New Intake Design
Here's a manifold I came up with over the weekend. I'm actually supposed to be working on the auxiliary ports, but the barrel throttles were fun to draw. The proportions of the engine are messed up, but it gives you some idea of what it should look like.
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c5...take001qq9.jpg http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c5...take002uk3.jpg http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c5...take003bg6.jpg what do you guys think? |
looks good...i dont know much about intakes but what effects will it have being that the there is two tbs instead of one and the pipes are seperated?
|
ITB's? Interesting. I think I've seen someone that sells a TB velocity stack combo. Back on topic. Nice drawing/ idea. I wonder if anyone will ever design a variable length intake runner system like the one used on the 787B.
|
Nice- ITBs. I like that design- Im assuming you would need a standalone with a setup like that though.
|
I plan to run something similar on my FC. I'll be using off-the-shelf parts, though. DCOE upper manifold with a slightly modified stock lower intake manifold, and I'll utilize a pair of TWM 48mm throttle bodies. I'll let you guys know how it works out in about 4 or 5 months, hopefully I can break 200rwhp N/A with a mild streetport.
|
http://www.rotaryshack.com/Products/...sp?intView=100 i bet if you ask these guys they will probably make it for you.
|
thanks for the feed back guys. actually i have a guy locally making it for me for free. no telling when ill get it started tho. i have to get him the materials to machine and build. as for the ecu, i have a friend whose running something similiar and hes actually using the stock ecu. its not exactly efficient but he wasnt left with enough cash to megasquirt it. Ill probably design a penelum(air volumizer) to put around the trumpets. 13turbofc, basically you get a shorter length for the intake to pull air in. if you look at the stock manifold it curves under itself and is rather long. i designed it with 2 separate pipes for each rotor to have its own intake. just seemed logical.
|
There is a reason the stock intake manifold is that long, low end torque. Its what makes the car somewhat decent for the street.
With a shorter IM the power band is shifted up. The bad thing about this is that with the stock ECU, you cannot take full advantage of it. Not to mention the heavy S4 rotors and stock ports will limit how high you can rev. The plenum should be placed after the throttle for maximum driveability at part throttle. |
That's some nice work! But it's not exactly new. :) Take a look at the Renesis intake...
You're going to want some kind of air volume after the throttle bodies. It will help tremendously with throttle response. |
thanks alot. i know its not a new design but i was really just wanting to design something with acad(i get bored easily). then i really started to think about it. I forgot to add the air volume but it is in my next design. this one is taking forever but when it is ill post it.
|
If I might make a suggesting: Throttle the secondary/aux ports together and the primarys together. If you throttle them with each other you wont get any high pressure wave benefit at any point. If you throttle the secondarys and primaries seperately then at least at some point in the mix the high pressure wave from the intake port closing will reach the chamber at the same time that the other intake port is opening, causing the same effect as the VDI.... If you did that I would stack them on top of each other, or stagger vertically so that the runners are the same length to the barrel.
If you are doing this on a turbo its not nearly as important. Otherwise it looks good. You could probably source TB's from an Honda RC51 or Ducati sport bike. BC |
Oh, and if you can get your friend to make a few of those LIMs you could EASILY sell a few of them on this board for a few bucks.
I would buy one. BC |
1 Attachment(s)
Everything except the barrel throttles is easily available from RB and TWM. The plenum takes some work. Another Ludwig Motorsports product.
http://www.ludwigmotorsports.com/brooks510/plenum4.jpg |
Is that alternator rusty as hell or am I seeing things? :squint:
|
Originally Posted by Cpt.Zanzibar
Here's a manifold I came up with over the weekend. I'm actually supposed to be working on the auxiliary ports, but the barrel throttles were fun to draw. The proportions of the engine are messed up, but it gives you some idea of what it should look like.
