SAE TECHNICAL

PAPER SERIES SAE 2006-32-0071

JSAE 20066571

Computer Simulation and Optimisation of an

Intake Camshaft for a Restricted 600cc
Four-Stroke Engine
James Taylor, Russell McKee, Geoffrey McCullough,
Geoffrey Cunningham and Charlie McCartan
Queens University Belfast

Small Engine Technology Conference and Exhibition

San Antonio, Texas
November 13-16, 2006

400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001 U.S.A. Tel: (724) 776-4841 Fax: (724) 776-0790 Web: www.sae.org
The Engineering Meetings Board has approved this paper for publication. It has successfully completed
SAE's peer review process under the supervision of the session organizer. This process requires a
minimum of three (3) reviews by industry experts.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise,
without the prior written permission of SAE.

For permission and licensing requests contact:

SAE Permissions
400 Commonwealth Drive
Warrendale, PA 15096-0001-USA
Email: permissions@sae.org
Tel: 724-772-4028
Fax: 724-776-3036

For multiple print copies contact:

SAE Customer Service

Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada)
Tel: 724-776-4970 (outside USA)
Fax: 724-776-0790
Email: CustomerService@sae.org

ISSN 0148-7191
Copyright 2006 SAE International
Copyright 2006 SAE Japan
Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE.
The author is solely responsible for the content of the paper. A process is available by which discussions
will be printed with the paper if it is published in SAE Transactions.
Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for presentation or publication by SAE should send the
manuscript or a 300 word abstract to Secretary, Engineering Meetings Board, SAE.

