Sneak Peek! Ford's "Bobcat" Dual Fuel Engine

pickuptrucks.com ^ | June, 8th 2009 | Mike Levine

[taildragger]

A radical twin-fuel engine from Ford, code-named “Bobcat,” that variably blends gasoline and ethanol on demand to realize diesel-like performance continues to make steady progress in its development, according to presentations made by the automaker to the Department of Energy and Society of Automotive Engineers in April. The presentations also provide a first look at the engine’s architecture and make some remarkable claims about “E85-optimized” engine efficiency versus size.

[taildragger]

The Bobcat engine starts with a small turbocharged engine with separate gasoline and ethanol (E85) fuel injectors for each cylinder. The gasoline system mixes fuel and air in the motor's intake manifold using port injection. The second system uses direct injection to introduce small amounts of ethanol directly into the combustion chamber to control premature detonation, or knock, which results from the high temperature and pressure of a turbocharged engine. The ethanol prevents knock by cooling the air/fuel mixture until the engine is ready for combustion. With knock suppressed, the compression ratio can be increased.

Ford’s engineering partner, Ethanol Boosting Systems, LLC of Cambridge, Mass., has trademarked the term “DI Octane Boost” to describe the process; the direct injection of ethanol effectively increases the octane of regular gasoline from 88-91 octane to more than 150 octane.

The percentage mix of gasoline and ethanol varies according to load. In low- to medium-load conditions, only port-injected gasoline may be required. Direct-injected ethanol is added and increased as a function of load but only in the amount necessary to prevent knock. Using such technology, a 5.0-liter V-8 Bobcat engine could potentially produce 500 horsepower and 750 pounds-feet or more of torque.

Two 3-D computer-rendered diagrams included in Ford’s DOE presentation show the front and rear views of such an engine using a 90-degree V-block design. Two massive air/water heat exchangers sit atop the engine to cool turbocharged air before it enters the throttle body and intake manifold. Twin turbos sit on the lower right and left sides.

A separate engine cutaway diagram of a Bobcat motor shows the positioning of a gasoline port injector and ethanol direct injector. The gasoline and ethanol would be stored in two separate fuel tanks.

EBS claims that relative to today’s common port fuel injected gasoline engines in cars and light-duty trucks, direct-injection ethanol boosting would provide a fuel efficiency gain for typical combined city/highway driving of 25 to 30 percent, at an incremental cost of $1,100 to $1,500, depending on the size of the vehicle. The efficiency gain and torque are comparable to current turbodiesel engines, like Ford’s 350-hp/650 lbs.-ft. 6.4-liter Power Stroke, but at about a third of the cost and with the advantage of cleaner emissions without expensive exhaust aftertreatment hardware.

Ethanol boosting also promises 5 to 10 percent greater fuel economy than Ford’s new line of gasoline-turbocharged direct-injection EcoBoost engines, which it’s based on. Ford’s DOE presentation says, “The E85 optimized engine and the dual fuel concept are logical extensions of Ford’s ‘EcoBoost’ strategy.”

Another way to measure efficiency, regardless of engine architecture, is through a metric called Brake Mean Effective Pressure. BMEP quantifies the amount of work an engine can do versus its displacement by measuring the average pressure exerted on an engine’s pistons. The more efficient an engine is, the higher its BMEP score.

According to Ford’s SAE presentation, an experimental 3.5-liter GTDI EcoBoost engine modified with E85 direct injection and gasoline port fuel injection run on a dynamometer achieved a BMEP score of 305 psi (27 bar), which translates to approximately 553 pounds-feet of torque and 316-hp at 3,000 rpm (flat torque curve from 1,500 to 3,000 rpm). The experimental engine was limited by the engine block’s ability to handle higher compression ratios. In comparison, a standard GTDI EcoBoost engine on a dyno was rated at 17 bar, which translates to approximately 350 pounds-feet of torque and 300-hp at 4,500 rpm (flat torque curve from 1,500 to 4,500 rpm).

As we mentioned earlier, ethanol use increases with engine load. A potential drawback to the Bobcat engine would be access to an ethanol refueling infrastructure, especially when a truck is working hard pulling a trailer or climbing hills.

