Motec Fuel Test.pdf

Mounted Engine Dynamometer Evaluation of High Octane Retail Fuels

Executive Summary Fuel comparison tests were performed on three leading brand high octane fuels, Shell V-Power Racing and two Premium 98 Octane fuels (brands X and Y), under strictly controlled conditions. Tests were performed using a current model Mitsubishi Evo IX 2ltr turbocharged engine* mounted to a purpose built engine dynamometer cell. Tests were conducted using the standard Mitsubishi ECU and a MoTeC Plug In M800 ECU. No modifications were made to the engine. The results of the testing clearly indicated that: 1) Tuning of engines is required to obtain the maximum benefit from any fuel. 2) There can be significant performance benefits to the fitting of a MoTeC Engine Control Unit (ECU), even without engine modifications. 3) Shell V-Power Racing 100 Octane fuel consistently delivered significantly more torque (up to 10.7%) and engine horsepower (up to 4.6%) than other commercially available high octane fuels in the retail market. In addition, based on limited testing, Aviation Fuel (Av Gas) was also tested. Initial results showed that V-Power Racing was superior in its detonation resistance and able to make more power than the tested Av Gas. *Mitsubishi Lancer, Evolution IX, 4G63 2ltr, 16 valve DOHC MIVEC intercooled, turbocharged engine

© May 2007 MoTeC P/L

www.motec.com.au

Page 1 of 13

Introduction Controlled testing and monitoring of engine performance has always revealed clear evidence that while some fuels have inherent capabilities to deliver higher levels of engine performance, the magnitude of improvement in performance is related to two factors: 1) The level of engine tuning specific to the particular fuel 2) The quality of the fuel itself. The aim of the following study was to map engine performance against relatively minor tuning of a standard high performance engine, the Mitsubishi EVO IX 2Ltr, and fuel quality. The fuels chosen were available at and sourced from major brand retail service stations and as such are readily available to the general public. Fuels chosen for comparison - Shell 100 Octane V-Power Racing and two Premium 98 Octane brands (X and Y) - were considered to be representative of the premium and super premium fuels available in the retail market place.

Trial Setup The EVO IX engine was ramped on the engine dyno with test fuel at a rate of 300 rpm/sec to emulate maximum acceleration similar to 4th gear. Fuel was pumped from storage by an electric fuel pump, which was also used to flush fuel through the system when fuel changeover occurred. Trial data represented in the report is the average of 10 runs. Fuels were tested under identical and reproducible controlled conditions.

Engine Tuning - Timing Advance Results While running on the MoTeC ECU, the EVO IX engine timing was adjusted in all runs to maximise torque curves for all fuels tested. Engine ignition timing was advanced incrementally until ping / detonation was detected by the independent detonation detection device, then retarded sufficiently to prevent detonation during ramp runs. Premium 98 Octane fuels X and Y were both found to exhibit detonation at the same level of ignition timing advancement. In all cases, including a trial with Aviation Gasoline (Av Gas), 100 Octane VPower Racing was found to accept greater levels of timing advancement than the other trial fuels. The elevated octane of V-Power Racing was found to allow an extra 3.5 degrees of timing advancement when utilizing the MoTeC M800 Plug in ECU at standard boost levels. © May 2007 MoTeC P/L

www.motec.com.au

Page 2 of 13

With boost raised to 20 PSI via reprogramming through the MoTeC ECU, an extra 7.0 degrees of timing advancement was made once V Power was introduced. This was substantially more than expected and the torque curves say it all. (Fig 2)

Fuel

Timing Advance (Deg)

Torque

Premium X 98 Octane

0

302.9

Premium Y 98 Octane

0

305.5

3.5

316.9

100 Octane V-Power Racing

Table 1. Engine timing adjustment comparison, MoTeC M800 Plug in ECU standard boost.

Fuel

Timing Advance (Deg)

Torque

Premium X 98 Octane

0

328.1

Premium Y 98 Octane

0

328.1


7

363.5

Table 2. Engine timing adjustment comparison, MoTeC M800 Plug in ECU, 20psi boost.

