ESE's works engine tuner

[bucketracer]

I think Husanberg is right about about the NSR water injection not actually being water injected into the pipe but a cooling muff around the header pipe and that the thermal capacity of the muff and its water may be what delayed the pipe getting back up to temperature again.

"Water injection radiator", injection?? Husanberg told me how he thought it worked and it looks more likely that hot water vapor is being cooled again after water was circulated, possibly by an air blast around the header and then flashed off as steam.

The text talks about a radiator for cooling the exhaust water injection circuit, the word injection may have misled us.

I think the word "injection" shouldn't have been there and it should have read something like" the radiator is a condensor, cooling the exhaust water/steam circuit", a big difference.

The expansion chamber header cooling muff. My hats off to Husanberg for spotting this and giving me the heads up.

I think TeeZee will be very interested in all of this as it looks like traditional water injection into the header might be back on the menu.

[wobbly]

Ahha, I see where things were getting out of whack with the bmep numbers.
Take the very best 125GP engine specs and plug that into the formula.
We have 50Hp times 6500 divided by 0.125 times 13000 = 200psi which is a real, usable number, I see all the time.
Use the same numbers for a 4T and we have 50 times 13000 divided by 0.125 times 13000 = 400psi , that is completely impossible, and this is the whole reason a 2T is superior to a 4T when compared apples for apples.

I was getting lost with the difference between VE and DR.
DR is actual air ingested divided by swept vol, and in a racing 2T gets up to around 1.25.
VE is basically the same but factors in the other term of TE ( trapping efficiency) that indicates how well the engine retains the air it has ingested.
Due to short circuiting, VE is always lower than the DR - my mistake.

[husaberg]

Ahha, I see where things were getting out of whack with the bmep numbers.
Take the very best 125GP engine specs and plug that into the formula.
We have 50Hp times 6500 divided by 0.125 times 13000 = 200psi which is a real, usable number, I see all the time.
Use the same numbers for a 4T and we have 50 times 13000 divided by 0.125 times 13000 = 400psi , that is completely impossible, and this is the whole reason a 2T is superior to a 4T when compared apples for apples.

I was getting lost with the difference between VE and DR.
DR is actual air ingested divided by swept vol, and in a racing 2T gets up to around 1.25.
VE is basically the same but factors in the other term of TE ( trapping efficiency) that indicates how well the engine retains the air it has ingested.
Due to short circuiting, VE is always lower than the DR - my mistake.

Unless we include a turbo or Blower into the equation I guess? 530psi turbo f1 era
We haven't got far considering Norton was around 200psi with the Manx (Works specials) in 1955.

Any ideas how to get a hold of Jerry Burgess to ask about the water injection or water cooled Header?
Your theory on how it worked from memory is a injection into jacket then flashover to steam maybe?

[TZ350]

From http://www.epi-eng.com/piston_engine..._yardstick.htm

"At the end of the 2006 season, most of these F1 engines ran up to 20,000 RPM in a race, and made in the vicinity of 750 HP. One engine for which I have the figures made 755 BHP at an astonishing 19,250 RPM. At a peak power of 755 HP, the torque is 206 lb-ft and peak-power BMEP would be 212 psi. (14.63 bar). Peak torque of 214 lb-ft occurred at 17,000 RPM for a BMEP of 220 psi (15.18 bar). There can be no argument that 212 psi at 19,250 RPM is truly amazing."

It looks like 220psi is about it for a naturally aspirated race 4-Stroke, by comparison a Lycoming aircraft engine has a BMEP of about 163psi. There are only two ways to increase power, increase Torqe (BMEP) and/or RPM. BMEP tends to fall off as RPM is increased, so to increase BMEP and RPM is quite a feat, it usually becomes a trade off.

After playing with the numbers.

A 35 crank hp, 140 PSI BMEP 13,000 rpm 2 stroke 125cc F4 bucket engine looks within realistic reach and has plenty of development potential.

If a 150cc FXR could be developed up to FI car racing spec giving 220 psi BMEP and spun to 13,000 rpm then the power at the crank would be 33hp for about 30 rwhp.

A 25-27 rwhp FXR is achievable with the upper limit for F4 150cc 4-T's close to 30 rwhp.

So Rich's bike is possible and might not be just a rumor after all.....

[husaberg]

After playing with the numbers.

A 35 crank hp, 140 PSI BMEP 13,000 rpm 2 stroke 125cc F4 bucket engine looks within reach.

And by some skilled effort a 150cc FXR could be developed up to FI car racing spec giving 220 psi BMEP and spun to 13,000 rpm then the power at the crank achievable would be 33hp for about 30 rwhp.

A 25-27 rwhp FXR looks achievable with the upper limit for F4 150cc 4-T's at about 30 rwhp.

So Rich's bike is possible and might not be just a rumor after all.....

I did some quick math ages ago and came up with 40-44 BHP for a 100cc supercharged 22 psi inter-cooled water injected 8 valve twin 4 stroke with a Asian 300 at 1/2 engine speed. $ and kgs though.6.5:1 comp ratio Gates Mitzi evo balance shaft belt was the idea.
30 BHP is a more realistic target though. With a monster power spread.
Not sure What Speedpros estimate was? The catch is it really needs to be a twin.

[TZ350]

I did some quick math ages ago and came up with 40-44 BHP for a 100cc supercharged 22 psi inter-cooled water injected 8 valve twin 4 stroke. $ and kgs though.
30 BHP is a more realistic target though. With a monster power spread.

Now that interest me, we have a few 100cc 4-T engines about the place......

I played with a few supercharged engines when I was engine reconditioning (Automotive Machinist), unlike turbos they had super wide power bands with no "turbo lag". You didn't have to do much in the way of port and polish, more strengthening and cooling, std cam worked well too, but the valve train needed to be setup well and the ignition and compression had to be knocked back a mile, and the noise!!!, the only thing that drowned the exhaust out was the shreek of the belts and the sound of the tyres scrabbling for traction. Used to mark the manifold pressure gauge and when the boost pressure started to fall off when caning it, you knew you were starting to burn an exhaust valve or had bent one.

I just love supercharged engines....

[wobbly]

Yea, but no one has even approached the ultimate 100cc reed, with over 34RWHp, a spread from 8000 to 14000 in a chassis that weighs nothing and actually handles.
This combination is easily achievable, with well known technology, that doesn't involve anything more than some good hardware ,a die grinder, some CNC work with heads and exhaust nozzles, and a couple of days running pipe sims.
Bloody simple comparable to the head, cam,injection and turbo work needed to get the 4T even remotely close.

[TZ350]

Yes, it dosent look like a 150cc F4 4-Stroke can be pushed past 30 rwhp but a stroker has much more easily realised potential.

How is that special engine for Yowling coming on? any more photos? .......

[Buckets4Me]

you knew you were starting to burn an exhaust valve or had bent one.

.

and what did you do when you bent a valve ?

[TZ350]

and what did you do when you bent a valve ?

said ... Ohhh gosh darn........ true ....

Nope I stuck em in a lathe and tapped them true again......... there, the secret is out.

If they had become too bent to be able to straighten again you didn't need a boost gauge to tell you, you had a problem.

[kel]

Now what could be the next step? Moving the plenum volume to the other side of the inlet disk?
An enlarged crankcase volume would lower the resonance frequency of the inlet system and you would need to correct this, for instance by drastically lengthening the inlet timing.
See where this is going? You tell them, Wob; while you guys are having breakfast, it's time for me to get some sleep.

Frits, its a real pleasure to have you contributing to this thread
I hope you'll forgive me for being so presumptuous but could you take a moment to introduce yourself so as the regulars here can understand just how privileged we are to have you contributing.
I will have a stab at formulating an answer to what you have outlined above but you must forgive my errors as I have no notes or books to reference at the moment plus the crankcase remains a mystery to me at the best of times (variable flask, Helmholtz and all) but here goes - The increasing of the crankcase volume will alter the point at which we would close the inlet as the case pressure will reverse the flow through the carburetor latter in the cycle. The potential problem I would guess here is that rotary inlet has little inlet inertia, apparently pulse tuning in a rotary inlet is a no go?
For the opening point the crankcase balancing could take place latter but Im guessing we should open the inlet as early as possible and let the expansion chamber work its magic, but how early, the transfer flow would still need to bring down the case pressure before opening the inlet.
So just how far out am I?

[husaberg]

Yea, but no one has even approached the ultimate 100cc reed, with over 34RWHp, a spread from 8000 to 14000 in a chassis that weighs nothing and actually handles.
This combination is easily achievable, with well known technology, that doesn't involve anything more than some good hardware ,a die grinder, some CNC work with heads and exhaust nozzles, and a couple of days running pipe sims.
Bloody simple

I like the sound of this Wob as you already know. Although I thought it was 35HP.
Have you got any further with the Mike (Yow ling) engine?

Any Ideas on how to get more info Re the Honda Water injection. Like Say Jerry. The Net is coming up empty for me. I'd also love to see a copy of the SAE papers relating to it (Fleck)

[wobbly]

Yow Lings engine build has stalled as it needs a new crank web due to severe damage I found when I pulled it apart to install the stuffers.

I have Pete Bensons contact details, he was the kiwi head spanner man at Honda under Burgess, so I will see if I can contact him when he is in Philip Island this weekend, or when he comes home afterwards.

Wave tuning on a Rotary inlet system can be achieved in theory,using the 3rd harmonic as is done in reed engines, but in a practical application we have to run the carb/inlet length as short as is physically possible.
This puts the waves strongest action above the forcing frequency of the engine, because if you "tune" it correctly, the action is so strong and abrupt, the carburation becomes impossible to adjust in this narrow band,as evidenced
by huge amounts of standoff created by the same air passing the main jet several times.
You could tune the length below the powerband, but then the carbs hit the ground before the riders knee does, or in the case of a RSW, the bellmouth is in the middle of the rear shock spring.

[husaberg]

Yow Lings engine build has stalled as it needs a new crank web due to severe damage I found when I pulled it apart to install the stuffers.

I have Pete Bensons contact details, he was the kiwi head spanner man at Honda under Burgess, so I will see if I can contact him when he is in Philip Island this weekend, or when he comes home afterwards.

Wave tuning on a Rotary inlet system can be achieved in theory,using the 3rd harmonic as is done in reed engines, but in a practical application we have to run the carb/inlet length as short as is physically possible.This puts the waves strongest action above the forcing frequency of the engine, because if you "tune" it correctly, the action is so strong and abrupt, the carburation becomes impossible to adjust in this narrow band,as evidenced
by huge amounts of standoff created by the same air passing the main jet several times.

Thanks Wob
You have to wonder about the percentage of Kiwis and Aussies involved in GP and F1. We must box well above our weight in that regards.Cheers
The pulse wave I would have thought would be very strong in a Disk Valve
With its positive abrupt closing and opening.
I would have thought the reed would damp out the pulse a bit. Just an observation based on an assumption from 2 vs 4 exhaust tuning intake and exhaust theory.
I guess the cons would out weight the pros of using this as the fueling, I believe is more problematic on a disk as it is without over complicating it with pulse tuning as well.
I have noticed that whenever the GP500 V4's engines were redesigned the intakes always became shorter and more even in length. Most of the time they did this to the determent to engine balance (layout). So they were doing it for performance and I suppose layout for chassis design weight distribution as well to a degree in hindsight.

Anyone considered or played with offset cylinders such as in Yamaha R1 and YZF450 would that give us slightly (ever so slight) asymmetrical port timing? (Don't flame me has I having done the Math yet its just a hunch.)
As well as a bit of extra leverage at TDC?

Non-symmetrical timing is only possible with controlled valves (e.g. for the carburetor inlet via a window in the crankshaft or on a four stroke engine) or when the cylinder is offset from the axis of symmetry

• the cylinder shaft (con-rod) and crankshaft are offset. What this means is that the cylinder is not directly vertically overhead of the crankshaft. It is offset to a small degree, to one side of the crankshaft. So when the piston is at TDC, the conrod is not at an exactly vertical position but is already slightly slanted. When the air-fuel mixture burns, the power stroke now has a better 'leverage' on the crankshaft and this helps to extract more power out of the combustion.

Below the Swissauto and sometimes BRM later the ROC later on known as the pulse?
If you look at the bottom of the 3rd page at the lower of the 3 pictures. You will be able to see what Wob and I were talking about with mikes (RGV100) crankcase mods being reminiscent of the Swissauto.
Note the Weight 36kg with airbox and carbs and oil.

[TZ350]

If you manage to get a really continuous flow through that 24 mm hole, the limit should be about 60 HP, give or take. No, I'm dead serious.(I'm just talking about the carb though; not about its combination with a bucket engine).

Thats very interesting to know, if we find the 24mm carb restriction is starting to hold us back the plenum may yet come out of Buckets closest again.

At the moment blow-down-time-area is holding us up, also an optimized pipe design would be nice too.



34mm at the valve and 24mm carb

Way to go, Bucketracer. But there's one thing to consider: unless the tract from plenum to engine starts at the deepest point of the plenum, a puddle of fuel will form in the plenum which will make setting the carburation a nightmare. I've been there....

Yes that was the Team ESE experience......

We even tried pumping the puddled fuel back to the tank.

The 34mm engine/plenum inlet was initially very short and there was a resonance problem at about 4-5,000 rpm, the standoff or spit out of the carb extended to the front axel.



This was greatly reduced by lengthening the engine/plenum inlet.



The current thoughts are, if we try the plenum again it will be with a short inlet and the VeTec inlet butterfly thing for changing the inlet resonance.



Or a variable crankcase volume with a butterfly arrangement that opens an extra side chamber attached to the crank case volume.

Frits I would be interested in your opinion about the usefulness of some sort of variable crankcase volume.