anyone happen to know where i could acquire the above said piece of info??
cheers guys
anyone happen to know where i could acquire the above said piece of info??
cheers guys
Hi mike, maps for T2 series are hard to come by, but if it helps the standard turbo has a 50 trim compressor, 0.48ar cover and a 58 trim turbine in 0.35ar housing.
std wheel is 48/34
this isn't a GTT wheel, but it'll give an idea
http://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbob...4_454083_2.htm
if you find a real map post it...
i have been struggling on this for a while.
i've had the standard head i've got on the flow bench, and it not looking that great lol
through my calcs i've managed to work out that if the engine was N/A with the standard head it would reach peak power at just under 4K....
if i use average air speed as 330 m/s then the power figure comes out just about right, so i was hoping to find the map and ad that in to prove the airspeed.
have you managed to look at the flow distribution with the manifold in place?
publish some graphs, you know you want to...
nay not yet, gonna be hitting the flow bench again this saturday.. so i may add it to my list of thing to do.
i've done flow tests on cylinder 1: bare head, head&manifold and without manifold but with a flared inlet, increments of 0.5 mm lift up to 8.5mm.
but looking at my valve lift though, at first test they only open to around 6.1mm(with the pip 285)??
have you looked at valve lift against cam lift and the differences between the two??
thats what i've got, but it's part of my retest on saturday... i'm thinking some new springs could be of benefit here. so i may chuck the piper ones in to see if it makes the graph a little better....
Last edited by Mike GTT; 09-02-2009 at 17:44.
that's good stuff, the manifold is clearly crap. Did you radius the manifold inlet, or was that with the carb fitted?
What pressure drop are you testing at?
The 285 has over 10mm of lift, the curves I gave you were for cam lift, so you need to multiply by ~1.5 and then subtract the valve clearance to get valve lift. You can check your results using the "tech app" on the site (you can click on it at the top of this page).
i'll try it with the new spring in situ then, i took it to the max on the standards, i think theyre pretty old springs anyway....they've defo been sitting for a while for sure!
i've not tried it with the carb yet, i'm gonna test that on saturday.
all my tests have been on the small test bench for now, i'm testing at 10" H2O on the small bench, i'll test on the big bench @ 25" H2O.
i''ve not tested the exhaust side of things yet. there are so many issues with the induction side of things which could be improved, the exhaust side has fallen by the wayside for now
I have a flow figure for my Gordini inlet of 157cfm@25" at 10mm lift, bare head with a plasticine radius. I still need to work on the inlet, but with that fitted I get 144cfm at the same lift.
do you know at what rpm do renault state the max power at?? any idea of the top of your head??
can't find the data in the articles section??
5750 I thinkOriginally Posted by Mike GTT
my instinct says you've stuffed your figures up somewhere.i have been struggling on this for a while.
i've had the standard head i've got on the flow bench, and it not looking that great lol
through my calcs i've managed to work out that if the engine was N/A with the standard head it would reach peak power at just under 4K
if i use average air speed as 330 m/s then the power figure comes out just about right, so i was hoping to find the map and ad that in to prove the airspeed.
i don't think i have.... i've done two sets of figures one for the mean flow co-eff for both the stanard and piper cams.
i'm getting (if the engine was N/A);
peak power @ 4020 (standard)
peak power @ 5100 (piper)
its hard to cross reference with manufacturers stated power because i don't have the T2 map
piper state the power band to max out at 6500 right??
that means it would still rev past that, but peak power is at 6500?
330m/s is getting awfully close to supersonic
Just over 54 m/s is about 120mph!! So yeah you are breaking the speed of sound with 300 m/s!
when i sat down with my lecturer and went through one of his magic book, we saw most turbo can produce and hold (depending on turbo) 330m/s
the only reason i can see the piper producing max power at 6500 is by maxing the turbo and pressure dropping off as the turbo is relatively small??
got some wires crossed mate.
we're talking about air speed entering the engine. as opposed to the actual vehicle... i would infact pay to see the car do that! if it would stay together that is......
Opps my bad!! I really should read a thread properly before commenting!when i sat down with my lecturer and went through one of his magic book, we saw most turbo can produce and hold (depending on turbo) 330m/s
the only reason i can see the piper producing max power at 6500 is by maxing the turbo and pressure dropping off as the turbo is relatively small??
got some wires crossed mate.
we're talking about air speed entering the engine. as opposed to the actual vehicle... i would infact pay to see the car do that! if it would stay together that is......
you've set me a goal now buddy!
from tomorrow i'm gonna get the gaffa tape out and go for it! lol
down what diameter pipe?
I really can't see the ports on a standard engine running at around supersonic as an average. Something must be wrong in your sums, are you only using one cylinder or something?
I only know the lecturers I had at Uni, and they could spout some dreadful drivel at times, lecturers can cock up too...
If I can be arsed I'll try and run some stuff on my simulator tonight.
Hi Mike, I've run a few rough numbers.
I did a NA engine first with roughly a standard cam and your flow figures, I used a CR of 9.5:1, with a better inlet and exhaust manifolds. It made peak power at around 6000rpm.
I then added a turbo with 10 psi of boost, dropped the cr to 7.8:1, peak power came out at around 5750rpm, and average gas speed in the inlet runners at peak power was about 300ft/sec, or under 100m/s.
I've not got too anal about getting exact numbers, but that'll be a reasonable ballpark figure.
