Steve in Seattle
07-07-2004, 10:32 PM
This is an interesting idea: http://me.a-spec.ca:6001/Room/MillerCycle.html
and here: http://autozine.kyul.net/technical_school/engine/petrol2.htm
Essientally you take a standard N/A Otto-cycle engine like an LT1, then slap on a supercharger (include an intercooler for temps) and use a custom cam that pushes the intake valve closing point to nearly 50* past BDC.
Why bother? well, the result is that of a massive exhaust cam, with an intake cam designed to reduce the dynamic compression ratio a LOT. The idea is that the supercharger (if it's a positive-displacement design) will make up for the loss of dynamic compression with boost, getting you back to and past a NA engine in power output.
So where's the advantage? The whole idea though is to reduce pumping losses a normal compression stroke would see... but you're stuck with a lame intake cam and reduced hp that you normally would have had on an otto-cycle at WOT. The tradeoffs though result in an idle/cruise you have a much more efficient design and mpg.
So the question is... how is this any different than a supercharged engine with a lame intake lobe? Why the unique name of "Miller-cycle" I mean really... what's the patent for? :confused:
Is there something else (besides a DCR-retarded/boost-compensated design) that I'm missing here? is the intake valve timing adjustable for high-rpm use?
Just curious if anyone's worked with this design... seems like a normal blower engine with a green-peace label?
(on a side note, I never really considered the EGR system as "pressurizing" the intake to reduce pumping losses... but I guess it makes a little sense in hind sight... anyone know what kind of psi we're talking about in EGR operation?).
and here: http://autozine.kyul.net/technical_school/engine/petrol2.htm
Essientally you take a standard N/A Otto-cycle engine like an LT1, then slap on a supercharger (include an intercooler for temps) and use a custom cam that pushes the intake valve closing point to nearly 50* past BDC.
Why bother? well, the result is that of a massive exhaust cam, with an intake cam designed to reduce the dynamic compression ratio a LOT. The idea is that the supercharger (if it's a positive-displacement design) will make up for the loss of dynamic compression with boost, getting you back to and past a NA engine in power output.
So where's the advantage? The whole idea though is to reduce pumping losses a normal compression stroke would see... but you're stuck with a lame intake cam and reduced hp that you normally would have had on an otto-cycle at WOT. The tradeoffs though result in an idle/cruise you have a much more efficient design and mpg.
So the question is... how is this any different than a supercharged engine with a lame intake lobe? Why the unique name of "Miller-cycle" I mean really... what's the patent for? :confused:
Is there something else (besides a DCR-retarded/boost-compensated design) that I'm missing here? is the intake valve timing adjustable for high-rpm use?
Just curious if anyone's worked with this design... seems like a normal blower engine with a green-peace label?
(on a side note, I never really considered the EGR system as "pressurizing" the intake to reduce pumping losses... but I guess it makes a little sense in hind sight... anyone know what kind of psi we're talking about in EGR operation?).