Topic: Boosted Applications... Turbo/Supercharger

[BLUE71TURBO]

Hey RickyRacer, Fageol has all that info on thier website........http://www.fageolsuperchargers.com/
I myself havn't called them yet but i believe the 48.3 cu. feet per min. is the correct size for 750cc's up to 1200cc's.

[BLUE71TURBO]

Bamboozler, i think you should look into an IHI Turbochager. They are a smaller turbo and not exspensive. They will spool up faster on a smaller engine. Also for better fuel distribution, you need to center your pipe on your intake manifold. When you come up on boost the two cylinders farthest away will lean way out. Also you may want to add a boost bottle for extra fuel for when your on boost. You can't believe how much fuel you can run through an engine
with a turbo on boost !        Oh i forgot to mention, when you use a blow through system with stock carbs.
  When positive manifold boost pressure is applied to the venturi of the carburetor(s) , fuel cannot travel it's normal path to the venturi. So positive manifold boost pressure must be applied to the float bowl(s) through the vent line fittings or tubes. You can do this by running lines from the vent fittings directly to the intake plenum chamber.
   But once the float bowl(s) have been pressurized, fuel flow from the gas tank through the float needle and seat
will be inhibited. You will have to use a electric fuel pump to pressurize the fuel bowl(s) . Then the fuel pressure
must remain only one to two psi above manifold pressure ( or float bowl boost pressure) to ensure constantly
filled float bowl(s) . That means you will need a fuel regulator that has a boost fuel enrichment adjustment.
  Also depending on how old your carbs are ,the throttle shafts might leak on boost also. This is why i decided
to use a draw through system. Only 1 carb to tune in.   

[Ricky_Racer]

Thanks, BT. L8R.  RR

[BLUE71TURBO]

Your most welcome RR !   

[Bamboozler]

Blue, thanks for the heads up in regards to the IHI turbos. I've heard and seen IHI turbos before but never really investigated their product line up; I'll take a peek.  I'm already rockin' a boost compensation line to pressurize the fuel bowls and an electric fuel pump with 1:1 rising rate regulator. The leaky stock carbs are plugged up the best I think I can get them by replacing the felt and rubber o-rings with larger diameter rubber washers to seal the choke and throttle shafts.  I've boost leak checked the systems and only the tiniest of hisses can be heard coming from the general carb area at 8-10 psi; nothing that should cause issue at the lower boost.  I think I ran the pressure up higher for a brief moment and didn't see any show stopper issues with leaking if I remember correctly.

Unfortunately my wide band replacement didn't come in time for the weekend, like I was told it would.  I'll have to pick up the tuning next week.  Really sucks, its 66 degrees F here and for Wisconsin in November thats a treat, probably the last of its kind before snow.  So no tuning but the hell if I'm not going to take a spin.. I promise to be good and stay out of the boost .

[Bamboozler]

I'd like to add a few notes for the archives in this thread about my Chinese turbo setup now that I've gotten a wideband O2 meter again and 150 or so miles on the bike. I'll throw more pics and detail in the project thread or copy this; just think this may help being posted here in the boosted thread.

The tune that has been in the bike since it first saw boost was surprisingly close to what I was aiming for.  Quick carb setup review:

• Boost compensation: Two 3/8" pitot tubes facing into the incoming air charge (one Teeing to #1/#2 carbs, the other to #3/#4)
• Atmospheric ports were drilled out to 1/8 (I think 1/8", again I'll confirm this in the project thread when I get to my notes).  I was half way through doing this when I realized the breech with the fuel over flow ports; *may not be necessary*.
• Additional boost compensation: fuel over flow ports plumbed to the intake manifold
• Idle jets: up one from stock(35) to #40
• Clip position: 78Fs have fixed needles, I added two #10 washers(I think, they're tiny) under the needles to enrichen about one clip position
• Main Jets: 120
• Float height: 14.5mm (stock tolerance)
• Idle fuel screw: 1 1/4 turns out

With a warm motor the idling A/F is around 14:1-14.5:1, this is very close to stoich (14.7:1). May be able to get away with stock slow jets as it didn't really need the choke at all to stay running when started cold. Or a 1/4 in with the fuel screw?. With out boost compensation at idle (shouldn't impact idle) and with stock #35 slow jets I was seeing ~16:1.

