Page 2115 of 2115 FirstFirst ... 11151615201520652105211321142115
Results 31,711 to 31,719 of 31719

Thread: ESE's works engine tuner

  1. #31711
    Join Date
    8th February 2007 - 20:42
    Bike
    TZ400
    Location
    tAURANGA
    Posts
    3,028
    I must say that the so call " Wobbly " exhaust duct parameters are based on square bore/stroke high output engines and thus oversquare
    dimensions will give excessive lengths.
    Lifting the duct floor is only possible once the blowdown has been fully optimised with Aux ports right around to bore center and pin plugs fitted.
    Even then I believe Jan only dyno tested up 3mm in a 54,5 stroke and that is as far as I have dared go.
    The floor should exit perpindicular then form a ski jump slope downward, and flattening asap.
    The roof should exit at 25* then form a radius , reducing in slope.
    This shape tends to equalise the cross sectional area at the point where the side ducts enter the main.
    I have started to think that maybe even attempting a convex roof and or duct floor shape is needed to reduce the area/colume even further.
    Recently I have been testing much larger ( wider ) swooping Aux ducts , and this increases peak and overev power up to a point of diminishing returns
    and then the midrange suffers.
    But of course widening the side ducts increases the area just past the Aux septum ends and on down further to the exit point , making
    this bigger than the 75% rule.
    So further changes to reduce the duct volume need looking at now.
    Ive got a thing thats unique and new.To prove it I'll have the last laugh on you.Cause instead of one head I got two.And you know two heads are better than one.

  2. #31712
    Join Date
    27th October 2013 - 08:53
    Bike
    variety
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    840
    this ktm rad turned out to be the perfect size for what i needed (yes im going to use rubber isolater bushings). brackets are on and old nipples are cut off and plugged. just have to put a couple new nipples on
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20190421_171920.jpg 
Views:	52 
Size:	819.1 KB 
ID:	341587  

  3. #31713
    Join Date
    14th April 2011 - 23:44
    Bike
    2008 Yamaha fino
    Location
    Bangkok
    Posts
    201
    Quote Originally Posted by wobbly View Post
    I must say that the so call " Wobbly " exhaust duct parameters are based on square bore/stroke high output engines and thus oversquare
    dimensions will give excessive lengths.
    Lifting the duct floor is only possible once the blowdown has been fully optimised with Aux ports right around to bore center and pin plugs fitted.
    Even then I believe Jan only dyno tested up 3mm in a 54,5 stroke and that is as far as I have dared go.
    The floor should exit perpindicular then form a ski jump slope downward, and flattening asap.
    The roof should exit at 25* then form a radius , reducing in slope.
    This shape tends to equalise the cross sectional area at the point where the side ducts enter the main.
    I have started to think that maybe even attempting a convex roof and or duct floor shape is needed to reduce the area/colume even further.
    Recently I have been testing much larger ( wider ) swooping Aux ducts , and this increases peak and overev power up to a point of diminishing returns
    and then the midrange suffers.
    But of course widening the side ducts increases the area just past the Aux septum ends and on down further to the exit point , making
    this bigger than the 75% rule.
    So further changes to reduce the duct volume need looking at now.
    Making the auxiliary ducts wider than 12mm made less power was my experience

  4. #31714
    Join Date
    20th April 2011 - 08:45
    Bike
    none
    Location
    Raalte, Netherlands
    Posts
    2,695
    Quote Originally Posted by wobbly View Post
    I must say that the so call " Wobbly " exhaust duct parameters are based on square bore/stroke high output engines and thus oversquare dimensions will give excessive lengths. Lifting the duct floor is only possible once the blowdown has been fully optimised with Aux ports right around to bore center and pin plugs fitted.
    Even then I believe Jan only dyno tested up 3mm in a 54,5 stroke and that is as far as I have dared go.
    Don't let those 3 mm frighten you Wob. Jan had cylinders cast with the exhaust floor more than 3 mm above BDC, but when he realised that he would be in retirement before he would be able to test those, he ground the floors down to the already-tested level before leaving the racing department for good, knowing very well that if these higher floors would have given a positive result after his farewell, some Italian would claim to have 'corrected the errors that Jan Thiel left behind'.

