PDA

View Full Version : Pursuit of the perfect 3SGTE intake manifold



takka
06-28-2010, 09:52 AM
Ok so anyone looking at this thread should have already looked through ChrisD's thread on creating a custom manifold for his celica.
http://www.celicatech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=44060

That thread is a great read an allot of work has been done by joe's gt to analyse the flow characteristics of different manifold designs, resulting in some really good information.

Now i opened this one up to avoid thread jacking, as Chris's manifold is under construction and we are heading in different directions.
I actually own an mr2 but i hope we can work together in developing the 3sgte manifold, and some of you might be able to use the design im leaning towards.
Ok well the main criteria i have for this manifold is to retain the tvis, i went to allot of trouble to get my tvis operational again as the previous owner gutted it for no good reason. tvis is in no cases a restriction, not even in high horsepower cars, the cross-sectional area of the two manifold ports per cylinder are as big or bigger than any manifold that doesn't deliver power like a light switch.
Next would be having a side feed throttle which will be great for getting rid of the shithouse flow distribution the 3sgte has, also to minimize turbo pluming and make it perfect for water to air intercooling, after that would be a plenum size that produces good spool while still having an increased volume.

here's what I'm thinking for the plenum, which will hopefully be optimized by Joe :)
http://i964.photobucket.com/albums/ae130/takkaz/plenum2.jpg

And I am thinking about some stolen ideas also.
ATS
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c57/1fastsol/DSC04171.jpg
racerx1715(mr2oc)
http://i213.photobucket.com/albums/cc148/racerx1715/IMG_2090.jpg

Put these two together an you have a winner!, the ports should be more uniform on the side feed manifold which will make life easier.

So now id love to know what you think Joe???? and anyone else with some ideas.

ChrisD
06-28-2010, 04:41 PM
Hehe. Well to start, the "perfect" manifold is different for every car, goals, and budget. So perfect for me and perfect for you can be different, but both still be good ideas. :)

Have you weighed the pros/cons of a fully custom manifold?

joe's gt
06-28-2010, 09:56 PM
haha takka. I am still technically a noob with all this. I am by no means an expert. I just know how to use some software and know some general ideas. What I wouldn't give to be able to afford an actual intake manifold textbook or something like that.

So a few questions...

1. Where do you want to make your power? (need a smaller plenum for lower rpm and larger for upper)

2. I assume you want to use the 3sge runners?

3. Some velocity stack ideas you are considering?

4. Willing to attempt a dual plenum? (possibly using something like this (http://www.jasperintegration.com/distribution-plenum.html))

takka
06-29-2010, 12:43 AM
The idea is to have power across the board, your car doesn't have to be a pig to drive just because you have 500hp with small compromises on both sides you can have a powerful car thats a joy to drive.
Now the original plan was to put the 3sge manifold i have on so i can go to water to air, an pull the intercooler an all its pluming out of my boot. but as the plans for power are increasing i thought why not improve on stock, so im sticking with the 3sge runners as creating custom runners for the tvis would be time consuming an probably yield no gains and i want to retain driveability.
With the plenum size i want try an avoid to many negative effects from being over sized, im thinking between 2 and 2.5 times stock, i cant see myself needing more than that, and i'll be chasing around the 500hp mark as time goes on.
The runners are so close together i think that rules out any conventional velocity stacks, i think the only option is machining them into the base plate, or leaving them stock.
Now i have considered a dual plenum, but for the amount of fabrication i don't think the need is there. To me it seems the dual plenum design is ideal for a short runner manifold with size constraints.

joe's gt
06-29-2010, 04:49 AM
The idea is to have power across the board, your car doesn't have to be a pig to drive just because you have 500hp with small compromises on both sides you can have a powerful car thats a joy to drive.
Now the original plan was to put the 3sge manifold i have on so i can go to water to air, an pull the intercooler an all its pluming out of my boot. but as the plans for power are increasing i thought why not improve on stock, so im sticking with the 3sge runners as creating custom runners for the tvis would be time consuming an probably yield no gains and i want to retain driveability.
With the plenum size i want try an avoid to many negative effects from being over sized, im thinking between 2 and 2.5 times stock, i cant see myself needing more than that, and i'll be chasing around the 500hp mark as time goes on.
The runners are so close together i think that rules out any conventional velocity stacks, i think the only option is machining them into the base plate, or leaving them stock.
Now i have considered a dual plenum, but for the amount of fabrication i don't think the need is there. To me it seems the dual plenum design is ideal for a short runner manifold with size constraints.

A dual plenum is hugely advantageous for equally distributing air velocity, but does significantly increase fabrication complexity. It would, however, eliminate the need for an angled TB, because that first plenum serves the same purpose of equalizing the air. I might try it just cuz I am curious, but I'll get started on your stuff. I won't really have a time table until I get started. But I think I have enough to get going.

joe's gt
06-30-2010, 03:28 AM
Takka, is this what you were thinking of? Tell me what changes I need to make.
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b396/92ct-27gt/plenum1.jpg

Also I need to know what boost pressures and rpms you want this stuff modeled at so I can calculate some theoretical mass flow rates. Also if you could estimate the maximum height of the plenum that we have to work with (account for the space from the top of the 3sge runners to the hood initially, but also factor in that a 2-3" pipe will be extending upward off of that as well if you don't want to go with a dual plenum.

takka
06-30-2010, 02:38 PM
yeah that looks pretty good, under the throttle should angle back towards the runners i think, i'm at 18psi right now an 5500rpm should be good.
ill get some measurements in the morning for the placement. thanks heaps for this joe!

i think this one will end up a bit longer than 12"

joe's gt
06-30-2010, 08:29 PM
cool. I can angle the bottom back towards the runners. However, there will only most likely be a little section angled back because as you can see, a 70mm TB takes up quite a bit of space.

takka
07-01-2010, 12:04 AM
yeah it is big, which is good. the plenum material is 4" so that would be a good spot to angle it back.

takka
07-02-2010, 01:27 AM
did a few quick measurements, an i think i have about 6" to play with from where ill cut the manifold to the engine cover so will be close but was thinking that anyway

Johnny
07-02-2010, 02:39 AM
would converting to itbs be beneficial in any way would it even be feaseable might as well go all out if you can right

takka
07-02-2010, 04:02 AM
the idea is to keep tvis, individual throttles are expensive an you get vacuum accumulation problems.
if you were going all out you could make them work but most boosted application steer clear of them

joe's gt
07-02-2010, 06:23 AM
the idea is to keep tvis, individual throttles are expensive an you get vacuum accumulation problems.
if you were going all out you could make them work but most boosted application steer clear of them