Engine Dynamometer Torque Curve Results Torque curves derived from the average result of ten runs for each fuel, under comparable conditions, were represented graphically (see Figures 1 and 2). For ease of interpretation, differences between fuels under similar trial conditions have been highlighted in colour. Key data, turbocharger boost pressure, ECU type, peak torque and % difference between fuels tested are reported in Tables 3 and 4. Figure 1 represents three trials applying increasing levels of engine tuning to the fuels involved: Trial 1: ‘Standard ECU’ Using the Mitsubishi ECU as if fitted to the standard vehicle with standard Turbocharger boost (14psi). This resulted in close to 1% variation in peak torque between Premium X 98 Octane and V-Power racing 100 Octane.


www.motec.com.au

Page 3 of 13

Trial 2: ‘MoTeC ECU boost matched to Std ECU’ The Mitsubishi ECU was replaced with a MoTeC M800 Plug in ECU. The turbocharger boost profile was tuned to match the standard ECU and ignition timing maximised to suit the engine. This combination resulted in a significant increase in torque for both fuels, 16.5% for V-Power Racing and 13.5% for Premium X 98 Octane. Comparing both fuels together, there was a 3.4% increase in torque for V-Power Racing relative to Premium X 98 Octane.

Trial 3: ‘MoTeC ECU 20psi boost’ A final refinement in tuning via an increase in turbocharger boost pressure to 20psi resulted in a further increase in torque relative to Trial 1 of 36.0% for V-Power Racing and a 24.0 % for Premium X 98 Octane. These results indicate that dramatic increases in torque can be achieved via engine tuning and sophisticated engine management systems, and that 100 Octane V-Power Racing delivered measurable and significantly better boosts to performance than Premium X 98 Octane fuel.


www.motec.com.au

Page 4 of 13

Engine Dynamometer Results

Figure 1: Torque comparison of VPR and Premium X 98 Octane.

ECU

Turbo Pressure (PSI)

Torque @ 3950 rpm

Premium 98 Octane

Mitsubishi

14

265.0


Mitsubishi

14

267.5

Premium 98 Octane

MoTeC

14

300.8


MoTeC

14

311.0

Premium 98 Octane

MoTeC

20

328.5


MoTeC

20

363.7

Fuel

% Max Torque Diff. +0.9%

+3.4%

+10.7%

Table 3: Torque Curves


www.motec.com.au

Page 5 of 13

Figure 1a: Progressive torque comparison.

ECU


Torque @ 3950 rpm

Premium 98 Octane

Mitsubishi

14

265.0


Mitsubishi

14

267.5

+0.9%

Premium 98 Octane

MoTeC

14

300.8

+13.5%


MoTeC

14

311.0

+17.4%

Premium 98 Octane

MoTeC

20

328.5

+24.0%


MoTeC

20

363.7

+37.2%

Fuel

% Max Torque Gain

Table 3a: Progressive Torque advantage relative to standard Mitsubishi ECU on Premium 98 Octane


www.motec.com.au

Page 6 of 13

Figure 2: Comparison of VPR and Premium 98 Octane X and Y under optimum engine conditions.

ECU


Torque @ 3900 rpm

Premium X 98 Octane

MoTeC

20

328.1

Premium Y 98 Octane

MoTeC

20

328.1

0%


MoTeC

20

363.5

+10.8%

Fuel

% Max Torque Difference

Table 4: V-Power Racing and Premium 98 Octane Fuel Torque


www.motec.com.au

Page 7 of 13

Figure 3: Horse Power Comparison of VPR and Premium 98 Octane.

Fuel

ECU


Horse Power @ 6750rpm

Premium 98 Octane

Mitsubishi

14

302.5


Mitsubishi

14

308.5

Premium 98 Octane

MoTeC

14

339.6


MoTeC

14

352.6

Premium 98 Octane

MoTeC

20

343.8


MoTeC

20

359.6

% Max HP Diff.

+2.0%

+3.8%

+4.6%

Table 5: V-Power Racing and Premium X 98 Octane Horse Power Results


www.motec.com.au

Page 8 of 13

MoTeC PROCEDURES EQUIPMENT USED MoTeC Research Centre engine dynamometer cell Cell includes: Dynamic Test Systems water brake engine dynamometer with Dyno Log electronic control software. Dyno Log software features full ambient condition compensation. Engine and dyno monitored by MoTeC Advanced Dash Logger (ADL)