  5. #31715
    Join Date
    14th April 2011 - 23:44
    Bike
    2008 Yamaha fino
    Location
    Bangkok
    Posts
    201
    Quote Originally Posted by Frits Overmars View Post
    Don't let those 3 mm frighten you Wob. Jan had cylinders cast with the exhaust floor more than 3 mm above BDC, but when he realised that he would be in retirement before he would be able to test those, he ground the floors down to the already-tested level before leaving the racing department for good, knowing very well that if these higher floors would have given a positive result after his farewell, some Italian would claim to have 'corrected the errors that Jan Thiel left behind'.
    That is true Frits.
    But I had 2 cylinders cast with the bottom of the exhaust as high as the transfers top.
    The last 5 years all our exhaust ducts were CNC machined.
    With many variations!
    During the last year the exhaust bottom was 3mm above BDC.

  6. #31716
    Join Date
    8th February 2007 - 20:42
    Bike
    TZ400
    Location
    tAURANGA
    Posts
    3,028
    The 12mm wide Aux ducts is exactly where I ended up in my testing as well and that was easy to hand grind ,test , then digitise to
    have 5 axis CNC machined.
    Filling the floor with weld is a nightmare once the cylinder has been run ,and then the cost of a replate means I simply havnt had
    a chance to experement yet.
    But going higher sure looks like it is the go , as the wider Aux ducts need compensating for in the extra area change past the septum ends.
    Ive got a thing thats unique and new.To prove it I'll have the last laugh on you.Cause instead of one head I got two.And you know two heads are better than one.

  7. #31717
    Join Date
    27th October 2013 - 08:53
    Bike
    variety
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    840
    hey guys I was looking and I could easily make a simple four sided duct for the front of the rad with 1.5mm thick aluminum plate. each side would only be able to extend about 3" in front of the rad and theres a lot of tubing obstructions for the incoming air to deal with but I don't really see any downside to doing this. what do you guys think ? I found a article that says theres no need for the duct to expand any more than 7* as it goes from entrance to the rad cores. does this sound about right ? this isn't a road going bike but I figured some simple front ducting would be easy enough to make and it should do a bit better at directing some air to the cores, rather than leaving the rad with nothing at all. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/air-d...ns-willem-toet

    one last question about the 7*. are they meaning each wall would expand 7* ? so basically the opening of the duct would be smaller than the rad cores because each wall is leaning in 7*
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Resized_20190422_004736_12171.jpg 
Views:	30 
Size:	360.3 KB 
ID:	341596  

  8. #31718
    Join Date
    18th May 2007 - 20:23
    Bike
    RG50 and 76 Suzuki GP125 Buckets
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    9,686
    Quote Originally Posted by peewee View Post
    I figured some simple front ducting would be easy enough to make and it should do a bit better at directing some air to the cores, rather than leaving the rad with nothing at all. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/air-d...ns-willem-toet .... basically the opening of the duct would be smaller than the rad cores because each wall is leaning in 7*
    That is a rely interesting article.

    I have posted some of it below.

    Radiator cooling entries. With a fixed point of blockage (such as a radiator) you can increase the rate of expansion beyond the normal 7 degree limit as you approach the core (aerodynamic blockage) itself. It is a trick many aero people use in all sorts of applications. So use increasing expansion as you get close to the core of the radiator. It is a good strategy to do that in any case if you can. A radiator entry should be at least 20% of the area of the core for most motorsport applications. Of course this is influenced by the speed of the vehicle, the radiator area, heat rejection etc. but that’s a good starting point. If you go significantly bigger you typically pay the price of some drag.

    Some more from the same author:-
    https://www.linkedin.com/today/posts/willemtoet1
    - Magic Weapons-

    https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/for_website_magicweaponsanne-mariesbradyseptember2017.pdf

  9. #31719
    Join Date
    20th January 2010 - 14:41
    Bike
    husaberg
    Location
    The Wild Wild West
    Posts
    9,489
    Quote Originally Posted by TZ350 View Post
    That is a rely interesting article.