+1

joe's gt
07-04-2010, 08:22 AM
slight delay, sorry takka. My dc jack went out on my laptop so I got to desolder the old one and solder a new one in.

karl
07-05-2010, 06:51 PM
i really like the idea of keeping TVIS.

i recently had an interesting experience with it- i had rewired some things over the winter to try to get the TVIS working again (old actuator was cashed. replaced it with a modified camry V6 ACIS actuator). long story short, something was amiss and the butterflies were held closed full time. car would fall on its face around 4k/10psi.

so i unplugged the solenoid and got back all the top end power, but what surprised me was how unbelievably laggy the car felt without them. i'd estimate a good 40ft-lbs at lower boost/rpm is missing without it. with the TVIS, the turbo would spool fast enough to spike above my 18psi fuel cut. without it, it takes forever to spool up to 15.

i'm considering trying to control TVIS by boost rather than RPM in order to assist low end power, since the car seemed to make more power at lower boost even in higher rpm as the turbo was spooling up.

joe's gt
07-06-2010, 02:43 AM
Here ya go!

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b396/92ct-27gt/3hx135Lx20adensity.jpg

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b396/92ct-27gt/3hx135Lx20aflow.jpg

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b396/92ct-27gt/3hx135Lx20adata.jpg

It don't get much better than those numbers. Mass flow rate is the important one.

Currently the plenum volume is 2.1L...Bigger? Smaller? Whatever you want.

Basically takka, I need to know the thickness of your throttle body that you are using and the radius of curvature of whatever bend (whether it be a silicone hose or pipe) that you have going onto the throttle body. This way I can model them and determine the height of the system (from the top of the runners to top of the intake pipe) to see if it clears the hood. Then we can modify and reanalyze from there.

And BTW, to all who view this thread, this is the last manifold analysis I will be doing. I am starting a full time job soon and just won't have the time to do the trial and error necessary for obtaining a good design.

takka
07-06-2010, 11:29 AM
wow that is good distribution, thank you so much for doing this for me Joe!
Around 2L is perfect for me i think, i still haven't decided on the throttle yet iv been looking at some ford setups as i have an after market ECU an i can use any type of sensors, im looking for short length but price is the key.
I will use a silicon bend id say joe, so what was the throttle angle and measurements for this test? does having a larger gap between runner #1 and the end of the plenum have any effect on flow into that runner?

joe's gt
07-06-2010, 07:30 PM
I will use a silicon bend id say joe, so what was the throttle angle and measurements for this test? does having a larger gap between runner #1 and the end of the plenum have any effect on flow into that runner?

I'll get measurements up for you today. Also, you want the gap between runner 1 and the end of the plenum to be small so air doesn't have a chance to escape past that runner. Also, it helps force the incoming air to the other runners. In addition to angle, height, and length, decreasing volume towards the end of the plenum plays a major role in helping to equalize distribution. If you have volume after runner 1, some air will end up occupying that space instead of being forced into the other runners.

Right now I have the end height around 2", because if you go any smaller than that, you will start decreasing the radius of the half round plenum and have to taper the base inward at the end. I can go smaller on the end if you are willing to do that. You can actually make the end height pretty small before it starts choking flow to runner 1. A smaller end height will help in decreasing volume at the end of the plenum and help distribution.

However, looking at the results now, I honestly don't believe shortening that end height will yield any significant, noticeable improvement. That flow is VERY equal right now.

The throttle angle was 20*

Gandalf
07-06-2010, 07:57 PM
I am watching this like a hawk, since my plenum ideas/needs are very similar to yours takka... I also want to keep the TVIS, use the 3sge runners, already have a 70mm BBK TB waiting, and lots of aluminum to work with... lol.

Before you mentioned that you wanted to go 2 - 2.5 times bigger than stock... you refer to stock plenum size?

That distribution is nearly perfect Joe... best I've seen. Might it increase flow a bit more to runner #1 if the manifold extended past that first runner by two or three inches, moving the dead zone away from it a bit more. I don't mean change the angle either, just keep tapering at that same angle...

joe's gt
07-06-2010, 08:23 PM
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b396/92ct-27gt/plenumdimensions1.jpg

joe's gt
07-06-2010, 10:44 PM
So I experimented with extending the plenum past the runners. Surprisingly it had almost zero effect. What seemingly has a huge effect is the length of the TB from runner 8, the height of the TB, and the angle of the TB. Those 3 things are KEY to getting good distribution. Plenum taper angle and extension past the runner 1 seem to have less of an effect on the overall distribution. When I extended the plenum past runner 1, distribution barely changed and there was just a dead zone in the volume between runner 1 and the end of the plenum.

Also, it seems that for the best distribution, that angled piece on the bottom of the plenum needs to be as close to the bottom opening of the TB and to the right edge of runner 8 as possible. This helps guide the air into runner 8 and prevents the air from spreading out too much below the TB.

Gandalf
07-07-2010, 01:06 AM
Great work! that's awesome detailed experimenting, thank you for doing that... its good to know!

Gandalf
07-07-2010, 05:34 PM
i'm considering trying to control TVIS by boost rather than RPM in order to assist low end power, since the car seemed to make more power at lower boost even in higher rpm as the turbo was spooling up. This might be an excellent idea... I think you should get right on that ;) Seriously that makes more sense... Let me know what you come up with!

joe's gt
07-07-2010, 06:10 PM
i'm considering trying to control TVIS by boost rather than RPM in order to assist low end power, since the car seemed to make more power at lower boost even in higher rpm as the turbo was spooling up.

I'm way behind you in an electronics sense Karl, but wouldn't you only have to tap into a boost gauge wire, monitor the voltage at various levels using metered compressed air, and then fit a curve. Then you could have something like an Arduino pro with code to control the TVIS actuator.

It looks like you could get a board from sparkfun for $10. Probably even cheaper from ebay.

Gandalf
07-07-2010, 08:37 PM
Karl is running a Honda computer on his 3sgte, which is what I plan to do also... with software it basically is an ems. If I had to guess, he would be correlating the voltage signal for the the actuator with the signal from the map sensor somehow, and can have the actuator begin opening the TVIS when boost reaches X psi, and be fully open at X+3 psi or whatever.

What worries me a bit is thinking about shifting at WOT, when boost drops momentarily for a shift, and then boom back on the power and boost is suddenly back on, won't it slam the TVIS open/closed really hard? Last thing we would want would be bits of TVIS going into the engine...

An arduino can certainly do it, but I don't think its necessary. I'll let Karl answer you, lol.

Joe, I'm not asking you to do more testing, but, what would happen if the half-circle was a bit conical, especially towards the end, so that we could have a lower end height of say 1"... and as you say, the baseplate would narrow to a 2" wide at that end? That would minimize extra volume and maybe help bring that runner #1 up a bit... You have probably already played around enough to know the answer...

I am thinking of taking the 4" half-pipe and squeezing one end of it into a narrower shape, then removing the excess, and then shaping/welding the inside wall of the end so it leads right down flush into the last runner, like you suggest...

I want to show this and get opinions on this... This is the 3sge plenum cut off to look at the runners. Why are there shorter wall sections between runners #1 and #2, and between runners #6 and #7, where the wall dips down like that?
I am thinking of grinding down the top of the runner walls untill they are all the same, and then knife-edging the edges...

http://members.shaw.ca/MKI.5_Overflow/New_Intake_Manifold/3sge_plenum_bottom_runner_inlets2

joe's gt
07-07-2010, 09:35 PM
Yeah, I could do that. What I was saying related to takka is that since the radius of curvature of the Half Round is 2", if you start cutting beyond that the radius will continually decrease so you will have to taper the base plate inwards on both sides.

Did you see the Dual Plenum CFD I did in this same forum section. The top plenum is a conical shape which is key for forcing air to distribute equally through the slit. Otherwise it would just all shoot towards the end, and runners 7 and 8 wouldn't get nearly enough air. Decreasing volume towards the end of the plenum helps force the air to the right most runners.

Gandalf
07-08-2010, 04:02 PM
Very nice on the dual plenum. The advancements on manifolds being made here are so cool and its a great opportunity for learning as well. The advantage of the dual plenum is distribution, especially for straight runners. It may sacrifice a bit in terms of response since the total volume of both chambers must be filled.

And thank you for entertaining these ideas. The last thing I mean to do is thread-jack, since takka started this thread to avoid exactly that! Our goals/components are virtually identical. I just want to help and not leave stones unturned, so that the design benefits, and leaves little to doubt. The key is smooth curves, with as few dead areas or sudden edges/lips, leading directly into the runners on either end, and I'm trying to figure out how to physically finish off the end of the plenum to give the best supply to that runner #1, and finish the base and runner entries...

takka
07-09-2010, 10:59 AM
hey gandalf do you have any top view pics looking into runners, i have a manifold but i haven't cut the plenum off yet.
want to see how much of an offset(if any) there is between cyl# 1/2 and 3/4 for equal runner length. trying to decide where to slice the runners??

hey Joe, thanks again for all your work.
wanted your thoughts on the disturbance the throttle plate would create, i cant see any negatives really hopefully moves some away from runners 4 and 5?? didn't know if your models included a throttle plate

Gandalf
07-09-2010, 12:32 PM
Can you believe I actually fell asleep with the runners on my chest last night? lol!
Good thing the GF didn't surprise me or I'd never hear the end of it.

I will take some pics right now to provide some more angles. Spent a lot of time pondering how far down to remove the plenum, since I want to utilize anything good about the oem plenum base and runners, and allow for the smoothest transition to the new plenum.

I also was thinking about the throttle plate! Depending on how I end up welding the "tilt" of the new plenum, whether to "clock" the TB to allow air to always be flowing in along the top/bottom of the plenum directly at the runners even at part throttle. I am not sure if I am being clear. Most of the walls that separate the runner entries are at the same angle, except for two. If I leave the runner entry walls as is, then I would line up the TB so that the throttle plate shaft (axis) is parallal with the majority of the runner wall entry angles. If I machine down the block-side of the oem plenum and the runner entry walls to match the two strange sloped walls between runners #1 and #2, and #6 and #7, then I would need to clock the TB by an estimated 30 degrees counter-clockwise.

I wish I knew what those two sloped walls were designed to compensate. To leave or not to leave.

A throttle plate probably mucks up airflow by creating turbulence at anything other than WOT... that can't be easy for Joe to factor in to the model. I always figured that having the TB further away from the plenum will help even distribution especially considering how the TB might affect things... I was delighted that your design and Joe's model chose to move the TB away from the plenum!

Gandalf
07-09-2010, 03:36 PM
Excuse the fact that the mani is very dirty and I need to get it sandblasted, and maybe brush it to get rid of rough spots.
This is an overview from straight above (the angled runners create a bit of an illusion). (EDIT-note furrows shown by arrows):

http://members.shaw.ca/MR2_Forum_Extras2/3sgelc_plenum_runners_cyl2wall3_closeup.jpg

This is a closeup of the area between runners #4 and #5, showing the offset, seen straight from above:

http://members.shaw.ca/MR2_Forum_Extras2/3sgelc_plenum_runners_cyl2wall3_topview.jpg

This view is at an angle to look straight into runner #5:

http://members.shaw.ca/MR2_Forum_Extras2/3sgelc_plenum_runners_cyl2wall3_angle.jpg

Hope that helps.

This is a crude diagram showing what I am referring to:

http://members.shaw.ca/MR2_Forum_Extras2/3sgelc_plenum_runners_analysis.jpg

The blue line refers to the angle of the majority of the runner walls at entry. The red line represents the angle of the two sloped runner walls.
The green line represents how far down the plenum the cut could be made to make all the runner slopes equal, the yellow arrows point to where the two sloped runners meet ther plenum wall.
The violet shows the approx shape of a runner wall that would be removed to make them all equal.
The light blue circle is approx where the new plenum could sit, tilted maybe 25 degrees, and hence the TB could also tilt 25 degrees to the left.

Perhaps none of this matters. But its better to discuss than not.
takka, are you just going to weld a flat base at the bottom, and cutting new holes in it to match the runners, or are you going to just add sidewalls and the half-plenum (or more) on top of the existing oem base?

takka
07-09-2010, 05:16 PM
your picture of #5 runner is the offset i was referring to, the idea is to remove the entire plenum section so there is uniform runner openings. I was hoping there would be less of an offset, air should pass into runners 1234 easier than 5678 due to the increased bend radius of 5678 but that might not be so bad just complicates making a base plate with bell mouths machined into it

toyota would have done alot of testing on this manifold, the irregular runner openings are most likely compensation for low flow in those runners

joe's gt
07-09-2010, 05:53 PM
For the throttle body plate questions, check out the below post by Conrad_Turbo.

http://www.celicatech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=44060&page=10

He's a much more experienced mechanical engineer than me.

As for the offset, obviously there is nothing we can do to control that. Chris told me that when looking at the manifold straight on, all of the runners leave at a 60* angle to the left. Is this correct?

In your opinion, do I need to angle the runners forward or backward at all and then experiment with TB forward and backward angle? Or when the runners are attached to the head, when they meet the plenum do they leave vertically?

Gandalf
07-09-2010, 08:29 PM
takka, sorry, I mislabelled my second pic (edited now), it is also of the #4 and #5 runners... the offset is not as apparent right at the inlets, maybe 5mm towards the trunk at the inlets... it appears much more dramatic in the last pic because the runners 5-8 curve away from the block more in the center, whereas runners 1-4 curve more dramatically as they enter the block.

I don't think we need to worry about the offset, it has more to do with runner length/curve I think.

I keep wondering how much of what Toyota compensated in terms of those two sloped walls had to do with the airflow for the small plenum, or for small runner differences, or that strange TB angle this mani had. Very hard to know. So I looked at the whole plenum again, and noticed that those two sloped walls line up with two nipple entrances into the plenum. They are visible furrows in the plenum base that are directly in line with those two sloped walls. I have edited my pic #1 in post #30 with arrows to indicate the furrows. I believe now that Toyota actually modified those two runner inlet walls due to those nipples and furrows. Weird.

Making tiny compensations for the irregularities designed by Toyota for those variables can't be the right thing to do... I am inclined to agree that making all the inlets the same, regardless of the type of base, is the way to go. I don't want to change runner length much, if any.

Joe, thanks I just read the referred post on TB axis etc, and I'm sure he is saying the same thing as I am... the axis lined up with the widest parts of the plenum would mean the axis is parallel with the baseplate of the plenum floor.

The inlets to the runners appear to all be the same angle, to me it looks like 58 degrees (90 being completely vertical) when I traced them on paper, which agrees with ChrisD's statement.

Here is a view of the runners and inlets from almost a level plane, looking from the block's point-of-view:

http://members.shaw.ca/MR2_Forum_Extras2/3sgelc_plenum_runners_cyl2wall3_engineview.jpg

karl
07-09-2010, 09:18 PM
I'm way behind you in an electronics sense Karl, but wouldn't you only have to tap into a boost gauge wire, monitor the voltage at various levels using metered compressed air, and then fit a curve. Then you could have something like an Arduino pro with code to control the TVIS actuator.

It looks like you could get a board from sparkfun for $10. Probably even cheaper from ebay.


you're WAY overthinking it :D

1x comparator.
1x potentiometer
a few resistors and caps.

using a uC for this would be like pest control using thermonuclear devices, hehe. the nice thing about using known sensors for MAP is that once you have the transfer function, you know exactly the voltages you want to trip the sensor at. the comparator is pretty much a switch that activates when one input is higher than the other input. feed it a boost signal (no need for buffer circuits since the comparator has >1Mohm input impedance) and a reference signal (adjustable with the pot) and you have yourself a boost switch.

the lines to the solenoid are small enough that the butterflies never open/close quickly enough to damage anything. they have kind of a built-in damper.

martin, i'm on my way to the post office with your dizzy right now.

takka
07-10-2010, 03:10 AM
no Joe they do not leave vertically, i think i will cut the runners on an angle which leans the plenum towards the engine to try an match the port opening angles, there will have to be a compromise between between the 1234 and 5678 angles that will also help with hight a small amount, and for me help with intercooler pluming.

joe's gt
07-10-2010, 04:11 AM
So if my thinking is correct, while the runners are not vertical, the plenum when attached will be tilted, the throttle body assembly will also be tilted exactly the same. This would not affect the distribution analysis. Does this seem reasonable? We are essentially just taking the current analysis and tilting it.

Gandalf
07-10-2010, 07:47 AM
That sounds right to me. Joe, what runner angle did you use?

joe's gt
07-10-2010, 08:08 AM
60 degrees. If its 58 degrees tho that's fine, 2 degrees is not gonna make any difference.

Also, takka when you figure out what your gonna do it, let me know if those dimensions are gonna work. Otherwise we can make it shorter length wise or height wise and re-analyze.

Also, Gandalf, I am in the process of doing the model with a tapering inward base for a conical like end to the Half Round.

takka
07-10-2010, 01:59 PM
im starting to think it might not be worth going any further than gandalf has in removing the plenum, an just weld the new plenum on top. i dont know if much would be gained by altering it?

Gandalf
07-10-2010, 07:27 PM
Joe, that's all sounds awesome, thanks so much for doing that!

takka, I think I'll alter the block-side so that they are all the same, and the plenum will "tilt" towards the block. The other side of the oem runners/plenum will be untouched, except for some smoothing, and maybe edging the runner walls. I want to make sure the block-side gets a smooth transition in, and not a lip before the air enters the runners. I want to try and keep the plenum centered on the line formed by trhe runners, though.

takka
07-11-2010, 01:31 AM
yeah that all sounds about right, i was talking about cutting alot lower and removing all the tapered inlets then making my own bell mouths but that will be much more work an cost, an i dont think the benefits will out way the extra input

Gandalf
07-15-2010, 01:52 PM
Ok, here is my plenum with the block-side shaved away so that all the runner walls are the same. The result is a tilt of aprrox 25 degrees as discussed. It is going to take some finicky cutting and shaping of the new plenum at the block-side to follow the shapes of the runners, but I am prepared to do what it takes. This is still rough, I need to belt-sand to get totally even, knife-edge the walls, and then dremel any necessary spots and wire-brush the irregularities.
takka this might help you decide on how to proceed with yours.

http://members.shaw.ca/MR2_Forum_Extras2/Runner_inlets1.jpg

joe's gt
07-15-2010, 06:31 PM
All you need is to get it close. The weld bead can fill in quite a bit of space if need be.

racerx1715
07-18-2010, 08:12 PM
Takka, if your going to steal ideas at least give credit where credit is due!!

Second pics is my new base plate design for my latest intake manifold.

joe's gt
07-18-2010, 08:39 PM
I'm sorry, I wasn't aware that radiusing a base plate and knife edging runners had never been done before.

racerx1715
07-18-2010, 10:54 PM
I'm sorry, I wasn't aware that radiusing a base plate and knife edging runners had never been done before.


Its done all the time, I was referring more to using my picture than anything not the idea.

Shadowlife25
07-19-2010, 12:22 AM
How about you get over the fact that someone used a picture that you posted to illustrate what they were talking about.

Be friendly. Don't be snippy. It goes much further when you are new and still getting a feel for the place. k? :)

racerx1715
07-19-2010, 12:28 AM
How about you get over the fact that someone used a picture that you posted to illustrate what they were talking about.

Be friendly. Don't be snippy. It goes much further when you are new and still getting a feel for the place. k? :)

Yeah, I see that now. I apologize.

Gandalf
07-19-2010, 01:51 AM
takka does mention that the parts/ideas are not his, and in his research he has come across several ideas that he wants to incorporate aspects of. I'm sure he won't mind adding a note indicating that its your actual baseplate - pretty yummy btw :) Isn't the pic available from the ATS site anyway?

For anyone who doesn't know, racerx1715 does some excellent designs + machining and is a vendor on the MR2 board.

takka
07-19-2010, 02:03 AM
hey guys been away for awhile
Gandalf that looks good, pretty much exactly what i was thinking. Do you have a welder for that nice sample of drive shaft :) or you going to take it to a fab shop.

hey racerx sorry about that thought i already made a reference to you, but it must have been in chrisD's tread, hope there is no offence taken i have been very interested in everything you have been doing over on mr2oc

Shadowlife25
07-19-2010, 02:10 AM
takka does mention that the parts/ideas are not his, and in his research he has come across several ideas that he wants to incorporate aspects of. I'm sure he won't mind adding a note indicating that its your actual baseplate - pretty yummy btw :) Isn't the pic available from the ATS site anyway?

For anyone who doesn't know, racerx1715 does some excellent designs + machining and is a vendor on the MR2 board.


I know these thing. Point was, we are a community, and should treat eachother with respect.
This goes for all members.
I am on board with giving credit where it is due 100%, but jumping the gun and getting upset doesn't do anyone any favors. ;)

Gandalf
07-19-2010, 05:14 AM
^ absolutely agree :)

hey guys been away for awhile
Gandalf that looks good, pretty much exactly what i was thinking. Do you have a welder for that nice sample of drive shaft :) or you going to take it to a fab shop.
I am going to learn how to weld if it kills me. Too many projects I would be able to tackle. Gotta be done.

joe's gt
07-19-2010, 05:39 AM
Bottom line guys, internet is public record. You post something on here, unless its copyrighted or patented, you got a right to do with it what you wish.

IMO, the base plate wasn't anything ground breaking or some great idea that was stolen. Hell I assumed everyone that made a plenum did that to their base plate. The pic was just being used to illustrate a point.

If you are willing to post something on the internet that is not protected by law, you have to live with the possibility of it being stolen or used in reference to something else.

Hell, a company could take Chris' plenum or now this one in this thread, manufacture it, sell it, and say they designed it.

Would it be extremely unethical? Yes
Would I be able to do anything about it? No

Because its public record and its not lawfully protected.

Gandalf, as for welding, its actually really easy. It just takes some practice on developing a steady hand and consistent travel speed. TIG is the best. MIG is great for tacking things together tho.

Sang
07-19-2010, 05:45 AM
Bottom line guys, internet is public record. You post something on here, unless its copyrighted or patented, you got a right to do with it what you wish.

Bottom line is: the picture taker owns the rights to the photo. Just because it's on the internet does not make something public record.

Shadowlife25
07-19-2010, 06:13 AM
Credit has been given.

Drop this now and get back on topic please everyone.

Gandalf
07-19-2010, 04:35 PM
Gandalf, as for welding, its actually really easy. It just takes some practice on developing a steady hand and consistent travel speed. TIG is the best. MIG is great for tacking things together tho. I am actually looking at gas-welding. There are some great videos, kits, and how-to's available. A lot less expensive too. By the time I pay someone to weld all the stuff I want to do, I could have bought my own welding rig 3x over. Any thoughts on that? Can weld steel with it also with different tips.

takka
07-20-2010, 12:36 AM
get a tig welder mate, best for this kind of stuff make sure you yet an AC/DC one then you can weld anything i have a mig as well but they are not as pretty or precise

joe's gt
07-20-2010, 04:04 AM
TIG has better penetration and is great for both aluminum and steel. Very clean and almost no sparks. You can't weld aluminum with gas because the heat is not concentrated enough.

racerx1715
07-20-2010, 07:15 AM
Wow, I didn't mean to cause such a ruckus. Sorry.

Back to the intake manifold, with the fluid flow analysis. You should look into the runner area for the last runner. For circular runners you want the final height of the plenum to be 1.5 times the diameter of the runner. If you drop below that value you will run into problems. I'm sure you can find the area and get a rough idea of the size. Something to take into consideration.

Gandalf
07-20-2010, 09:19 PM
Do you refer to runner #1 at the end, or #8 (the first one after the TB)?

I am not certain how to transfer that info to an 8-runner manifold... would that be like adding the runners 7 and 8 together for area, and then taking a diameter of such a circle?

---------- Post added at 02:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:54 PM ----------


get a tig welder mate, best for this kind of stuff make sure you yet an AC/DC one then you can weld anything i have a mig as well but they are not as pretty or precise


TIG has better penetration and is great for both aluminum and steel. Very clean and almost no sparks. You can't weld aluminum with gas because the heat is not concentrated enough.

I know tig is the best, no arguments there, I simply don't have the budget to drop $1500 on a welder. In my opinion the welding industry is the single most overpriced industry out there, in terrms of gear.

The only two options I have are either to mig-weld or gas weld, or have someone else do it for a fat price. The reason I thought of gas weld is because of this u-tube video from tinmantech. He does a beautiful job with oxy-ace, then puts the weld through a air-hammer and a form-press to prove its tenacity:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aF1Srs_e1Aw&feature=related
Quite amazing.

I am dealing with thicker aluminum, though.

Sang
07-21-2010, 05:26 AM
Not sure what you would call a "fat price", but back when I was thinking about getting a larger plenum welded onto stock runners, Jeff quoted me a very reasonable price. AND that was based on just sending him raw materials over. If you're doing all the leg work, it really shouldn't cost too much. You just have to find a good welder that is reasonably priced.

When I was finding quotes to just get a couple fittings TIG'd onto my valve cover...I was getting everything from $15/fitting to $60/fitting. Needless to say, I lost my breath when I got latter.

racerx1715
07-21-2010, 06:56 AM
Do you refer to runner #1 at the end, or #8 (the first one after the TB)?

I am not certain how to transfer that info to an 8-runner manifold... would that be like adding the runners 7 and 8 together for area, and then taking a diameter of such a circle?

---------- Post added at 02:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:54 PM ----------





I know tig is the best, no arguments there, I simply don't have the budget to drop $1500 on a welder. In my opinion the welding industry is the single most overpriced industry out there, in terrms of gear.

The only two options I have are either to mig-weld or gas weld, or have someone else do it for a fat price. The reason I thought of gas weld is because of this u-tube video from tinmantech. He does a beautiful job with oxy-ace, then puts the weld through a air-hammer and a form-press to prove its tenacity:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aF1Srs_e1Aw&feature=related
Quite amazing.

I am dealing with thicker aluminum, though.

Referring to runner numbers 1 and 2. It should be possible to take the cross sectional area and then get an approximate diameter to a circle. I'm sure there is a better way, its not coming to mind currently.

Gandalf
07-21-2010, 06:41 PM
Just to check also, by "final height" you mean the height of the plenum at the tapered end, by runners 1&2, correct?

Gandalf
07-22-2010, 04:54 AM
I had a long telephone conversation with RacerX tonight, and he explained that flow alone is not the only thing going on, in spite of a turbocharger slamming air in there. The short of it is, when those runners open up suddenly, they like to have a plenum height above that is 1.5 times as high (minimum) as the runner diameter. The runner diameter would be the runers 1&2 areas added together, and the height measurement would take place in the "center" of the resulting combined runner. To entertain this, I did the following calculation:

the area of runner 1 (if it were totally round) = 8.296 sqcm +
the area of runner 2 (if it were totally square) = 8.75 sqcm. = 17.046 sqcm

the area of runner 1 (if it were totally square) = 10.5 sqcm +
the area of runner 2 (if it were totally round) = 7.069 sqcm = 17.569 sqcm

17.046 sqcm + 17.569 sqcm = 34.615
divided by two = 17.3075 sqcm

The reason I did this was to take into acount the rounded squarish oval shapes. The total sq area of the two runners added together is 17.3075 sqcm.
17.3075 sqcm / 3.14159 = 5.607 (radius squared)
sqroot of 5.607 = 2.3679
radius (2.3679) x 2 equals 4.7358 cm (diameter).
multiply that by the 1.5 factor to get desired plenum height above runners 1&2 = 7.104 cm. converted to inches = 2.8 inches.

So, according to this idea, the plenum height at the spot between the last two runners should be 2.8 inches. This is a little higher than we were tapering down to at the very end (2 inches)... but not much.

Of course our 3sge runners are slanted, which will also factor in there somehow... but very hard to take everything into account.

We also talked about plenum volume. What seemed to work best for him on our 2.0 liter engine was around a 3.0 L plenum, or around 183 cubic inches. He went a fair bit bigger on one of his recent manifolds and felt that he lost some unnecessary spool and lower end (around 260 cubic inches I believe).
Again, this is bigger than what we were planning. But, all is food for thought, and its nice to hear some real-world experience with manifold designs.

Haha. Any thoughts?

Gandalf
07-22-2010, 06:42 PM
joe's gt,
have you had a chance to work on that conical taper... ? :) I am very curious which runners that shape might help, or bias...

I wonder if some more porting just on the runner inlets of #1 and #8 can also help to improve flow into cyl 1 and 4 once the TVIS is open, since there is room for more material removal there.

takka
07-23-2010, 02:06 AM
To RacerX if your watching, would you take on designing a base plate for the side feed manifold?? cant see it being easy to make it how we want it but id say it would make a fair difference? only trouble for me is being in Australia cant send you a sample manifold but if gandalf is also interested maybe we could work something out??

joe's gt
07-23-2010, 03:53 AM
joe's gt,
have you had a chance to work on that conical taper... ? :) I am very curious which runners that shape might help, or bias...

I wonder if some more porting just on the runner inlets of #1 and #8 can also help to improve flow into cyl 1 and 4 once the TVIS is open, since there is room for more material removal there.

Not yet, really sorry. I started a new job this week and am a little overwhelmed at the moment. As it is now, if you do the conical taper, the end height will be well below the 1.5x runner area you want to go with.

RacerX, how did you come up with this 1.5x runner area end height? Was it in a textbook or is it from experimental evidence? I'm not trying to discredit you or anything, just curious as to where that number came from and why it works out that way.

racerx1715
07-23-2010, 06:04 AM
To RacerX if your watching, would you take on designing a base plate for the side feed manifold?? cant see it being easy to make it how we want it but id say it would make a fair difference? only trouble for me is being in Australia cant send you a sample manifold but if gandalf is also interested maybe we could work something out??

Yeah, I'd be willing to take that on. I would need dimensions, I have solidworks and should be able to get it modeled from some decent dimensions. Then I can program it in and cut it.

I've posted this a few times on MR2oc, its very interesting read from an engineering perspective on velocity stacks. (reminds me of fluid mechanics lab)

http://www.profblairandassociates.com/pdfs/RET_Bellmouth_Sept.pdf

---------- Post added at 05:04 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:49 AM ----------


Not yet, really sorry. I started a new job this week and am a little overwhelmed at the moment. As it is now, if you do the conical taper, the end height will be well below the 1.5x runner area you want to go with.

RacerX, how did you come up with this 1.5x runner area end height? Was it in a textbook or is it from experimental evidence? I'm not trying to discredit you or anything, just curious as to where that number came from and why it works out that way.

It's the inside diameter. The rear of a tapered plenum should be 1.5 times the inside runner diameter.

I've actually come across it twice in engineering text. (Theory of engine manifold design.) I've also experienced it in dyno testing, and saw its evidence in another manifold I built for an NA application on a flow bench.

I know it sounds odd, I didn't really believe it at first either. Then testing showed me otherwise.

joe's gt
07-23-2010, 06:21 AM
I've actually come across it twice in engineering text. (Theory of engine manifold design.) I've also experienced it in dyno testing, and saw its evidence in another manifold I built for an NA application on a flow bench.

I know it sounds odd, I didn't really believe it at first either. Then testing showed me otherwise.

WOWZAH! That is an expensive textbook. lol. Can't justify spending that amount of money on something that is just a hobby. Dang, I really wanted to read some type of text book on manifold design. Know of any cheaper ones?

Gandalf, you still want to do that conical modeling? It will put you well below the ideal minimum end height that racerx was talking about.

Gandalf
07-23-2010, 07:54 AM
Well, what I have been doing for the last couple of days is taking a hammer to aluminum tubing, and seeing how conical I can get it once I cut a slit in it lengthwise. I have the technique down now lol. Inside the driveshafts there is a rubber/cardboard tube, I believe it to be a dampener of sorts. Once it is cut lengthwise it comes out easily. I put this on the outside of the tube to cushion the hammer's edges. Works perfectly.

The tube I have ready now began with a 4.5" diameter tube. I hammered it conical, and then cut just enough of it out of the base to fit on the existing runner inlet shape. Its resulting dimensions are 4" tall and wide at runner #8, and just under 3" tall and 2.5" wide between runners #1&2. I then taper the very end quite sharply to meet the end of the base. I wanted to see if I could make a shape that would meet all those dimensions, and also follow the natural curves of the runner inlet design... This is as close as its gonna get I think.

In order to make a flow representation of this, it is basically a "D" shaped plenum, conical, with the above dimensions. Then I plan to continue the same upper line of the plenum, but have a reverse-conical shape that tapers back up to the TB, perhaps a little longer than joe's gt's 2.9" since the overall plenum angle is not as steep. Maybe 4 - 5". then the TB to have an ideal angle, likely very close to joe's gt's... likely around 18-20*. I really am trying to follow the flow design since it is great.

Perhaps I will post a diagram with exact dimensions and pics. I don't expect you (joe's gt) to try and make a very complicated design because I know its tons of work. But I do think a half-plenum with a flat base wouldn't be an accurate facsimile of what this is.

The thing is, I deep down believe that a non-flat baseplate should have better and more natural flow... its just harder to make. Perhaps I should see it through, and get it flow-tested? If it fails, I still have the runners perfectly intact save for minor changes to the inlets which a baseplate would eliminate anyway? There also have got to be more of these runners around, I will keep my eyes open.

In the mentioned text, is it not just for NA manifolds?

joe's gt
07-24-2010, 07:11 AM
A sketch with dimensions would do wonders for trying to understand the exact geometry you are talking about. It might not be as hard to model as you expect, then again it might be way harder. lol

Gandalf
07-24-2010, 07:36 AM
I'll do one up, with actual pics too. :) thanks for being willing!

Regarding that article, it was interesting that the shape of the runner inlets was a factor, and eliptical bellmouths were the best. Again, I think its different for forced induction.

Gandalf
07-25-2010, 07:46 AM
Ok... forgive my inaccurate drawing and the fact that it's not to scale... and I understand that my plenum shape is not totally uniform... neither are the runners thanks to offset. Obviously I havent't touched the runner inlets yet... I'll save that for when plenum design is finalized. I realize joe's gt that its difficult to copy this... whatever you can manage will be great. If you can play a bit with TB angle to determine the best one, that would be awesome.

Plenum is made of 1/8" aluminum.

Inside Diameters
At the point between runners 1 & 2:
2.56 inches wide
2.874 inches tall (to the center of the runner)

At the point just past runner 8:
4.134 inches tall (to center of runner)
4.134 inches wide

Length of plenum section "A" = 4.5"
Length of plenum section "B" = 10.83"
Total plenum length including 1/2" TB plate = 15.83" (yes this line is all meant to be perfectly straight ;) )

http://members.shaw.ca/MR2_Forum_Extras2/3sgelc_plenum_conical1.jpg

http://members.shaw.ca/MR2_Forum_Extras2/3sgelc_plenum_conical2.jpg

http://members.shaw.ca/MR2_Forum_Extras2/3sgelc_plenum_conical3.jpg

http://members.shaw.ca/MR2_Forum_Extras2/3sgelc_plenum_conical4.jpg

joe's gt
07-26-2010, 04:58 AM
Gandalf, the end of the plenum between runners 1 and 2, are we extending that at the exact same shape to the end of the runners?

Gandalf
07-26-2010, 05:58 AM
From the top of the end of the plenum, it can slant steeply straight down to the edge of the first inlet, or it can continue at the same shape if its easier to model. I intended it to slant from the top of the plenum edge steeply down. The same shape might just be "dead" space, judging from previous models.

ravensguildassasin
08-10-2010, 10:19 PM
now i have a question? (and please excuse my ignorance here still learning this car.) but could you just run the tvis system like they do on the SVT focus where it actuates at 50% throttle or higher. thus allowing it to be open even on shifts? or if you do go the boost route use a boost meter like a tps sensor and at xx pounds of boost and higher it is open. that way even when the boost drops a bit from shifting it does not slam the tvis shut. or get more technical and use a set up that runs tvis on a boost curve. the same idea as the tps sensor just more parameter's to put in. again i am still learning this system so bear with me.

Grot
08-10-2010, 10:48 PM
That is probably possible.
Stock it is run by vacuum. so that may be an issue. Dont know much about the system myself tho.

joe's gt
08-11-2010, 04:03 AM
I believe one of the board members named karl was working on a similar concept of having a boost controlled tvis.

As for this thread, Gandalf and takka I am extremely sorry for dropping the ball on this. I have recently started a new job where I am working 50-60 hrs a week and a sudden change in plans of buying a house instead of renting has kind of put a lot of work on my plate. I have not forgotten about this, unfortunately there is just a lot going on right now in my own life and I have to put this on the back burner for now.

ravensguildassasin
08-11-2010, 05:02 AM
i can see it working off the tps if it has varying voltage. then you could just through a resistor on it to kick it on after the voltage is high enough it will kick it on. i know this is a very simple idea, but i am just brain storming. i don't really know enough about the boost controllers to give any concepts on how to make it work. other then using a varying boost stepping scale to control the tvis in stages.
but on the same note it would seem that you would need to be able to adjust the A/F ratio to match the varying boost air stages.

takka
08-11-2010, 02:38 PM
TVIS needs to be rpm dependent, it should only disengage when it becomes a flow restriction and the engine cant ingest that much air until higher revs.

hey joe, your right mate, you have helped us so much. its a learning curve not a race :)
just got my new tig and plasma cutter so i should pull my finger out as well.[COLOR="Silver"]

Gandalf
08-11-2010, 09:38 PM
new tig
drool
which one did you get? Been studying daily to get caught up on all the ins and outs...

takka
08-12-2010, 11:02 AM
got it off ebay, perfect for my needs 200amp AC/DC single phase inverter with inbuilt plasma cutter it will be really handy!

joe's gt
08-14-2010, 05:44 AM
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b396/92ct-27gt/plenumright.jpg

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b396/92ct-27gt/plenumleftview.jpg

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b396/92ct-27gt/plenumrightview.jpg

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b396/92ct-27gt/plenumiso.jpg

Gandalf
08-15-2010, 10:45 AM
Wow!
joe's gt, I am blown away, I was just on a work trip... I can't believe you took the time to do this considering what you are taking on at the moment, I don't know what to say, I think takka said it very well that we are privileged to have had your help as far as you have given it already... and this design is not uniform so it probably was that much more of a bugger... You do what you need to do to deal with your new challenges, this car stuff is dessert and playtime by comparison, so don't feel bad if you can't get to this, righto?

I wonder how much of a difference having an actual base plate makes in a manifold... my gut says it will send more air towards the end of the plenum, which might be a good thing... or whether it makes it more difficult for air to turn the "corners" into the runners...

Gandalf
08-15-2010, 01:51 PM
got it off ebay, perfect for my needs 200amp AC/DC single phase inverter with inbuilt plasma cutter it will be really handy!

congrats! no doubt...
I have been watching videos from weldingtipsandtricks.com and he extensively tried out a new welder (Everlast 250 EX inverter) with excellent results, it has an affordable pricepoint brand new, I am saving up for it.

joe's gt
08-15-2010, 07:58 PM
haha, as I said before, I just did the easy part. Unfortunately the CFD trial and error is what is very time consuming. The modeling is the easy part :)

If I knew more about manifold design, I could probably reach conclusions faster, but as a hobbyist, I just can't afford textbooks on the subject.

takka
08-16-2010, 12:11 AM
Gandalf welding is alot easier than most people think, you will have heaps of fun if buy one.

joe's gt
08-16-2010, 12:20 AM
Gandalf welding is alot easier than most people think, you will have heaps of fun if buy one.

Exactly! once you get passed the equipment expense, its smooth sailing. People act as if its some black art. Similar to tuning. However, if your life depends on the structural integrity of the weld, then yeah, leave that to a professional. Otherwise, have at it.

takka
08-16-2010, 12:44 AM
hey joe, i was hoping to be further along an have some results to show you. but iv discovered a blown head gasket, the wastegate jammed closed an i was over boosting to 23 psi so im about to start putting together a new 5s based longblock, should be an interesting setup when im done going to try some different stuff.

joe's gt
08-16-2010, 04:09 AM
hey joe, i was hoping to be further along an have some results to show you. but iv discovered a blown head gasket, the wastegate jammed closed an i was over boosting to 23 psi so im about to start putting together a new 5s based longblock, should be an interesting setup when im done going to try some different stuff.

Awesome! Well not that your head gasket blew, but that you get to build a 5s block from the ground up. Be sure to take lots of pics.

ericfragola
08-20-2010, 06:27 PM
i got my welder at harbor friehgt for 120 including a 2 year replacement plan. its a flux wire welder but it works for what i need. i have welded extra bars on my roll cage and my new roof with it. its a lot of fun :) make sure you own a grinder too ;) its nice that it plugs into a normal socket too!

ravensguildassasin
08-21-2010, 02:48 AM
if you are worried about welding just go to the local machine shop, ask for a few bits of varying scrape metal. tell them you are using it for learning to weld and they will generally give you it for free and just practice practice practice. its easy as that to learn to weld.

Gandalf
08-25-2010, 07:49 AM
Lol, I have been going to the metal scrapyard, and picking up aluminum by the wheelbarrow full... they sell it $1 a pound, I have sooo much aluminum to practice on its nuts... tubing, manifolds, plate... a nice collection...
Its gonna be a month until I can afford my TIG welder... in the mean time, I have honed, shaped and brushed my runner inlets... I removed about 2/3 cup of material. I removed more from runners #1 and #8 since they always seem shy of the others in terms of flow volume and velocity:

http://members.shaw.ca/MR2_Forum_Extras2/Manifold_honed_5.jpg

takka, sorry to hear about your HG and delays, all the best for the new 5s build! I really hope I can avoid any major setbacks for several years, lol.

Magnum
08-25-2010, 09:11 AM
Some of those area's look very thin. You will have a hard time welding it without blowing holes in the runners.

takka
08-25-2010, 09:26 AM
Thanks mate, I have actually been looking forward to a buildup i'm a mechanic by trade so was only a matter of time :) wonder how the knife edges will go, it is my understanding that it will create a low pressure zone on walls at the top of the runner which will restrict flow by reducing the effective cross-sectional area. looks really good tho, hopefully the angle decreases the effect.

Gandalf
08-25-2010, 11:13 AM
Some of those area's look very thin. You will have a hard time welding it without blowing holes in the runners.

Its not as thin as it looks from this angle, as far as the whole outside wall goes. Its about 1/8" minimum at the very top, increasing in thickness immediately as it goes down. I won't be going near this manifold until I can TIG weld various aluminum thicknesses nicely.

takka, I would think that these edges would certainly be an improvement over the stock bluntness and irregular-ness, regardless ;). I can see that knife-edges on 90* runners would cause the low-pressure areas as the air passes them...
However, here there are 4 angles involved... the runners slope towards the TB, they slope from right to left on the horizontal plane, the walls angle in deeper on the left side of the plenum, and the plenum itself is also angled upwards towards the TB. Another factor is that the walls are only sharpened on the "back" side, or the "low-pressure" side, so that they curve in an aerofoil shape.

It should be an advantage over runners that are straight up and down, as these are resulting in only about a 40* turn (60*runner angle - 20* TB angle)roughly, as opposed to 90*.

Gandalf
11-06-2010, 12:53 AM
Hello guys,
I got some help from SnowRocker88 on the MR2 board with simulations, and have finalized the design for the plenum. In reality I will leave more plenum-height at the far end, because of the undisplayed dynamics that occur once the ports are closing and opening rapidly. But as you can see, the extra neck-length of the design combined with neck, TB, and runner angles, give a great even distribution with no eddy's. I am thrilled! The distribution is on par with a dual-plenum design and the velocity is maintained. I have also included a sim with the TVIS closed, which also came out very well.

The design is actually quite forgiving, because we varied the TB angle from from 10* to 22.5* and the distribution was still great throughout. Thanks hugely to all who contributed here!!!

My TIG welder is on the way, I will get some seat-time on it and get this welded up soon... and will post more results.

http://members.shaw.ca/MR2_Forum_Extras2/New_Manifold_Flow_Results_Final.jpg

http://members.shaw.ca/MR2_Forum_Extras2/New_Manifold_Flow_Results_Final_TVIS.jpg

joe's gt
11-06-2010, 04:24 AM
Sorry about not following through to both gandalf and takka. Life kind of hit me like a ton of bricks after I left school and I just didn't have the time to do the trial and error necessary for the analysis. I'm glad you found someone else with fluid dynamics software to help you out.

What software did SnowRocker88 use to do the analysis?

Gandalf
11-08-2010, 02:23 AM
Hello there!
No worries at all, don't feel one bit bad, it is time consuming and I am in school at the moment, I know how life can just take over and time is a luxury. I am lucky to have gotten the help that I have, and that the design has turned out to be worth all the trouble. Hopefully people can benefit from the results.

I am thankful to you regardless because of the time you put into other's designs because I learned and benefitted from studying those designs.

Gandalf
11-08-2010, 08:02 PM
almost forgot,
the program used was solidworks :)