Turbo-Archie
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2002
I was thinking that.
What about using the RJC with a 1.5" spacer?
You would have to test above and below..
..
interesting numbers
- Thread starter A2000RICH
- Start date
I was thinking that.
What about using the RJC with a 1.5" spacer?
You would have to test above and below..
..
big reazon
Member
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2006
Have you tried plenum spacer and power plate?
Turbo-Archie
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2002
interesting thread. I just want to make sure i understand how you are testing this. you have a manifold assembled with a TB with the throttle plate open and are drawing air through each individual port with the other 5 blocked?
turbo nasty
Turbo Dojo / MNTR
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2001
Looks like thats the way hes doing it Jason.
When we first developed the plate we experimented with different forms of testing and tried to figure out what was the best most exaggerated characteristic so that we could fine tune the area that no one had really thought about before, the path and direction of the airflow as it is processed through the intake tract and how that affects the distribution of air to that cylinder..
When we were developing a product that would take advantage if this back in 2002 we performed this exact test on the flow bench. We found a few problems when drawing air, and creating vacuum through the manifold on a flow bench.
We could not duplicate the actual scenario in the manifold because with a vacuum it was impossible to draw air though the entire manifold as a whole and measure the amount of air being drawn through each port This was not possible with the equipment we had.
The air being drawn into the cylinder is different than air being blown through the intake tract. The variance in turbulation and air direction between air being blown in colliding with restrictions and static air vs. just being drawn in was two different scenarios entirely.
When we flowed just one port with all the other ports blocked off as this test was done we could not conclude how the manifold was distributing the air or the direction of the air through the manifold or how the turbulence and force of the air created by the blower affected cylinder fill. Basically all the characteristics that we were trying to manipulate. We could only measure the restriction of one port.
From our experience this test really does not take into consideration the path the air follows under pressure to reach the cylinders as a whole or how the momentum and direction of the air affects the flow in each cylinder as a whole. It only measures the restriction of the airflow within each cylinder individually with all other cylinders being static. With the power plate we only addressed and used the path and momentum of the forced fed air to help fill the cylinders equally.
When we were developing a product that would take advantage if this back in 2002 we performed this exact test on the flow bench. We found a few problems when drawing air, and creating vacuum through the manifold on a flow bench.
We could not duplicate the actual scenario in the manifold because with a vacuum it was impossible to draw air though the entire manifold as a whole and measure the amount of air being drawn through each port This was not possible with the equipment we had.
The air being drawn into the cylinder is different than air being blown through the intake tract. The variance in turbulation and air direction between air being blown in colliding with restrictions and static air vs. just being drawn in was two different scenarios entirely.
When we flowed just one port with all the other ports blocked off as this test was done we could not conclude how the manifold was distributing the air or the direction of the air through the manifold or how the turbulence and force of the air created by the blower affected cylinder fill. Basically all the characteristics that we were trying to manipulate. We could only measure the restriction of one port.
From our experience this test really does not take into consideration the path the air follows under pressure to reach the cylinders as a whole or how the momentum and direction of the air affects the flow in each cylinder as a whole. It only measures the restriction of the airflow within each cylinder individually with all other cylinders being static. With the power plate we only addressed and used the path and momentum of the forced fed air to help fill the cylinders equally.
we are testing these units in a manner that is about as close as you could expect to get without actually being on a running engine---------- usually for the intercooled units we fabricate a fixture that bolts to the flowbench that serves as the intake pipe and attach it to the input of the throttle body----------with the throttle plate blocked open we place the inlet of the TB on the output of the flow bench----since the hot air manifolds usually have the turbo blowing directly into them we make the inlet pipe so it feeds directly into the manifold--------some flow benches flow only in one direction and some flow in both----------i have both kinds but for this test i use the bidirectional unit (Superflow SF-600) and set it to EXHAUST-------We do a total flow with all runners open and then we test each runner one at a time--------we have seen some manifolds that flow very balanced numbers that had poor total numbers and some that had large total numbers and extreme variations from runner-----we do the test at 1 PSI (28 inches of water)------ it should be clear to everyone that this is high enough pressure that we can be rather certain that the air will continue to flow in a similar matter well up to the the maximum pressures we are ever going to develop in our cars-------it is true that using a draw through method ( ie vacuum) to evaluate a manifold could possibly lead to misleading information-------air tends to be very linear at pressures above 1 bar------our tests at 28 inches place the air in the manifold well above above zero pressure-----1 ATM + 1PSI--------air becomes very non linear below 1/2 ATM and any test that might cause a drop in pressure below this value would be very suspect for this kind of test-------that is not to say that it could not be done but much care would have to be taken to insure that the resistance to air flow did not cause the pressure in the device being tested to fall into this range----------manifolds that are designed for non boosted applications could probably be tested more accurately in this manner but when they are producing most power even they are probably at WOT and the pressure drop inside their runners is minimal---------one thing is certain----our engines only produce lots of power when the manifold pressure is well above 1ATM and that is the condition where we need to make sure that they not only flow well but that there is a good balance from runner to runner--------i believe that these parameters are equally important----------it was clear to me that the RJC PP does a good job of improving the stock manifold-----at one time i had some doubts about it since i had never seen what i felt were any credible numbers but my tests clearly show that it does what is claimed------it produces a very nominal overall pressure drop while doing a good job of equalizing individual runner flow--------it is easy to increase turbo boost to make up for a small pressure drop but extremely difficult and or costly to equalize cylinder flow-------i would trade one for the other any day and so would any good engine builder -------we are constantly getting calls about testing all sorts of combinations-------lots of manifolds have been sent in as well as related accesories and there is not enough time to keep up with all of it with everything else that is going on in the shop---------that means that we might not get to everything anytime soon and i will tend to skip the things that don't seem logical-----for example why would we test the PP with the champion spacer when its not designed for that application?? -------------just my comments for tonight..............RC
excellent, much better testing methods than i originally thought. I think your second test with all the cylinders is really going to be enlightening.
also we did test a few of the spacers with the power plate. did they flow the same? no the distribution was different. our conclusion was if you have to run a spacer place it under the power plate. This has the least affect on the airstream. We simply could not make a power plate for every thickness of spacer and plenum brand combo.
johnplogii
Senior citizen
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2005
Richard I have been quietly doing intake flow characteristics research as well. Would you be able to measure the pressure delta above and below the power plate at 28 inches on the monometer? Nothing like good old accurate well thought out testing!
Thanks for sharing the data.
Similar threads
