WTF is Mule trying to say (poll)

[rhjames]

Mule:

I have no opinions regarding my diesel experience, just experiences with diesels. You and probably half of the guys reading this silly argument totally missed my point about pressures as they pertain to cylinder (or whatever) filling, barometrics and altitudes, all of which have got a hell of a lot to do with making power. (You missed the weather school lesson as well...)

what the heck are you so torqued up about? Let's see if I can just as torqued up as well.....

what difference does it make about your assertion of 100% VE at idle, at high rpm, or blown? what's your point? That 100% VE doesn't occur in either NA or blown engines? who cares?

You missed out in the diesel example, where my turbo pressures not only doubled, but ran the HP figures over 600% at only 34lbs of boost. You still claim that you can't get twice the hp at twice the atmosphere, but I just gave you an example of 2.5 times the atmosphere and 6 times the HP.

Let me state it another way:

at idle, atmosphere 1 (zero pressure on the gauge), I have 100 hp.

at 2100 rpm, atmosphere 2.5 (34lbs of pressure), I have 600 hp.

There is the example you have been saying can't be done. Not only did I get twice the hp per atmosphere, I got 6 times the hp at 2.5 times the atmospheres. All the while using a diesel with lousy VE. You wanted facts, you've got them now. You don't have to believe me either, just consult Cummins diesel engines. OR Caterpillar, or Detroit Diesel, or whoever.......

When I ran a supercharged engine, I didn't give a damn about VE being 100%, I "knew" it wasn't 100%, so I over drove the SC to compensate for the power lost to heat, friction, and lousy VE. And now these guys are just doing the same thing (relatively) with turbo chargers.....if they run a wastegate, they adjust it for a certain maximum pressure and that's all it will do (reminds me of pop-off valves at Indy). If they run computerized fuel system controls, you adjust the fuel map to compensate for everything bad that's going on. How simple is that? Probably simpler than I care to learn about in one sitting......

Until I started to actually read about this tuner crap---talking about atmospheres, mapping, physics and the like, I operated on the knowns of overdriving superchargers and waste gate controlled turbo chargers.

Call it "old school" if you must.....but that's where I come from. It worked then, it still works now.

Have you actually raced, tuned, or modified a tunnel ram intake? If so, you know damn well what I was talking about when I said there is no "pressure" in the intake tubes under any circumstances, regardless of rpm or cam profile, both of which have a heck of a lot to do with everything that engine does....I say again, put a pressure gauge on one and give me a reading that says it's producing pressure as you state. The only remote chance you have of achieving pressure, is on a poorly designed manifold that allows for backwash from adjacent cylinders, or some amount of cam overlap causing the intake charge to be backwashed up into the intake. However, the backwash effect will be compensated for by the vacuum present in the plenum chamber of the intake manifold. (Let's see, Porsche engineered their intakes with unequal runners to prevent backwash----and never gained pressure in the intake tubes.)

Again, stick a gauge on it and give me the numbers.....

You have totally missed the idea of naturally aspirated engines and their relationships to each stroke the engine takes in it's crankshaft revolution, regarding vacuum or pressurization of the cylinders.


Let me explain that one for you:

Stroke 1: intake---the downward stroke of the piston causes vacuum which draws the intake charge into the combustion chamber

Stroke 2: compression---the upward stroke of the piston compresses said intake charge

Stroke 3: ignition (power)---the ignition of the fuel air charge causes an explosion, thereby causing the piston to travel downward, causing the crankshaft to rotate

Stroke 4: exhaust---this is the removal of spend gases caused by the returning of the piston to it's upward position

At no point in this 4 stroke cycle does anything cause pressurization, except on the compression stroke.

Your discussion has totally talked about the intake stroke. This is all vacuum on a naturally aspirated engine. Tunnel ram, single plane, dual plane, cross ram, tuned, or not. Vacuum, period. Tuning or creating a ram effect only enhances the velocity of the intake charge. It does not create pressure in the cylinders.

If you're giving us a physics or engineering lesson, show us your PHD.

For that matter, please don't, as it doesn't take a MBA to fly FedEx either......(maybe you'll see the comparison?)

In the meantime, try a little common sense----or did you forget that one while you were in engine building 101?

I took that class some 37+ years ago, when I was about 12 yrs young.....when did you take it?


----

[rhjames]

as for your tube example, try closing off the water in a garden hose, as you describe.

does the hose expand with the the water cut off? yes it does, because the hose is flexible and the water is solid.

will this example work in an engine cylinder on the intake stroke? no, because the cylinder is not as flexible as the garden hose, and the air is not as solid as the water.

your example is flawed for this reason:

the intake stroke causes vacuum (you call it suction). due to the lack of 100% VE, the intake charge is always in vacuum, even when the barn door is closed. Only when the piston rotates back up on the compression stroke does the intake "charge" become pressurized (compressed).

blowers and turbos overcome this lack of efficiency, by pressurizing the intake charge.

Enough said-----

[Herr-Kuhn]

Will someone please kill this thread...

[Mule]

Now I understand. At idle your diesel makes 100 hp on no boost but at 2100 rpms & 34 pounds of boost it makes 600. How much power does it make at 0 rpms? That wasn't engine building you were studying, that was bolt turning.

You might want to call Dan Jones at ATI & enlighten him on your "old school" knowledge. He makes millions selling the baddest centrifugal superchargers on the planet. Just think what he could do if he only knew. Don't forget to tell him the part about the weather.

[Fabio421]

Originally posted by Herr-Kuhn
Will someone please kill this thread...

You started it

[rhjames]

as per this entire thread, mule fails to see or understand the example I gave as it relates to his assertion that you can't have twice the hp on twice the atmosphere.

I have proven his theory wrong, but he refuses to acknowledge his theoretical flaws.

His parameters:

1 atmosphere yields "X" amount of hp

2 atmospheres will not yield 2x "X" amount of hp


my example of my Cummins diesel was dead-on.

1 atmosphere yields 100hp

2.5 atmosphere yields 600 plus hp


following your theory, my diesel would make only 200 hp at atmosphere 2, but it actually makes more hp.

cut this up any way you want to Mule, but your theory doesn't say anything about rpms, and you still don't know what I'm talking about.



Bolt turner, truck driver, engineering student, graduate with a Phd in physics, prostock engine builder, is no matter.....

your theory, a presented, has been debunked and you haven't got the balls to admit it.

you constantly refer to various manufacturers in your posts, but have you, yourself, put any of these theories or products to work in the real world???-----probably not.

It's your theory and presentation, not mine. It's flawed, get over it.


This thread and any others relating to this silly argument about atmospheres, weather, and thermodynamics theory, should be put to death------promptly.

NO wonder there's so much hate and discontent on these boards-----

I'll ban myself from this one as well, to save Mule, Danglerb, and anyone else who's been banned from Rennlist or this one or that one, the trouble of being so far confused it will make their collective heads explode------


-----

[rhjames]

as per this entire thread, mule fails to see or understand the example I gave as it relates to his assertion that you can't have twice the hp on twice the atmosphere.

I have proven his theory wrong, but he refuses to acknowledge his theoretical flaws.

It's your theory and presentation, not mine. It's flawed, get over it.


This thread and any others relating to this silly argument about atmospheres, weather, and thermodynamics theory, should be put to death------promptly.

NO wonder there's so much hate and discontent on these boards-----

I'll ban myself from this one as well, to save Mule, Danglerb, and anyone else who's been banned from Rennlist or this one or that one, the trouble of being so far confused it will make their collective heads explode------


-----

[Herr-Kuhn]

Maybe I can end it?

[Danglerb]

One thing is for certain, the atmosphere created in this post isn't making any HP, or getting any traction.

If I can figure out how to close it, I will.

[Mule]

Aw heck I guess I need to give Rh his due. You are correct in that I did not specifically state that when measuring hp I was referring to PEAK hp and not hp at idle or with the engine off. Shows what I get for assuming.

[rhjames]

thank you-----

-----