Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

One of the HPI dvds had their R34 GT-T project car blow one up on a track day but they were sort of expecting it to after all the mods they did. Was funny though.

On guy who lives near me has a NOS system on his GT-T and the stock turbo is still hanging in there.

nos wont affect the turbo, as long as hes running a good boost controller all the nos will do is create more zorst gasses, the wastegate will redirect the gasses.

  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Ceramic is very heat resistant but it is also very brittle and in know way malleable like steel ... it doesnt put up with pressure or etreme force acting upon it very well...

It also fractures when its placed under extreme conditions of thermal expansion and contraction.

Just like floor tiles when they crack same deal =)

Been lighter in weight; ceramic is a better choice for linear power delivery. On a relatively low capacity engine running low boost transition onto boost is smooth.

Me personally i would not run more than ten psi of boost on the standard turbo...

But then theres people like 2rismo running 11's on the standard turbo

End Rant =P

i reiterating that =)

but you can also f**k your turbo by running it at 1 bar boost; like say around a race track then switching you car off straight away without letting it cool down ...

the change in tempreture the turbo experiences is able to cause fractures due to contraction ... thats all im saying ...

low remp = :huh:

high temp = :D

gooooooo the soccerooooosssssss =)

i reiterating that =)

but you can also f**k your turbo by running it at 1 bar boost; like say around a race track then switching you car off straight away without letting it cool down ...

the change in tempreture the turbo experiences is able to cause fractures due to contraction ... thats all im saying ...

Sounds like speculation to me. :D

I think someone should ask for their money back for their engineering degree, or go back and study rotating dynamic forces and ceramic material properties.

What you are claiming is the turbo shaft heats faster than the ceramic turbine at the interface, causing the turbine to break at the hub. If this is so then the rate of thermal expansion between the shaft material and the ceramic must differ greatly. Not a bad theory but not fully thought through. A root cause analysis would require that this would happen soon after startup every time, otherwise the adhesive material must be considerably flexible and the turbine over shaft tolerance must be very loose.

Ceramic is more tolerant of thermal shock than other materials, hence its application in many aerospace roles as well as piston crowns and innumerable other useful high temp locations. Also, ceramics are not just ceramics. A floor tile will not be the same material as a ceramic turbine or an inconel turbine which is also a ceramic (the stuff used for an R34 GTR N1 turbine), and is usually temperature relieved in order to allow the item to become a single grain through high temperatur grain growth, especially in gas turbines in military jet aircraft.

Having said that let me say again as I have mentioned in other threads that the most likely causes of ceramic turbine failure are FOD (foreign object damage) such as a loose piece of material like carbon dislodging in the exhaust and striking the blade(s), often after a turbo R&R or severe overexpansion due to excessive RPM. Ceramic is not tolerant of tensile loads so a situation occurs where the centrifugal loads increase due to the weight of the blades themselves causing one or more to separate. The resulting imbalance either tears the turbine apart or severely fatigues the shaft causing it to snap off at a stress concentrator like the turbine attachment or the bearing region.

So, after a refit of stock turbos, play the lottery and hope for the best, or never run excessive boost which causes high turbo rpm.

Cheers

Good thing I don't have an engineers degree then. lol

I've always thought it comes down to 2 things that break the ceramic turbines.

Excessive EGT's (i.e track use, been known to have a turbo let go at stock boost)

Foreign particles (spark plug bits due to detonation or as you state carbon)

High turbo's RPM, well yes, with excessive shaft speed the turbo will be spinning out of its efficiency, back pressure is high as are actual inlet temps. Both of which contribute to high egt's and detonation.

I'm not sure the boost is really such a good example as its airflow that really matters.

A good example of this is how an RB20DET has a ceramic turbo spinning at 1bar for years yet do the same with an RB25DET and its ceramic turbo will let go sooner rather than later.

I believe thats basically what you have said Geoff.

