Feeler: Phenolic intake spacers
12-19-2009, 07:36 AM
#76
Former Vendor
I'll pony up some $$$, but I want to know how you're planning to record and capture the data. Also, would you consider sharing the raw data with contributors? How much time are you getting on the dyno?
12-19-2009, 12:35 PM
#78
Rainman
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
all the data will be put up in this thread. dyno time should be a handful of runs, maybe 2 without the spacer and two with it.
12-19-2009, 01:23 PM
#79
Are you planning to log a complete data set referenced to RPM, and other parameters or just try to watch a readout while its on the dyno? Most dynos probably have the ability to input a 5v sensor and log the data the same as you would with a wideband.
12-19-2009, 01:30 PM
#80
Rainman
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
ill have to ask the shop if they have a temperature thing like that.
i think it would be a good idea to plot vs rpm or time. my little sensors do temp vs time but those ones i dont know how to mount inside the runner as they would probably fall into the engine :X
i think it would be a good idea to plot vs rpm or time. my little sensors do temp vs time but those ones i dont know how to mount inside the runner as they would probably fall into the engine :X
12-19-2009, 07:47 PM
#81
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia (Formerly: Sunnyvale, CA)
Posts: 2,120
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
RPM vs torque/power will give you the only meaningful results. For both the spacers installed and uninstalled, you want to record the runs starting with the engine already at full operating temperature. Temp data at the air intake during runs is of very minor interest in itself if it does not translate into measureable performance improvements.
Last edited by Mark944na86; 12-20-2009 at 12:07 AM. Reason: typo
12-19-2009, 08:40 PM
#82
Rainman
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
oh i suppose thats true huh.
the temperature issue was with speculation to see if a major temperature loss was achieved which could potentially mean more power. now that the dyno has been figured in it only matters what the power numbers are.
in that case that simplifies things for me greatly. i can still take a temp reading for the hell of it (already tapped my manifold lol) which could be interesting to compare to ambient temperature to see if convection is still an issue in the engine bay. however power is what we are after!
the temperature issue was with speculation to see if a major temperature loss was achieved which could potentially mean more power. now that the dyno has been figured in it only matters what the power numbers are.
in that case that simplifies things for me greatly. i can still take a temp reading for the hell of it (already tapped my manifold lol) which could be interesting to compare to ambient temperature to see if convection is still an issue in the engine bay. however power is what we are after!
12-21-2009, 10:06 AM
#87
Former Vendor
Spencer, if you can figure out a way to correlate the temp readings over time to the dyno plot, I'll contribute. For my purposes, I care less about the power results than I do the actual temp differentials with and without the spacer. The first thing is to prove that the spacers reduce temp. The second thing to do is to prove that the temp reduction correlates directly to performance improvement in terms of torque or horsepower. Without this correlation, you won't know if the any change in power is due to temp differentials, or other variables that you've introduced into the system by installing the spacer (like length of tract, disrupting the port flow, the impact to Helmholz resonance, injector spray pattern, etc.).
The general rule of thumb is that every 10°F of temp reduction in the charge air correlates to roughly a gain of 1 BHP. It's not sufficient to just show a change in BHP. Furthermore, you could have significant reduction in temp, but could still have a reduction in power due to other variables that you introduce with the spacer. It might take many hours or days of testing to find the right combination on one specific platform, so I think it's unrealistic in a total of 4 dyno pulls to get all of those results at once.
What we need to prove first is that the spacer reduces charge air temp, by how much, and under what conditions. As someone else stated above, reducing the charge air temp is essentially free power. Having the good quality temp data will then give us a baseline for the potential power gains that could be realized with complete dyno tuning. If you follow this approach, your testing will have much more applicability across a wider range of platforms.
Now, if the testing shows that temps are reduced and simultaneously results in performance improvements, that's all the better. I'm just saying, we shouldn't assume that we'll see the latter. We should be focusing on capturing the temp differential given the limited testing time we'll have.
The general rule of thumb is that every 10°F of temp reduction in the charge air correlates to roughly a gain of 1 BHP. It's not sufficient to just show a change in BHP. Furthermore, you could have significant reduction in temp, but could still have a reduction in power due to other variables that you introduce with the spacer. It might take many hours or days of testing to find the right combination on one specific platform, so I think it's unrealistic in a total of 4 dyno pulls to get all of those results at once.
What we need to prove first is that the spacer reduces charge air temp, by how much, and under what conditions. As someone else stated above, reducing the charge air temp is essentially free power. Having the good quality temp data will then give us a baseline for the potential power gains that could be realized with complete dyno tuning. If you follow this approach, your testing will have much more applicability across a wider range of platforms.
Now, if the testing shows that temps are reduced and simultaneously results in performance improvements, that's all the better. I'm just saying, we shouldn't assume that we'll see the latter. We should be focusing on capturing the temp differential given the limited testing time we'll have.
12-21-2009, 01:02 PM
#88
Rainman
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Spencer, if you can figure out a way to correlate the temp readings over time to the dyno plot, I'll contribute. For my purposes, I care less about the power results than I do the actual temp differentials with and without the spacer. The first thing is to prove that the spacers reduce temp. The second thing to do is to prove that the temp reduction correlates directly to performance improvement in terms of torque or horsepower. Without this correlation, you won't know if the any change in power is due to temp differentials, or other variables that you've introduced into the system by installing the spacer (like length of tract, disrupting the port flow, the impact to Helmholz resonance, injector spray pattern, etc.).
The general rule of thumb is that every 10°F of temp reduction in the charge air correlates to roughly a gain of 1 BHP. It's not sufficient to just show a change in BHP. Furthermore, you could have significant reduction in temp, but could still have a reduction in power due to other variables that you introduce with the spacer. It might take many hours or days of testing to find the right combination on one specific platform, so I think it's unrealistic in a total of 4 dyno pulls to get all of those results at once.
What we need to prove first is that the spacer reduces charge air temp, by how much, and under what conditions. As someone else stated above, reducing the charge air temp is essentially free power. Having the good quality temp data will then give us a baseline for the potential power gains that could be realized with complete dyno tuning. If you follow this approach, your testing will have much more applicability across a wider range of platforms.
Now, if the testing shows that temps are reduced and simultaneously results in performance improvements, that's all the better. I'm just saying, we shouldn't assume that we'll see the latter. We should be focusing on capturing the temp differential given the limited testing time we'll have.
The general rule of thumb is that every 10°F of temp reduction in the charge air correlates to roughly a gain of 1 BHP. It's not sufficient to just show a change in BHP. Furthermore, you could have significant reduction in temp, but could still have a reduction in power due to other variables that you introduce with the spacer. It might take many hours or days of testing to find the right combination on one specific platform, so I think it's unrealistic in a total of 4 dyno pulls to get all of those results at once.
What we need to prove first is that the spacer reduces charge air temp, by how much, and under what conditions. As someone else stated above, reducing the charge air temp is essentially free power. Having the good quality temp data will then give us a baseline for the potential power gains that could be realized with complete dyno tuning. If you follow this approach, your testing will have much more applicability across a wider range of platforms.
Now, if the testing shows that temps are reduced and simultaneously results in performance improvements, that's all the better. I'm just saying, we shouldn't assume that we'll see the latter. We should be focusing on capturing the temp differential given the limited testing time we'll have.
however, this is designed to be a completely bolt on affair with no new tuning needed. im sure that if this were installed and showed gains, actual tuning would yield even higher results. thats not what im going for here, if someone wants to do that on their own by all means they should. i just cant afford the amount of dyno time it would take to really get things dialed in and optimized.
12-21-2009, 01:16 PM
#89
Former Vendor
Spencer, I'm totally with you on the intent for these to bolt on...what I meant to convey is that in order to get it to that point, there are probably a lot of variables specific to each particular platform that would have to be "tweaked" to get it just right to yield optimum results.
To summarize, the most important thing to capture, in my opinion, is temp differential, because that will tell us the how much potential power could be gained. If your testing only shows a 5° variance in IAT, it's probably not worth pursuing much further. OTOH, if your testing shows a 50° or more variance in IAT, then IMO it would really be worth pursuing aggressively, even if the initial dyno run showed a reduction in power (quite likely due to the other variables). Does that make sense?
To summarize, the most important thing to capture, in my opinion, is temp differential, because that will tell us the how much potential power could be gained. If your testing only shows a 5° variance in IAT, it's probably not worth pursuing much further. OTOH, if your testing shows a 50° or more variance in IAT, then IMO it would really be worth pursuing aggressively, even if the initial dyno run showed a reduction in power (quite likely due to the other variables). Does that make sense?
12-21-2009, 01:33 PM
#90
Rainman
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
yes i see where youre coming from. to me personally both possible outcomes of the spacers are useful; if the spacers allow for more power simply with them being there, then great. however if all they do is accomplish cooler air charge with little power gain, thats still fine for my uses (supercharger). what the regular NA guys are after is more power, not really air temp.
like i said i will be keeping track of the temperatures somehow, i just dont know how yet. my sensors do react very quickly though. honestly if i have to take a videotape of some multimeters hooked up to my sensors and then plot something from there i will. i would like something more sophisticated though.
like i said i will be keeping track of the temperatures somehow, i just dont know how yet. my sensors do react very quickly though. honestly if i have to take a videotape of some multimeters hooked up to my sensors and then plot something from there i will. i would like something more sophisticated though.