Ford’s SAE presentation provides several range estimates for refueling a 5.0-liter Bobcat V-8 with a 10 gallon E85 tank and 26 gallon gas tank compared to a current Ford F-150 with a 5.4-liter V-8 and 26 gallon gas tank. Under mild driving conditions, the 5.0-liter E85 tank might have to be refilled only once every 20,000 miles and the gas tank refilled every 528 miles. Today’s 5.4-liter V-8 is said to have a 486 mile range under these conditions. However, an extreme towing scenario with the 5.0-liter V-8 pulling a fully-loaded trailer up a constant 6 percent grade could mean refilling the E85 tank as often as every 100 miles. That would be more often than the gas tank, which has an expected range of 243 miles under those conditions. Today’s 5.4-liter V-8 is said to have a 99 mile range under these conditions.

If the ethanol tank did run dry, the Bobcat engine could operate indefinitely with lower performance using only gasoline until a source of E85 could be found.

Under most operating conditions, however, Ford’s Bobcat engine could be the right powertrain at the right time to meet newly mandated corporate average fuel economy requirements that require fuel efficiency standard for all light trucks (crossovers, pickup trucks, SUVs and vans) to rise to 30 mpg by 2016, from 23.1 mpg today.

Will it work in the real world? Ford will try out its theories outside of computer simulations and the laboratory before the end of the year when a Bobcat engine is tested in an F-Series pickup for the first time.

[Crolis]

Thanks for posting. This is facinating. Ford seems to be positioned nicely to bring some nice technology into the marketplace.

[taildragger]

BTTT....

[domenad]

Freaking awesome! I bought Ford at $1.95 just to use up the spare $30 in my account. I wish I had bought a thousand shares.

[Army Air Corps]

Ping.

[Brookhaven]

The gasoline and ethanol would be stored in two separate fuel tanks.

---

Isn’t one of the problems with ethanol that it is very hard to handle (as in catches fire easily) in its pure form?

Also, two fuel tanks means two fuel caps. What will prevent your typical soccer mom from putting ethanol in the gas tank (and gas in the ethanol tank)?

Neat idea though.

[taildragger]

Crolis,

It is fasinating. "Ricardo" is working on straight E85 DI with equally crazy gobs of torque. They call their system EBDI I believe.

Either way the "Diesel Ping List" will go crazy, but both efforts might say to the Diesel, bye-bye.....

[JWinNC]

all that added complexity to get less than 20mpg?

might as well stick with diesel

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

Very interesting, it looks like someone has finely figured out the only proper use for ethanol in an internal combustion engine. Hats off to Ford, this looks very promising.

Regards,
GtG

[taildragger]

Looks like the system would run without it with a perforamnce downgrade.

Just wait until soccer mom gets home and go fuel it yourself and get a "Cherry Coke Slushy", while your at it. :-).....

[DieHard the Hunter]

First, I wonder how they manage to prevent the engine from running too hot.

Second, with higher compression ratios and a much more explosive air/fuel mixture, I wonder how they manage the inevitable need for more maintenance on the heads and head gaskets.

Doubtless Ford will have all of this figured out nicely: they’re pretty clever. It would be interesting to see how.

[lafroste]

No, No, NO, It CAN’T meet the CAFE standards. The purpose of the standards is to force cheap, foil made death traps. This could meet the standards while keeping the heavy metal, therefore, the CAFE standards will have to be raised until this engine can’t meet them.

[Abathar]

"However, an extreme towing scenario with the 5.0-liter V-8 pulling a fully-loaded trailer up a constant 6 percent grade could mean refilling the E85 tank as often as every 100 miles."

I guess if you live out in the mountains or are using it for heavy work it might not be practical, stick with a strait diesel.

For the weekend warrior who goes to Lowes or pulls a boat a few times a summer and commutes with his truck during the week it seems to be practical though.

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

An added note:

Direct cylinder injection requires that the substance injected be pressurized to something like 1000 to 1200 psi. Port injection uses much lower pressures (100 psi or less). The requirement for higher pressures makes for some tricky material selections for the injection pump. Diesel injector pumps work with hardened steel because the fuel has good lubricity. Alcohol is a very "dry" fuel and has very low lubricity and gasoline isn't much better. The injection pump has to meter very small quantities of E85 at high pressure, this suggests very tight tolerances and very hard (wear resistant) materials. It won't be cheap compared to the gasoline only systems in current use. However, if they get it working properly it'll be worth it.

