I'm just trying to understand the concept behind the oval bowl VS a round bowl. I don't have the modeling programs to get a 3D image of what is going on, but to me it would seem like a round bowl with a larger diameter would be better for overall performance than the oval bowl. On the other hand though I can see how the oval bowl would help to distribute the combustion force over the strongest area of the piston.
I don't think there was a "concept" on bowl design as it relates to combustion, flame propogation, or performance.
From what I gathered (I don't want to put words in his mouth so he can correct any issue I'm inaccurate on) it seems like Jon looked at what was happening (piston cracking along the pin) and did some modeling and found the area that cracks happened at the weakest portion of the piston by it's design.
He was looking for a way to eliminate the weak link. His biggest concern was increasing strength in that area, while still having a "bowl" for combustion and doing so in a way to keep CR within certain limits.
I'm ASSuming that he had a few limitations:
1: There has to be some sort of "bowl" for combustion to take place
2: There has to be enough meat above the pin to increase the overall strength in that area (whole reason for the project).
3: Injector spray pattern (dictating minimum size of the bowl)
4: Compression Ratio
5: Others that I'm not thinking of
Those factors led to a bowl that was as wide as the OEM bowl (to keep the spray mostly in the bowl......or at least as much as stock does), and because of that factor combined with making it a shallower bowl (leaving more material above the pin) while needing enough material removed for proper CR values, it necessitated elongating the bowl on opposite sides of the pin.
This led to the shape which he modelled and found to be "stronger" and he took a chance with it (although he did his homework it wasn't just a WAG). I don't think he was worried about proper combustion or emissions as long as it still ignited the fuel in a controlled manner. The changed exhaust note was a byproduct (not a design feature) as well as the unshrouding of some of the exhaust valve (not a design feature, but a welcome byproduct), which may be the reason for the changed exhaust note or it could ALSO be due to the way combustion takes place which may change the harmonics in the cylinder (I'm assuming if you could look in the cylinder at the flame on a stock bowl vs. this would be different).
Jon, have you compared (with your chamber pressure monitoring system) the stock bowl vs. these on a similarly hardwared and tuned engine? It would be interesting to see if or how it affects cylinder pressure (if at all assuming same CR)?
When they were first discussed/shown, piston cracking was a hot topic. Some were going to forged pistons because of it, but were unsure of ring life and/or piston life on a DD. Monotherms were not out (and even now I have not heard much from them), so these were a potential alternative for a spirited DD and possibly more. These pistons will have a breaking point, myself and others would like to see them do well at it will only be better for all of us. I doubt they are the end all and be all of pistons and for a extreme high HP purpose built rig, there are most likely better alternatives, but for the price and their "wearability", it would be a good answer for a large percentage of the populus who still drive our trucks but like to drag race, truck pull, etc.
I guess only time will tell, but much like "Ben's special rods" the proof will be in the pudding. So far these are doing much better than those :spit:
And even if they do break, it will be interesting to see how much it took to make that happen.