Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I dont think it would handle the heat. Unless it was purpose made to suit with bigger rotor clearances and whatnot. Other then that I cant see why it wouldnt work, so long as you can overcome the engineering difficulties in fitting it and setting up the drive for it.

But anything is possible with enough time and money!

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Not quite sure how to word it, but...

Rolls, people are negative, such is life. I honestly though I came up with the idea for sequential turbo's, posted, and of course it'd already been done. You can only learn from asking, and some are better less negative/harsh teachers than others. I've asked much stupider things and learnt from my mistakes, but am better off/smarter from doing so.

Yeah I wasn't actually proposing anyone build this, was more just interested in what effect creating negative backpressure would have on an engine and how much energy would be required to do so.

It is always interesting to discuss things like this as they enhance your understanding of how it all works and keep you thinking.

Negative posts that don't even raise any points about the idea serve to just discourage people from thinking about new ideas, in reality the more people you think actively thinking about things like this higher the chance someone will come up with an actual working idea that can benefit people.

Mafia seems to really like posts like this, hell even when people are asking genuine questions (like differences between neo and s1/2 rb25) he posts bullshit like that.

I thought up an idea a while ago of a large tank (say 5 litres) hidden somewhere that stores vacuum under idle/cruise etc, then switches a solenoid at WOT to lower the dump/front pipe pressures for a split second to try help spool a turbo quicker. Don't know if it'd work, but thought it was interesting..

I like the idea of energy storage, much like the KERS system they are using in F1 and other hybrid energy drives. Would definitely be interested in how effective something like this would be as well. Another option would be to use compressed air stored up from braking etc and then using this to pre-spool the turbo when getting on the throttle.

Seriously though, if your exhaust is flowing enough, it should have no issues getting rid of the gasses.

Of course it should have no issues getting rid of it, but it would help get rid of them better. If you reduce backpressure you help exhaust flow, more exhaust flow increases scavenging and helps get more air into cylinders. You can see this effect when going to a bigger hot side, you make far more power for the same boost as you have just opened up the exhaust side of the car much more. If you were to attempt to achieve the same thing via sucking the exhaust out, you could have the gains of going to a larger hot side but whilst retaining the response of a smaller hot side.

It all just comes down to how much energy is required to do so, eg if it is more or less than you would gain by reducing the back pressure. if it is less then you have a net gain, eg you make more power, if it is more then you will loose power.

Get what I mean?

I dont think it would handle the heat. Unless it was purpose made to suit with bigger rotor clearances and whatnot. Other then that I cant see why it wouldnt work, so long as you can overcome the engineering difficulties in fitting it and setting up the drive for it.

But anything is possible with enough time and money!

I agree that heat would certainly be an issue, but what if you use a centrifugal design, eg like the compressor on a turbo, there is only one moving part so tolerances are not as big an issue (just look at the rear end of a turbo, they work fine).

Edited by Rolls

I love outside the box thinking. if no 1 ever had crazy idea's we would still be on horseback.

But from what I can think of it would be just too big and over complicated unless it was on some form of stationary motor like a big genset. I think you would be better off running a bigger dump and modding the turbine housing with a CO2 jet plumbed up to it so that it pre spools the turbo. Sort of like how RIP'S has his drag car.

On the subject of new ideas... We all love the toyota prius now don't we blokes?! We all love formula one too. Both the prius and f1 cars use braking energy and convert it into acceleration energy. Here is my idea. If we swapped our braking system with "air compressor brakes" then we could pump up an air tank and use the gas to spool the turbo quicker. I'm sure there would be easier ways to pump up a tank to help spool the turbo but why not use braking energy. It gets wasted anyway... :merli:

On the subject of new ideas... We all love the toyota prius now don't we blokes?! We all love formula one too. Both the prius and f1 cars use braking energy and convert it into acceleration energy. Here is my idea. If we swapped our braking system with "air compressor brakes" then we could pump up an air tank and use the gas to spool the turbo quicker. I'm sure there would be easier ways to pump up a tank to help spool the turbo but why not use braking energy. It gets wasted anyway... :merli:

Have the car fitted with an air tank for storing 100 litres of air at 300psi, then have nozzles in the intake and at the lights with closed throttle unleash 100litres of air into the intake on take off. Instant boost! Then pull up in your nearest petrol station and fill it up again! FREE!

Have the car fitted with an air tank for storing 100 litres of air at 300psi, then have nozzles in the intake and at the lights with closed throttle unleash 100litres of air into the intake on take off. Instant boost! Then pull up in your nearest petrol station and fill it up again! FREE!

MONORAIL....MONORAIL....MONORAIL, What's that word ? MONORAIL !

Have the car fitted with an air tank for storing 100 litres of air at 300psi, then have nozzles in the intake and at the lights with closed throttle unleash 100litres of air into the intake on take off. Instant boost! Then pull up in your nearest petrol station and fill it up again! FREE!

Assuming the BOV opens up when you do this would probably be a very effective pre spool!

I just wanted to come in here and say that the idea isn't worth pursuing. It's not quite up there with tailpipes with louvres in to cause the outside air to flow through and "suck" the exhaust gas out, but it's still attacking the problem from the wrong end.

Here's why. The turbo is a bloody great obstruction in the exhaust. Quite deliberately so. Sure, reducing the downstream pressure will enhance the spool behaviour and all the other little aspects of turbo performance that we'd like to enhance, but really, when you get right down to it, a decently free flowing exhaust, sized to suit the power level and hence total gas flow rate of the engine, does not put up much back pressure on a turbine. A couple of psi** at the max. Now, if you could drive a pump of some sort to pull that small backpressure down to say zero, then it will help, sure. But, I'm pretty sure that if you spent the same amount of power (be it electrical via the alternator or be it mechanical via a supercharger or be it just by running the turbo harder and putting a bit more backpressure on the exhaust ports, so as to create some more compressed air that you can burn fuel with, then you will make more power.

As has been written by others above, twin charging will give you exactly what you are after - reduced exhaust manifold pressure though being able to use a larger turbine housing as well as more low rpm boost and total power. This all achieved with a blower that is easier to package than whatever you would have to do to put it in the exhaust stream, and just handling clean cold air instead of nasty, hot exhaust gases. Alternatively, as some OEMs are working on, you can use an electric motor on the same shaft as the turbo to spin it up to speed prior to the exhaust flow becoming large enough to do it. Gets you some of the same benefits - if you upsize the turbine housing and rely on the electric motor to get it spooling then you get more power and better cylinder fill, etc etc.

In vehicle compressors for hybrid drive systems are in use in bigger vehicles. Trucks and buses. Not really feasible in cars, especially performance cars because of the mass of the receiver. You have to remember that in our cars and and trucks and buses, we're talking about the same sorts of power levels - 350 to 500HP engines. But in trucks and buses we've got multi tonne masses being pulled around, so adding a few extra hundred kilos for the compressor and storage is not as big a penalty as in a 1500kg car.

** I don't want to hear about cars with 4 and 5 psi of measured backpressure. I don't care if your exhaust is not big enough. The fact remains that it is quite possible to put a big enough exhaust on to bring the backpressure down to something reasonable.

I just wanted to come in here and say that the idea isn't worth pursuing. It's not quite up there with tailpipes with louvres in to cause the outside air to flow through and "suck" the exhaust gas out, but it's still attacking the problem from the wrong end.

No doubt, I just want to know what will happen.

Now, if you could drive a pump of some sort to pull that small backpressure down to say zero, then it will help, sure.

I'm not talking about taking it down to zero, I'm talking about taking it down to say -20mmhg or greater, eg creating a vacuum and literally sucking the exhaust out, not making it zero restriction, creating the opposite of a restriction.

I'm not talking about taking it down to zero, I'm talking about taking it down to say -20mmhg or greater, eg creating a vacuum and literally sucking the exhaust out, not making it zero restriction, creating the opposite of a restriction.

Doesn't matter. You'd still spend your energy doing that when it would be better spent at the other end. You can get much more from compressing some air and intercooling it than you can from stretching it out into a vacuum. Also, going to negative pressure, even a little bit, makes the gas volume larger, velocity in the pipe larger and so you need an even bigger exhaust system in order to stop pressure drop from clawing back some of your gains.

Have the car fitted with an air tank for storing 100 litres of air at 300psi, then have nozzles in the intake and at the lights with closed throttle unleash 100litres of air into the intake on take off. Instant boost! Then pull up in your nearest petrol station and fill it up again! FREE!

Injecting that much air would send your AFR's a bit mental, plus you have to match that with fuel and it won't actually spool the turbo instantly

EDIT: actually thinking about this. If you inject air after the turbo it may want to turn the turbo backwards (maybe), and if it is injected before turbo, your gonna lose most of it out of the filter

Holset (from memory) were researching and developing an "E-Boost" that used a small electric motor to help the turbo accelerate from low RPM or something like that. Saw this a while ago so don't remember much but this is a much better idea. Still I can't really justify it on an RB. As had been said. You would lose alot of the energy ou are "gaining" with powering whatever you end up using

A KERS type system is what I'd have to say would be the closest to using an energy sorce to help acceleration, but the weight/complexity of such a unit on an older car would make it kinda useless, especially when you have to recharge it. On new cars where it can be built in, yeah but I sorta don't see the point unless it's used for taking off/getting up to speed rather then an actual speed boost

Edited by 89CAL

Has anyone else here heard about (I think it's VW)'s regenerative braking experiments using a flywheel that spins up on braking, then returns the power to the wheels under acceleration?

Has anyone else here heard about (I think it's VW)'s regenerative braking experiments using a flywheel that spins up on braking, then returns the power to the wheels under acceleration?

Porsche have done it and so have many other companies, it can be quite effective.

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

    • As far as I can tell I have everything properly set in the Haltech software for engine size, injector data, all sensors seem to be reporting proper numbers.  If I change any injector details it doesnt run right.    Changing the base map is having the biggest change in response, im not sure how people are saying it doesnt really matter.  I'm guessing under normal conditions the ECU is able to self adjust and keep everything smooth.   Right now my best performance is happening by lowering the base map just enough to where the ECU us doing short term cut of about 45% to reach the target Lambda of 14.7.  That way when I start putting load on it still has high enough fuel map to not be so lean.  After 2500 rpm I raised the base map to what would be really rich at no load, but still helps with the lean spots on load.  I figure I don't have much reason to be above 2500rpm with no load.  When watching other videos it seems their target is reached much faster than mine.  Mine takes forever to adjust and reach the target. My next few days will be spent making sure timing is good, it was running fine before doing the ECU and DBW swap, but want to verify.  I'll also probably swap in the new injectors I bought as well as a walbro 255 pump.  
    • It would be different if the sealant hadn't started to peel up with gaps in the glue about ~6cm and bigger in some areas. I would much prefer not having to do the work take them off the car . However, the filler the owner put in the roof rack mount cavities has shrunk and begun to crack on the rail delete panels. I cant trust that to hold off moisture ingress especially where I live. Not only that but I have faded paint on as well as on either side of these panels, so they would need to come off to give the roofline a proper respray. My goal is to get in there and put a healthy amount of epoxy instead of panel filler/bog and potentially skin with carbon fiber. I have 2 spare rolls from an old motorcycle fairing project from a few years back and I think it'd be a nice touch on a black stag.  I've seen some threads where people replace their roof rack delete with a welded in sheet metal part. But has anyone re-worked the roof rails themselves? It seems like there is a lot of volume there to add in some threads and maybe a keyway for a quick(er) release roof rack system. Not afraid to mill something out if I have to. It would be cool to have a cross bar only setup. That way I can keep the sleek roofline that would accept a couple bolts to gain back that extra utility  3D print some snazzy covers to hide the threaded section to be thorough and keep things covered when not using the rack. 
    • Probably not. A workshop grade scantool is my go to for proper Consult interrogation. Any workshop grade tool should do it. Just go to a workshop.
    • In my head it does make sense to be a fuel problem since that is what I touched when cleaning the system. When I was testing with the fuel pressure gauge, the pressure was constantly 2.5 bar with the FPR vacuum removed. When stalling, the pressure was going up to 3.0 bar (which is how it should be on ignition).
    • ECUtalk pages don't mention they support the ABS computer (consult port has more than one CAN), so you might just need a different scan tool. But, I would expect ABS is a different light to the brake warning/handbrake light, do you see an ABS light come on for a few seconds when you turn the key from ACC to IGN? But since you said: I'd have a look at the ABS sensors in the rear hubs to make sure they are not damaged, disconnected etc.
×
×
  • Create New...