Gandalf

[Kenny Bunk]

A radical twin-fuel engine from Ford, code-named “Bobcat,” that variably blends gasoline and ethanol on demand to realize diesel-like performance continues to make steady progress in its development,

"Diesel-like Performance" Indeed, what Liberal Arts Green Weenie Grad wrote that BullShiite?
This is a spark engine that runs on ethanol or gasoline. Big whoop. Double big whoop with the big tax on important Brazilian ethanol.

This is still part of the ethanol craze, when we have billions of barrels of barrels of crude beneath our feet and every Euro car maker is already making small clean diesels that get upwards of 50mpg. You can buy one right now at your VW dealer. If Chrysler can get them, from FIAT, they can compete. Imagine a beautiful small SUV that can get 55mpg on diesel for 15 Gs.

This is also part of the Green Weenie Craze to never allow Diesel passenger cars into the United States; PROBABLY the direct result of having been frightened in utero by a MB 190 D emitting a cloud of smoke on a frosty morning in 1947.

As a result of "boutique fuel rules" Diesel is now as expensive .. or more ... than gasoline, when it should not be, requiring much less energy to refine.

Good post. But let's tell Ford that their Bobcat is based on pussy-tech AND THE RIDICULOUS ETHANOL PREMISE.

When the corn crop is converted to ethanol, tortillas will hit $5.00 each. expect our illegal Mexican aliens to riot in the streets OF YOUR TOWN.

[Jeffrey_D.]

“Freaking awesome!”

Indeed ! I did and now I wish I could have risked even more !!!
Nothing like more than tripling your bet in 3 months.

[Balding_Eagle]

therefore, the CAFE standards will have to be raised until this engine can’t meet them.

Right on. Can't have emissions tests that can be passed.

[OpeEdMunkey]

Also, two fuel tanks means two fuel caps. What will prevent your typical soccer mom from putting ethanol in the gas tank (and gas in the ethanol tank)?

Good point.

Different sized fuel filler neck inserts? Actually it would have to be different shapes since different sizes only protect in one direction. That in turn would require some kind of pump nozzle retrofit.

Ah what the heck. It's only money. Interesting technology though.

[MHGinTN]

You obviously have never had one of my special martinis ... “Very interesting, it looks like someone has finely figured out the only proper use for ethanol in an internal combustion engine.”

[VeniVidiVici]

Seems to me that a 5.0L V8 with twin-turbos could probably get 500hp regardless of whatever voodoo switches between varying mixtures of ethanol and gasoline.

[Colvin]

Look in your traditional gas tank with a match, and then try the same with ethanol. See which burns your face more.

[taildragger]

This is true for the aftermarket, try making a gaggle of them and getting them to pass 50 state emissions. Yes after-marketers can, and do, but with OEM reliability?

[Phil Southern]

alcohol and water injection have been around for a while, just not cost effective. This doesn’t sound very cost effective on any level. I’d rather them press forward with that 60mpg diesel tech, and/or explore Audi’s diesel technology. There are not many new things under the sun when it comes to gasoline or diesel engines, just better solutions to all the same old problems. Google Smokey-Yunick-hot-vapor for an example of technology that was bought and quashed by GM. With updated electronics it may be really good (or not). Here’s a link http://www.legendarycollectorcars.com/featured-vehicles/smokey-yunicks-hot-vapor-fiero-51-mpg-and-0-60-in-less-than-6-seconds-see-and-hear-it-run-in-our-exclusive-video/

[taildragger]

PS..

Aware of Smokey, yes he was out of the box on this one. my question is, is this ethanol revisit by EBS and Ricardo a revisit of cutting edge WWII technology i.e. ADI which was sprayed into superchargers for extra power. Now they are going straight into the cylinders. EBS is claiming 150 octane, up from 87 to 93. In WWII they were running 130-45 and got up to 170 octane. A much greater marginal increase with this new system. Check the book Allied Aircraft Piston Engines of WWII, that is where I got the info on the ADI. With that all said, by revisiting this (alcohol injection) technology, and new applications and technologies applied, will it spring board this "engine" beyond Diesels? Time will tell.

[expatpat]

Ingenious.

[Scythian]

Obama will use GM to destroy Ford subsidizing it so it can produce cars at a massive loss and undercut Ford.

[aruanan]

As a result of "boutique fuel rules" Diesel is now as expensive .. or more ... than gasoline, when it should not be, requiring much less energy to refine.

But there is twice as much gasoline per barrel of crude than diesel.

[Kenny Bunk]

But there is twice as much gasoline per barrel of crude than diesel.

