This document discusses the history and evolution of fuel injection systems. It begins by explaining how fuel injection has largely replaced carburetors over the past 30 years. It then provides details on early mechanical fuel injection systems, including the Lucas mechanical system that was commonly used in motorsports through the early 1980s. The document also describes constant flow fuel injection systems that continuously inject fuel, as well as the principles behind carburetor operation to provide context.
This document discusses the history and evolution of fuel injection systems. It begins by explaining how fuel injection has largely replaced carburetors over the past 30 years. It then provides details on early mechanical fuel injection systems, including the Lucas mechanical system that was commonly used in motorsports through the early 1980s. The document also describes constant flow fuel injection systems that continuously inject fuel, as well as the principles behind carburetor operation to provide context.
This document discusses the history and evolution of fuel injection systems. It begins by explaining how fuel injection has largely replaced carburetors over the past 30 years. It then provides details on early mechanical fuel injection systems, including the Lucas mechanical system that was commonly used in motorsports through the early 1980s. The document also describes constant flow fuel injection systems that continuously inject fuel, as well as the principles behind carburetor operation to provide context.
uel injection has come a long way in the past 30 years.
Where once the carburettor ruled the engine, now the fuel injection system reigns. But while much is written about the electronics and the power of the software used, comparatively little is reported about the fuelling systems themselves and how they are used. Mention the words Fuel Injection to most and they will conjure up an image of electronic boxes and digital systems but back in the day fuel injection was never like that. For many years constant fow mechanical systems were the nature of the beast. Instead of injecting discreet amounts of fuel in response to an electronic pulse, these systems continuously pump fuel into the intake manifold. That this type of system is available even today says much about its effectiveness and suitability for certain tasks. The problem in fuelling any spark ignition engine is to introduce the fuel as a vapour into the charge air of the engine in a combustible form and at the optimum air to fuel ratio. But before we launch into the complexity of the task in the context of fuel injection it is worth looking at the principles behind the pinnacle of mixing technology for many years, the fxed-jet carburettor. The carburettor When fuelling any variable speed, gasoline engine, once up to running temperature there are four conditions that need to be addressed to give adequate control engine idle, progression, what I will call normal running and acceleration. Apart from these we have issues such as cold start, which every engine has to do at some time or other, and hot re- starts, which can be particularly challenging for some applications. But for all gasoline engines, even those for racing, those are the four main areas of operation, during which the carburettor has to function satisfactorily. During normal running, air passes through an auxiliary venturi placed in the engine intake air stream, and a fuel-air mixture is pulled through by the partial vacuum thus created. The fuel is initially metered by a main jet from the foat chamber, while the air in the fuel- air pre-mix is regulated by an air-correction jet. In between, the air is mixed into the fuel using emulsion tubes. Without any correction of this nature, as the engine speed (and hence airfow) increased, the fuel-air mixture entering it would tend to move towards rich. While the main jet limits the amount of fuel metered according to the depression created in the venturi, the air- correction jets try to control this progressive enrichment and therefore maintain a constant air-fuel ratio. The emulsion tube has a number of holes at various heights along it that alter the primary fuel-air mixing according to the level of fuel in the foat chamber, which itself depends on the fuel demand coming from the engine. In essence, therefore, although quite simple in its approach, the internal workings of the fxed-jet carburettor are quite complex and may take considerable fne tuning. Factor in enrichment for acceleration, a separate circuit for engine idle and another when just moving away from idle (progression) and you have a complex instrument that can be temperamental. 