Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I've been considering something like this for a while now...

Go ghetto :)

Swing past bunnings and grab a 12v electronic irrigation solenoid... put it in the plumb-back line, and you're done. When the valve is shut, you'll get flutter as it's blocked, when open you'll get the sneeze.

This sounds like the simplest and most effective idea

Cam,

Not so sure what are doing agrees with my position on riceness....

But because you seem to know a bit about what you are doing, I will give you a hint regarding the resistor...

Calculating the resistance is only part of the equation...You also need to work out what wattage resistor is req'd to dissipate the heat... If you get this wrong you will get smoke then a pop...

Hint is as follows... P=VxI sub in V=IxR get P=IxIxR or P=I^2 x R

In 10 Ohm, the largest resistor I have seen is 10watt... But if you put 2x 20 Ohm 10 watt resistors in parallel you get 10 Ohm 20watt etc etc...

you want something like an LPG solenoid that has a simple open/closed setup, which is basically what manual dual stage boost controllers use between the 2 adjusters. then to make sure the bov stays shut all you have to do is have the solenoid open, floor it, once you have full boost close the solenoid and you will have 10psi holding the bov shut just like if you had the bov hooked up normally, and then you are free to enjoy the dose and extra lag as much as you like.

Not so sure what are doing agrees with my position on riceness....

Yeah i know its pretty ricey but... I guess I've got nothing to say to that.

This is more of an assignment for my electrical engineering unit.

Plus I enjoy the old flutter.

I'm pretty sure this could be done quite easily without the use of any electronics. Just put a t-piece in the vacuum line. Then run a vacuum line coming from the spare outlet on the t-piece into the cabin of the car and on the end of that hose put a normal bleed valve on it. Block the other end of the bleed valve up leaving the third bleeder outlet open. Then you can manually open and close the bleed valve to give you the desired affect.

I had to do something similar back in the uk on a small 4 cylinder turbocharged car in order to get the car to idle properly with an atmo bov.

it would remove the vaccum from the bov as it will just suck in air rather than creating a vuccum and open the bov. however using a bleeder valve won't really allow enough air through to stop the vaccum opening the bov. and the cost of buying a second bleeder valve wouldn't be much different to the solenoid setup and then all you have to do is flick a switch and not sit there winding the valve.

Just to make sure I understand it.

Vacuum line that goes from plenum to BOV has a T-piece in it. From this T-piece a vacuum line goes into the cabin and boost tee is connected to it. The other side of the boost tee is blocked up.

So in this theory when the boost Tee is closed, the BOV operates normally.

The part I don't understand is when the boost tee is open, it is creating a boost leak.

Am I missing something?

when the boost tee is opened yes it will create a boost leak, but this won't really affect the bov much. however it will also create a vaccum leak so that the bov sees less vaccum and doesn't open. this is pretty much exactly the same principle as the stock boost solenoid uses to raise the boost by 2psi, or in a very similar way to how a wastegate controls the boost level by redirecting exhaust flow around the exhaust wheel of the turbo

Hey guys just got an idea I want to share with ya'll...

I've got a GFB Hybrid BOV on my X-Trail and it has a plumb-back configuration.

The idea is to somehow make a switch/circuit to activate the BOV or not.

So when the switch is at 'off' the BOV acts like there's no Vacuum line attached to it, and the turbo flutters its head off, then when its 'on', the BOV acts normal.

You're approaching this backwards :D

Block off the outlet of the BOV for flutter, open it for sneeze. Use one of those electric butterflies to do it...

Cheers,

SW

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...