Printed in USA

Computer Simulation and Optimisation of an Intake Camshaft
for a Restricted 600cc Four-Stroke Engine
James Taylor, Russell McKee, Geoffrey McCullough,
Geoffrey Cunningham and Charlie McCartan
Copyright 2006 SAE International and Copyright 2006 SAE Japan
ABSTRACT
The use of inlet-restricted engines is commonplace in
many motor sport applications and is particularly relevant
for FSAE or Formula Student teams. The study outlined
in this paper uses an engine simulation package, Virtual
4-Stroke, to predict the propagation of unsteady gas flow
through an inlet-restricted 600cc four-stroke FSAE
engine and hence optimise its geometry to maximise
torque output.
The Automated Design feature of the Virtual 4-Stroke
package uses an intelligent Design-of-Experiments
approach to obtain the optimum combination of a given
set of geometric variables. This feature was used to find
the engine configuration that maximises the torque
output over the speed range 4000rpm to 12,000rpm.
The variables investigated included the inlet pipe length,
inlet plenum volume, inlet and exhaust camshaft opening
8
time, duration and lift, with a total of 10 possible
combinations. Provided there is an accurate baseline
model, Virtual 4-Stroke can accurately predict the effect
of a changed profile on the unsteady gas dynamics
within the engine, and the resulting torque output.
It was found that one of the most significant factors to
affect the torque output was the duration of the intake
camshaft. Based on the model predictions, a modified
intake camshaft profile was therefore manufactured.
Dynamometer testing provided good correlation with the
simulations and improvements of 8% were found over
the useable engine speed range from 5500rpm to
10,500rpm. Details of the model inputs, optimised
camshaft profile and dynamometer test results are
included and discussed.
INTRODUCTION
The Formula Student competition challenges university
students to design, build and compete in a small single
seater racing car.
The Formula SAE series rules [1] dictate that the engine
used must operate on a four-stroke cycle and that the
2006-32-0071 / 20066571
Queens University Belfast
capacity must not exceed 610cc. It also states that all the
air entering through the intake system must pass through
a 20mm restrictor that is downstream of the throttle.
Most of the teams who participate in the dynamic events
employ four-cylinder motorcycle engines [2, 3, 4].
However, some choose single-cylinder angines [5, 6] and
some have even designed and manufactured bespoke
units [3]. The Queens Formula Racing (QFR) team have
decided to use a 1999-02 Yamaha YZF R6 to power its
formula student cars. This unit, the specification of which
is given in Table 1, is compact and reliable with a high
power-to-weight ratio.
Table 1: Yamaha YZFR6 Engine Specifications
Engine: Yamaha R6 inline-4-cylinder, 4-
stroke, DOHC, 16-valve, liquid
cooled
Displacement: 599cc
Bore and 65.5mm x 44.5mm
Stroke:
Compression 12.4:1
Ratio:
Max. Power: 120 @ 13000 (bhp @ rpm)
Max. Torque: 68.1 @ 11500 (Nm @ rpm)
Fuel System: Keihin CVRD37 Fuel Injection
In order to negate the effects of the 20mm restrictor on
the intake system, many teams turn to forced induction
by either turbo-charging [7, 8] or supercharging [9] their
engines. There are several disadvantages associated
with forced induction, including cost, development time,
reliability, packaging and added weight. It is for these
reasons that QFR have decided to develop a reliable
naturally aspirated configuration.
The objective for the simulation study outlined in this
paper was to develop a naturally aspirated engine that
delivered the maximum torque possible over the wide
useable engine speed range of 3000rpm to 12,000rpm.
The engine speed range selected for this optimisation
was significantly larger than that of previous projects and
it was hoped that this would provide a flatter torque curve
that would make the car easier to drive. In addition, a
smoother torque curve would allow the driver to use a
higher speed range which, in turn, would remove the
need for one gear change during the 75m acceleration
event and hence reduce the time recorded. QFR feels
that the standard engine can be tuned specifically to suit
the FSAE rules and competition [10] and that the
optimisation of engine geometry is best performed by
using engine simulation software.
VIRTUAL 4-STROKE
Virtual Engines (V.E.) is the dedicated engine simulation
software package used to optimise the Formula Student
YZFR6 engine. It was developed by Optimum Power
Technology [11] and uses fundamental unsteady gas
dynamics theory [12] to predict the propagation of
pressure waves throughout the intake and exhaust
systems. A design interface allows the user to enter the
geometry and combustion characteristics of the engine
under investigation, while the post-processing facilities
allow cycle-averaged and crank angle-resolved data to
be presented and interpreted.
Understanding unsteady gas dynamics is key to
predicting changes in engine performance and is thus an
essential tool for the engine tuner [12, 13, 14]. The
parameters that are known to have a significant effect on
the performance of an inlet restricted engine include:
x Valve timing and lift
x Inlet plenum volume
x Inlet runner lengths
Previous work carried out on the QFR FSAE engines
had focused on optimising the runner lengths and
plenum volume. Consequently, this study focuses on
optimising the profile and timing of the camshafts.
The geometry and timing of the valve events are
optimised for the unrestricted R6. However, the
restrictor required by the FSAE rules means that the
engine is essentially operating at part load even when
the throttle is wide open. The camshaft geometry is
therefore no longer ideally suited to an intake system
fitted with a restrictor. There have been numerous
studies performed that investigate the effect of valve lift
profiles on engine performance, of which references [15,
16] are but a sampler.
EXPERIMENTAL APPARATUS
To validate the predictions from Virtual 4-Stroke the
YZFR6 engine was connected to a 145kW Schenck AC
asynchronous, four quadrant dynamometer [18]. The
engine was connected to the dynamometer via the
gearbox output shaft. This was done to reduce the
rotational speed of the output shaft as the dynamometer
has a maximum rotational speed of 10,000rpm,
considerably lower than the engines maximum test
speed of 12,500rpm. Consequently, the torque values
quoted in this paper were recorded from the gearbox and
are expected to be slightly lower than the engine torque
readings due to transmission losses in the gearbox.
Exhaust emissions and AFR were recorded using a
Horiba MEXA 7000 Exhaust gas analyser. The engine
was fitted with custom fuel injection and ignition systems
controlled by a DTA engine management system. This
allowed adjustments to be readily made to the fuel and
ignition maps.
Comparisons of engine performance under full load was
the primary focus of this investigation, and as such only
the wide open throttle (WOT) points of the engine
management system were mapped for each test. The
fuel mapping cells were changed to achieve an air/fuel
ratio of 13:1. The ignition was then adjusted to the
minimum advance for best torque. Cycle-averaged
performance and emissions data were collected over the
usable speed range of 3000rpm to 12,500rpm at
intervals of 500rpm. All measurements were corrected to
take account of varying atmospheric pressure,
temperature and relative humidity using the correction
factor recommended by SAE J1349.
BASELINE MODEL
At the beginning of the study, it was decided to test the
production setup in unrestricted form on the
dynamometer. A baseline virtual model was created of
this setup for comparative purposes. As the standard
setup consists of four individual intake runners and
throttles, it was relatively simple to simulate. The flow
diagram for this setup can be seen in Figure 1.
The air enters the engine from a predetermined
atmospheric pressure in the top left of the flow diagram.
It then passes through a bell mouth into a short pipe
leading to the plenum. From here it passes down the four
individual runners, past a throttle, intake ports and valves
into the cylinder. The exhaust gas leaves the cylinder
through the valves and ports, and passes through a 4-2-
1 exhaust system with silencer until it reaches the exit
atmospheric conditions.
Figure 1: Flow diagram of unrestricted YZFR6
 Automated Design finds the optimum parameter settings
60.0 based on thermodynamic theory. However, it takes no
PREDICTED TORQUE account of the implications that these changes will have
50.0 upon mechanical design. For example, the simulations
suggested that the valve lift should be increased by a
Torque (Nm)

40.0 factor of 1.08. However, the YZF R6 is a highly tuned

MEASURED TORQUE performance engine with high compression and bore-to-
30.0 stroke ratios. As a result, it has very little clearance
between the piston and valves under normal operating
20.0 conditions. Consequently, there is little room to increase
the valve lift. Even if sufficient room was available, the
10.0 valve train would require substantial redesign to cope
3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
Engine Speed (RPM)
9000 10000 11000 12000
with the increased loads imposed by the greater valve
acceleration resulting from the higher lift.
Figure 2: Comparison of predicted and measured torque
The results of the Automated Design simulations are
The results from the engine testing session were
summarised in Table 2. The optimised values for the
compared with the predicted results from Virtual 4-Stroke
valve timings and lifts are referenced to the standard
and are presented in Figure 2. It can be seen that there
production values by a multiplier factor. For example,
is good correlation between the results, apart from a
the simulation suggests that the exhaust valve lift should
slight shift in the torque curve and at engine speeds of
be increased by a factor of 1.12 compared to the
5000 and 6500rpm. The correlation between the
standard lift. As with the suggested intake lift, it was not
simulated and measured results gave confidence in the
possible to apply this value without substantial
models ability to predict the performance of the QUB
modification to the valve train and piston. It can also be
FSAE engine.
seen from the result that the Exhaust Valve Duration
(EVD) multiplier has changed by only 4% and that the
AUTOMATED DESIGN open angle is actually the factory timing used on the
production engine. Consequently, it was again decided
The Automated Design feature of the Virtual 4-Stroke to leave the exhaust camshaft profile as standard and to
package uses an intelligent Design-of-Experiments focus on the intake valve events.
approach to obtain the optimum combination of a given
set of geometric variables. This feature was used to find Table 2: Automated design variable, resolution and
the engine configuration that maximises the torque results
output over the speed range 4000rpm to 12,000rpm.
The variables investigated included the inlet pipe length, Production Optimised
inlet plenum volume, inlet and exhaust camshaft opening Variable Resolution
8 Setting Value
time, duration and lift, with a total of 10 possible O O O
IVO 64 CA BTDC 2 CA 56 BTDC
combinations. It was decided to include the plenum
volume and intake runner lengths for completion of the IVL (M) 1 0.02 1.08

tuning process over the wider engine speed range. The IVD (M) 1 0.02 0.88
unrestricted model, described in Figure 1, was changed EVO
O
73 CA BBDC
O
2 CA
O
60 BBDC
to include the 20mm restrictor on the intake, single
throttle body and intake plenum. The changes to the new EVL (M) 1 0.02 1.12

model can be seen in Figure 3. EVD (M) 1 0.02 0.96
Intake Runner
215 * 5 260
Len. (mm)
Plenum Vol. (cc) 2680 * 100 3300
* Values used on previous QFR cars

Multiplier

From the Automated Design study it is clear that the

intake camshaft duration is one of the most significant
factors affecting engine performance in its restricted
format. A sensitivity analysis was therefore performed on
this individual parameter in which the duration multiplier
was changed from 0.8 to 1 in steps of 0.01. All other
parameters remained unchanged. The results from this
analysis can be seen in Figure 4 which illustrates the
predicted torque output for a range of intake valve
opening durations. The optimised value of 0.88 is also
Figure 3: Flow diagram of restricted YZFR6 included for comparison.
 60 Whenever Virtual 4-Stroke applies a multiplier to the
MULTIPLIER = 0.80
camshaft profile, all the lift values remain unchanged and
the intervals between the points are factored by the
55 multiplier. This means essentially that the profile is
Corrected Brake Torque in Nm

scaled whilst retaining the same shape. Pipercams were

50
MULTIPLIER = 0.90 employed to design a profile to this specification, whilst
considering the dynamic implications of the changes
MULTIPLIER = 0.88
requested. For this reason, the profile manufactured
45 differed from that suggested by the simulation exercise.
MULTIPLIER = 1.0
The profile of the actual manufactured camshaft was
40
therefore measured and entered into to Virtual 4-Stroke.
This new data was used to check if the IVO angle was
still optimised for the new design. Figure 6 shows a
35 comparison between the standard profile, Virtual 4-
4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000
RPM Stroke optimised profile and the manufactured profile.
Figure 7 shows a comparison between the standard cam
Figure 4: Intake valve duration sensitivity analysis profile and that manufactured by Pipercams.

Figure 4 clearly shows the importance of modifying the 9

intake duration at engine speeds below 12,000rpm. It is
8
one of the few factors to have a marked effect over the
complete engine speed range. The suggested multiplier 7

of 0.88 was chosen for the final design. At 8000rpm this 6

Valve Lift (mm)

camshaft gives 12Nm more torque compared to the 5
standard camshaft. A duration multiplier of below 0.88 4
has the effect of increasing torque below 9000rpm but
3
dramatically decreasing it above that speed. Pipercams
[17] were employed to manufacture a camshaft with a 2 R6 Intake Valve Lift Profile Pipercams 2005

duration of 298CA. This is 12% less (based on the 1

R6 Intake Valve Lift Profile Standard

multiplier value of 0.88) than the standard cam duration 0

R6 Intake Valve Lift Profile VE 0.88

of 338CA. 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Crank Angle (deg)

MANUFACTURED CAMSHAFT PROFILE

Figure 6: Valve lift profile comparison
When the redesigned intake cam was received from
Pipercams, it was decided to carry out several tests on a
demonstration YZFR6 engine as illustrated in Figure 5.
These tests were required to assess the actual profile
ground by Pipercams and check if the new IVO caused
any contact between the piston and valves. The
demonstration engine has a sectioned head that
provides the opportunity to observe the piston and valve
motion while turning the engine over by hand.

Dial
gauges

Figure 7: Camshaft profile comparison

Section of
cylinder head The result of reducing the duration of the camshaft while
removed retaining the standard lift means that the valves will open
significantly faster compared to the standard camshaft. It
Crank angle can be seen from Figure 6 that the Pipercams profile is
degree wheel somewhat different to that of the profile recommended
by the Automated Design results. The changes in the
shape are necessary to reduce valve accelerations and
velocities experienced by the valve train.

Figure 5: YZFR6 used to measure valve lift

 The measurements taken from the demonstration impels fresh charge to flow from the intake, through the
YZFR6 engine revealed that it was not possible to turn cylinder and into the exhaust pipe. This removes
the engine over when the IVO angle was advanced exhaust gas from the previous cycle, and maximises the
o
beyond 45 BTDC due to contact between the piston and volume available for fresh air and fuel.
inlet valves. In addition, simulations based on the
manufactured camshaft suggested an optimum opening However, in restricted format, the pressure at the intake
o
time for this profile of 20 BTDC. This provided good valve is sub-atmospheric due to the throttled-intake. The
mid-range torque, without sacrificing it at the top end of pressure is lower than that at the exhaust valve and so,
the speed range. Although the chosen timing differs during valve overlap, exhaust gas flows from the
o
substantially from the opening angle of 64 BTDC used exhaust, through the cylinder, and into the intake pipe.
with the standard Yamaha camshaft, it was decided to This not only reverses the scavenging effect, but also
implement this setting on the engine as it ensured a means that when the exhaust valve is closed and the
good safety margin. piston begins to move down the cylinder during the
induction stroke, the first gas to pass into the cylinder is
ENGINE TEST RESULTS spent exhaust gas flowing from the intake pipe.