Yabut, requiring a greater energy investment to extract. I'll work that out thermodynamically and get back to you. Of course the catalytic crackers can also use refinery gases as as an energy source ... but energy is energy.

[Kenny Bunk]

"Going to Emergency War Power now, ethanol water injection, to try and get away from that FW 190 ... rats, just blew 5 ju..................

"Shorty, hit the silk .........

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

You obviously have never had one of my special martinis ...

The company I used to work for had a licensee manufacturing our product line in Porto Alegre Brazil. It required several trips each year by the engineering staff to kept thing running smoothly. My boss went down for an extended stay and came back with a new "martini" recipe. Half gin, half vodka, no vermouth, on the rocks and served with a twist. He said he had trouble getting Brazilian bartenders to make a decent martini, always way too much vermouth. He finely came up with his lethal concoction and determined that you could vary the 50/50 proportions a great deal without affecting the taste. He called it the "Green Gringo Special" and said they were like breasts, one was not enough and three was way too much.

I used to mix mine in a shaker and leave it in the freezer for an hour or so before serving straight up. Truly the "water of life"!

Regards,
GtG

[MHGinTN]

50/50 ... Well, if the gin and vodka are excellent quality (a good potato vodka and Bombay Sapphire), and a sufficient amount of filtered water, over filtered water ice ... I guess I will have to try that this evening! Except, one is my limit on a mixed drink.

[slowhandluke]

But there is twice as much gasoline per barrel of crude than diesel.

Maybe for the 'light sweet' crude, but is that also true of the heavier types of crude oil?

[ASOC]

LOL

You are correct. WIth injection the MErlin (12 cyl) could do max boost at altitude and produce 2,200 HP at over 10K.

What’s the big deal? A P-38 could outrun a Zero on one engine - if they had a working injection system.

IOW, nothing new here - just a new place to use old tech....

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

Good God man, you put water in a martini? Have you no decency?

Regards,
GtG

[MHGinTN]

The universal solvent adds no taste and takes none away, it just smoothes the swallowing.

[MHGinTN]

BTW, we humans are ‘internal combustion engines’ don’tchaknow. I remember one blonde beauty when I was in grad school after my first marriage who ... um, never mind.

[usmcobra]

A twin turbo 5.0 liter V-8 with direct fuel injection.....

553 pounds-feet of torque and 316-hp at 3,000 rpm...

Who needs a hemi????

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

But there is twice as much gasoline per barrel of crude than diesel.

Maybe for the 'light sweet' crude, but is that also true of the heavier types of crude oil?

If you just stuck to straight distillation that would not be true. US refineries are designed to produce more gasoline by "cracking" the heavier (then gasoline) molecules to produce lighter gasoline fractions and "reforming" lighter (then gasoline) molecules to produce heavier gasoline molecules. All of this is blended into the "straight run" gasoline.

The old USSR, on the other hand, designed their refineries to produce diesel and jet fuel at the expense of gasoline. The consequence was having to design cars that ran on kerosene. I don't know what they have done since the breakup of the old union.

The moral of the story is you can pretty much maximize any particular hydrocarbon fraction which will come at the expense of production of the heavier and lighter fractions. There are only so many gallons in a barrel of oil, you have to pick what you want.

Regards,
GtG

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

US refineries are designed to produce more gasoline by "cracking" the heavier (then gasoline) molecules to produce lighter gasoline fractions and "reforming" lighter (then gasoline) molecules to produce heavier gasoline molecules. All of this is blended into the "straight run" gasoline.

As an interesting side note I should point out that none of the above mentioned molecular monkey business changes the energy content of the finished product. All the hydrocarbon fractions have about 18,000 BTU per pound. You can jigger around all you want but you can't change that. By playing around you can change the "octane" rating but 120 octane gasoline is still 18,000 BTU per pound as is kerosene.

Raising the octane rating allows one to extract more of that 18,000 figure by running higher combustion pressures. One hundred octane being the equivalent of 100% iso octane, zero octane being 100% normal heptane, anything in-between being a proportionate blend of the two fractions. Anything over 100 being pure iso octane with tetra ethyl lead added. That's why the octane dropped to 93-97 when the "lead" was removed and all our cars were "derated" to burn sunk pi$$.