30 Of all changes in engine technology over the past 30 years, fuel injection is arguably the most signicant, as John Coxon explains Picking the mixing Figure 1 The xed jet carburettor 31 FOCUS : FUEL INJECTION Lucas mechanical injection Although it is perhaps hard to believe now, fuel injection systems in the higher echelons of motor sport were normally mechanical as recently as the early 1980s. One such system, still in regular use every weekend at historic events, is the Lucas mechanical system. Still recognised as one of the most sophisticated and easy-to-use fuelling systems of its time, it uses a moving shuttle to meter the fuel to individual cylinders [Figure 3]. The shuttle operates between a fxed stop and a movable stop to meter the fow. A rotor geared to half engine speed and spinning around the metering sleeve times the delivery according to transfer port angle. With a constant fuel pressure of about 100-110 psi, the sole function of the injector is therefore to atomise the fuel. So fuel delivery at the normal wide-open throttle use of racing engines is proportional to engine speed, consequently it is only an approximate (but perfectly satisfactory) estimation of the fuelling requirement. More than this, however, the system has a method of altering part- throttle fuelling using a 3D cam profle mechanically linked directly to the throttle. Crude by 21st-century standards, the system was popular with engine builders because engine fuelling characteristics could be changed very easily with only limited test-bed running. Nevertheless, the fact that fuelling was timed to inject just at the correct time minimised fuel losses through the exhaust valve and gave surprisingly good fuel economy. Although an electric fuel pump was needed for starting, once it was running the engine would idle very easily with negligible bore wash. Furthermore, the design of the fuel injection nozzles produced little or no dripping on engine shutdown, preventing fuel from slowly dripping into the engine and potentially hydraulicing with disastrous results the next time the engine was cranked. But perhaps most important is the fact that throttle response was more or less instantaneous, which partly explains why drivers often preferred this system to any other contemporary designs in its heyday [Figure 4]. The introduction of a feedback loop, whereby any slight deviation from the desired air fuel ratio is corrected, is also particularly challenging. With these shortcomings in even the most sophisticated carburettors, it is little wonder that engineers have looked to other solutions that physically inject the fuel. Development of the frst gasoline injector systems goes as far back as that of the carburettor itself, and even until comparatively recently they were predominately mechanical. But the introduction of air pollution legislation spurred the development of a more precise fuelling technology thats essential for three-way catalyst control. In response to signals from the intake manifold and engine speed, fuel was injected directly into the intake manifold via a solenoid- controlled injector. Early systems were extremely expensive and time consuming to set up, so fuel injection on road vehicles was initially ftted only to executive vehicles and expensive sports cars. However as emission legislation became more widespread, systems were developed that were mechanically-hydraulically controlled, continuously injecting fuel into the intake manifold in a very similar manner to that of a carburettor. As emission control legislation became tougher these systems were gradually replaced by fully digitally controlled electronic systems but even so it was the mid eighties before fully programmable systems became the norm in Formula One. For a long time top level motorsport relied upon purely mechanical systems. The most prolifc of these at the top level was the Lucas system [Figure 2]. t Figure 2 The Lucas mechanical fuel injection system Figure 3 The Lucas metering/timing system Figure 4 The wide open throttle fuelling from the Lucas system is very much a compromise. Minimum fuel for best torque (MBT) is derived from dyno running and the fuel delivery rate selected as the best t selected to avoid running too weak or too rich at any one particular WOT condition. Note how the engine runs very weak at less than 2000 rpm. Fortunately race engines dont run full load at these speeds 32 the pump speed by 50% will increase its output by a similar amount. In practice, however, at very low as well as very high speeds, the effects of internal leakage, pumping friction losses and simple clearance issues mean this may not be the case. But in essence, when run directly off the engine via some kind of mechanical drive, the fuel delivery will be proportional to engine speed. To tailor the fow more precisely, a main bypass jet is introduced to the return feed going back to the fuel tank. The larger this jet the greater the return feed and the less the fuel going to the engine. This is the most basic adjustment in