Opportunity lost - DB 16 cyl

[Shortround6]

The V-16 airship engine went 2000 kilograms, and gave 1320hp un-supercharged.

Diamler Benz had many good engineers but the fact that you can make a 2 ton + airship engine that can run at 900-1000hp for literally days on on end or stretch it to a 2500hp Motor torpedo boat engine does not automatically mean that they could succeed in making a high power V-16 airplane engine or X-24 airplane engine that weighed 1/3 the pounds per horsepower.

 

[Aurum]

You are saying DB609 for the He177?

Yes of course. He-177 was definitely the best most important application

When would 609s be available? I believe it was first bench tested in 1942.

In fact DB609 could be available in 1940 in 1941 for sure. If it was began alongside with DB603.
Do not forget that DB603 was designed for Mercedes-Benz T80 record car. And it was ready with DB603 in 1940.
DB603 was halted till 1942 simply because it was no application for it. It could not be installed on Bf-109 because it was too big heavy and there was Jumo 211 for bombers.

Why not develop the DB604 instead? It had been running earlier, and was cancelled in 1942. It would be lighter, more compact and more powerful?

Because it was absolutely new design. It needed really allot of time to be accomplished.

DB609 could be ready rather earlier.

The DB609 probably had a Vee angle of 60° because it was developed from the DB603 V12 - for which 60° is the normal angle.

Yes, I also thiink so. They just extended DB603 casing for 2 additional pairs of cyls.

45° also wouldn't leave much room in the vee for the intake runners, and would reduce the lateral strength of the engine - considering the DB609 was about 3m long making it narrower may not have been the best thing.

On the contrary. V angle have to be definitely 45° then casing will be higher so more tough. And it would be enough space for intake runners too.

Not sure about V16s being perfectly balanced regardless of bank angle, but V12s certainly are. The question is, as you point out, the firing intervals, and what influence they have on the crankshaft torsional vibrations. From all accounts that is where teh DB609 ran into its main troubles.

V16 with V45° is also perfectly balanced and firing intervals are equal. It is directly the same situation that V12 is.
V12 has cranks angled at 120° to each other and V16 has them 90° angled as it is sown on the drawing.

 

[Aurum]

And how much did it weigh?

The V-16 airship engine went 2000 kilograms, and gave 1320hp un-supercharged.

Do not forget that that was DIESEL but DB609 was to be petrol engine. Thats why masses are so different.
You can find DB602 in Wiki

Diamler Benz had many good engineers but the fact that you can make a 2 ton + airship engine that can run at 900-1000hp for literally days on on end or stretch it to a 2500hp Motor torpedo boat engine does not automatically mean that they could succeed in making a high power V-16 airplane engine or X-24 airplane engine that weighed 1/3 the pounds per horsepower.

In fact I do not assume great problems if DB609 DB603 were designed together.
But DB609 have to be well done, with 45° obligatory.
In this case it will have equal to DB603 specific power but not 15% less as it was in reality because of wrong V-angle trouble balancing.
So power rating would be 2400hp for Take off and 2100hp maximum continuous.

Lets see pics how DB609 should looks like. It should have 2 small superchargers from DB601 on bothe sides but not one as it is shown

 

[Aurum]

The same way I composed new Soviet Mikulin's engine AM-36 that is V16 of AM-35V12. It would be best for Pe-8 "Soviet fortress"
1/100 scale

 

[Shortround6]

The thing with some of the odd ball engine configurations is not that they could not be made but that there were drawbacks to them. You can make a V-16, it just needs to be heavier per HP than a V-12 to account for the longer crankshaft and crankcase which have to be heavier to stand up to the greater vibration.
Torsional vibration of the crankshaft is the twisting and untwisting as the cylinders fire. With the resistance to twisting fixed at one end (the prop) which crankshaft will twist more with the same force applied. One that is three feet long with the force applied 3 feet from the "fixed" end or or the 4 ft crank with the force applied 4 feet from the fixed end?

A V-16 with a 45 degree angle can fire every 45 degrees. The only way a 90 degree V-16 can fire at 45 degree intervals is by using split crankpins. Probably something to be avoided in an aircraft engine. With a 60 degree bank angle you can get a V16 to fire evenly but you will have two cylinders firing at the same time which can introduce a whole new set of vibration problems.

Edit: excuse me it should have been a V-16 with a 90 degree angle will have two cylinders firing at the same time.