EQUIPMENT SET UP DATA LOGGING MoTeC Advanced Dash Logger was set up to: A. Record the following parameters 1. RPM 2. Boost 3. Air temp after intercooler 4. Ambient Air Temp 5. Water Temp 6. Exhaust Temp 7. Oil Temp 8. Fuel Pressure 9. Engine Torque 10. Oil Pressure


www.motec.com.au

Page 9 of 13

B. Alarm against breach of limits on the following parameters 1. Ambient Air Temperature +/- 6 Deg C 2. Boost level +/- 7 kPa 3. Oil Temperature +/- 15 Deg C 4. Inlet Air Temperature +/- 6 Deg C 5. Oil Pressure +/- 100 kPa 6. Water Temperature +/- 10 Deg C 7. Exhaust Temperature +/- 75 Deg C FUEL 60 L Batch Controlled Premium X 98 Octane fuel 60L Batch Controlled Premium Y 98 Octane fuel 60L Batch controlled 100 Octane Fuel VPR – Shell V-Power Racing All fuel was laboratory tested by Intertek Testing Services P/L 218 Lorimer St North Melbourne. Testing was against key fuel parameters [density (ASTM D4052), Distillation (ASTM D86), Reid Vapour pressure (ASTM D323), Research Octane (ASTM D2699) and Motor Octane (ASTM D2700)] to ensure homogeneity and determine quality. Fuel was obtained by direct purchase from local service station retail outlets. Plumb in 4 separate fuel cells. The 4 cells enabled quick and efficient changing of fuel types: 1. Premium X 98 Octane 2. Premium Y 98 Octane 3. V-Power Racing 100 Octane 4. Waste fuel from draining lines between fuel changes. The fuel system was flushed through after each fuel change over and engine run for 1 minute to remove traces of previous fuel.


www.motec.com.au

Page 10 of 13

TEST ENGINE Standard Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution IX 2ltr 4G63 2ltr 16 valve DOHC MIVEC intercooled turbocharged engine Set up in Dyno cell as near as possible to installation in vehicle. Use standard air induction and exhaust front pipe including catalytic converter. Fit up extra sensors external of engine sensors to meet requirements for measurements into the MoTeC dash Logger. Fit up external detonation listening device also.

TESTING Conditions All testing was done under stable atmospheric conditions and final results recorded on the same day Procedure After a suitable warm up, a series of ramp tests were conducted whereby the average of 10 runs were recorded as the standard for the relevant fuel. Ramp Test Procedure Position engine throttle to 100% Engine was held by Dyno at a pre start speed of 2000 RPM off boost. © May 2007 MoTeC P/L

www.motec.com.au

Page 11 of 13

The engine was then accelerated at a controlled rate of 300RPM per second (similar to maximum acceleration of the vehicle in a higher gear) Ramp run was completed at 6750 rpm and torque was logged and displayed on Dyno Log software. The entire test was computer controlled, promoting repeatable results. Repeat ramp tests for different fuels to be tested.

TEST COMBINATIONS 1. Standard ECU and wiring harness as fitted in the factory car. Measures were taken to ensure the factory ECU was running in its normal condition and not in any limp home mode. 2. Remove standard ECU and fit MoTeC M800 Plug in ECU and modify boost curve to match that of the standard Mitsubishi ECU. Then tune to MoTeC ECU to make max Torque on each relevant fuel. Utilise on-board knock monitoring to determine no detonation throughout tuning procedure. 3. Modify boost curve in MoTeC plug in ECU to increase average boost of 14 to 20 PSI. Then tune to MoTeC ECU to make max Torque on each relevant fuel. TEST RESULTS Test results were represented graphically for direct comparison. Individual data points such as torque at specific engine speeds was determined by the operator via the assessment software.


www.motec.com.au

Page 12 of 13

Appendix 1

FUEL QUALITY TEST RESULTS Test

Test Method Density ASTM @15oC D4052 Distillation ASTM D86

Research Octane Motor Octane Reid Vapour Pressure

ASTM D2699 ASTM D2700 ASTM D323

Unit

VPR

g/cm3

X

Y

0.7714

0.7575

0.7554

IBP

40.3

33.4

32.7

10% Evap 50% Evap 90% Evap FBP Residue %v/v

54.3

54.6

52.7

109.3

107.6

105.7

141.3

153.7

163.1

173.9 1.0

184.5 1.2

190.2 0.9

RON

101.1

98.2

98.4

MON

87.8

86.7

86.5

kPa

59.00

64.00

57.25

o

C

Table 6: Fuel batch control results.


www.motec.com.au

Page 13 of 13