a constant-fow fuelling system and, when supplemented by a small poppet valve and spring, the additional restriction will help maintain the fuel pressure at low engine speeds and idle. At higher engine speeds, when the engine might be experiencing a loss of volumetric effciency, the fuel curve may also need to be restricted by introducing a high-speed bypass valve. Similar to the main bypass valve assembly the addition of a poppet and spring assembly together with a jet is used to alter the position at which the fuel is leaned off (see Figure 6). Normally set to function somewhere around 500-1000 rpm above peak torque, clever adjustment of this system, together with a richer main jet, can get closer to the ideal fuelling curve necessary for maximum power all through the engine speed range. Constant-ow injection systems Predating the Lucas system but still very popular even today are constant-fow designs. Simple and rugged, such systems are easily tuneable and avoid all the complexities associated with carburettor tuning. Indeed, in some circumstances, the absence of a carburettor foat chamber made this kind of system the natural selection. For instance, where high-g loads are experienced on the track, when cornering or moving in a straight line, the fuel level in the foat chamber can be quite erratic. Since the quality of the fuelling depends very much on the precise fuel level in the chamber, any undue alteration in the level can have a deleterious effect. Constant-fow systems of this type use a mechanical pump to control the supply of fuel to the injection unit according to the engines rpm. This variable fow generates a back-pressure in the fuel system against the fxed orifces of the main bypass jet and nozzle, while idle and part-load conditions are moderated using a barrel valve assembly. Fuel metering is achieved by sensing the engine speed and throttle angle. The speed is sensed using a positive displacement pump, generally of the gear-rotor variety which, when used within their designed operating envelope, have theoretically linear fow rate characteristics according to the shaft speed. In other words, increasing FOCUS : FUEL INJECTION t Figure 5 Kinsler constant ow schematic Figure 6 The high speed bypass circuit can enable closer fuelling to the ideal by allowing a rich main jet and then a high speed circuit to follow the engine requirement Figure 7 Constant ow nozzle RET_ADTEMP.indd 1 18/3/10 11:41:04 34
effciency (as a result of the fuel vaporising and displacing air) is greater than the beneft for combustion, this option is probably best forgotten. As a rule, many race engine manufacturers try a number of injector positions before signing off any new engine design. When it comes to fuel control, however, digital fuel injection can take a number of different directions. The frst and simplest is very similar in some ways to the earlier mechanical systems. Monitoring only the engine speed and throttle angle can give the basis for a very simple and highly effective fuel control system, and this method is sometimes referred to as Alpha-N. Since gasoline engines are very tolerant of variations in air-fuel ratio from 6% rich to 3% lean with only small changes to the power delivered such a system will outperform even the best mechanical system. But day- today variations in atmospheric pressure and ambient temperature will change the density of the intake air so, since electronic components are not expensive, more sophisticated methods have been developed. By substituting throttle angle as an approximation of airfow for a calculated value derived from the gas laws, the actual airfow can be inferred from pressure and temperature measurements inside the intake manifold. Known as the Speed-Density method, if the volumetric effciency is therefore known at all the engine operating conditions of engine speed and manifold air pressures, a much more accurate calculation of the airfow rate and hence air-fuel ratio can be produced. For the ultimate in control, air fow meters have been developed to measure the actual fow rate of the air passing into the engine. Designed around hot wire, hot flm or bubble technology, these are best positioned away from the heavily pulsing airfow and, as such, when used, they tend to be found upstream of the throttle in the cold air feed pipe that leads to the entrance of the air plenum. With so many spec engine formulae today, where no modifcation to the engine or its systems is allowed, this is an increasingly familiar option. Injector sequencing In a typical port-injected four-cylinder engine, once the appropriate injector pulse width had been calculated, all four injectors could be fred at once. This would deliver the appropriate amount of fuel to each cylinder. In practice though we tend to inject all four cylinders At wide-open throttle, once the fuel has passed through