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c5...take001qq9.jpg http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c5...take002uk3.jpg http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c5...take003bg6.jpg what do you guys think? This is the most important aspect of the motor. Unfortunately the hardest to tune. Remember as the RPMS rise the pressure waves change and the reverb into the intake is also changed. Account the amount of volume needed for the trailing bounce of the reverb to be picked up on the scavenging timing and volume of the ports. Your high point of the velocity pulse will carry a high pressure zone and the trailing will carry a low pressure zone. When you get the reverb these will colloid and stall your intake. This is where runner bounce comes from, more prominent on NA engines. Things as bends and actuators are used to counter it. |
Originally Posted by C. Ludwig
Everything except the barrel throttles is easily available from RB and TWM. The plenum takes some work. Another Ludwig Motorsports product.
http://www.ludwigmotorsports.com/brooks510/plenum4.jpg |
You can even get roller throttles comercially. Here's a pic of some webber flanged ones.
http://www.flyinmiata.com/projects/c...flip.php?x=674 Also on this page you can see another option for the intake manifold. http://www.yawpower.com/dec2004.html |
If you're gonna go and make a custom manifold with ITBs, why not just put the secondary injectors on the lower half of the manifold, closer to the ports (basically spraying right into them)? Seems like it would work better...
|
Originally Posted by rogrx7
I talked to some one that says that this design pops motors.
|
i agree with the statement made before. the primary and secondary ports really shouldnt be on the same TB. Look at any factory EFI manifold for the rotary. the secondary and primary ports are seperated hense the three plate TB design. Helps driveability a ton too.
|
If going custom with the TB's and manifolds you want to place the injectors as FAR away from the ports as possible, because it leaves more time for better fuel atomisation.
|
Fuel atomization is at its best when the spray velocity as reached its max end point. Any time after that is soly fuel collection time.
|
that and wont moving the injectors back cause a delay between the time when its injected and the time when its actaully in the combustion chamber?
|
^ Yes generaly you would have to run the injector duty more to compinsate the fuel collection. Closer is bettor to a point. This is where the direct port injection theory comes from.
|
This is basically what he told me. The guy also has a pretty nicc FC as works at a shop.
http://img488.imageshack.us/img488/977/boomeu0.jpg |
Originally Posted by rogrx7
This is basically what he told me. The guy also has a pretty nicc FC as works at a shop.
http://img488.imageshack.us/img488/977/boomeu0.jpg |
asymmetry isnt such a big deal, if there is an effect on the efficiency of a specific portion any reasonable standalone permits tuning per-injector.
even my r1's factory computer has individual injector trim adjustment available through the gauge cluster. Just because an intake appears symmetrical or ideal in your mind, injectors are not all equal, manifolds and runners have internal variations, the ports @ the motor vary, everything has variance, ultimately the tune has to compensate for variations everywhere. |
Yes the tune can compinsate but that would require an EGT on each output and not tuning just per single colector wide band. Not meany people spend that much money and show me one tuner who would like to tune per single EGT and not be able to trust the wide band very much. I think they would all like to have a balanced system to tune from with individual EGT.
|
By your logic then a 4 cylinder engine with a manifold with the TB on one end of the plenum (just like 99% of all I4's out there) will kill a motor. That's just not right. Asymmetry in the plenum won't will a motor, having different runner lenghts is bad though, you're confusing the two.
|
No its not going to kill it but its not a good design.
|
thats very similar to this crazy FWD car i saw last weekend::
http://memimage.cardomain.net/member...95_23_full.jpg |
Holy shit, a FWD rotarty !! Craziness
Do you haappen to know what kind of car thats in? Or at least what its rupposed to look like since its a tube frame drag car? |
Originally Posted by iceblue
Yes that design is very pore. However I doubt it will blow the motor.
|
One of the best designs I saw was where it had ITB's with a rectangular box around them and the intake hole in the middle of it. That or he had the box open to the top to use the turbo scoop as a CAI, I can't remember.
|
Why in gods name would someone go to that much trouble to put the power to the wrong wheels?
They should have just made it a midship... |
Originally Posted by Valkyrie
Why in gods name would someone go to that much trouble to put the power to the wrong wheels?