When at cruising speed (1/8-1/4 throttle) at in town speeds 25-35mph and up to low country highway speeds 50-60mph the A/R is sitting again around 14:1, which is good (bit on the rich side maybe).

As you kick it up to around 75-90 and maintain this speed the A/F drops to 11:1.  I happened to have a 65mph four lane highway on my way to work and the A/F was pegged at 11:1 while doing aroun 75-85 (think speedo is off a bit, slightly faster than traffic).  The speed and or wind resistance creates enough load that I was constantly at around 0.0-0.5 psi of boost; depending on the load to the motor. Easy to build boost quickly at this point.  I think either the removal of some boost compensation and or removing the extra needle shim(s) would help to get my cruising (1/4 throttle) high speed A/R back up to 14.7:1.

Twisting the throttle to wide open gives a solid 11.8:1 A/R in any gear or speed.  I think this is in the middle range of where things should be, the bike responds very well; no hickups, pops, bucks.  Haven't done a plug chop to confirm what the plugs say.  From other applications I figure (11.0-11.5:1 is rich/conservative, 11.5-12.0:1 is intermediate, 12.0-12.5 max power tune/getting close to opps too far), I realize this is a very subjective subject, many factors and motors details to consider when figuring this.

"Laggy" isn't the best word to describe the bike but rather the onset of boost.  From a stop the bike is very quick on its feet, as if there isn't a turbo installed at all; and may even be quicker than it was stock (maybe less restriction than an air box?).  The bike seems to be naturally aspirated with an afterburner.  With a big bore kit, bullet proof motor, and 15-20psi I think this turbo could be a real terror. When you lay into the throttle and get in the upper RPMs the bike starts to pull harder and harder.. to the point where the clutch starts to slip (around 7-8psi area). To be expected I guess, Barnett clutch springs will be hit up next.  However I think the season is almost gone and may be a winter project, 33-35F on the way to work and back two days in a row is making me dress like I'm snowmobiling.

[j squared]

Also for better fuel distribution, you need to center your pipe on your intake manifold. When you come up on boost the two cylinders farthest away will lean way out.

Without a flow bench anyone is just guessing about these things. I have seen home made boxed plenums run perfect flow to each cylinder while parabolic plenums lean out a clylinder because the harmonics were off.  Same with the reciprocal.  Without flow testing every single individual manifold design it is up in the air.

[BLUE71TURBO]

Also for better fuel distribution, you need to center your pipe on your intake manifold. When you come up on boost the two cylinders farthest away will lean way out.

Without a flow bench anyone is just guessing about these things. I have seen home made boxed plenums run perfect flow to each cylinder while parabolic plenums lean out a clylinder because the harmonics were off.  Same with the reciprocal.  Without flow testing every single individual manifold design it is up in the air.

No guessing about it.  It has been proven by all turbo manufactures on a draw through turbocharged setup ( especially
on motorcycles with the turbo so close to the engine ) the spigot on the manifold where the turbo compressor connects to is generally arranged to be a little higher than the spigots for the intake ports.  This is done to keep the swirling air-fuel mixture which is intering the manifold from making an imediate left, causing the left two cylinders to run richer and the right two being leaner. Thats why you will see a divider plate inside the entrance of the intake manifold, dividing the incoming air and fuel charge in half while equally distributing it to all four cylinders.
  All the turbocharged motorcycles i have ever seen and built have had the inlet on the intake manifold centered, whether it was a draw through system or blow through, street or full on dragrace.     JON G.

[j squared]

Look at the sheer number of intake manifold designs out there.  Thats all Ill really say. Ive personally seen manifolds like this flow test more evenly than tapered manifolds that looked great.

[BLUE71TURBO]

Look at the sheer number of intake manifold designs out there.  Thats all Ill really say. Ive personally seen manifolds like this flow test more evenly than tapered manifolds that looked great.


The sheer number of designs ?  If your talking automobile engines, yes there's alot of different designs. For motorcycle's
there is not. 

[Bamboozler]

I think you both have valid points regarding the intake design in my CB project.  The intake could have been optimized in its design, this I agree.  Centering the inlet would have given me a better ensurance that the air velocity entering into each runner is the as equal as it could be.  But even with it centered you still can favor the inside verses the outside runners depending on the design.  Ultimately it would need to be designed via computer or each runner flow tested.  I don't think that auto vs cycle designs matter; there purpose is the same.  It just depends where your pipe naturally comes into the picture and what space you have to work with. Most autos have no room for top or back entry cold pipes (hood and fire wall tends to block), so their entry tends come from the side.  Cycles tend to have a more 3D space to to play with allowing a more symmetrical entry.  But again, I don't think this alone guarantees the air flow is divided to each runner equally.

I choose to drop the inlet into the bottom and offset on one side because of easy of removal rather than flow optimization. At the beginning of the project I was more concern about having to pull the carb rack off 20 times to play musical jets, that theme carried into how it was made and how the FPR and fuel pump where placed (ease of removal). I also didn't want it plumbed into the side of the manifold because the pipe would protrude into your leg while riding.  Getting the inlet into the middle would have been a very tight squeeze for installation and the plumbing of fuel and vac lines would've been more difficult.  One way of optimizing might have been to wedge the bottom from the inlet pipe where it is to the far side runner to even out the abrupt angle of entry for the air flow.  Ultimately the plugs need to be analyzed, find the leanest plug and tune the bike for the leanest plug; turn the boost up a psi or two if you want to compromise for an inefficient design.

While researching for suitable turbos I came across a college project .pdf that was posted online.  Interesting term paper or class project from University of Waterloo, "Clean Snowmobile design paper". Within they take a Yamaha Genesis 120HP four stoke and turbo it while trying to keep noise and pollution to a minimum.  For their intake design they used a neat program called ANSYS to model the velocity streams of their custom plenum.  I have access to both ANSYS for flow modeling and Solidworks to create the models.  I've heard that ANSYS is a challenging program to use, but it would be cool to model the CB's intake and tweak the design for improved flow; or for any aspect of a turbo project (header, intercooler end tank, intercooler pipe, velocity stacks..).  Check out the pics of their ANSYS simulation below (pre optimization, you can see the inside runner getting the shaft:)... cool stuff.  Maybe I can farm out the work to someone familiar with both programs.

[scartail]

The typical mechanical license won' t be able to do CFD. You'll need the flotran license. I think it is part of the multiphysics package. The company I work at of 3K employees carries only one license of it, and have over a hundred mechanical licenses. You can see how important it is to us. or how specialize it is.

Anyway... I'm a novice with CFD, but from the picture you have attached... I can do that (you can do that). If you do find that you company carries this particular license, there is a really good tutorial online for CFD with Ansys. I ran into it several weeks back when I was modeling exhaust flow. I'll track it down if you are interested... And for our purposes, it's find. We're probably not too interested in what the exit flow rate is... but merely what the optimum flow is.

[Bamboozler]

Scartail- I know nothing about ANSYS unfortunately, I'll have to check my resource to see if the flotran license is there; from what you say it might not be so. Thanks for the heads up regarding the program. Cool that you have experience with it it, that ought to cut a lot of guesswork out before fab begins in any project it can be used for!  If you run across the link for the CFD tutorial please post. If not for me, it would be useful for relay to the person with ANSYS experience of what is being requested.

I found the link to the University of Waterloo study if anyone is interested in checking it out for an interesting read http://www.mtukrc.org/download/waterloo/waterloo_ic_design_paper_2009.pdf.  I have to correct my last post, I stated that the two attached pics were from pre-optimization, but after re-reading I realized that they are after improvements were made.

I heard that modeling with SolidWorks is fairly straightforward and somewhat easy to pick up in comparison to the other modeling software packages out there (i.e. ProE).  I wouldn't mind taking the time to try and pick that up. At least with a model on hand it could be past to someone who could take things to the next level, whether it be ANSYS or a prototyping machine shop or what ever you want to play with.

[JLeather]

I was taught on ProE and later transitioned to Unigraphics and finally SolidWorks.  While I do like SW the best of them all, I feel that learning on ProE was a great foundation.  ProE doesn't let you take shortcuts.  Everything has to be 100% constrained, all 6 degrees of freedom, all the time.  Yeah, it's a major pain and sometimes you can't figure out why it won't let you continue, but later on I was glad for it because I know how to constrain things.  SW, by comparison, lets you just drop things in and constrain them later.  This is a problem if you forget a constraint and days later you realize something moved.

I agree with BLUE71 on the turbo manifold design though.  I remember reading that in a draw-thru setup the centrifugal force of the turbo forces the fuel to actually puddle in the outside edge of the turbo and leave as a semi-stream (instead of the nice fine mist it went in as).  If it had a straight shot to a cylinder that's where all the fuel would go.  It's not even just a question of flow of a gas, because it's not suspended anymore.  The sharp bend in a turbo manifold gives the stream somewhere to hit and spread out again.

[scartail]

Scartail- I know nothing about ANSYS unfortunately, I'll have to check my resource to see if the flotran license is there; from what you say it might not be so. Thanks for the heads up regarding the program. Cool that you have experience with it it, that ought to cut a lot of guesswork out before fab begins in any project it can be used for!  If you run across the link for the CFD tutorial please post. If not for me, it would be useful for relay to the person with ANSYS experience of what is being requested.

I found the link to the University of Waterloo study if anyone is interested in checking it out for an interesting read http://www.mtukrc.org/download/waterloo/waterloo_ic_design_paper_2009.pdf.  I have to correct my last post, I stated that the two attached pics were from pre-optimization, but after re-reading I realized that they are after improvements were made.

I heard that modeling with SolidWorks is fairly straightforward and somewhat easy to pick up in comparison to the other modeling software packages out there (i.e. ProE).  I wouldn't mind taking the time to try and pick that up. At least with a model on hand it could be past to someone who could take things to the next level, whether it be ANSYS or a prototyping machine shop or what ever you want to play with.

I was mistaken where the reference was. It's Chapter 5 of Ansys Help Tutorials... "Laminar and Turbulent Flow Analyses in a 2-D Duct"

I've attached results of what I was studying. I wanted to see how my log-syle manifold (for my 1.8L) was flowing before it got to the turbo. I'm not even close to being profficient at it.

[Bamboozler]

Very cool Scartail!  Now I know just who to hit up to run a SW model....   Few quick questions while hoping not to distract from the subject of this thread.  What units are the two legends representing?  I see the first in 0.xxxx and the last two in xxxx (vectors are showing air flow direction, but the values are in what (or no specific units?)).  And secondly how long did it take you to get the model setup and ran (time in with the program following the tutorial, if you followed it)?

JL - Thanks for the heads up regarding the programs.  In all actuality I'd be lucky to find the time to get versed with SW, let alone with ProE.  But it sounds like good sense to follow the course you noted to become the most proficient at the two.  I'm still wanting to take a crack at some PCB layout programs as my background comes from more of a electrical vs mechanical.  In any case, cool to have these tools on hand and not have to be rockin' it old school with slide rulers!

[scartail]

Bam: The first picture is of total pressure ratio. As an after thought the dynamic pressure would probably have been better. The second two plots are of the velocity field. Units are ft/sec (as I recall). The takeaway from them wouldn't the actually magnitude of the numbers... But the relationships. You can see where some regions are moving faster or slower than the other. For example, the blue between 1-2 runner, and 3-4... You also see where the air is churning (the exit is about the center)... It's more of a qualitative assessment, more than quantitative (atleast that was my intent). The numbers... I just fed in the velocity that I thought the engine would be spitting out. Could be a bad assumption.

Regarding how long it too... depending on your Ansys background, of course... It was very quick, less than an hour. If you have used ansys regularly before, it should be bad. My model is a simple 3D geometry with not that many elements. I am less than a novice with CFD. It's not that bad, atleast the punching keys part.

If you want to give it a shot, I can walk you thru it. The tutorial is good, but it was for 2D ansys. Concept is applicable.

[Bamboozler]

Thanks for the the note Scartail, the explanation sums it up well.  Interesting to know what the velocity of the exhaust gases in a motor match the speeds of bullets... I just reloaded my .308 deer hunting loads to ~2500f/s if I'm remembering correctly; that air is moving!  When I get to the point of being able to play with the simulation and run into any questions I'll shoot ya a PM.  Thanks again for answering the questions.

[scartail]

Yes! You're right... Units are in/sec.  It didn't click.

[JLeather]

I'm slowly but surely progressing towards my turbo build.  Suffered a setback when I found that my MTC turbo pistons were no good anymore.  The guy that took them out of the engine (not me) pried against the oil ring land to get the circlip out and bent it.  Ah, well, they were 30 years old.  Time for a change.  So on Friday a care package arrived for me from Dynoman.



Custom JE forged 836 pistons.  8:1 static CR with my head and the pictured .050" copper headgasket.  APE tool steel pins in the JE piston length.  Happy days 

How about some more pictures?







Is anything prettier than a fresh set of CNC pistons?  Still debating having them and/or the head coated.  That swain-tech ceramic stuff is awfully nice, but I've already blown my budget and then some.  Anyway, I really do hope to start assembling stuff over my Christmas break from work.  I'll start my own thread then.  Still don't know which bike I'm gonna put it in, but I know it's gonna be fast 

[Bamboozler]

Christmas has come early!  Sexy looking go fast parts ya have there!!  Looking forward to the build thread.

edited to add:
Nice to see Dynoman has the 836cc Turbo piston kit on their new products page. I think the C/R and displacement should be a winner for boosted apps.

[BLUE71TURBO]

Nice parts JLEATHER. You'll have a "boost" of pleasure when it's done !!      

[23tbucket]

Hello. This is my first post on this site. I recognize lots of names here and there seems to be quite a few fellow Canadians on this site as well. Seems like their are more people here interested in similar things as myself. I'm getting a bit disillusioned on some of the BS going on another site i've been on since 2005. Time to move on.... I am in the process of putting fuel injection on a '76 CB 750A, using microsquirt to drive things. This engine is also going to be supercharged and will have an external alternator. I can move some of my other site posts on installing throttle bodies on the SOHC 750 if you are interested. This is my first SOHC build....I've built up 2 CB550's and 1 DOHC CB750, which is fuel injected and turbocharged. It's over at Deuces Wild DOHC if interested? There is also a "how-to" on installing throttle bodies for the DOHC on the same site. If i'm stepping over the line with this first post, please let me know...no offence will be taken.
Thank You; Clifford

[BLUE71TURBO]

Hello 23TBUCKET !!  Glad you can join us here !! Any and all info to be shared is welcome !!  Go and introduce yourself in the new member section. Lot's of great guy's here with lot's of info and knowledge.  My name is JON. aka BLUE71TURBO.   


                   

                   

My pride and joy !!   

[wannabridin]

turbo, every time i see that damn bike i drool, it is SO freggin cool...

do you have a build thread for it by chance??