| Page: |
| Home > Help Needed / General Tech Chat > suck through to blow through | |||||||
|
194 Posts Member #: 1296 Advanced Member Milford Haven Pembrokeshire |
25th Jan, 2007 at 07:51:04pm
Following up on a previous topic, i've decided experiment by converting my suck through supercharger to a blow through system using 2 chargers in series.
|
||||||
|
223 Posts Member #: 598 Senior Member Gaol |
25th Jan, 2007 at 09:23:02pm
superchargers will heat the air more than a turbo due to the poor adiabatic efficiency.
On 5th of Sep, 2006 at 05:47pm mini13 said:
I reckon if his brains were gunpowder he couldn't blow his own hat off... |
||||||
|
194 Posts Member #: 1296 Advanced Member Milford Haven Pembrokeshire |
26th Jan, 2007 at 07:34:04am
My thinking behind the 2 chargers is that each charger is more efficient at lower pressures, so 1 charger will flow a higher volume of air at 6psi than it will at 12psi and efficiency really drops off beyond 12.
|
||||||
|
223 Posts Member #: 598 Senior Member Gaol |
26th Jan, 2007 at 09:33:59am
I think that the internal passages are different on the HIF44, the float is different as it is stronger to withstand collapsing. Im sure you have thought about the fuel pump , return lines, and pressure regulator.
Edited by blown_imp on 26th Jan, 2007. On 5th of Sep, 2006 at 05:47pm mini13 said:
I reckon if his brains were gunpowder he couldn't blow his own hat off... |
||||||
|
194 Posts Member #: 1296 Advanced Member Milford Haven Pembrokeshire |
26th Jan, 2007 at 10:13:15am
Fuel pump needs to be capable of supplying fuel at a pressure greater than max boost!
|
||||||
|
223 Posts Member #: 598 Senior Member Gaol |
26th Jan, 2007 at 12:27:06pm
Unfortunatly that wont work mini23, the fuel pressure regulator is a must as it will provide 3psi to the carb under all conditions, as boost is introuduced it will add the 3psi to the boost. So at 5psi boost the fuel pressure will be at 8psi and so on.
On 5th of Sep, 2006 at 05:47pm mini13 said:
I reckon if his brains were gunpowder he couldn't blow his own hat off... |
||||||
![]() 2909 Posts Member #: 83 Post Whore Glasgow, Scotland |
26th Jan, 2007 at 08:31:40pm
On 26th of Jan, 2007 at 12:27pm blown_imp said:
having both superchargers working at the same RPM will not work either, as they move a fixed volume per revolution, the second chager will do no work. The first charger will have to spin faster than the second to provide more air than the second one can move. This will create an increase in pressure in the intemediate section between blowers that the second blower can work with. J you could have both chargers working in paralell? turbo 16v k-series 11.9@118.9 :)
|
||||||
|
194 Posts Member #: 1296 Advanced Member Milford Haven Pembrokeshire |
27th Jan, 2007 at 07:49:39am
Thanks for the information on the fuel pressure regulator, maybe you could suggest a good product/source?
|
||||||
|
8604 Posts Member #: 573 Formerly Axel Podland |
27th Jan, 2007 at 09:40:49am
On 27th of Jan, 2007 at 07:49am mini23 said:
As for the second supercharger doing no work that would only be the case if the final discharge were open to atmosphere and not restricted. Thats also the case with one charger! As said this is only an experiment and what its based on is the chargers capability to shift larger volumes of air at a lower discharge pressure. My prediction is that the second charger will have a greater load imposed on it than the first. I'm with blown imp on this one. If both blowers are running at the same speed, the first one will not do anything. The first one needs to run faster. You only cause boost when you are trying to force a certain of volume of air into a smaller space. As both blowers are the same capacity, then there will be no compression between them. Speed the first one up and it will be moving a larger volume of air than the second one and the air will be compressed. With my planned turbo/supercharger setup, the turbo is pushing the air equivalent to a 3 litre engine, the blower 2 litre and the engine is one litre, hence you get successive compression. Edited by Paul S on 27th Jan, 2007. Saul Bellow - "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
|
||||||
|
715 Posts Member #: 1381 Post Whore Doncaster, South Yorkshire |
27th Jan, 2007 at 10:03:33am
On 27th of Jan, 2007 at 07:49am mini23 said:
As for the second supercharger doing no work that would only be the case if the final discharge were open to atmosphere and not restricted. Thats also the case with one charger! As said this is only an experiment and what its based on is the chargers capability to shift larger volumes of air at a lower discharge pressure. My prediction is that the second charger will have a greater load imposed on it than the first. As for running them in paralell, that would be a simple conversion for this setup and is something that may be tried if the series setup fails to work. If this proves to be the case then it would probably be easier to fit a larger single charger! Sorry, it won't work. I have to agree with BlownImp on this one. I will try to explain why. Assuming you are to use 2 Eaton m45 blowers. These are fixed displacement units ie thay displace a fixed volume per revolution say for arguments sake .75 ltr. Assuming in this case the blower compresses the volume to .5ltr with a corresponding pressure increase of say 5psi. If you then feed this 0.5 ltr into the next blower which is looking to displace 0.75 ltr but can only recieve 0.5 ltr from the first blower you will see the problem. If there were no losses at all the second blower cannot compress this to a higer pressure than it was when it entered the blower as it would need 0.75ltr of the higher pressure output from the first blower. This is the reson you would have to spin the first blower at a greater speed than the second, or fit a larger first blower say an m62. The best set upfor a compound/ twin charged set up by far is turbo-blower-carb-engine. This has many advantages over either a single turbo or a single blower and is what I am doing on my project. Regards Dave Edited by danboy on 27th Jan, 2007. |
||||||
|
194 Posts Member #: 1296 Advanced Member Milford Haven Pembrokeshire |
27th Jan, 2007 at 03:58:41pm
Yes, ok, good reply, that all makes sence.
