Jump to content
SAU Community

Benefits Of Mounting Intercooler At A Slant?

eXquiSit
 Share

Recommended Posts

eXquiSit Mentor

eXquiSit

Posted
Posted

is there any efficiency gains from doing this?

most aftermarket kits are mounted vertically, but i noticed on some cars, such as gtr's, that the factory has mounted them on a slight angle?

is this so that the air passing though has to work harder 'against' the surface area of the fins and tubes instead of easily flowing 'past' them?

any thoughts would be much appreciated!

=)

R31Nismoid Grand Master

R31Nismoid

Posted
Posted

Doubt it makes much (if any) tangible difference. Could simply be a looks thing as much as performance.

The GTR one on an angle though - at least with a S3 front lip - the bottom of the cooler sits even with the bar. If it was vertical there would be quite a gap up the top of the cooler so it could be about reducing the gaps between bars/cores etc.

wedge_r34gtr Mentor

wedge_r34gtr

Posted
Posted

is there any efficiency gains from doing this?

most aftermarket kits are mounted vertically, but i noticed on some cars, such as gtr's, that the factory has mounted them on a slight angle?

is this so that the air passing though has to work harder 'against' the surface area of the fins and tubes instead of easily flowing 'past' them?

any thoughts would be much appreciated!

=)

From a thermodynamics point of view, the most effecient set-up would be perpendicular to the air flow (i.e. vertical) which would allow the maximum amount of frontal surface area to be exposed to the air flow. Slanted intercooler = less frontal surface area. More airflow = more stuff to cool the charge. This is the principle behind n1 vents and the shape of some bumps to direct air to the intercooler/radiator. It should be noted that manufactures design will play a part (i.e. were the internal channels designed with a slant install inmind toallow better airflow through the cooler).

But i also agree with Ash, any difference would be fairly intangible unless the intercolller was slanted at a large angle (say 15deg).

djr81 Grand Master

djr81

Posted
Posted

From a thermodynamics point of view, the most effecient set-up would be perpendicular to the air flow (i.e. vertical) which would allow the maximum amount of frontal surface area to be exposed to the air flow. Slanted intercooler = less frontal surface area. More airflow = more stuff to cool the charge. This is the principle behind n1 vents and the shape of some bumps to direct air to the intercooler/radiator. It should be noted that manufactures design will play a part (i.e. were the internal channels designed with a slant install inmind toallow better airflow through the cooler).

But i also agree with Ash, any difference would be fairly intangible unless the intercolller was slanted at a large angle (say 15deg).

Actually if you look at the old school F1 car intercoolers they are mounted (As are radiators) at and angle to the air flow. It reduces drag for a given amount of heat exchange.

In a road car it is just for packaging.

wedge_r34gtr Mentor

wedge_r34gtr

Posted
Posted (edited)

....It reduces drag for a given amount of heat exchange.

In a road car it is just for packaging.

Both true, but from a thermodynamic point of view; this is not the optimium set-up.

air to air Intercooler design will always be a balance between drag reduction, packaging and cooler effeciency.

Edited by wedge_r34gtr
Bsa Mentor

Bsa

Posted
Posted

Iv always mounted coolers on a slant in my eyes it will restrict airflow to a extent meaning more time to cool the fins and tubes or bars also when on a skyline with not much room allows more surface area to be open before the bar support

Nee-san Grand Master

Nee-san

Posted
Posted

the position and geometry of the ducting feeding the heat exchanger really dictates it's position or angle of attack, as djr81 said, alot of grandprix cars are slanted on an angle to reduce drag in terms of frontal area exposed to the air stream and the ducting pod itself, there is nothing less efficient then just letting an intercooler or radiator "Swing in the wind" so to speak.

so to summarise I would say ducting makes or breaks the effectiveness of coolers.

89CAL Grand Master

89CAL

Posted
Posted

Iv always mounted coolers on a slant in my eyes it will restrict airflow to a extent meaning more time to cool the fins and tubes or bars also when on a skyline with not much room allows more surface area to be open before the bar support

Isn't it better to have air flowing quickly so there is more cold air hitting the fins. Slowing the air down means the air gets hotter so is less efficient.

This is how I see it anyway. Not saying I'm right. But I don't see any benefit from mounting it at an angle.

Bsa Mentor

Bsa

Posted
Posted

Isn't it better to have air flowing quickly so there is more cold air hitting the fins. Slowing the air down means the air gets hotter so is less efficient.

This is how I see it anyway. Not saying I'm right. But I don't see any benefit from mounting it at an angle.

Im not 100% but it's always worked on the many Iv done way I look at it is it will create a slight pressure drop behind the cooler which would help the radiator as well because it will cause the air to aim more into the radiator centre

pipster11 Grand Master

pipster11

Posted
Posted

you want a high mass flow rate for more heat transfer

so therefore more air going through it

so therefore less time per particle

i can dig out my thermodynamics book if needed

Dajae Community Regular

Dajae

Posted
Posted

You could have all the fancy ducting and frontal exposure in the world, but unless that heated air has some where to go (read: low pressure after heat exchange), it wont do much.. Too often you see people install these 100mm+ thick intercoolers just to have them sitting near-flush with radiator/fans/supports, etc.

It's much more worthwhile to examine the air that is trying to escape than worrying about how the air enters.. My two cents.

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
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      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. 
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      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.
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      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.
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      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.
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...