Inlet port & rampipe entry section shape

Competition engines and 'live' projects only. Good photos to illustrate your post are expected.
Post Reply
vcg
Posts: 51
Joined: August 13th, 2006, 3:36 pm
Location: Athens, Greece
Contact:

Inlet port & rampipe entry section shape

Post by vcg »

Hi Guy,

I wanted to ask for years . Why do you use plasticine around the manifold mating face where the intake ports start when you measure gas flow of a Fiat TC head? Does it have something to do with trumpets/horns to improve flow? What is the difference in measurements with and without the plasticine?

Thanks once again,
Vassilis
124 BS1, 124 BC1, 131 Racing, E Type 4.2 SII, XJ-S 3.6
Guy Croft
Site Admin
Posts: 5039
Joined: June 18th, 2006, 9:31 am
Location: Bedford, UK
Contact:

Re: Gas Flowing Practice

Post by Guy Croft »

If you leave a sharp edge the resulting turbulence (see picture) during inlet flowtest results causes erratic + high flow loss.

The intensity of the turbulence can vary from test to test and so gives 'unrepeatable' results. In other words you get erratic readings when repeating tests that don't make any sense. So it is best avoided. Given that all good engines will (hopefully) run with radiused rampipes, if you don't have an entry radius you are not seeing the thing behaving at its best potential.

GC
Attachments
entry loss.GIF
entry loss.GIF (26.98 KiB) Viewed 12583 times
1NRO
Posts: 123
Joined: June 22nd, 2006, 4:46 pm
Location: Carlisle
Contact:

Re: Gas Flowing Practice

Post by 1NRO »

Guy,

If a choice of radiused entry was available would there be a particular (ish) radius to aim for?

Nik
259
Guy Croft
Site Admin
Posts: 5039
Joined: June 18th, 2006, 9:31 am
Location: Bedford, UK
Contact:

Re: Gas Flowing Practice

Post by Guy Croft »

Are you referring to the clay for test or rampipe design?

G
1NRO
Posts: 123
Joined: June 22nd, 2006, 4:46 pm
Location: Carlisle
Contact:

Re: Gas Flowing Practice

Post by 1NRO »

Guy,

The ram pipe design interests me. I've dressed the weld off my manifold and eased a small radius onto the entry but stopped short of making it bigger though I nearly did. I've not yet had a gauge on it but intend doing just that when I can get round to a friend who has a set, a couple of pictures is the best I can do for now.

Image

Image

Thanks,

Nik
259
Guy Croft
Site Admin
Posts: 5039
Joined: June 18th, 2006, 9:31 am
Location: Bedford, UK
Contact:

Re: Gas Flowing Practice

Post by Guy Croft »

As a rule of thumb Nik - the bigger the better. The larger the radius - esp into a parallel port section like yours - the less separation you'll get around the curve - exactly like the short side radius in a port.

To prove out what you can 'get away with' (ie: how small you can go) - you need modelling clay and a flowbench, but any rad is better than none. But a simpler method you might be able to adopt is - build a rad into your setup without adding material. Maybe do it by flaring (tapering) the outer region of the entry section (2" in or so) at 15 deg included angle (keeping min 2-3mm wall section thickness) and then radiusing that flare into the existing flat outer area.

FWIW - in the general interest:

As I showed in great detail with flowbench testing the GC Head Prep DVD (which a disappointingly small number of people bought) the entry loss with a good rampipe design (or radiused entry section in this case) should be ZERO! Some examples of good and bad below.