 

[razor1uk]

There are many conflicting perameters to engine configurations as per what yourselves (say, as an metophorical engine designer, are..) trying to achieve as its main characteristics, which Short'6 highlighted a couple (engineering pun intended muhuhaha) in his above posting

 

[davebender]

That's not exactly correct.

RLM funded development of the DB603 engine during 1936. RLM funding was withdrawn during 1937.

During January 1940 the third DB603 engine prototype was installed in the T80 record car. A few weeks later RLM provided funding for an additional 120 DB603 engine prototypes.

 

[Denniss]

That's not exactly correct.

RLM funded development of the DB603 engine during 1936. RLM funding was withdrawn during 1937.

During January 1940 the third DB603 engine prototype was installed in the T80 record car. A few weeks later RLM provided funding for an additional 120 DB603 engine prototypes.

You always claim this - what's your source for this? During 1936/1937 DB was struggling to get the DB 600 functional and developing the DB 601 - how on earth should they be able to develop the DB 603 from the DB 600/601 base if this wasn't fully functional?

 

[Shortround6]

In his world more money always means that more engineers, draftsmen and whatever resources/knowledge needed will be available in just a few months if not instantly.

Perhaps other engine companies were also lacking in funds but few, if any, companies worked on more that one major engine program/s at the same time in the late 1930s or even during WW II.
A company may have had several, or even a half dozen projects going at once but only one or two were pursued with any real vigor at one time.

 

[davebender]

Your time line is a bit off.

1934. DB600 prototypes running.
Oct 1935. Genshagen engine factory funded by RLM.
Feb 1937. First production model DB600 engine.
Jun 1937. Genshagen engine factory has 5,813 workers.
Nov 1937. 65 x DB600 and 19 x DB601 engines produced.
Jul 1938. DB600 engine production ends in favor of the DB601.

Daimler-Benz management wanted to produce DB601 engines from the beginning (1937). RLM insisted on tooling the factory for DB600 engines. Daimler-Benz considered this a waste of money as they had to retool to some extent for the DB601 engine. One of many disagreements between RLM and Daimler-Benz management.

 

[Nick Sumner]

Re: The AM-36 V16. Is this a real design?

Russian Piston Aero Engines by Vladimir Kotelnikov has the AM-36 as an 18 cylinder Y block engine.

 

[Aurum]

RLM funded development of the DB603 engine during 1936. RLM funding was withdrawn during 1937.
During January 1940 the third DB603 engine prototype was installed in the T80 record car. A few weeks later RLM provided funding for an additional 120 DB603 engine prototypes.

Thanks, its interesting info. And do you know when the first 120 DB603 were produced what were their customers?

Also do you have particular monthly statistics of DB engines production in war time? I have only joint stat data altogether for all models of then from USSBS.

You always claim this - what's your source for this? During 1936/1937 DB was struggling to get the DB 600 functional and developing the DB 601 - how on earth should they be able to develop the DB 603 from the DB 600/601 base if this wasn't fully functional?

Its quite interesting thing again, but DB603 was developed NOT from DB600/601 but in parallel its predecessor could be diesel engine MB500 V12.

 

[Aurum]

Re: The AM-36 V16. Is this a real design?
Russian Piston Aero Engines by Vladimir Kotelnikov has the AM-36 as an 18 cylinder Y block engine.

Yes you are right. But sometimes it happened that several design projects had the same code on the very first stage. That was just my estimation

 

[Aurum]

2,500hp MB511 was supercharged version of this engine. It was considered very reliable, which should dispel any doubts about Daimler-Benz ability to make a reliable V20 engine.

Yes, and MB511 had predecessors of course.

Marine series of Mercedes Benz diesels began from MB500, that was 700/950 hp 1460/1630 V12 4-stroke diesel 175/230 mm, effect. pressure 7,90 kg/cm2, spec. mass 2,28 kg/hp, spec. consump. 0,18 kg/hp*h.

Then there was MB501 - 1500/2000 hp 1480/1630 V20 4-stroke diesel 185/250 mm, effect. pressure 8,25 kg/cm2, spec. mass 2,15 kg/hp, spec. consump. 0,18 kg/hp*h.

Then MB502 - 900/1320 hp 1500/1650 V16 4-stroke diesel 175/230 mm, effect. pressure 8,15 kg/cm2, spec. mass 2,04 kg/hp, spec. consump. 0,18 kg/hp*h.
This figures are from DB602 slightly differs from other souse.