the barrel assembly it will go directly to the nozzles in each intake tract before being sprayed into the intake air stream [Figure 7]. Much like the carburettor, however, to improve vaporisation with naturally aspirated engines the fuel is mixed with a small amount of air immediately before delivery. This air is usually bled from the clean side of the manifold nearer the intake. For part-throttle operation the barrel valve comes into play. Connected directly to the throttle assembly using a mechanical link, when the throttle begins to close so does a spool in the barrel valve. At wide-open throttle the passageway through the barrel is effectively a large notch cut in the side of the spool and all the fuel fows directly to the nozzle, unrestricted. As the throttle is closed this spool rotates, and the ramp ground onto the side reduces the passageway to restrict the fow of fuel to match the engines reduced air requirement. This opening will be at a minimum at engine idle. At about half throttle another port is opened that leads to a secondary bypass valve, and from here back to the fuel tank. At an opening of about 40-20 this port is progressively opening and takes the excess fuel back to the tank. This secondary bypass valve normally has a higher pressure than the main bypass system so that when the engine returns to idle, this poppet valve closes and allows the spring and poppet valve in the main jet to regulate the idle fuel pressure. Once mastered, injection systems of this type are easily set up and are still very popular, although they do need day-to-day fne tuning to compensate for changes in atmospheric pressure and ambient temperatures. Electronic fuel injection The sophistication, simplicity of build and ease of calibration makes modern electronic fuelling systems the only option for many. Electromagnetic fuel injectors injecting gasoline fuel at anywhere up to 100 bar (about 1450 psi), and sometimes under closed-loop control and fully integrated with an ignition system incorporating knock control, would seem to be about as close to the ideal fuel management in the traditional port-injected gasoline engine as you can get. But advances in modern diesel engine technology, particularly common rail systems, has ensured that a whole new technology of direct injection is being developed for the gasoline engine such that in another ten years port injection for the gasoline engine may be a thing of the past. For the time being, however, manifold-injected or port- injected systems call them what you will are the most commonly available. Single-point systems were advocated briefy in the early days of electronic injection. But because they combined the cost of fuel injection with the air-fuel ratio distribution problems of the carburettor they were rejected in favour of the multi-point system, and are now a long-forgotten dead end in automotive history. These days virtually all injection systems use at least one, possibly two injectors per cylinder, injecting the fuel as close as possible to and in many cases onto the back of the intake valve. In racing engines the fuel can also be injected centrally into the bellmouth of the intake runner, although when the fall in volumetric Figure 8 Typical port fuel injector 35 FOCUS : FUEL INJECTION with only half the amount needed once every engine revolution (that is, every 360 crank degree). Sometimes referred to as the batch-triggered method, any fuel that doesnt enter the cylinder during the inlet valve opening period will remain in the intake port until the next cycle. Its not necessarily as bad as it sounds, as this fuel will have time to take in heat from the manifold wall and surroundings and vaporise in time for the next valve opening event, giving a more homogenous mixture. The longer injection periods of this method also means that smaller injectors can be used, giving better overall fuel metering control [Figure 8]. The other option is sequential injection. In this case each injector is fred according to the intake valve events on its corresponding cylinder. Fired only to coincide with the induction stroke, sequential systems seem to give better control over batch fred systems but do need larger injectors to inject the fuel into the engine in the shorter time frames available. Logically, in competition engines, injection must have been fully completed by the time the intake valve closes but in on-road applications at part throttle, injection is more usually completed immediately before the intake valve opens. Whatever the intended use, sequential systems have to vary the pulse width and adjust the start of injection (SOI) to fulfl the above conditions, so this needs to be freely programmable in any control system. In terms of out-and-out performance, there is little to choose between batch-fring and sequential systems. Sequential systems will