One rampipe design that I always liked was that produced by Pipercross; their range of intake systems is always worth reading and I am pleased to see the importance they place on cold ducted air feed to the manifold - something at last that people are paying attention to. Cold air feed - and I mean fully sealed off - not just a pipe 'spraying' cold air into the intake region (!) and close attention to entry section (ie: rampipes and things of that type) give the closest I know to CHEAP HORSEPOWER!

http://www.thepipercrossshop.co.uk/comp ... mpipes.asp

G
Attachments
44IDF no rampipe. Worst possible setup due to very high entry loss..JPG
44IDF no rampipe. Worst possible setup due to very high entry loss..JPG (30.38 KiB) Viewed 12348 times
40 IDF with Weber rampipe - only slightly better than nothing.jpg
40 IDF with Weber rampipe - only slightly better than nothing.jpg (112.46 KiB) Viewed 12347 times
No idea of the origin of these quite good rampipes but they're way better than Weber ones.
No idea of the origin of these quite good rampipes but they're way better than Weber ones.
40IDF with flared rampipes - quite good.JPG (146 KiB) Viewed 12348 times
I don't know why Weber never produced a rampipe with a full 'roll-back' radius, they have been making them like this for decades. They are  a lot better than nothing at all though..
I don't know why Weber never produced a rampipe with a full 'roll-back' radius, they have been making them like this for decades. They are a lot better than nothing at all though..
40DCOE with Weber rampipes - quite good.jpg (108.32 KiB) Viewed 12343 times
Clay on inlet manifold on test. You don't have to shape the clay to an Olympian standard of symmetry...jpg
Clay on inlet manifold on test. You don't have to shape the clay to an Olympian standard of symmetry...jpg (450.57 KiB) Viewed 12345 times
Getting more serious now, these are very good
Getting more serious now, these are very good
Jenvey rampipes on paired (not ITB) throttle bodies.JPG (56.8 KiB) Viewed 12346 times
another superb design
another superb design
Jenvey tapered throttle body with an optimum rampipe, tapered or flared - the right included angle and generous roll-back radius.JPG (608.03 KiB) Viewed 12344 times
These Dellorto DHLA rampipes also fit Weber IDF and are a very good low-cost substitute for the OE Weber ones. Like most rampipes they're aval in different 'stack' heights ie: lengths. You must have at least 1" all around them clear of filter/bulkhead etc.
These Dellorto DHLA rampipes also fit Weber IDF and are a very good low-cost substitute for the OE Weber ones. Like most rampipes they're aval in different 'stack' heights ie: lengths. You must have at least 1" all around them clear of filter/bulkhead etc.
DHLA Dellorto rampipe..jpg (112.07 KiB) Viewed 12340 times
1NRO
Posts: 123
Joined: June 22nd, 2006, 4:46 pm
Location: Carlisle
Contact:

Re: Gas Flowing Practice

Post by 1NRO »

Guy,

Thanks for an excellent explanation and pictures, I can feel the grinders going to be out again. I haven't the meat in the runners to form the taper I'd like but there's a little thickness to work in each entry especially in the lowest point of the plenum. This inevitably will lead to the entry being oval in shape (even more so than it already is). This won't matter a bit will it? I'm imagining that the air entry into the runner is eased naturally by the shape of my plenum at the highest points but hindered by the flat floor so the more I can radius the floor and taper the runner at this point the better?

Slightly off topic but based around the runner cross section (trying my best to taper it) I'm considering trying to take a mould of the runners so I can map the cross section. Have you any experience of doing this? I'm trying to find a product to use without luck.

Nik
259
Guy Croft
Site Admin
Posts: 5039
Joined: June 18th, 2006, 9:31 am
Location: Bedford, UK
Contact:

Re: Gas Flowing Practice

Post by Guy Croft »

1NRO
Posts: 123
Joined: June 22nd, 2006, 4:46 pm
Location: Carlisle
Contact:

Re: Gas Flowing Practice

Post by 1NRO »

I've been searching for a supplier in the UK of something along the lines of this http://www.smooth-on.com/Rigid-and-Flex ... index.html which I'm led to believe is good for this very task, not the best quality mould but quick and easy with a decent ability to be sliced up. The taper intrigues me and I can't think of an easier way of mapping it accurately.

Regards,

Nik
259
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests