Direct Injection / Port Injection & Both in an engine

Status
Not open for further replies.
Quote:
Dowding and his Ford engineering colleague Stephen Russ stress that carbon deposits on tailpipes and intake valves have never been an issue in their DI engines.
 
I beg to differ. There is Youtube Videos showing otherwise.

Example because I know I'm going to get called on it...
 
Last edited:
I don't doubt that Ford has excellent control over it and there are so many factors that can play into it like old lady driving, poor fuel quality, poor oil quality and over extended change intervals, excessive idling, poor maintenance etc.

But we can't know for sure and I would rather an OE has taken steps to protect against it with the dual fuel injection setup until we can solve it in other ways.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: StevieC
I don't doubt that Ford has excellent control over it and there are so many factors that can play into it like old lady driving, poor fuel quality, poor oil quality and over extended change intervals, excessive idling, poor maintenance etc.

But we can't know for sure and I would rather an OE has taken steps to protect against it with the dual fuel injection setup until we can solve it in other ways.




Ford's mitigation techniques were steps taken to protect against it, something that doesn't absolutely "require" a more complex dual injection setup. As I recall, that wasn't even Toyota's original purpose of the included port injection, as it was to mitigate low-speed drivability issues from what I remember reading.

Ford used/uses camshaft timing to "wash" the valves with reversion, which is taking advantage of the cleaning capabilities of the detergents found in the fuel, which is why port injected engines don't have valve deposit problems.

While fancy oils might help reduce it, ultimately that's not a solution and why it became such an issue for VAG.

Poor fuel quality will cause problems on non-DI engines too, such as plugged injectors and deposits, so that's not something that is going to again, be isolated solely to the realms of DI.
 
Originally Posted By: tcp71
there may be a few cases where valves got dirty, but overall Ford has almost no issues with it compared to the number of engines out there. This may have something to do with it:

https://patents.google.com/patent/US6178944B1/en

https://patents.google.com/patent/US7137377B2/en

https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2014089304A1


Yup, that's the reversion "washing" technology, it was an excellent idea, and something that VAG didn't appear to consider when they did their DI implementation.
 
Originally Posted By: StevieC
I beg to differ. There is Youtube Videos showing otherwise.

Example because I know I'm going to get called on it...



And as the guy eluded to in the video, it's all the oil vapors going into the intake manifold from the PCV system. The cylinders closest to the PCV port will have more valve deposits than the cylinders farthest away from the PCV port on the manifold.

I'm surprised the car manufacturers haven't come up with a better way to separate the vapors before they hit the intake manifold. People think aftermarket PCV 'catch-cans' are useless, but I say they do help keep lots of oil out of the intake manifold.
 
OVERKILL, I think Toyota is using both for long term deposit control as a minor factor, performance definately, but more importantly they switch to and from Atkinson cycle depending on conditions and this might have something to do with it as well. It also has cam phasing on the exhaust as well as the intake.

I'm sure there is some great benefit for them or they wouldn't have included it. It's all about cost.

I will tell you that the engine has excellent get up and go and really great fuel efficiency for the vehicle weight, and the size of the engine.
 
Last edited:
According to what's presented in this document, which is consistent with my understanding of the purpose of the dual injection, the usage was for better low speed power and fuel economy:

Quote:
On the basis of the analysis of the combustion process, it was found that for the partial load, the two-point (per one cylinder) injection of fuel causes a more favourable distribution of the air to fuel ratio in the volume of the cylinder than in the case when the total mass of the fuel is injected to the intake pipe, or directly into the cylinder [10]. The mixture is more homogeneous. Only around the spark plug electrodes, it is slightly enriched with respect to the
stoichiometric composition, which shortens the induction period and influences positively the combustion process.


Quote:
The engine works in the whole speed range only with direct fuel injection at low load, that is up to about 0.28 MPa of BMEP (brake mean effective pressure) and for the engine speed higher than 2800 RPM, irrespective of the engine load. As it was mentioned above, in the rest of map, the fuel is divided between two injection systems: direct and multipoint. The application of such a sophisticated fuel injection system, besides of improvement of the torque curve, gives lower fuel consumption of the engine.


Paper here:
https://suw.biblos.pk.edu.pl/resources/i...tion_system.pdf

My impression is that the mitigation of intake valve deposits was a pleasant side effect.
 
Thanks
thumbsup2.gif
 
I wonder if Ford did the same thing with their 1.0L 3-cyl engine. I know they have the traditional DI in it, but the issue of the intake valves getting dirty was always my concern (car camp alot and sometimes I let my car idle when it gets COOOOOOLD outside.)
 
Last edited:
I have an '18 Highlander with the D4-S which is direct/port injected so yours would be the same. Just has the addition of the hybrid system.

The Avalon I'm not sure. Does it say D4-S on the engine cover?
 
Ford exists because of the F-150, it is their bread and butter. They didn't go to dual injection on all of their F-150 engines (2nd gen 2.7 and 3.5 Ecoboosts starting 2017 MY, and went to dual injection instead of just DI for 2nd gen 5.0 in 2018 MY) for no reason. It costs more and makes the engine more complex. They were well aware of valve deposit potential problems and took steps to prevent it after learning form their mistakes starting in 2011. See the video below... notice at the end they don't show the valves.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom