don't SOUND right in a road car.

mavrick

12 posts

268 months

Friday 26th July 2002
quotequote all
oh - I don't know. I think TVR seem to have got
it right with the Cerbera sports exhaust...

350matt

3,770 posts

286 months

Monday 29th July 2002
quotequote all
The main reason to run a flat plane crank is to couple the exhaust pulses properly and so get more power, it is possible with a 90° V8 but much crossing over the engine is required and usually the primary lengthds are then too long.

Matt

xain

Original Poster:

261 posts

284 months

Monday 29th July 2002
quotequote all
Ah, so the idea is to combine 2 exhaust pulses so that while they are travelling down the exhaust system they effectively siphon more mixture into a cylinder that is just starting it's intake phase with the exhaust valve still open (overlap)?

So I guess the slightly different sounds inthe exhaust nbote are caused by two cylinders firing at once with a *tiny* difference in times.

mavrick

12 posts

268 months

Monday 29th July 2002
quotequote all
I thought it was because of the big bang approach..
which gives the tyres a longer duration in which
to recover traction.

dannylt

1,906 posts

291 months

Monday 29th July 2002
quotequote all
Big bang stuff is only really relevant for motorcycles with their tiny contact patch, i.e. the new Ducati V4 that fires just like a V2. More cylinders means more valve area which means more power.

The Ferrari V8 is also a flat plane crank, so it's not exactly that you can't make them sound nice... but the Cerbie one is even weirder because of the 75 degree angle - irregular periods between firings. I think it's lovely

danny

lawrence1

133 posts

282 months

Wednesday 7th August 2002
quotequote all
Two cylinders dont fire at the same time. A typical firing order would be 15486372, numbering up the side of the block.
The single plane crankshaft provides 180 degree exhaust pulse intervals between adjacent cylinders and with simple manifold modifications this can be extended to 360 degrees before pulse interference can occur.

The 2 plane crankshaft (like that of a Ford or Chevrolet V8) has a dynamic state of balance far superior to that of the single plane crank, and for this reason is more popular.

philshort

8,293 posts

284 months

Wednesday 7th August 2002
quotequote all
There's an explanation here. From what I can make of it the difference is in the positions of the crank pins. Looking at the crank sideways on a normal (cross plane) V8 will have crank pins at every 90 degrees - ie in four positions. Cross plane cranks have them at 180 degrees.

ATG

21,358 posts

279 months

Thursday 8th August 2002
quotequote all
Interesting site that Phil. Nice one.

lawrence1

133 posts

282 months

Thursday 8th August 2002
quotequote all
Interesting site. Reinforces my previous statement.

As for all V8's being 90 degrees, well there are 2 that I know of in common use. The Ford Windsor 302 and 351 cubic in V8's are 60 degree engines, not 90.

They are a very compact unit and seem to perform as equally as well as their 90 d counterparts.

Ford also make the same engine as a 90 degree unit. They are the 302 and 351 Cleavland.

simpo one

87,081 posts

272 months

Wednesday 4th September 2002
quotequote all
Since you've cracked the flat-plane crank problem, can anyone explain how a rotary engine (aeroplane, not Wankel) works? I can't see how the con-rods don't go straight through the crankshaft!

kevinday

12,287 posts

287 months

Thursday 5th September 2002
quotequote all
There are no pistons or conrods in the Wankel engine drawings I've seen. The cylinders are arrayed around the crank which is shaped to compress into the cylinders as it passes. I don't know how and it is a fair while ago so I have probably remembered wrong anyway

philshort

8,293 posts

284 months

Thursday 5th September 2002
quotequote all
I'd imagine (and this is purely speculation!) that a rotary (not Wankel) configuration simply has crank pins spread at equal distances around the crank. The advantage of course is perfect balance should be acheivable as the pistons all travel in different directions, and you should be able to get equal and opposite forces cancelling each other - like a boxer engine only more so.

Mark.S

473 posts

284 months

Thursday 5th September 2002
quotequote all

jmorgan

36,010 posts

291 months

Thursday 5th September 2002
quotequote all
quote:

Since you've cracked the flat-plane crank problem, can anyone explain how a rotary engine (aeroplane, not Wankel) works? I can't see how the con-rods don't go straight through the crankshaft!


Do you mean the air cooled ones, cylinders in a circle around the crank?

GreenV8S

30,481 posts

291 months

Thursday 5th September 2002
quotequote all
quote:

Since you've cracked the flat-plane crank problem, can anyone explain how a rotary engine (aeroplane, not Wankel) works? I can't see how the con-rods don't go straight through the crankshaft!



I think you're referring to a Radial engine, where the cylinders are arranged in a circle. The conventional 'in-line' design of each con rod having a separate big end bearing onto its own crank on the crankshaft wouldn't work, because all the cranks would have to be in the same place. Having all the con rods connecting on a common crank wouldn't work either, because they would get knotted up!

How this actually works is, there is one 'master' piston with a normal con rod and big-end bearing onto a crank. All the other pistons have modified con rods that connect onto the end of the master con rod. Hence the big ends move round in a circle but don't rotate (if you see what I mean).

OK cr*p explanation and you probably need a picture, but I don't have one. Sorry!

Cheers,
Peter Humphries (and a green V8S)

jmorgan

36,010 posts

291 months

Thursday 5th September 2002
quotequote all
quote:

quote:

Since you've cracked the flat-plane crank problem, can anyone explain how a rotary engine (aeroplane, not Wankel) works? I can't see how the con-rods don't go straight through the crankshaft!



I think you're referring to a Radial engine, where the cylinders are arranged in a circle. The conventional 'in-line' design of each con rod having a separate big end bearing onto its own crank on the crankshaft wouldn't work, because all the cranks would have to be in the same place. Having all the con rods connecting on a common crank wouldn't work either, because they would get knotted up!

How this actually works is, there is one 'master' piston with a normal con rod and big-end bearing onto a crank. All the other pistons have modified con rods that connect onto the end of the master con rod. Hence the big ends move round in a circle but don't rotate (if you see what I mean).

OK cr*p explanation and you probably need a picture, but I don't have one. Sorry!

Cheers,
Peter Humphries (and a green V8S)


They had one at duxford that looked like it was being set up for a display. No cylinders on it for show etc. very compact.

kevinday

12,287 posts

287 months

Thursday 5th September 2002
quotequote all
I must (learn) to a post fully before I