In order to rate octane of an unknown fuel it was run in a single cylinder engine with a variable compression ratio that could be adjusted until the engine was just starting to "knock". The test was rerun with varying blends of iso octane and normal heptane until you achieved the same knock characteristics. The ratio of octane to heptane was the octane rating of the unknown fuel. This was known as the "research" method. There is a similar method using variable spark timing known as the "motor" method. In use both tests were run and averaged which is why you may recall seeing gas pumps with (R+M)/2 next to the octane rating listed on the pump.

Regards,
GtG

PS Ethanol is 12,000 BTU/Lb, when you correct for the difference in specific gravity it's about 60% of the energy content of even the skunkiest gasoline on a per gallon basis.

[MHGinTN]

Show off ...

[Red Badger]

Rest In Peace, old friend, your work is finished.....

If you want ON or OFF the DIESEL ”KnOcK” LIST just FReepmail me.....

This is a fairly HIGH VOLUME ping list on some days.....

[Red Badger]

She blew your head gasket?....................

[Eye of Unk]

Though I have supported GM for years the only way I would buy a Ford engine is the day it can run on tap water.

[norwaypinesavage]

"Isn’t one of the problems with ethanol that it is very hard to handle (as in catches fire easily) in its pure form?"

Ethanol, in a pure form is often referred to as Vodka. It is very hard to handle, in other than small quantities. In proper quantities, though, it is quite effective, especially when added to a girl friend.

Actually, it burns with a light blue flame that is sometimes difficult to see. This makes fires sometimes difficult to deal with. It is similar to gasoline in many other respects.

[B Knotts]

Actually, diesel is now cheaper again than regular gasoline, both anecdotally and nationally.

But, yes, it would be a lot simpler to just use diesel engines than this contraption.

[NVDave]

Diesel isn’t more expensive now because of fuel emissions standards. It is more expensive because Europe’s auto fleet is now 40% diesel and the PRC is consuming vast quantities of diesel.

#1/#2 diesel, kerosene, jet-a, home heating oil - they’re all basically distillate and their use has skyrocketed in the last 10 years outside the US. Since the US went to ULSD, our diesel is fungible in EU markets - and since they’re ready to pay more for it, some of our diesel heads back to Europe when they ship their gasoline here. They have excess gasoline (thanks to their drivers converting to diesel) and the ship doesn’t want to go back empty...

[Kenny Bunk]

Excellent points.

I was around when the armed forces converted everything to diesel. Sure as hell simplified the supply chain. Why doesn't everyone in civvie street do the same thing, i.e., make diesel the fuel of individual transportation?

Small-ish diesel engines, turbo-charged, computer controlled, cat converted, etc. etc. And in MHO, it's about time we stopped promoting rocket-like acceleration and "power" as sales features. A gd Toyota Corolla or Honda Civic has better numbers 0-60 and turns the quarter faster than a 1965 Ferrari ... especially after José changes the chip and adds the 6-inch estraight-through tuned exhaust that Abarth never dreamed of.

[NVDave]

The lubricity issue has reared its ugly head in older diesel fuel systems when we went to ULSD, esp. when western refiners (like Chevron out of CA) started shipping ULSD with dye as their off-road fuel. It used to be (many moons ago) that dyed fuel was also very high in sulphur. No longer can we depend on that.

So the older farm machines and trucks that used those old Roosa-Master and rotary pumps (the ones where the rack looks like a distributor cap — you know the old ones I’m talking about, right? Circular pattern of the lines coming off the pump?) will wreck their pump/rack if you don’t add some fuel conditioner to add lubricity.

It is mighty galling to have a piece of farm equipment that MIGHT have cost you $5K get a wreck in the fuel system thanks to ULSD - and the cost to repair the pump and rack might be $1500 to $2000 at some pump shops.

It is almost enough to make a guy want to start farming with a coal-fired steam tractor again, just to piss the greenies off.

[NVDave]

I don’t know. I’m with you - if we just standardized on diesel engines, we could improve the fleet fuel efficiency of US autos overnight - and not by some chump amount. Look at what the Euroweenies are getting in their TDI cars — 40 to 60 MPG. That’s every bit of what these clown car hybrids can get - and without any “new” technology.

Sadly, GM’s stupidity with the 350cid diesel so screwed the US consumer that they’re very leery of diesels in cars, for the most part. Muni bus fleets, with their soot-belching Detroits, did the rest.

If Subaru shipped their diesel to the US, we’d buy one tomorrow.

[Army Air Corps]

It is almost enough to make a guy want to start farming with a coal-fired steam tractor again, just to piss the greenies off.

I'd pay money to see that!