Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi guys

I have been through almost every BOV topic / post / thread on this and the sylineowners.com forum ad infinitum, but still have not seen any discussion on the below:

Here's a little background info: I have an R33 GTST with...

2835Pro S set to 1.1 Bar

HKS induction

Z32 AFM

Apexi PFC / Boost control kit (and Datalogit on the way)

ARC Frount Mount

HKS SSQV BOV!!

Plus other bits that are not really relevant to this discussion

My tuner has plumbed the boost control kit into pre intercooler piping, basically just off the turbo (boost gauge on PFC commander never shows vacuum!), which I can understand the reasoning - you see actual boost pressure from the turbo, not post Intercooler / throttle body boost). Also, all recirc piping has been removed / blanked off, so I can't really head back down the recirc route.

Because of this new "plumb boost feed directly off turbo" method, I now see massive spikes of 1.9 Bar plus massive flutter on gear change (you wouldn't normally see this when the boost controller is tee'd off the manifold). I'm guessing here that the BOV is not opening enough (it does open a little though).

So, there are two things to note with this issue:

1. HKS SSQV. Now I don't want to go into recirc / atmo discussions (as we've all seen multiple different theories here :blink: ) so can anyone tell me if this BOV can discharge the excess boost (1.1 Bar) effeciently? One thing I've noted with this BOV as well, is that the pressure generated by the turbo pushes against the piston, keeping it closed. So in theory, wouldn't manifold vacuum have to be greater than the boost pressure to pull the piston out?

2. 1.9 Bar being measured at the turbo. Surely this is bad?! For the guys that do not run a BOV, when the throttle body is closed, this equates to (I assume that a closed throttle has an area of 25mm / 0.025m (radius) squared times pi = 0.001963m2):

Pressure = Force x Area

1.9 x .98 (to get atmospheres) = Force x 0.001963

1.82 / 0.001963 = 927 N

Force = Mass x Acceleration

927 = Mass x 9.8m/s/s (gravity)

Therefore Mass = approx 100Kg?!

So an instantaneous mass of 100Kg is either being applied to the throttle butterfly / throttle butterfly pin, or the turbo blades?!?! Even if my theory of obtaining a figure for mass is incorrect, there can be no argument that 927N of force is being applied to either / both these parts, instantaneously...

Has anyone else measured boost spikes on the turbo side, or is there something completely wrong with my setup?? Thoughts / input on my force theory would be welcomed, as would an idea on an appropriate atmo BOV to vent the right amount of boost...

Cheers

Steve

P.S. I have now changed into my flame-retardant suite - let the burring commence! :)

-20 points for doing math on NY eve :blink::)

Edit: I should prolly post something worthwhile.

Those BOV's have been used on cars running more boost then that.

The reversion and boost spike your seeing is clearly due to your BOV not opening properly. Check the vacuum feed your using (between TB and motor yes?) Check the BOV on the bench with a vacuum pump maybe?

The trick for easy 100% workability would be to use a recirc BOV, not an atmo one... but you don’t wanna hear that :D

Your calcs could be correct, but the way the comp wheel is shaped means pulses can go backwards through it much easier (iv heard) and air ain't that viscous

my 2 cents

Edited by GeeTR

You havnt taken into account that there is vacuum on the other side of the throttle plate, so that force is more like 150kg. I dont think a boost spike like that woiuld be particularly uncommon, its just that people dont usually measure it. Maybe try blocking the BOV altogether, and ill bet it goes to 3bar.

Kilograms are not a measure of force guys. All you've calculated is the mass you'd have to apply a force of 927N to in order to accelerate it at 9.8m/s/s in ideal conditions, which has nothing to do with this.

Stick with the 900N force, although in reality i think you'd find the conditions way, WAY more complex and delicate. Some sort of sensors would help :blink:

Kilograms are not a measure of force guys. All you've calculated is the mass you'd have to apply a force of 927N to in order to accelerate it at 9.8m/s/s in ideal conditions, which has nothing to do with this.

Stick with the 900N force, although in reality i think you'd find the conditions way, WAY more complex and delicate. Some sort of sensors would help :(

Hmmm, seeing as we are all living on the same planet, fro arguements sake Kg is an effective measurement, as he was simply trying to determine a relative amount in perspective.

-20 points for doing math on NY eve :devil::D

Edit: I should prolly post something worthwhile.

Those BOV's have been used on cars running more boost then that.

The reversion and boost spike your seeing is clearly due to your BOV not opening properly. Check the vacuum feed your using (between TB and motor yes?) Check the BOV on the bench with a vacuum pump maybe?

The trick for easy 100% workability would be to use a recirc BOV, not an atmo one... but you don't wanna hear that :(

Your calcs could be correct, but the way the comp wheel is shaped means pulses can go backwards through it much easier (iv heard) and air ain't that viscous

my 2 cents

:worship: It was still afternoon here in the UK, so the brain was (kinda) functioning :) I'm not feeling particularly clever today however...

It appears the best route for me to take is get all the bits back for a recirc. Can this be done, even if my engine has been tuned for no recirc?

Oh, and happy new year everyone!

Steve

I don't see why you've set the plumbing up that way. With a decent intercooler you shouldn't be seeing massive pressure drops anyway.

As for the massive spike, a blow off valve is basically a piston or valve with a spring on it, and a vacuum/pressure line running to it. While the throttle body is open, the idea is that the pressure inside your inlet piping is equal to what's held inside the chamber in the blow off valve. What I'd make sure is that the vacuum line going to the blow-off valve is coming from somewhere post-throttle body.

2. 1.9 Bar being measured at the turbo. Surely this is bad?! For the guys that do not run a BOV, when the throttle body is closed, this equates to (I assume that a closed throttle has an area of 25mm / 0.025m (radius) squared times pi = 0.001963m2):

Pressure = Force x Area

1.9 x .98 (to get atmospheres) = Force x 0.001963

1.82 / 0.001963 = 927 N

Force = Mass x Acceleration

927 = Mass x 9.8m/s/s (gravity)

Therefore Mass = approx 100Kg?!

i don't know how you came up with this, but it would have nothing to do with the air-flow dynamics inside the engine

The prob is the boost gauge and PFC boost gauge cannot be taken from the turbo compressor outlet, there is no vacuum in the turbo, and also there is massive pressure fluctuations. If you hook up a mechanical boost gauge, you'll see the needle dance around like crazy, and even worse when you back off, this is where your "spike" is coming from, doesnt mean the engine is acctually seeing 1.9 bar.

Boost gauge needs to be taken from manifold, and EBC needs to be taken from turbo outlet.

The prob is the boost gauge and PFC boost gauge cannot be taken from the turbo compressor outlet, there is no vacuum in the turbo, and also there is massive pressure fluctuations. If you hook up a mechanical boost gauge, you'll see the needle dance around like crazy, and even worse when you back off, this is where your "spike" is coming from, doesnt mean the engine is acctually seeing 1.9 bar.

Boost gauge needs to be taken from manifold, and EBC needs to be taken from turbo outlet.

Thats what he is saying, the pressure spike inside the IC piping on gearchange is 1.9bar, hence the pressure on the closed throttle plate.

I don't see why you've set the plumbing up that way. With a decent intercooler you shouldn't be seeing massive pressure drops anyway.

As for the massive spike, a blow off valve is basically a piston or valve with a spring on it, and a vacuum/pressure line running to it. While the throttle body is open, the idea is that the pressure inside your inlet piping is equal to what's held inside the chamber in the blow off valve. What I'd make sure is that the vacuum line going to the blow-off valve is coming from somewhere post-throttle body.

I'm not getting a pressure drop, it's the fact I'm getting spiking of .8 bar - that's the problem! I can only put this down to a faulty HKS BOV (I've disassembled for inspection, and everything's in order as far as I can see)

What I question with the HKS BOV is, if you have a look at the way the SSQV works, boost is always in the chamber of the BOV pushing the seat against the seal - it helps keep the valve shut (in theory you could block the vacuum line, and the piston will seal against the seat based on pre throttle body boost). Most BOV's (non-HKS!) I'm aware of use spring tension and boost found on the vacuum line to remain fully closed. When there is vacuum at the manifold, both manifold vacuum AND boost in the pre manifold piping are used to push the valve out / compress the spring, and vent the excess boost. What I don't understand with the HKS is, the vacuum release has to work against spring tension AND residual boost pressure to open! >_<

Well, to answer my own question (under "Product Detail") http://www.racinglab.com/mit3019turhk.html still not sure if I understand fully though...

Also (for Simon-R32), the way the PFC boost controller works is, it comes with a MAP sensor that plugs into the PFC and uses the existing two wires to the stock boost control solenoid. Because the PFC uses this MAP sensor to display boost on the Commander and control boost, the Commander will never display vacuum (due to my MAP sensor being plumbed into turbo piping rather than post throttle body). Is this OK? Does the PFC need to know if there is vacuum? Before I had the work done, tuned etc., I had plumbed the MAP sensor into post throttle body...

Thanks for all your input...

Steve

Edited by skybus

yeah your map sensor needs to be on manifold, then it will read vac and correct boost pressure.

im fairly certain your "spiking" issues doesnt exist either, its just air fluctuations from the turbo causing the gauge to go spastic.

i used to have an AVCR which uses the very same map sensor and solenoid as the PFC kit, and i had it hooked up to manifold and then to turbo outlet, and with stock turbo it said it was spiking to 1.5 bar... which is simply;y not true, the figures were fluctuating like crazy, i was only running 10 psi haha

I wouldnt be surprised at all idf the stock turbo without bov makes 1.5 bar on liftoff/gearchange. The turbo can be flowing 100's cubic feet per minute, at a pressure ratio of 1.7, then the throttle is shut, and the 100's CFM has nowhere to go, the piping/intercooler act like a big pneumatic spring, with the pressure building right up, then the pressure waves bounce back off the throttle body and out through the turbo, then the process repeats itself, hence fully sic flutter

Kilograms are a measure of mass, nothing to do with different planets.

I thought Kilograms were a measure of weight, and Newtons are a measure of mass. Its been a long time though.

I hate the SSQ BOV's; i found them to be more about noise than anything else. Have a look at the opening and you can see that its not significantly bigger than a stock item; thats why theyre so loud, so they cant really be efficient at venting air between the throttle and turbo at 1.9 bar. I really like the Tial 50mm BOV's.

Shaun.

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

    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
    • If they can dyno them, get them dyno'd, make sure they're not leaking, and if they look okay on the dyno and are performing relatively well, put them in the car.   If they're leaking oil etc, and you feel so inclined, open them up yourself and see what you can do to fix it. The main thing you're trying to do is replace the parts that perish, like seals. You're not attempting to change the valving. You might even be able to find somewhere that has the Tein parts/rebuild kit if you dig hard.
×
×
  • Create New...