inevitably give better driveability and fuel economy through more precise control of the fuel, but if engine performance is your only goal, the simplicity of batch-fring may be the best choice. As an alternative, some might say compromise, a group-fring or semi-sequential method may be used. On a traditional four-cylinder engine, therefore, instead of triggering all injectors at once, the cylinders would be grouped into pairs with each pair injected on alternate revolutions. So on our typical 1-3-4-2 fring cycle, cylinders 1 and 3 could be fred together, followed by 2 and 4 on the next revolution. This arrangement allows the injection to be selected as a function of the engine operating point and minimises the incidence of fuel hanging around in the port/manifold for long periods. Direct injection In the past 10-12 years, spurred on by growing fuel economy and emissions legislation worldwide, engineers have at last been able to prove the benefts of injecting the fuel directly into the combustion chamber. Referred to as gasoline direct injection, GDI, or sometimes DFI (Direct Fuel Injection) or even DISI (Direct Injection Spark Ignition), this technology is slowly fnding its way into the race engine business. Well call it simply DI. Although banned in Formula One, there cant be any serious vehicle manufacturer that doesnt have a DI programme of some sort such are the potential benefts. Unlike port injection, however, the challenges of producing a combustible mixture using DI are signifcant, and the fuel has to be both metered and formed into an homogenous mixture in a much shorter time than any of the methods already mentioned. For true DI operation, the fuel needs to be injected wholly within the induction stroke and after the exhaust valve closes before compression, to ensure full atomisation in advance of combustion and remember, an engine running at 11,000 rpm has a maximum injection period of only 1.5 ms! When other combustion modes are used, for example stratifed, lean combustion when operating at part load (for example running in the pit lane), the fuel might be injected much later in the cycle and during the compression stroke. But whatever the timing of injection, the task is to provide the fuel fow to match that of the fow of intake air and its distribution within the cylinder. Injecting against compression pressures means the injector will therefore need to work at much higher pressures than its port-mounted alternative. Injector types Setting aside for the time being their method of mounting and whether they are for port or direct systems, injector nozzles fall into three types pintle, disc and ball. Owing much of its heritage to diesel technology, the pintle nozzle consists of a tapered needle sitting in a tapered seat. When energised this needle is withdrawn, allowing the pressurised fuel to discharge. Popular with early OE manufacturers because of concerns over injector fouling with other designs, these have largely been superseded by disc or ball varieties. The disc type injector eliminates the pintles armature and the solenoid acts directly on a fat disc through the core of the injector body. This disc rests on a seat with an orifce in it, through which the fuel is injected. Lighter and with a better response than the ball type, this design results in less build-up of deposits and hence a longer service life. Used by GM but now a favourite with Bosch the ball type injector mechanism uses the same solenoid operating technology as the pintle but also has a ball and socket arrangement to seal the orifce and control injection more precisely. Designed with multiple holes for a t Figure 9 Bosch direct injector (Courtesy Bosch Engineering GmbH) 36 range of spray angles and patterns, injection rates can be much quicker than other designs. On the electrical side, pulse- width modulated (PWM) injectors tend to come in two categories depending on the impedance of the solenoid windings. Since the injector driver circuit is part of the ECU electronics it is important to match these to the correct type of injector if the injector is to work as it should and the circuit not fail. These two injector driver designs are peak and hold and saturation. Peak-and-hold drivers generally work with low-impedance injectors. Typically in the 1-4 band, the full battery voltage is applied across the solenoid windings until the current reaches a level where the solenoid moves the injector to its maximum opening position, after which the current is reduced for the rest of the pulse. Because of the low impedance, the switching currents will be high and, since heat generated is proportional to the square of the current, the heat to be dissipated within the driver circuit will also be high [Figure 11]. Saturation drivers, by contrast, have much higher impedance windings, typically 10-17 or lower with a ballast resistor, and