Bottom-Access Engine Compartment Layout Without a Front Hood

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional cars with internal combustion engines face challenges in accessing the engine for maintenance due to the structural weakening caused by the engine compartment 'hole' and the need for additional structural elements, leading to increased mass and reduced stiffness.

Innovation Solution

A car design with a centrally or rearward-mounted internal combustion engine, featuring hydrogen fuel storage tanks and a unique drivetrain system, allows bottom access to the engine compartment without an openable hood, maintaining structural integrity and reducing mass while enabling easy maintenance.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Strength

If a hood is added to close the engine compartment hole, then structural stiffness is improved, but device complexity and mass increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvestructural stiffnessVSAvoiddevice complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent removes the hood entirely from the vehicle structure, extracting the problematic component that caused both the stiffness issue (by creating a hole) and the complexity issue (as a separate movable part). The engine compartment is left open without any closing mechanism, eliminating the need for hinges, latches, and the hood panel itself.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

Instead of closing the engine compartment hole with a hood as in conventional designs, the patent inverts the approach by leaving it open and accepting the structural consequence. This inversion transforms the hood from a necessary closing element into an unnecessary component that is completely eliminated.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #13The other way round (Inversion)

2Strength

If a hood is added to close the engine compartment hole, then structural stiffness is improved, but mass increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvestructural stiffnessVSAvoidmass
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSWeight of moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The hood is extracted and removed from the vehicle, eliminating its mass contribution. The patent accepts the structural implication of having an open engine compartment rather than carrying the weight of a hood and its closing mechanisms.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The conventional approach of closing the engine compartment is inverted by leaving it open, thereby eliminating the mass penalty associated with hoods and their support structures.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #13The other way round (Inversion)

3Device complexity

If the engine compartment hole is left open without a hood, then mass and device complexity are reduced, but structural stiffness deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedevice complexityVSAvoidstructural stiffness
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSStrength

Solution Approach 1:

The hood is removed entirely, accepting the structural consequence of an open engine compartment. The patent prioritizes eliminating complexity over maintaining the stiffness that a hood would provide.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

Instead of closing the engine compartment to maintain stiffness, the patent inverts the approach by leaving it open, accepting the stiffness reduction as a trade-off for eliminating the hood and its mechanisms.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #13The other way round (Inversion)

4Strength

If access to the engine is from above through a hood, then structural integrity is maintained, but ease of operation deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvestructural integrityVSAvoidease of operation
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The hood is extracted and removed, transforming the engine access approach. Instead of requiring operators to open a hood and reach down from above, the open engine compartment allows direct access from any angle, significantly improving ease of operation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

5Strength

If access to the engine is from above through a hood, then structural integrity is maintained, but ease of repair deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvestructural integrityVSAvoidease of repair
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSEase of repair

Solution Approach 1:

The hood is removed, eliminating the barrier to engine access. Mechanics can now approach the engine from any direction and access components more easily, improving repair efficiency without requiring hood opening and maneuvering.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Data Source

PatentEP4328118A1Car provided with an internal combustion engine
Publication Date: 2024.02.28 FERRARI SPA
  • EP4328118A1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4328118A1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP4328118A1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A car (1) having: two front wheels (2); two rear wheels (4); an internal combustion engine (5), which is provided with a plurality of cylinders (18), where respective pistons (19) slide on the inside, and with a crankshaft (20) connected to the pistons (19); an engine compartment (78), where the internal combustion engine (5) is arranged; and a bottom (14), which is the lowest part of the car (1) and, in use, faces a road surface on which the car (1) moves. The body (12) has no openable hood allowing access to the engine compartment (78). Instead, the bottom (14) comprises an opening (79) having a size similar to the size of the engine compartment (78), which is arranged in the area of the engine compartment (78), and a removable panel (80), which is fixed in a removable manner and closes the opening (79).