Figure 8 shows the measured torque curves resulting The backflow during valve overlap in a restricted engine
from the standard and modified camshafts. It is clear evidently has a negative effect on engine performance
that optimising the intake valve profile and timing has as it results in a lower mass of trapped air and fuel at the
been very successful in improving the torque output, with end of the intake process. It is clear from the engine test
an increase of almost 5Nm over the entire engine speed results that the reduced valve overlap, resulting from the
range and an impressive 44% increase at 3000rpm. The modified camshaft profile and timing, has significantly
peak torque output of the engine improved by 3.8% to reduced this effect and provided significant increases in
54Nm at 10,500rpm and the torque curve was enhanced torque output. This can also be seen using the post
further by the smoother progression from 8000rpm to processing Dynoscope function in Virtual 4-Stroke.
11,000rpm which is desirable for novice drivers. Figures 9 and 10 show the results of the simulated mass
flow rate past the intake valve during the valve overlap
65
period of the standard and modified intake camshafts.
60
40
55 IVO EVC IVC
Corrected Torque (Nm)

3000rpm Standard
Engine Speed (RPM)

50 30 C
Modified Intake Camshaft
45
Standard Intake Camshaft Valve
Mass Flow Rate (g/s)

20
40
overlap
35
10
30

25 0
-64 -14 36 86 136 186 236
20
3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 11000 12000 13000 -10
Corrected Torque (Nm)
Engine speed (RPM) Reverse flow through inlet valve
-20
Crank Angle (Degrees)
Figure 8: Engine test results comparing engine
performance using the standard and modified camshafts
Figure 9: Mass Flow Rate past the intake valve with the
The restrictor required by the FSAE rules means that the standard camshaft setup
engine is essentially operating at part load even when
the throttle is wide open. Reducing the duration of the These simulations were completed at an engine speed of
intake cam profile and retarding the IVO angle has 3000rpm, where the modified camshaft provided the
resulted in a decrease in the valve overlap phase by most significant torque improvements. Figure 9 clearly
o
46 CA, or 45%. shows the negative mass flow caused by the standard
intake camshaft between IVO and EVC.
With the unrestricted engine operating at its peak torque
speed, the gas pressure at the exhaust valve is slightly The improved engine breathing can be seen in Figure 10
lower than the cylinder pressure during the valve overlap which shows the simulated mass flow rate past the
period due to the expansion wave generated at the intake vale using the modified intake camshaft. This
collector returning to the exhaust valve at precisely the graph shows almost no backflow between IVO and EVC
correct time in the cycle. In addition, the pressure at the which provides the substantial improvements in torque
intake valve is higher than both the cylinder pressure and produced.
exhaust pressure due to the returning ramming wave
generated at the bellmouth end. The combination of the
tuned inlet and exhaust manifold geometries therefore
generates a pressure gradient across the engine which
 40 Performance, Four-Cylinder, Four-Stroke Motorcycle
IVO EVC IVC
Engine into a Snowmobile Application SAE Paper
30
No. 2005-01-3678
3000rpm Pipercams
4. Renee T. Jameson, Patrick A. Hodgins,
Mass Flow Rate (g/s)

20

Improvement of the Torque Characteristics of a

10 Small, High-Speed Engine Through the Design of
Helmholtz-Tuned Manifolding SAE 900680
0
-19 31 81 131 181 231 5. G.P. Blair, E. Callender, D.O. Mackey, Maps of
-10
Discharge Coefficients for Valves, Ports and
Throttles SAE Paper No. 2001-01-1798/4219
No reverse flow during valve overlap
-20
Crank Angle (Degrees) 6. G.P. Blair, D.O. Mackey, M.C. Ashe, G.F. Chatfield,
On Improving the Accuracy of the Simulation of
Figure 8: Mass Flow Rate past the intake valve with the Reciprocating Engines, IMechE Paper No.
modified intake camshaft C587/001/2000
7. Fredrik Westin, Optimization of Turbocharged
This result of the improved performance was highlighted Engines Transient Response With Application on a
at the 2006 UK Formula Student competition with the car Formula SAE/Student Engine, SAE Paper No.
nd
setting the 2 fastest time during the acceleration event. 2005-01-2113

CONCLUSION 8. Takahiro Noyori, Tokio Matsui, Tetsuya Ohira, Yuji

Akamatsu, Takeshi Nakamura, Development of a
An engine simulation package has been used to optimise 660cc Turbo-charged Spark-Ignition Direct-Injection
the design of a Yamaha YZFR6 600cc engine for the Engine, SAE Paper No. 2003-32-0013
QFR FSAE car. The results of the study, which were 9. K. R. Schmid, R. T. Johnson, A Single Cylinder
validated by dynamometer tests, revealed that
Engine Study of Lean Supercharged Operation for
substantial gains in torque output can be achieved for an
Spark Ignition Engines, SAE Paper No. 830146
inlet restricted engine by retarding the opening time of
the intake valves, thereby reducing the valve overlap 10. R.H. McKee, G. McCullough, G. Cunningham, J.O.
period. The opening duration of the intake camshaft Taylor, N. McDowell, J.T. Taylor and R. McCullough,
must also be reduced such that the closing time remains Experimental Optimisation of Manifold and
similar to that of the standard production engine. The Camshaft Geometries for a Restricted 600cc Four-
computer simulation revealed that the gains in engine cylinder Four-stroke Engine, SAE Paper No. 2006-
performance resulting from these changes were due to a 32-0070
reduction in the amount of exhaust gas flowing from the
exhaust port to the intake manifold during valve overlap. 11. VIRTUAL ENGINES Engine Simulation Software,
This, in turn, increased the mass of fresh air trapped in VIRTUAL 4-Stroke and VIRTUAL 2-Stroke, Optimum
the cylinder during the intake phase. Power Technology, Bridgeville, PA, www.optimum-
power.com
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
12. G.P. Blair, Design and Simulation of Four-Stroke
Engines, Society of Automotive Engineers, 0-7680-
The Authors would like to thank the Queens University
0440-3, 1999
Belfast, School of Mechanical and Aerospace
Engineering for providing access to engine test facilities. 13. G.P. Blair, Breathing Easy, Race Engine
In addition, the support of Optimum Power Technology in Technology, Volume 1, Issue 2, Autumn 2003,
providing the Virtual Engines licences is greatly Pages 46-51, ISSN 1740-6803
appreciated.
14. G.P. Blair, Catching Breath, Race Engine
REFERENCES Technology, Volume 1 Issue 3, Winter 2003, Pages
50-58, ISSN 1740-6803
1. Formula SAE rules [online]. Available:
http://www.sae.org/students/fsaerules.pdf 15. Yun Young Ham, Pyongwan Park, The Effects of
Intake Valve Events on Engine Breathing Capability,
2. Mario Farrugia, Mike Rossey and Brian SAE Paper No. 912470
P.Sangeorzan, On the Use of a Honda 600cc 4-
Cylinder Engine for Formula SAE Competition SAE 16. James M. Novak, Raymond A. Kach, Computer
Paper No. 2005-01-0025 Optimization of Camshaft Lift Profiles for a Nascar V-
8 Engine With Restrictor Plate, SAE Paper No.
3. Greg A. Davis, Nicholas Dahlheimer, David Meyer, 962514
Aaron Steven Messenger, James Johnson,
Bernhard Bettig, Incorporation of a High 17. Piper Cams [online]. Available:
http://www.pipercams.co.uk
18. M. Plint and A.J. Martyr, Engine Testing: Theory and
Practice Second Edition, chpt. 7, Butterworth
Heinemann, 0-7506-4021-9, 1999

NOMENCLATURE

RPM Engine speed in rotations per minute

TCD Top Dead Centre
BDC Bottom Dead Centre
ATDC After Top Dead Centre
BTDC Before Top Dead Centre
ABDC After Bottom Dead Centre
BBDC Before Bottom Dead Centre
IVO Inlet Valve Open
IVC Inlet Valve Closed
IVD Inlet Valve Duration
EVO Exhaust Valve Open
EVC Exhaust Valve Closed
EVD Exhaust Valve Duration
VE Virtual Engines
CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics
SoB Start of Burn
EoB End of Burn
CA Crank Angle
QFR Queens Formula Racing
QUB Queens University Belfast
M Multiplier
WOT Wide Open Throttle