High temps will be a factor of high boost on a turbo not suited to that level of boost as the small exit area forces the unburnt fuel to linger longer waiting to exit the turbine and so it continues to burn. Boost is a result of turbine rpm and at higher rpm the blades are subjected to increased tensile load until eventually they rupture. In Jet turbines I have calculated for up to 2mm of blade growth due to tensile loading.

Paul the R33 gtst turbine is a larger diameter and as such would rupture at lower rpm than the R32 gtst turbine. It is a combination of the rpm and the actual mass in each blade. GTR turbos are often run at 1 bar with less incidence of failure because they are smaller again.

Actually I won't accept it unless you provide the physical evidence and a significant enough sample.

You said the shaft expands, not the shrink fit of the turbine onto the shaft causing excessive hoop stress.

Methinks you are not an engineer at all and have decided to run and hide.

I have not heard of one rupturing off boost.

Yeah you're right to question. It's still a carry over for me from early uni days when it was strongly pushed by the materials guru as more a ceramic structure, even though almost all of the elements are metallic and is precipitation hardened. I argued the toss but decided to keep my averages up rather than piss him off by arguing further.

Consider MMC's (metal matrix compounds) that are often held to be ceramics by some as well but I think quite different.

Some articles so others can make their minds up. I will point out that all use the term alloy so I should adjust my terminology as well.

http://www.burnsstainless.com/TechArticles...el_article.html

http://www.suppliersonline.com/propertypages/Inconel706.asp

http://hcrosscompany.com/metals/inconel.htm

Cheers

Paul the R33 gtst turbine is a larger diameter and as such would rupture at lower rpm than the R32 gtst turbine. It is a combination of the rpm and the actual mass in each blade. GTR turbos are often run at 1 bar with less incidence of failure because they are smaller again.

In the case of the RB20, r33 Rb25, r34 rb25 and vg30 turbo's I really think shaft speed is the very last thing to kill a turbo, I believe high egt's/detonation is the likely cause.

Raise boost you raise airflow, actual outlet temp raises (especially if its running in to choke), backpressure within the turbine housing builds. Compounded you have one awesome receipt for detonation. So what do we do? Reduce ignition timing to prevent detonation and we raise EGT's. Are we better off running it a little richer so we can keep some decent timing in there?

I would assume so however It would be awesome to have a play on the dyno with an egt guage to see the benifits of tuning in this manner.

Why R34 GTT's running stock boost have been known to let go when you hit the track also supports the EGT theory.

Another mention that 'may' support the EGT theory and not so much the shaft speed is:

As you increase boost you dramatically increase shaft speed, improving VE also increases shaft speed but no where near as dramatically as higher boost levels.

The R34 GTT turbo runs the larger VG30 OP6 style turbine housing, larger turbine housings reduce back pressure resulting in higher VE that results in lower boost required in order to flow x amount of air in and out of the engine.

But do consider, as you make more power you make more exhaust gas, as a result backpressure 'may' be the same as the smaller housing just at a higher power level. The R34's do make more power stock and are generally known to make roughly 10rwkw more than the r33 rb25 turbo. I'm not completely sure on this maybe disco could share his thoughts.

As all RB turbo's share the same turbine wheel (same size, trim everything); one can rule out the turbine wheel weight differential between the turbo's as to why one would let go before another.

When setting up my bodgy actuator some time ago I accidently pushed 18psi through the stock turbo through second gear.

IF it was the case that the wheel has growth surely that squirt through second gear would have been enough time to grow as a result collecting the turbine housing.

So to conclude....

Turbine shaft speed is directly related to airflow not boost. Boost is definitely comparable on a given motor/turbo setup, not to be used when comparing different turbo's on different motors. i.e rb20 vs rb25.

The question remains... Is it turbine shaft speed or high egt's that will get to the turbo's ceramic wheel before the other.

I believe egt's.

Actually I won't accept it unless you provide the physical evidence and a significant enough sample.