Andy
sorry mate been uber busy... that was for on port, its my first tim out on the flow bench, so i've retested using all inlets on saturday, doing another retest on the thursday to try and get some continuity.
alot of the figures we used were probably fudged anyway, i'll dig the working out and type the calcs once i've sifted through them if thats cool???
what engine simulator are using??
keep all the numbers and findings coming, this is the most interesting thread on the site, it's not often I bother to scratch my head
I'm not sure if any of my comments come across negatively, they're not, I'm behind you all the way, and when you show I'm talking bollocks I'll have learnt something
I'm using Performance Trends Engine Analyzer Pro. I think it may understate any problems with overlap so I've been reading between the lines a bit when choosing a cam.
we're using Ricardo wave, don't know if you've heard of it.
how you finding Performance Trends Engine Analyzer Pro, where'd you get it from??
not taken anything negatively mateit's good to have questions asked as you said, i'm in a group with people mainly using Honda CBR and VTEC heads, which are pretty good as standard, the C1J has a lot of room for improvement which is making for an interesting project for definate! theyre sitting on their a*ses learning nowt.
where did you go to uni? what did you study??
Wave will be a fair bit better than anything I've played with, even then, I'm not sure how well it deals with overlap, especially with the level of backpressure you can get from a turbo. From my playing the reality was much worse than the theoretical.
I got my software direct from Performance Trends.
I did electronics in Stafford, err, a few years ago now
was it a uni or a polytechnic?
I did electronics in Stafford, err, a few years ago now
CAD Progress with the ports, theyre only the first drawings,once i get the valve guide measured, i'll be able add them into the drawings, and then flow them in Fluent CFD, make the changes in cad, reflow in CFD then hopefully amke those mods to the actual head(practicality allowing so probably unlikely lol)...
when you do the CFD work do you also add the combustion chamber and cylinder wall?
On my Gordini head the cylinder wall gets in the way until around 5mm lift, after which it's more of an annoyance than a hinderance.
not quite that long ago, but then I was a mature studentwas it a uni or a polytechnic?
i'm just looking at flow through the head at this stage. i'm hoping to look at how it swirls an tumbles into the chamber probably towards easter.
on the gordini, are you saying that the cylinder head design isn't effective with the shape of the cylinder istelf??
i could add the cylinder and try it certainly, but the CFD is so sensitive to the 'meshing' in the cad package... this test could go either way to be honest, but i'm giving it a go! i hate computers! lol
it's a hemi, which on the plus side allows me to run 76mm of valve in a 76mm bore, the valve is canted over at I think 25deg, the edge of the valve starts off outside the bore of the engine, opens across the corner of the cylinder, and ends up more towards the centre of the bore. As you can imagine, at low lifts the cylinder wall blocks off a percentage of the valve circumference.
ah i see what you mean, in all honesty i've not looked at it. i've got a limited amount of time in regards to other assignments, so i am limited.
i've made some good progress over the past two weeks, i've flowed the standard head with manifold on each cylinder, but i've not accumilated the results as of yet, i'm guessing that CFD'ing the port is going to be hardest bit of the whole test so that's where i'm spending alot of my free time at the mo.... saturday has become flow bench day
gotta switch to me piper springs on my modified an see how she flows this week
Last edited by Mike GTT; 17-02-2009 at 20:56.
don't know whether or not to retitle this.... i seem to have gone on off on one!
I'm surprised that you don't have some nice soft springs to use on the flow bench, I did the Gordini heads with just an inner spring.
there's only one spring per valve on the C1J heads i have??
Theyre maxing out at 8.3(ish) mm of lift, don't know if the piper springs'll be any different??
yep, the pipers will lift more, but then the standard ones should lift more like 10mm
they could quite possibly be fooked.... have you tested the springs for load?....
i don't know where i'm going wrong??
I did do a few years back, put the results on the old site. Pretty sure I don't have the numbers anymore.they could quite possibly be fooked.... have you tested the springs for load?....
i don't know where i'm going wrong??
little update on this, i've flowed a head i've done a little work too, using the same size valves, but smoothed the port and manifold, still needs a little work, but much better over standard by the looks of things
Switched to piper springs and managing just over 10.5mm of lift on the bench.
Is there anyway of calculting the CFM from the flow percentage and flow range? in the superflow manual i can on see how to calculate it for range 1. I've been going off the flow chart next to the bench, but i've now got so many results it'll take ages to sift through it all. and some of my figures ar to the closest whole number. any advice??
I see you used NX5, cool.
I work on a PLM programme where our engineers use NX4 within a Teamcenter environment (NX6 by the end of the year). We also have a HPC (High Performance Compute) programme for the guys who do CFD. In fact I oversaw the installation of one of the server clusters a while back
Probably shouldn't say who I work for. Not sure if I've divulged something I shouldn't have above. In any case, my advice is, don't fly in anything that's got a GE engine on it
for what i'm CFDing there shouldn't be a need for a cluster, we are however using clusters to solve an up and coming audi design. but thats on NX5 and fluent which'll run overnight on the cluster we have in uni. its heavy stuff indeed.
don't think your dropping anyone in it lol NX is extensively used in industry... i've got a license for soldworks, but its quite hard to draw complex shapes. only advantage with solid woks is it has it own CFD built in, but i've not used it as of yet.
hopefully the CFD results will match the flow bench results i've obtained....one only hopes lol
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