They should have just made it a midship... |
Yeah, IMO FWD drag is for people who would rather prove a point than go fast :p
That setup would probably be badass in a road racing car... but with no turbo I can't imagine it would be all impressive as a drag car... at least, probably no more than 350 HP (even if it's a PP...). |
Originally Posted by rotarygod
Actually that design isn't bad at all. It should flow quite evenly between the runners. It isn't very pretty but that doesn't matter.
|
I know from reading about a local guy doing development on an IRTB Miata that having as large of an air box as is physically possible is best, and putting a filter straight on top of the TB's is bad because you get very turbulent air coming out of the filter, whereas in an airbox it should have time to settle down and become laminar.
|
Originally Posted by Sideways7
One of the best designs I saw was where it had ITB's with a rectangular box around them and the intake hole in the middle of it. That or he had the box open to the top to use the turbo scoop as a CAI, I can't remember.
https://www.rx7club.com/attachment.p...hmentid=127084 https://www.rx7club.com/attachment.p...hmentid=127087 i love this car! |
Um, I don't get why someone would bother fabbing up a plenum for ITBs when they could just put small filters on each of the throttles... it makes sense if it's for a hood scope or a cold-air intake, but otherwise I think filters on the throttles makes more sense (and it's not like you loose the cool induction sound...).
...or if it's for a turbo...which that isn't. |
I JUST explained that. When just sticking a little filter on top of the TB's you're getting lots of turbulent air into the TB's whereas with a airbox you'll have a much greater chance of having laminar flow and getting more air, and more power. You can also get a COLD air source and aren't stuck with HOT engine compartment air that's been heated by the rad, the oil cooler, the exhaust system and all the other hot things in there. You'll get a few % more power right there from air that's dosens of degrees cooler.
|
...woops :p
I don't read *every* post you know. But wouldn't that box get just as heatsoaked as the rest of the engine bay? It doesn't really seem oriented in a way that would be useful for sucking air in (unless there's a big hole in the hood). |
What hasnt been mentioned, and what I forgot to mention, about the setup on the first page is the distance from the TBs to the ports.
The benefit of ITBs comes from increased flow ability, and low throttled volume. The closer you can get the TBs to ports, the less volume of air there is behind the TBs, the less time it takes for throttle inputs to result in action. So short of the increase in flow ability, your setup doesnt help throttle responce very much. I would suggest finding a way to move the throttles closer to the intake ports, and then you also will gain the ability to vary the intake runner length of the Secondary ports in relation to the primary ports without having to figure out a crazy throttle linkage. BC |
Originally Posted by iceblue
Yes the tune can compinsate but that would require an EGT on each output and not tuning just per single colector wide band. Not meany people spend that much money and show me one tuner who would like to tune per single EGT and not be able to trust the wide band very much. I think they would all like to have a balanced system to tune from with individual EGT.
once you normalize by tuning the individual trims the collected exhaust AFR is meaningful. I have type-k thermocouples in my exhaust runners, it wasnt expensive... especially after you've already spent far more dollars building up a race car, some sensors and data acquisition are just a drop in the bucket. Just because everything looks identical you cant run on assuming your collected exhaust AFR is a represntation of uniforum conditions, either way you have to put egts in each exhaust runner if you want to tune it right, I mentioned it already, there are manufacturing variances everywhere. Asymmetry is not a bad design, it's just a different design. Builders will use asymmetry to their advantage to flatten out torque curves rather than having all engines (each rotor/piston is basically a small engine) come 'on cam' at the exact same moment, which often makes the torque curve peaky... For example, some people will vary the uncollected lengths on the exhuast or intake sides to change the shape of the curve, this can have a dramatic effect on drivability in different conditions (dirt vs snow vs gravel vs rain vs dry sticky asphalt vs flat vs hilly etc). Although when you only have two rotors to work with you're fairly limited, but on something like a 4/6/8 cylinder or a 4 rotor you have a good number of knobs to tweak. In turbo applications people generally just change the turbo to change the shape of the curve, but with NA you have to do more invasive things. Generally with NA uniformly changing the length of runners will shift the curve up or down the rev range, but to change the shape you change valve timing (port on rotary) or tune the lengths differently per rotor/cylinder. In the photographed intake above I doubt it has much impact on anything, unless the motor flows enough air for that air box to become anemic, if it's volume is too low then I believe you'll start seeing bias towards one rotor near higher rpms... but that doesnt necessarily mean the overall design is poor, it could just need more cubes. |
Originally Posted by Low Impedance
i agree with the statement made before. the primary and secondary ports really shouldnt be on the same TB. Look at any factory EFI manifold for the rotary. the secondary and primary ports are seperated hense the three plate TB design. Helps driveability a ton too.
Originally Posted by Black91n/a
If going custom with the TB's and manifolds you want to place the injectors as FAR away from the ports as possible, because it leaves more time for better fuel atomisation.
Originally Posted by Low Impedance
that and wont moving the injectors back cause a delay between the time when its injected and the time when its actaully in the combustion chamber?
I'm helping on an engine right now where the secondaries are at least 20" from the intake ports. In my intake, the secondaries are about equal to the stock distance in the NA (the TII injectors mount much higher).
Originally Posted by Sideways7
One of the best designs I saw was where it had ITB's with a rectangular box around them and the intake hole in the middle of it. That or he had the box open to the top to use the turbo scoop as a CAI, I can't remember.
Originally Posted by iceblue
Optimal would be centered. Exactly why the OEM setup is placed in the middle of the dynamic chamber. The radius would flow well but a bad DC. Thu the setup it is on is not running a DC TB it is simply an air channel it matters nothing, I actually thought it was a DC since I had it already in my head as we are on a custom intake thread and not air ducting to the TB. Irrelevant post threw me off. Anyways refer to my first sentence in this post in conjunction to DC. Apology for the confusion.
If you look at a lot of OEM cars, you will find that most of the throttle bodies are at one end of the plenum. Most aftermarket intakes are the same as well. Unless you are working to try and take advantage of the air spring created by the intake pulses plenum it's really not a concern. Doing such a design for the average home mechanic involves basically making a bunch of intakes and dynoing them, which gets old really quickly. :) |
Actually that pic posted is the one I was thinking of at the time. I had forgotten it was the NA 20b. doesn't it have a semi-peripheral port or something? Anyway, I swear I saw pics of one that used a box that utilized the TII scoop for a cai, though, so maybe thats the one you're talking about Aaron.
|
Originally Posted by pengarufoo
once you normalize by tuning the individual trims the collected exhaust AFR is meaningful.
I have type-k thermocouples in my exhaust runners, it wasnt expensive... especially after you've already spent far more dollars building up a race car, some sensors and data acquisition are just a drop in the bucket. Just because everything looks identical you cant run on assuming your collected exhaust AFR is a represntation of uniforum conditions, either way you have to put egts in each exhaust runner if you want to tune it right, I mentioned it already, there are manufacturing variances everywhere.
Originally Posted by pengarufoo
Asymmetry is not a bad design, it's just a different design. Builders will use asymmetry to their advantage to flatten out torque curves rather than having all engines (each rotor/piston is basically a small engine) come 'on cam' at the exact same moment, which often makes the torque curve peaky... For example, some people will vary the uncollected lengths on the exhuast or intake sides to change the shape of the curve, this can have a dramatic effect on drivability in different conditions (dirt vs snow vs gravel vs rain vs dry sticky asphalt vs flat vs hilly etc). Although when you only have two rotors to work with you're fairly limited, but on something like a 4/6/8 cylinder or a 4 rotor you have a good number of knobs to tweak.
Originally Posted by pengarufoo
In turbo applications people generally just change the turbo to change the shape of the curve, but with NA you have to do more invasive things. Generally with NA uniformly changing the length of runners will shift the curve up or down the rev range, but to change the shape you change valve timing (port on rotary) or tune the lengths differently per rotor/cylinder.
Originally Posted by pengarufoo
In the photographed intake above I doubt it has much impact on anything, unless the motor flows enough air for that air box to become anemic, if it's volume is too low then I believe you'll start seeing bias towards one rotor near higher rpms... but that doesnt necessarily mean the overall design is poor, it could just need more cubes.
|
Originally Posted by Aaron Cake
The RX-7s throttle body is centered to match up with the intake runners and keep them equal in length.
Originally Posted by Aaron Cake
Assuming the flow characteristics between rotors are identical, then runner length must be the same between them. However it's not hugely important where the air enters are plenum because the real "spring" of air forms at the mouth of each runner. The plenum always remains at a higher pressure then the runners and thus plenum velocity is not really important (it's a very turbulent area regardless of where the throttle body enters).
Originally Posted by Aaron Cake
If you look at a lot of OEM cars, you will find that most of the throttle bodies are at one end of the plenum. Most aftermarket intakes are the same as well. Unless you are working to try and take advantage of the air spring created by the intake pulses plenum it's really not a concern. Doing such a design for the average home mechanic involves basically making a bunch of intakes and dynoing them, which gets old really quickly. :)
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:56 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands