TCCoA Forums banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
789 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
12,082 Posts
Apparently a very technical accomplishment.

Use the Force they must!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
789 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Its actually a fairly simple idea and I'm wondering if the space/piping savings will fit a turbo under our hoods
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
423 Posts
I cant see how it would save space though... Now you would have to find room to allow some sort of "driveshaft" to connect the two turbines.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
789 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
What if they were both in the valley? Shaft under a custom manifold, hot side in the back with exhaust piping and cold side in the front with option of piping to the intercooler? It'll be setup almost like a twinscrew supercharger. Am I crazy?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,961 Posts
What if they were both in the valley? Shaft under a custom manifold, hot side in the back with exhaust piping and cold side in the front with option of piping to the intercooler? It'll be setup almost like a twinscrew supercharger. Am I crazy?
You are. What kind of material do you plan to use for the shaft and have you calculated the harmonics using FEA? Unless you have done so properly, it won't work. It takes a crew of full-time engineers to accomplish things like this to work for more than 5 minutes.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
423 Posts
I agree, this is a "good" idea if you have lots of money to waste on a project that may or may not work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,673 Posts
You are. What kind of material do you plan to use for the shaft and have you calculated the harmonics using FEA? Unless you have done so properly, it won't work. It takes a crew of full-time engineers to accomplish things like this to work for more than 5 minutes.
I agree with this comment.
The prop/driveshaft between the exhaust section and the compressor section must spin at 40K-100K (wikipedia says they go as high as 250K).

Even with a commercial grade machine shop, the precision required to make a system that would last for even a "toy" car (let alone a daily driver) would be beyond what most companies could do.

Unlike F1, a hobbyist doesn't really have any "rules" limitations. Perhaps a better way to solve this problem would be something like an exhaust driven alternator coupled to an electric (not belt-driven) supercharger.

I'm not talking about the turbofan/bilge pump crap but the production quality stuff that several mfgs are developing.
http://www.caranddriver.com/features/beltless-blower-electrifying-the-supercharger-tech-dept
http://www.cpowert.com/
http://www.treehugger.com/cars/electric-supercharger-boosts-torque-50-and-reduces-co2-by-20.html




And on the input side, maybe something like this:
http://www.designworldonline.com/thingap-automotive-introduces-the-turbo-generator/


In the end, you would have to weigh
1) the exhaust + intake pipe routing problem of having a traditional turbo and intercooler setup w/ its efficiency losses due to heat soak and friction vs.
2) the added weight of the turbo-generator and electric supercharger plus the efficiency losses of converting air flow to electricity and then back to air flow.

I'm still willing to bet that for tbirds, the big issue will be ECU tuning. Just look at all the twin turbo tbird projects that have died before fruition on these forums.

-g
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
423 Posts
Most of em die from frustration due to pipe routing. There's just no easy way to do it, and there just not enough room.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
17,043 Posts
Tuning is perfectly doable so long as the tuner knows what they are doing, It's really not that much different than tuning a car for a blower. I think the rare events where someone fabs a system from scratch they tend to either be too broke or too stubborn to shell out the money to finish it off. When builds revolve around old Turbos sourced from diesels the local pick n pull or Chinese cheapos from ebay they builder is probably going into it with the idea that they're going to be able to do everything themselves and not spend any more money than what the Turbo(s) cost.

In these cars cases(namely Modular cars) pipe routing is a major issue that there's no good solution for. There's room to run the exhaust tubing, or run the intake tubing, but not both, not without putting tubing below the K member anyway, which is not a good idea.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,961 Posts
There's room to run the exhaust tubing, or run the intake tubing, but not both, not without putting tubing below the K member anyway, which is not a good idea.
unless you don't use the stock K-member and go tubular :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,412 Posts
Can't wait to see that.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
10,659 Posts
If there are electric superchargers available that will feed a 4.6l engine, life will be fun. :)

Imagine 15lbs of boost off the line, independent of rpm...

How many CFM is a 4.6l engine eating at 6k rpm? :confused:

I'd love to see one. :)
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,310 Posts
If there are electric superchargers available that will feed a 4.6l engine, life will be fun. :)

Imagine 15lbs of boost off the line, independent of rpm...

How many CFM is a 4.6l engine eating at 6k rpm? :confused:

I'd love to see one. :)
Depends on load. Assuming ~60% load at that RPM, you're looking at 60% of 2.3L for every RPM, or 13,800 * .6 = 8280L/min or about 292 CFM (or about 23.5#/min for you MAF sensor inclined guys :)).
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,961 Posts
Depends on load. Assuming ~60% load at that RPM, you're looking at 60% of 2.3L for every RPM, or 13,800 * .6 = 8280L/min or about 292 CFM (or about 23.5#/min for you MAF sensor inclined guys :)).
I know my old setup was doing ~31 #/min @ ~6000 RPMs.
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top