Talk:Diesel engine/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Forced induction

In diesel engines, there is no "greatly reduced" risk of pre-ignition or detonation, this risk does not exist (thus, it cannot be reduced). Even if this risk existed and even if it could be reduced, it could not be the reason why anyone would want to turbocharge a diesel engine. The primary reasons for turbocharging are increasing efficiency and torque. The latter is especially important because by principle, Diesel engines produce less torque than Otto type petrol engines: The maximum torque is produced at lambda values around 0.9, which in normal bog-standard diesel engines are impossible. The ignition limits of a diesel engine are typically lambda 1.3 and something in between 5.0 and 6.0, which means that they cannot burn as much fuel per displacement and thus produce less torque. It also means that a typical three-way catalyst does not work: At lambda > 1, a catalyst converter can oxidise hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide, but it cannot reduce nitrogen oxides. Therefore, excess lambda is not that much of an issue (it is always too lean for a TWC). If exhaust gas treatment is desired in diesel engines, a two-way catalyst in combination with a particulate filter and a denox device (such as an LNT or SCR catalyst) must be used. Best regards, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 19:21, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

pV or PV

When pV indicates the product of pressure and volume, as in Ideal gas law where:

• $p$ is the absolute pressure of the gas, and
• $V$ is the volume of the gas,

it should be capitalized according to the conventions for gas laws. The "p" should not be capitalized, but the "V" should be capitalized.

However, in this article, PV appears as an abbreviation for pressure-volume, and it should be capitalized according to MOS:CAPSACRS, as it also appears in Pressure–volume diagram. "PV" should be capitalized.

Comfr (talk) 00:17, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Article issues and classification

The article has been sporting a B-class rating but does not qualify as having "citation needed" tags.

• Citations: The criteria #1 states; The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations. It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited.
• The article is reasonably well-written.. The list of categories includes Wikipedia articles that are too technical from July 2022 which are not indicative of "well-written. The article has been reassessed pending the resolution of issues. -- Otr500 (talk) 23:36, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

External links

There are six entries in the "External links". Three seems to be an acceptable number and of course, everyone has their favorite to add for four. The problem is that none is needed for article promotion.

• ELpoints #3) states: Links in the "External links" section should be kept to a minimum. A lack of external links or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links.
• LINKFARM states: There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to the external links section of an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia. On articles about topics with many fansites, for example, including a link to one major fansite may be appropriate.
• WP:ELMIN: Minimize the number of links. -- Otr500 (talk) 01:07, 11 February 2023 (UTC)