the injector driver is fully on during the full injector pulse width. With the resulting lower currents, the heat build-up will be much less but the speed of response will suffer. Since many low-pressure motorsport systems rely on normal production-based components, most injectors for motorsport are based around saturation technology, despite their (slightly) poorer FOCUS : FUEL INJECTION performance. But because the high-pressure injectors in DI and high pressure port-injected systems need to be able to open and close rapidly, they use peak-and-hold driver technology. The precise differences between a high-pressure port injector and a direct injector suitable for Bosch DI installations are only application- specifc. While the direct injector may require a long, narrow nose for reasons of packaging in and around the combustion chamber, modern high-pressure injectors are based around the same 12 V electromagnetic, 200 bar maximum pressure, architecture. While fuel injector fuel-feed positions can be either bottom feed sometimes referred to as gallery feed or top feed, the self-venting capability of top-feed units tends to make them most suited to motorsport applications. The fuel circuit Fuel systems for injected engines are usually divided into high and low pressure. Any system where the fuel line pressure into the injector is 10 bar or less is generally considered to be low pressure. Consequently, anything above that, whether direct or port injected, is considered high. In reality, few low-pressure systems work above 8 bar, whereas high-pressure systems can be 50, 100 or now even 200 bar, although current Formula One fuel systems are limited by regulation to 100 bar. In most OE vehicle fuel systems the pump will almost invariably be in the fuel tank itself. Better fuel pick-up and modular designs with fewer joints to leak may have advantages in this business but in competition, for reasons of ease of access, the separate in-line pump is still king. In these low-pressure systems the fuel line pressure is typically between 3 and 4 bar (45-60 psi), but because of the need to inject fuel more quickly in some designs, injectors are often rated up to 8 bar. Pumps to deliver these pressures at the fow rates required are usually of a roller cell design. When much higher pressures are needed this type of pump will be used as a lift pump to prime the fuel system of another, mechanically-driven unit that takes its drive from the camshaft. Early Bosch high-pressure pumps for frst-generation DI systems consisted of three-barrel type pumps driven off an eccentric camshaft lobe, and equally spaced around the cam. Delivering 50-120 bar, these have now been replaced by pumps up to 200 bar using a single pump piston [Figures 14 and 15]. In the case of low-pressure systems, for many years OE vehicle manufacturers would pump the fuel directly into the injector fuel rail, with any surplus fuel being diverted back by the pressure regulator Figure 10 Cross-section of Bosch EV14 port injector (Courtesy Bosch Engineering GmbH) Figure 11 Peak and hold injector characteristics Figure 12 Saturation injector characteristics Figure 13 Low pressure pump 37 to the fuel tank. This had the dual advantages of sending any vapour vented from the injector back to the tank and re-circulating the fuel to minimise the threat of fuel vapour forming in the frst place. With one side of the invariably mechanical regulator connected to the intake manifold pressure, the actual pressure difference across the injector would remain constant at all times. Thus the pulse width so calculated would be based on this constant pressure difference across the injector. Instead of placing the regulator at the far end of the fuel rail, later low-pressure systems repositioned it together with a pressure sensor in the fuel tank immediately next to the fuel pump and flter assembly. With this approach, only the fuel to be injected into the engine was delivered to the fuel rail, any excess being returned directly to the tank. With no reference to the manifold pressure, this has to be taken into account when the injector pulse width is being calculated. Systems of this type are called returnless and have led to another development, referred to as demand-controlled. Similar to the returnless system, demand-controlled systems pump only the fuel needed for use by the engine. The pressure to the fuel rail is controlled directly from the engine ECU working to closed-loop control with the pressure sensor in the rail. Although a pressure relief valve is installed for safety reasons, a conventional pressure regulator is no longer needed, and the delivery volume to the rail is controlled by changing the voltage to the pump. This is undertaken by a clock-operated module triggered from the engine ECU. Giving better metering precision and having the ability to increase