You said the shaft expands, not the shrink fit of the turbine onto the shaft causing excessive hoop stress.

Methinks you are not an engineer at all and have decided to run and hide.

I have not heard of one rupturing off boost.

i never once said they will throw a wheel off boost, i said the damage occurrs during that period. the wheel will throw once spooled.

thankyou for the comments, but not good enough im afraid ;)

and if anyone has a spare ceramic wheel and shaft lying around, send it to me and i will put it into my machine and spin it up to 300,000rpm and leave it for 10 min at that rpm, then i will apply heat for 10 min with the assistance of an oxy torch with accetelene bias so as not to melt the thing.

open to offers. i will record the findings on video

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • See if you can thermal epoxy a heatsink or two onto it?
    • The other problem was one of those "oh shit we are going to die moments". Basically the high spec Q50s have a full electric steering rack, and the povo ones had a regular hydraulic rack with an electric pump.  So couple of laps into session 5 as I came into turn 2 (big run off now, happily), the dash turned into a christmas tree and the steering became super heavy and I went well off. I assumed it was a tyre failure so limped to the pits, but everything was OK. But....the master warning light was still on so I checked the DTCs and saw – C13E6 “Heat Protection”. Yes, that bloody steering rack computer sitting where the oil cooler should be has its own sensors and error logic, and decided I was using the steering wheel too much. I really appreciated the helpful information in the manual (my bold) POSSIBLE CAUSE • Continuing the overloading steering (Sports driving in the circuit etc,) “DATA MONITOR” >> “C/M TEMPERATURE”. The rise of steering force motor internal temperature caused the protection function to operate. This is not a system malfunction. INSPECTION END So, basically the electric motor in the steering rack got to 150c, and it decided to shut down without warning for my safety. Didn't feel safe. Short term I'll see if I can duct some air to that motor (the engine bay is sealed pretty tight). Long term, depending on how often this happens, I'll look into swapping the povo spec electric/hydraulic rack in. While the rack should be fine the power supply to the pump will be a pain and might be best to deal with it when I add a PDM.
    • And finally, 2 problems I really need to sort.  Firstly as Matt said the auto trans is not happy as it gets hot - I couldn't log the temps but the gauge showed 90o. On the first day I took it out back in Feb, because the coolant was getting hot I never got to any auto trans issues; but on this day by late session 3 and then really clearly in 4 and 5 as it got hotter it just would not shift up. You can hear the issue really clearly at 12:55 and 16:20 on the vid. So the good news is, literally this week Ecutek finally released tuning for the jatco 7 speed. I'll have a chat to Racebox and see what they can do electrically to keep it cooler and to get the gears, if anything. That will likely take some R&D and can only really happen on track as it never gets even warm with road use. I've also picked up some eye wateringly expensive Redline D6 ATF to try, it had the highest viscosity I could find at 100o so we will see if that helps (just waiting for some oil pan gaskets so I can change it properly). If neither of those work I need to remove the coolant/trans interwarmer and the radiator cooler and go to an external cooler....somewhere.....(goodbye washer reservoir?), and if that fails give up on this mad idea and wait for Nissan to release the manual 400R
    • So, what else.... Power. I don't know what it is making because I haven't done a post tune dyno run yet; I will when I get a chance. It was 240rwkw dead stock. Conclusion from the day....it does not need a single kw more until I sort some other stuff. It comes on so hard that I could hear the twin N1 turbos on the R32 crying, and I just can't use what it has around a tight track with the current setup. Brakes. They are perfect. Hit them hard all day and they never felt like having an issue; you can see in the video we were making ground on much lighter cars on better tyres under brakes. They are standard (red sport) calipers, standard size discs in DBA5000 2 piece, Winmax pads and Motul RBF600 fluid, all from Matty at Racebrakes Sydney. Keeping in mind the car is more powerful than my R32 and weighs 1780, he clearly knows his shit. Suspension. This is one of the first areas I need to change. It has electronically controlled dampers from factory, but everything is just way too soft for track work even on the hardest setting (it is nice when hustling on country roads though). In particular it rolls into oversteer mid corner and pitches too much under hard braking so it becomes unstable eg in the turn 1 kink I need to brake early, turn through the kink then brake again so I don't pirouette like an AE86. I need to get some decent shocks with matched springs and sway bars ASAP, even if it is just a v1 setup until I work out a proper race/rally setup later. Tyres. I am running Yoko A052 in 235/45/18 all round, because that was what I could get in approximately the right height on wheels I had in the shed (Rays/Nismo 18x8 off the old Leaf actually!). As track tyres they are pretty poor; I note GTSBoy recently posted a porker comparo video including them where they were about the same as AD09.....that is nothing like a top line track tyre. I'll start getting that sorted but realistically I should get proper sized wheels first (likely 9.5 +38 front and 11 +55 at the rear, so a custom order, and I can't rotate them like the R32), then work out what the best tyre option is. BTW on that, Targa Tas had gone to road tyres instead of semi slicks now so that is a whole other world of choices to sort. Diff. This is the other thing that urgently needs to be addressed. It left massive 1s out of the fish hook all day, even when I was trying not too (you can also hear it reving on the video, and see the RPM rising too fast compared to speed in the data). It has an open diff that Infiniti optimistically called a B-LSD for "Brake Limited Slip Diff". It does good straight line standing start 11s but it is woeful on the track. Nismo seem to make a 2 way for it.
    • Also, I logged some data from the ECU for each session (mostly oil pressures and various temps, but also speed, revs etc, can't believe I forgot accelerator position). The Ecutek data loads nicely to datazap, I got good data from sessions 2, 3 and 4: https://datazap.me/u/duncanhandleyhgeconsultingcomau/250813-wakefield-session-2?log=0&data=7 https://datazap.me/u/duncanhandleyhgeconsultingcomau/250813-wakefield-session-3?log=0&data=6 https://datazap.me/u/duncanhandleyhgeconsultingcomau/250813-wakefield-session-4?log=0&data=6 Each session is cut into 3 files but loaded together, you can change between them in the top left. As the test sessions are mostly about the car, not me, I basically start by checking the oil pressure (good, or at least consistent all day). These have an electrically controlled oil pump which targets 25psi(!) at low load and 50 at high. I'm running a much thicker oil than recommended by nissan (they said 0w20, I'm running 10w40) so its a little higher. The main thing is that it doesn't drop too far, eg in the long left hand fish hook, or under brakes so I know I'm not getting oil surge. Good start. Then Oil and Coolant temp, plus intercooler and intake temps, like this: Keeping in mind ambient was about 5o at session 2, I'd say the oil temp is good. The coolant temp as OK but a big worry for hot days (it was getting to 110 back in Feb when it was 35o) so I need to keep addressing that. The water to air intercooler is working totally backwards where we get 5o air in the intake, squish/warm it in the turbos (unknown temp) then run it through the intercoolers which are say 65o max in this case, then the result is 20o air into the engine......the day was too atypical to draw a conclusion on that I think, in the united states of freedom they do a lot of upsizing the intercooler and heat exchanger cores to get those temps down but they were OK this time. The other interesting (but not concerning) part for me was the turbo speed vs boost graph: I circled an example from the main straight. With the tune boost peaks at around 18psi but it deliberately drops to about 14psi at redline because the turbos are tiny - they choke at high revs and just create more heat than power if you run them hard all the way. But you can also see the turbo speed at the same time; it raises from about 180,000rpm to 210,000rpm which the boost falls....imagine the turbine speed if they held 18psi to redline. The wastegates are electrically controlled so there is a heap of logic about boost target, actual boost, delta etc etc but it all seems to work well
×
×
  • Create New...