    I have posted some of it below.

    Radiator cooling entries. With a fixed point of blockage (such as a radiator) you can increase the rate of expansion beyond the normal 7 degree limit as you approach the core (aerodynamic blockage) itself. It is a trick many aero people use in all sorts of applications. So use increasing expansion as you get close to the core of the radiator. It is a good strategy to do that in any case if you can. A radiator entry should be at least 20% of the area of the core for most motorsport applications. Of course this is influenced by the speed of the vehicle, the radiator area, heat rejection etc. but that’s a good starting point. If you go significantly bigger you typically pay the price of some drag.
    The drag applies to physical size of the radiator as well.
    Remember the louvers shutters on planes they controlled the openings so as they flew faster they made the openings smaller to cut down on drag. they had 6 positions on a Spitfire.
    Also looks like it shut down the outlet and changed the angle of attack as well.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	detail_spitfire_ix_27.jpg 
Views:	32 
Size:	31.7 KB 
ID:	341597Click image for larger version. 

Name:	radtorquetube_small.jpg 
Views:	33 
Size:	118.0 KB 
ID:	341598Click image for larger version. 

Name:	03_side_wall_002.jpg 
Views:	29 
Size:	90.9 KB 
ID:	341599Click image for larger version. 

Name:	12SpitfireRadiator.jpg 
Views:	31 
Size:	25.5 KB 
ID:	341600
    Mustang was a bit different it was suposed to add thrust, i belive the Britten set up was very similar
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meredith_effect
    https://www.quora.com/Would-the-P-38...nar-flow-wings
    http://silencetwisterbuild.blogspot....or-theory.html
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	p51-cooling-system_158.jpg 
Views:	33 
Size:	56.2 KB 
ID:	341601
    Peter Williams used to change the entry arrea on the JPS Norton with Daytona being the smallest.




    Thoughtful Engineering Is A Powerful Source Of Conversation

    By Kevin Cameron April 11, 2019
    In 1973, Peter Williams brought to Daytona his evolving concept of what could be achieved in racing with the limited power of Norton’s pushrod parallel-twin 750. In conversation, what came through was his cheerful and strong belief that thoughtful engineering, as opposed to reliance upon tradition, could still improve the motorcycle significantly.

    As an example, cooling air for his engine’s head and cylinders was controlled by choice of an orifice plate, installed in the wind-tunnel-developed fairing just ahead of the engine. On a high-speed track such as Daytona, the smallest orifice would be used, with larger ones for tracks on which average air velocity would be less. It is, he noted, more efficient to flow air around the motorcycle than to let it flow through it. This is why aircraft powered by piston engines had either radiator shutters for liquid-cooling or cowl flaps to adjust cooling airflow to the power being used. The old practice of leaving the whole front of the fairing open ahead of the engine turned the bike into a large drag-producing air scoop—more just a cover rather than streamlining. Peter admitted just the cooling air needed. With its sophisticated air management, Peter’s design was just as fast as our 750cc Kawasaki two-strokes.

    The area of the fairing behind Peter’s front wheel was a completely non-intuitive flat surface, the veritable “barn door” perpendicular to airflow. Why? British aircraft in World War II equipped with arrays of radar dipoles would have lost a lot of top speed had a partial solution not been found; later airborne radars had steerable dish antennas inside of streamlined fiberglass fairings. The dipole arrays were therefore placed ahead of flat surfaces. Air, slowing as it piled up in front of such surfaces, generated less drag as it passed through the dipoles. The aerodynamically “nasty” exposed fork and front wheel of a racing motorcycle, looking just like a radar dipole array to oncoming airflow, was therefore treated in the same way. The flat surface behind the front wheel pushed a lump of low-velocity air ahead of itself, within which the wheel generated significantly less drag.
    https://www.cycleworld.com/thoughtfu...e-conversation



    Kinky is using a feather. Perverted is using the whole chicken

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 14 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 14 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •