Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Is my engine under more stress if i run the same boost (possibly less), the same rpm, the same approx A/F values but make more power. This also assumes that my radiator and oil cooler are suitably sized to remove any additional heat input.

Reason i ask is that i was told my engine may not handle the extra power that my turbo setup makes if i installed some cams. If im increasing the effeciency of a motor am i stressing it more?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/51165-stresses-on-engines/
Share on other sites

ooh ooh a classmate :D

 

Was Roy a real nerd then? ;)

I was always too dumb to be a nerd :( And surprise, surprise too busy talking about the weekends pi55 up :D

I can do the mechanics of it all, but basically ; more air, more fuel more bang = more power.

The more bang is the concern. :Oops:

But if i keep revs sane, ie std at 7,200rpm, oil and water temps under control and only run 1.2bar, would having a set of cams that take power from 235-240 to 245-260rwkws really hurt a std RB20 that much more then running the extra 0.2bar of boost (i have my scramble set to 1.4bar...so when its pointed in the right direction i give it hits from 1.1 to 1.4 bar for the straights) :Bang:

Just added up what this whole RB26 cam farkup has cost me, :)

There is probably an energy equation in there related to each cylinder i'm guessing.. and the amount of time that energy remains in the cylinder (which would be controlled by the duration of the cams amongst other things)

Unfortunately I forgot my maths nearly 10 years ago :D freakin computers...

it would be easy to say there would be less stress on the engine when gaining power from cams then rasing boost as they both increase air flow but cams dont increase heat, like adding more boost.

I think that hold's true because what i have read of SK's posts being able to run reliable 250kw with cams and stock injectors but going about making 250kw with a fuel reg and boost the pistons burn and die. So 200kw becomes the reliable power limit.

SO GO THE CAMS!!! :D

Thermal stress, or mechanical stress ? they are quite different.

You can quite easily blow up a stock engine by leaning it out, as we all know. Thermal stress is probably the most dangerous with a mildly modified engine, if it is badly tuned or not tuned at all. Detonation damage is another very quick killer of turbo engines. None of this has anything to do with the basic strength or integrity of the engine itself.

Mechanical stress is a completely different thing. Rpm and inertia forces are what most likely are going to break things and that has little to do with power output. If it is properly tuned and you stay within the factory redline it can make significantly more power without any additional MAXIMUM mechanical loading. The average loads will be up, and the torque be higher, but that will not break things, except maybe the clutch.

Bigger cams and valve springs might be dangerous if you then expect to wind it out to 10,000 Rpm all the time, or buzz the engine by dropping back to second gear at 160 Kmh. An extreme and silly example, but you get the idea.

LOL, its an internal combustion engine, and ppl never meantion cyclic loads:)

I may just wait 3 months and 10-15,000kms to see how the wrecker engine goes before i get the courage to lean on it a bit more with cams. Want to eliminate as many variables as possible so if the engine goes bang i at least have an idea of why.

But the power cannot go up at the same rpmif the torque doesn't, which means that there has to be more load on the piston, conrod and crank (as well as all the inbetweens) and so it goes. If it was RPM increase alone then sure, inertial forces increase, but more power at the same rpm means there is more air going in, therefore more fuel required for a stoich mixture, so a bigger bang must result.

I'd run a little extra power until you are able to get an oil change/oil analysis done, then plan the next power increase. Fuelling is not an issue for your setup though mate.

Your call.......

This is a interesting topic

Whats everyone's general opinion about the safe power level (assuming all the support systems are up to scratch) for each RB motor?

my understanding is -

RB20 - 240-250rwkw with around 7500 as a 'safe' RPM

RB25 - 290-300rwkw with around 7300 as a 'safe' RPM

RB26 - 300-320rwkw with around 7800 as a 'safe' RPM

I think revs and detonation are the real killer of RB's, keep both of them under control and I reckon there is no reason Roy your engine would be under any great deal of more stress

Chris

This is a interesting topic

Whats everyone's general opinion about the safe power level (assuming all the support systems are up to scratch) for each RB motor?

my understanding is -

RB20 - 240-250rwkw with around 7500 as a 'safe' RPM

RB25 - 290-300rwkw with around 7300 as a 'safe' RPM

RB26 - 300-320rwkw with around 7800 as a 'safe' RPM

I think revs and detonation are the real killer of RB's, keep both of them under control and I reckon there is no reason Roy your engine would be under any great deal of more stress

Chris

Hi Chris, I would be inclined to believe that the RB20 safe rpm limit is more like 8,000 rpm. Ours has been at 225 rwkw for over 2 years and we run it to the rev limited 8,250 rpm all the time. I would add heat to your list of RB killers, especially oil temperature. But by far the worst thing for R's is poor tuning.

:cheers:

Ok cool

mine currently has a rev limit of around 8200 with my re-programmed ECU

What would be a sensible every day rev limit for a RB20 running about 18 psi boost

Agree re oil cooler, I put one on early on, perhaps thats why mine has survived as long as it has

Theoretically with a set of larger cams the dynamic compression ratio is lowered. Reducing the thermal stress and detonation issues.

The motor 'should' be a little more forgiving.

If a rod is going to let go it will let go. Not because of the cams making a little more power.

A good set of cams help the combustion process become more controlled and less likely to detonate.

It may explain why Steve's old R33 held 320rwkw without the usual issue of cracked ringlands.

Lowered comp 8.6:1 and a set of cams.

EDIT: Cam selection for NA is fairly straight forward being the larger the cam the higher the static comp needs to be in order for the DCR to be in a good range to suit the fuel. (otherwise it will make less power)

With Forced induction it throws another variable in to the equation.

Joel is spot on. Have a look at the Mazda Miller engine, it will amaze you. Although supercharged not turbocharged, this engine has a static compression ratio of 10.2 :1 and runs 18 psi boost from the factory. And they don't detonate either.

The reason being the inlet valve closes 72 degrees after BDC. The piston is almost half way up the bore before the inlet valve closes, meaning only half the actual piston stroke compresses anything.

Think about it. If the theoretical compression ratio is 10:1 and if only HALF the stroke length is used it would only actually be 5:1. It is not quite that low, but you get the general idea. It is not that simple because of con rod angles and piston motion, but late inlet closing does reduce compression. The cranking pressure with a compression gauge will give a pretty good idea of this effect as well.

As Joel says, some of the normally aspirated racing engines run 16:1 compression ratio, but the cams are pretty extreme too.

With a turbo, what stuffs things up is exhaust back pressure, which is nearly always more than boost. On a stock factory engine it might be twice boost pressure. If you have turned up the boost yourself it might be closer to three times boost pressure.

A large overlap cam simply is not going to work with a small turbo. Small turbo, small cam. Big turbo big cam is the general trend.

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

    • I was using the wiring diagram I have So 12.74V is coming into the rear Fuel Pump relay as I measured.  When I turn the key to ON im getting 0.6V to the Fuel Pump plug; which i assume is backfeed voltage and doesnt include the 12V from ignition power.  The rear relay is working and being triggered.  From the diagram I clearly see the rear relay 80 = Rear Relay going into the Body/H loom (R-27) 27 = Fuel Pump plug going into the Body/H loom (T-20) 40 = Short Connector (R-27) I'm reading 12.74V on the blue/black wire which is the power for the Fuel Pump   From this diagram I can see the Ignition relay goes into the front and up to the ignition  2 = Fuel Pump Relay <1M> (R-27) 37 = ING Relay <1M> I started from the pump using this reference Which the way I read it (referencing Nissan wiring color codes) is: Pin Wire Color Function 1 B/P (Black/Pink) Ground 2 L/W (Blue/White)        ECU Trigger 3 SB (Sky Blue) Fuel Pump 5 L/B (Blue/Black) 12V Constant Tested SB to SB on Fuel Pump for continuity - confirmed Tested negative on Fuel Pump to 12V battery and L/B - confirmed 12V Pulled the relay putting 12V between Pin 1 & 2 and testing continuity on Pin 3 & 4 - confirmed relay   So that has me looking at this part of the circuit to understand whats happening here...and im still confused. From best I can tell; the disconnect is back to my previous diagram; between Ignition Relay and Fuel Pump Relay...which yet again; afaik is where the immobiliser should.    Thats what I was trying to explain to GTSboy; im not trying to fix it myself; yet I seem to have to get a Masters in Electrical Engineering (while im busy doing my actual job of DevOps & Cloud Engineering) somehow.  I just wanted more expert opinions; or more so that what I tested is correct and proves it to something around that area; to go back to the alarm tech (for a 3rd time) that he needs to fix it. He keeps telling me its not the alarm. He lives on the complete other side of the city so i understand not wanting to make a trip but as I said before if its the alarm it should be up to him to fix it. But he's adament its not; even though I pointed out the FP was immobilised through the original alarm. To my mind; it seems that the ECU is sending the signal; but the ignition is not getting 12V down the line.       
    • Maybe also really stiffly sprung track cars. Get the inside wheel up in a corner and all the fun stops. Also me sometimes (rarely) when I have to stand on the brake to convince the diff to drive the wheel that is still on the ground when I'm trying to diagonally get over severe driveway entrance, etc.
    • I feel like I'm missing something. You had an authorised installer come out and install a new alarm. Post install the car doesn't start, and you aren't getting the installer back to fix what they did wrong?
    • So either way it is gearbox out and look what is wrong?  I know about the input shaft bearing. Even before swap/new clutch the it sounded exactly like this: So is that inout shaft bearing or the other was installed backwards?  And can some please tell me the part number for that input shaft bearing? The gearbox is small box from R34 N/A and number is FS5W71C. Thank you  
    • I am yet to see anyone ever regret a quaife or helical. ...other than drifting/skidpan duties. I kind of want to upgrade my factory helical with a Quaife (but really it's not ultimately that different, and is a MASSIVE UNDERTAKING), that's how good the hype is about them, that I want to try them 'just to see'  
×
×
  • Create New...