|
||||||
|
715 Posts Member #: 1381 Post Whore Doncaster, South Yorkshire |
27th Jan, 2007 at 04:13:03pm
Mini 23
Edited by danboy on 27th Jan, 2007. |
||||||
|
194 Posts Member #: 1296 Advanced Member Milford Haven Pembrokeshire |
27th Jan, 2007 at 05:03:37pm
I may end up going down that route!
|
||||||
![]() 2909 Posts Member #: 83 Post Whore Glasgow, Scotland |
27th Jan, 2007 at 05:35:15pm
or run boht chargers in paralell... turbo 16v k-series 11.9@118.9 :)
|
||||||
|
8604 Posts Member #: 573 Formerly Axel Podland |
27th Jan, 2007 at 05:43:53pm
On 27th of Jan, 2007 at 05:35pm evolotion said:
or run boht chargers in paralell... The blowers are very inefficient compared to a modern Garrett GT type turbocharger. Furthermore, they are most efficient at a 1.4 pressure ratio, about 6psig boost! Two blowers in parallel would create a lot of boost and a hell of a lot of heat. Saul Bellow - "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
|
||||||
|
715 Posts Member #: 1381 Post Whore Doncaster, South Yorkshire |
27th Jan, 2007 at 07:24:21pm
Axel, do you want to edit that to NOT a lot of boost and........
Edited by danboy on 27th Jan, 2007. |
||||||
![]() 2909 Posts Member #: 83 Post Whore Glasgow, Scotland |
27th Jan, 2007 at 07:35:38pm
i wouldnt run 2 blowers either, just suggesting how it may be done, 2 blowers would effectively meen they are each running into an engine of 1/2 the cc's therefore a higher pressure ratio for less RPM. turbo 16v k-series 11.9@118.9 :)
|
||||||
|
8604 Posts Member #: 573 Formerly Axel Podland |
27th Jan, 2007 at 08:18:39pm
On 27th of Jan, 2007 at 07:24pm danboy said:
Axel, do you want to edit that to NOT a lot of boost and........ No. It could create a lot of boost, depending on what speed you run the blowers at, but it would be very hot air due to the blowers inefficiency compared to using a turbo. Saul Bellow - "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
|
||||||
|
194 Posts Member #: 1296 Advanced Member Milford Haven Pembrokeshire |
28th Jan, 2007 at 09:08:06am
On 27th of Jan, 2007 at 07:24pm danboy said:
Axel, do you want to edit that to NOT a lot of boost and........ Mini 23 How would you drive the Two blowers? Where would you mount them? What pulley arrangement would you have? Would you use an intercooler? Not trying to be negative about your project just curious Regards Dave At the moment the car has a fibreglass front, so removable in a couple of minutes. For my test I would remove the alternator and possibly relocate the radiator (electric fan prehaps) The chargers would then be mounted on a plate, side by side and tight together. From the underside of the plate I will fit the discharge pipe, which will consist of a pipe cut along its length until it clears the mounting plate itself, where it will return to fully round. This should enable the chargers to be mounted tight to the block. The discharge from the first charger will be piped directly into the suction of the second. I already have the pulley system in place driving the one charger so I would only need to manufacture a pulley for the second stage charger (twice the size as discussed). The chargers would be belt driven like twin cams. Initally I would test without an intercooler, and if the desired boost could be achieved (around 18psi) then an intercooler would be fitted to keep the charger air temperature down. Finally if everything works then it would probably be necessary to fit a clubman front. I still have my old 1275gt shell and log book, although the shell will never make it back on the road as its to far gone. Edited by mini23 on 28th Jan, 2007. |
||||||
| Home > Help Needed / General Tech Chat > suck through to blow through | |||||||
|
|||||||
| Page: |

