Blower Porting
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
Joined
·
4,636 Posts
Joined
·
4,636 Posts
If you aren't doing the heads...they will be restrictive and you won't really unlock the ported SC capability.IMO.
I was in the mid 600s with stock head and 90mm TB, 1300, cam and upper and lower.
Joined
·
4,636 Posts
@Rubber Duck knows backwards and forwards the flow numbers, especially versus the LS3, but the short answer is they are at upper end....as I understand it.
I had a mechanical issue that required pulling heads to get to lifters (mechanic caused) so since I was ripping her apart, I wanted to remove that point and go to the next level.
Joined
·
22,838 Posts
So much I want to say but won’t.
Stock LSA heads have a swirl inducing but flow restricting wing near the intake valve.
Do you prefer high IAT2’s?
Also, look at stock LSA flow numbers from 0.550” to 0.600” valve lift, compared to ported ones.
If you are running a stock cam, then it doesn’t matter, but if a decent aftermarket cam, it makes a big difference.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Joined
·
6,105 Posts
Ultimately the 'Absolute Flow Number Required' or CFM Demand which is generated by the piston speed, along with the camshaft used. While that math used to integrate the above is fairly rigorous, let's think of something much easier that most of us already understand.
If you add too much duration to the camshaft, you tend to lose 'Low End Torque'.
Here we understand that engine rpm, as well as piston speed deal with time. . ..
Finally; you can put better flowing cylinder heads on the engine, But if the engine rpm and resultant piston speed does not match the duration of the camshaft 'Correctly', the engine will lose power, rather than gain power.
Here peak hp must be targeted using both engine rpm as well as piston speed.
One we know the above we can calculate the required duration.
Lift is another issue, as one is simply attempting to match volume requirements of the cylinder to the lift of a specific sized valve, rather than duration, which deals with time. Time as is associated with piston speed.
If you add too much duration to the camshaft, you tend to lose 'Low End Torque'.
Here we understand that engine rpm, as well as piston speed deal with time. . ..
Finally; you can put better flowing cylinder heads on the engine, But if the engine rpm and resultant piston speed does not match the duration of the camshaft 'Correctly', the engine will lose power, rather than gain power.
Here peak hp must be targeted using both engine rpm as well as piston speed.
One we know the above we can calculate the required duration.
Lift is another issue, as one is simply attempting to match volume requirements of the cylinder to the lift of a specific sized valve, rather than duration, which deals with time. Time as is associated with piston speed.
Joined
·
6,105 Posts
Steve,
Being an air flow engineer, maybe you should 'Just Say It'..lol
Happy Holidays!
Bruce
Joined
·
6,105 Posts
If your use of the word 'Blower' is suggesting to simply turn up the boost of any 'Roots Blower', then tell the people on the Vette forums. . . . .
"They don't know what the hell they are speaking about."
Forums are great, as they are somewhat 'Democratic' in that anyone can speak and give their opinions.
However, many opinions are just that. . Opinions, and they contain no real information regarding the applied science(s), or the applied physics.
Cheers
Joined
·
6,105 Posts
Unlike an NA Engine, a Centrifugal Blower is more than likely working in 'Compressible Flow'. . .
Better heads will still help.
And sometimes a good head can and will help a lot!
Simply quantifying cylinder heads via their CFM Flow rate does not tell one the complete story.
Correct size / area, shape of the port, as well as including fins that run the length of the runners floor, which help stop the flow from changing sides after convergence lift is reached, are not found with stock heads, or even ported stock heads.
***We want the flow to enter in the middle of the cylinder,
not on the shrouded side.
This does not happen on any of the LS3 style heads after the valve lift reaches convergence lift.
Before convergence lift is reached, the flow moves from entering the cylinder, in the middle of the cylinder. But after convergence lift, the flow moves to the other side, which is the shrouded side of the combustion chamber.
So then; is someone going to tell me an engine equipped with a SC don't give a damn about any of the above? Frankly porting a head to work in compressible flow is much more difficult than porting one for a simple NA Engine.
Couple the above with an incorrectly engineered head that begins to restrict the flow at higher lifts, as the intake valve is being moved towards the spark plug side of the combustion chamber, where it finds a wall where the chamber rises steeply. Here a head with an 11° valve angle is much better than one with say a 23° valve to deck angle. Simply laying back that side of the combustion chamber, as some do, might help a little, but most likely will end up hurting the flow on a live engine, headed down the track,. .. a lot!
To correct the above, one must start out with a cylinder head this is too small, but has enough material that can be safely ported to achieve all of the above, plus maybe more. . .Depending!
I prefer the 'Peanut Heads' offered for the 427 CID Engine.
What you start out with is a peanut sized runner, and for the
most part a small chamber which can have its size and shape
engineered by the porter.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Camshaft requirements are very, very different for a Centrifugal Blower. . . .
So essentially; one would require a head ported differently, as well as
a camshaft that fits not only the requirements of an NA Engine, but
now fits the cylinder head ported for compressible flow, at some(?),
but specific engine rpm, which is determined by the stroke of the
engine.
This is why cylinder head porters and camshaft grinders always ask. . . .
"At What Peak HP RPM" are we building this engine for. . . .
The next questions that needs to be answered is. . . .
At what Engine RPM will you leave the line, and how far down will the RPM drop at the shifts.
-regarding an NA engine, or one with a simple roots blower-
I desire for the cylinder heads and camshaft to be working at 135% VE at Peak HP RPM.
When the engine drops down after the shift, I look for 100% VE and the shift cannot drop the engine down below peak torque rpm.
A 376 CID engine having an 237° intake lobe duration, will have at
best, at 7200 RPM a VE of 119%. Minimum cylinder head flow
required then would be ~317 CFM.
***Our 376 cid engines have a 2.165" Intake valve. An intake lobe having a duration of 237° should be good for peak hp to be generated at about 7000 rpm. I used 7200 in order to raise the piston speed. Shifting 10% above peak hp engine rpm is not uncommon.
Now, here is the 'Kicker'. . . That flow is with the 'Intake Manifold'
bolted on. Let's assume that the manifold 'only' drops the cfm flow
rate by 10%.
That means that the cylinder head must flow 350 cfm on the bench at 28" of water drop.
And since the flow moves to the wrong side of the port at or around
convergence lift, we can't run the higher lift camshaft profiles.
The flow needs to be 'All In' at or around 0.550" to maybe 0.600" of
net lift. So we can't lower the duration and add lift to generate more flow.
***A well engineered Hi-Perf engine will use a ratio of about 0.37, multiplied by the diameter of the valve, instead of 0.25 which is used to calculate the convergence lift. If we multiply 0.37 by 2.165" intake valve, the valve lift would then be 0.801", whereas convergence lift is found at 0.541" of valve lift.
The 237° lobe duration coupled with a 'Net Lift' of 0.600" should yield a fwhp of ~900 fwHP on quality gasoline, assuming that the blower fits the adiabatic efficiency defined by taking the square root of the absolute boost. I used a value of 2-BAR Absolute, which yields a density ratio of 1.41.
Finally, none of this can be simply reduced down to a statement such as;
"Just turn up the boost and let the blower do the work."
Cheers
Joined
·
6,105 Posts
Matt @GP tuning who commented earlier seems to have a combo that works.
His Dyno charts look good, and the horsepower numbers he is making tend to correlate with my math.
While I’m sure he has a combo that works together, I believe that some of what I see on his Dyno charts are related to his tuning abilities. But as I recall: Matt has put down 900 hp on his Dyno with a 376 CID engine using quality gasoline.
Joined
·
4,636 Posts
@Mystical ... Using guidance from these members of Matt and Duck, I made more HP than my friend, who is active with Camero and Vettes, thought I would achieve...and it is my DD.
Enjoy their brains.
BTW I just drove last weekend, from St Petersburg FL to West Palm Beach area (for a wedding) 433 miles round trip. Had several times of hitting solid deep triple digits from the cruising at 75-80 range....while I am averaging about 16mpg.
Enjoy their brains.
BTW I just drove last weekend, from St Petersburg FL to West Palm Beach area (for a wedding) 433 miles round trip. Had several times of hitting solid deep triple digits from the cruising at 75-80 range....while I am averaging about 16mpg.
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