And at last MB507 - 700/850 hp V12 4-stroke diesel.
It is considered that it was diesel version of DB603. It was installed on Karl morsel, LS type fast boats was planned to be Panther tank engine in DB project. Its avia version had DB607 code.
Here is List of aircraft engines of Germany during World War II

Some of swiftrunning diesels are described here

Also there was DB509 diesel engine which was installed on locos after the war. Its data unknown.

And besides that U-boots of IXD1 series were firstly equipped by 6 DB deisel engines of unknown type and U-180 even had Mercedes Benz three star as its emblem.

 

[Aurum]

You can make a V-16, it just needs to be heavier per HP than a V-12 to account for the longer crankshaft and crankcase which have to be heavier to stand up to the greater vibration.

I guess V16 can be of the same specific power then V12 is. Ort at least only bit heavier.

A V-16 with a 45 degree angle can fire every 45 degrees. The only way a 90 degree V-16 can fire at 45 degree intervals is by using split crankpins. Probably something to be avoided in an aircraft engine. With a 60 degree bank angle you can get a V16 to fire evenly but you will have two cylinders firing at the same time which can introduce a whole new set of vibration problems.

Edit: excuse me it should have been a V-16 with a 90 degree angle will have two cylinders firing at the same time.

A V-16 with a 45 degree angle can really fire every 45 degrees. So this will be smooth running crankshaft will be fully ballanced.
Allot of loco diesels have 45° angle in our days.

By the way, according to picture DB602V16 was exactly 45° angled.

 

[johnbr]

Here a photo of the DB-507.Any info on the Deutz DZ-710

 

[Aurum]

Any info on the Deutz DZ-710

Mighty beast! Never heard about it. Seems its opposite. Is there any date at least?
And where is this page from?

 

[johnbr]

This is all I have found the photo I have had for years found on a now died site.
DZ 710, Kloeckner-Humboldt-Deutz
Type: DZ 710
Year: Country: Germany
Configuration: 16 cylinder liquid-cooled diesel engine, two horizontally
opposed banks of eight cylinders. Two-stroke.
Cylinders: Bore: 160mm Stroke: 160mm Capacity: 51.52 l
Compression: 15 to 1
Length: 2400mm Width: 1350mm Height:
Weight: 1450kg
Power: 2700hp
Revolutions:
Consumption: SFC: 0.33 lb/hp/hr
DZ 720, Kloeckner-Humboldt-Deutz
Project for an engine of 'H' configuration, by joining two DZ 710
engines. 5400hp output, weight 2900kg.

 

[Aurum]

So in fact I did NOT understood why what for not only DB 609, but Chrysler IV-2220 that were V16's both had 60° V-angle!? If we admit that DB 609 inherited such angle from DB 603 casting, nevertheless such angle in Chrysler IV engine is absolutely unreasonable as far as it was absolutely new project.

45° V-angle between cylinders can be arranged for sure because all other V16 engines that are known to me have definitely such angle. Furthermore Lambert (Deschamps) V3050 diesel had even more sharp 30° V-angle definatly because it was 12 cyls. but 2 stroke so this is absolutely correct in the sense balancing ignition order.

Btw Chrysler IV was rater small (only 36.4 l that is just the same as Hispano-Suisa 12Y, DB 605 RR Grifone that were classical V12-ies had) but had to have extremely high rotations grade up to 3400 rpm! So perfect balancing were to be the mmajor reason for it!!!

PS
There are no photos of Chrysler IV engine from the front or rear side directly. Can 60° V-angle be a mistake so it has either 45° or 90° angled cyll. banks?

 

[WJPearce]

PS
There are no photos of Chrysler IV engine from the front or rear side directly. Can 60° V-angle be a mistake so it has either 45° or 90° angled cyll. banks?

I'm sorry if my post drags the discussion off topic, but the Chrysler IV-2220 (aka XI-2220) was indeed a 60 degree V-16. Chrysler was keeping the engine narrow at 33.5 inches but also needed enough room in the Vee (between the cylinder banks) for the propeller shaft, which extend from the gear reduction in the middle of the engine.

If you are interested in this engine, a new book dealing with the Chrysler IV-2220 was released either yesterday or today. The book does contain front and rear engine photos and a whole lot of information.

Chrysler Aircraft Engines
by Kim McCutcheon
ISBN: 978-09710847-7-3
8 1/4" x 10 3/4"
134 b/w and color photographs, line drawings
186 pages, Softbound
Price: US $27.95