the fuel pressure under conditions such as hot starts preventing the formation of fuel vapour, demand-controlled systems can also extend the operating range of injectors for turbocharged applications. But despite the many advantages to OE vehicles of the returnless system, most low-pressure motorsport systems still rely on a recirculating fuel line incorporating a return fuel line back to the tank. For gasoline direct systems and high pressure port-injected variations a low-pressure electric pump is used to supply the fuel from the tank to the intake of the high-pressure, mechanical pump at a minimum of 6 bar. Beyond this the fuel can either be sent to the injectors using a continuous delivery at constant pressure, with the fow rate controlled by the speed of the piston, or a demand-controlled system whose fow rate and pressure can be controlled by a separate function from the ECU. Piezoelectric injectors One of the latest innovations in fuel injection technology is the introduction of the piezoelectric injector. Developed for diesel engine applications, these fast-acting units are excellent at creating a greater number of pulses essential to control the rate shaping combustion process in a modern diesel engine. But their size and weight, as well as the fexibility of the spray patterns that can be created, make it most unlikely that the technology will be seen in gasoline-fuelled motorsport in the near future. In summary So there you have it, the simple mechanical systems through to the far more complex fully electronic digital versions. While the former still have a role to play the latter with their almost infnite possibilities are much more exacting. With advanced fuel injection you will, of course, need some form of engine controller. Fortunately there must be dozens of suitable systems on the market today, one of which will be ideally suited to your requirements, whatever they are. Moreover, any system capable of running a sequential port injection system will also be capable of DI. However, getting the fuel spray pattern to match the airfow characteristics in the combustion chamber is another matter. n Figure 14 High-pressure mechanical fuel pump (Courtesy Bosch Engineering GmbH) Figure 15 High-pressure pump cross-section. (Courtesy Bosch Engineering GmbH) Figure 16 2008 Porsche LMP2 engine NAME: ADDRESS: POSTCODE/ZIP: COUNTRY: PHONE: MOBILE/CELL: EMAIL: rInvoice me at the above email address HIGH POWER MEDIA LTD WHITFIELD HOUSE, CHEDDAR ROAD, WEDMORE, SOMERSET, ENGLAND BS28 4EJ TEL: +44 (0)1934 713811 FAX: +44 (0)208 497 2102 EMAIL: SUBS@HIGHPOWERMEDIA.COM Registered in England and Wales number 5666309 Registered ofce as above. VAT No. 888 253 574 RET & RTR 1 YEAR SUBSCRIPTIONS RET ONLY RET + RTR 2010* 8 FOR THE PRICE OF 7 15% OFF UK 70.00 r 119.00 r EUROPE 84.00 (~93 e ) r 142.80 (~158 e ) r USA/CANADA 87.50 (~$132) r 148.75 (~$224) r REST OF WORLD 91.00 r 154.70 r 1) FAX TO +44 (0)208 497 2102 2) TELEPHONE +44 (0)1934 713 811 3) POST TO ADDRESS BELOW 4) SECURELY ONLINE AT WWW.HIGHPOWERMEDIA.COM 4 WAYS TO SUBSCRIBE: RET BACK ISSUES All back issues of RET are available. ISSUE NOS REQUIRED: UK 12.50 EUROPE 15 (~17 e ) USA/CANADA 15.63 (~$24) RoW 16.25 EACH RET & RTR 2 YEAR SUBSCRIPTIONS RET ONLY RET + RTR 2010* & 2011** 16 FOR THE PRICE OF 12 25% OFF UK 120.00 r 210.00 r EUROPE 144.00 (~159 e ) r 252.00 (~278 e ) r USA/CANADA 150.00 (~$225) r 262.50 (~$394) r REST OF WORLD 156.00 r 273.00 r * RTR 2010 consists of Motorcycle Race Technology, F1 Race Technology Volume 4 & 24 Hour Race Technology Volume 4 ** RTR 2011 consists of Cup Race Technology Volume 2, F1 Race Technology Volume 5 & 24 Hour Race Technology Volume 5 Dont forget to sign-up to our free technical e-newsletter at www.ret-monitor.com/register YOUR DETAILS (3 DIGIT NO. LOCATED ON SIGNATURE STRIP) CREDIT CARD TYPE: rVISA rMASTERCARD rUK MAESTRO rAMEX CARD NUMBER: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ EXPIRY DATE: _ _ / _ _ VALID FROM: (IF APPLICABLE) _ _ / _ _ ISSUE NO. (FOR UK MAESTRO ONLY) _ _ SECURITY CODE: _ _ _ SIGNATURE: 24 HOUR race SINGLE RACE TECHNOLOGY REPORTS
VOL 1 VOL 2 VOL 3 VOL 4 ALL VOLS
F1 RTR APR 07 r APR 08 r APR 09 r APR 10 r r 24 HOUR RTR JUL 07 r JUL 08 r JUL 09 r JUL 10 r r CUP RTR NOV 07 r NOV 10 r DRAG RTR NOV 08 r MOTORCYCLE RTR NOV 09 r UK 20 EUROPE 24 (~27 e ) USA/CANADA 25 (~$38) RoW 26 EACH BUY 3 GET 4TH FREE RET BINDERS PLEASE ENTER THE NUMBER OF RET BINDERS YOU REQUIRE: UK 8 EACH EUROPE 9.60 (~11 e ) EACH USA/CANADA 10 (~$15) EACH RoW 10.40 EACH
Gas-Engines and Producer-Gas Plants
A Practice Treatise Setting Forth the Principles of Gas-Engines and Producer Design, the Selection and Installation of an Engine, Conditions of Perfect Operation, Producer-Gas Engines and Their Possibilities, the Care of Gas-Engines and Producer-Gas Plants, with a Chapter on Volatile Hydrocarbon and Oil Engines