Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Thursday October 30, 2014
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC Technical > Built Motor Discussion

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-02-2013, 04:43 AM   #1
Matty_STi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 333602
Join Date: Sep 2012
Chapter/Region: W. Canada
Vehicle:
2012 STi
DGM

Default Crazy idea - Intake Design

Okay preamble (skip this if you want to just jump straight to my idea):
So I have been working on the design of an intake for my build (check out my build thread for what I am looking at doing engine wise)(and because I am insane and like to tackle crazy projects). I have lots of experience in fluid dynamics, pressure systems, acoustics, aero, in general stuff involving air movement, vibration and pressurization. I also have access to some pretty powerful software packages that will help me with this design. And been around composites and carbon fiber for long enough to make it work for me when used in the appropriate setting.

I have been playing around with a few different ideas and doing lots of research on intake design (and invariably going cross eyed from reading the forum posts, blog entries, magazine articles, research papers etc. etc. etc. bleeergh). With my destroke build and high rev range plus big turbo I am going to have a powerband shifted fairly far to the right as is. I am hoping to preserve some low down torque, gain turbo spool lower down the rev band and in general maintain some drive-ability. Everything in engineering is an exercise in compromise and playing with your car is no exception. So, do I go with a smaller plenum long runner, big plenum long runner, small plenum short runner or big plenum short runner...??? Each has it's advantages (there are those far smarter than me that should be explaining this lol), but alas the one you would choose depends on a lot of variables. So with my worry of creating a laggy far right powerband crazy high revving, uncontrollable freak car burned firmly in my head I have been looking at ways to keep the big power numbers and high revs that I want without sacrificing low end torque quick spool and around town drive-ability. I have one idea that has been seeing lots of time in my mind but that's for a different thread and not related to intake manifolds and is really more of build it and try it and see what happens sort of endeavour....

The other part of the preamble that I should address is that I am going to be using an air to water intercooler. The idea of a big heavy chunk of aluminium sticking way out front with tonnes of piping screwing up lag even more and causing big pressure drops just didn't sit well with me. Air to water allows shorter piping, more efficient core designs that have less pressure drop, more chances for improving weight balance and the ability to place it where I want, and no worries of heat soak/highly improved cooling ability. The problem is getting an intercooler design that fits with a custom intake manifold and doesn't have goofy piping with crazy bends that mess up air flow.

Not being totally happy with the options that I saw out there I have taken on yet another project to get something that fits with exactly what I want in terms of end results.

/end preamble

The Idea:

-A plenum is just a pressure vessel that stores pressure and helps promote an even air flow rate to the runners from what I can see from so called good manifold designs (this is my own take on it).

-Turbulence in the plenum can be a good thing or a really really bad thing. Turbulence in the runners would be beneficial at helping mix air and fuel for more even air burn. Turbulence in the plenum could probably be detrimental to that and cause uneven air distribution to certain runners. Even air distribution = good

-Less piping from turbo to intercooler = good, less piping from intercooler to throttle body = good

I was sitting contemplating all this and came to the idea of why not integrating the air-2-water intercooler into the intake manifold. Put the throttle body before the intercooler. And use the intercooler core to promote even air distribution, and lower plenum turbulence. WAYYYYY less piping. Possibly more efficient in terms of the temp raises in the compressed air as it will spend less time moving through the pipe and sitting in the plenum.

Now I know one of the draw backs is that you want air to be moving through the intercooler and not sitting because then it won't be cooling it. *What happens when air to air IC's get heat soaked in stop and go traffic*. BUUUT an A2W IC has the coolant media constantly being moved through it, thus even if the air is sitting there it will continue to be cooled. The side effect of this is that with a proper IC core design, radiator and reservoir capacity I should never have to worry about the air sitting in this IC-Plenum hybrid won't heat up and may even cool further.

With the right sort of baffling and a good transition from plenum to runner should allow for very even air distribution. Because of the nature of an intercooler cores vanes I don't see there being a chance for large turbulent forces to be able to manifest - what I would call chaotic turbulence. When the air finally does reach the runner with much lower 'chaotic turbulence' I can then create 'managed' or 'designed' turbulence to mix the air with the fuel more evenly and (what I would consider fairly important) predictably!

The super short piping from turbo to TB will have way less turns and far fewer chances for boost leaks and things to come loose.

So quick and dirty: turbo -> shorty pipe -> Throttle body -> A2W IC-Plenum hybrid -> super fancy runners -> everything else lol

Building this probably won't be terrifically hard for me, most of this can be made out of some sort of carbon laminate or composite (except the IC core will just be an off the shelf from spearco or something).

Time for a positive/negative thingy:

Positives:
-shorter piping, less lag potential, potential for even more efficient cooling, much fewer things to leak and loosen, lower weight, better space management, more power potentially, potential for more even air-fuel mixing in runners, potential for more even air distribution to each runner and thus each cylinder is more balanced in output which means -> less wear and tear on engine

Negatives:
-Potential giant waste of time and money, could blow up in face, lots of hypothetical and unproven ideas, may not make any actual difference compared to straight off the shelf parts in more traditional setup

--------------

Before I posted this I wanted to see if someone had done this and there are a few products out there and some patents but nothing for a subaru.

http://www.hpamotorsport.com/intake.htm
http://www.google.com/patents/EP1170478B1?cl=en

------------------
Details of the coolant side of things:

I am leaning towards this pump: Meziere WP136S pump; 20GPM, 3000+ hrs service life
http://www.meziere.com/ps-892-860-wp136s.aspx

And quite a large heat exchanger: 26x7x2
http://www.frozenboost.com/product_i...80540435796d3f

With a couple 7 inch fans to move additional air. Though if my testing shows that a thicker core will benefit then I won't hesitate to go bigger. I am thinking that the 3.5 inch thick heat exchanger wouldn't be so horrible of an idea.

Reservoir will be in the trunk area and be 10L (2.64 gallons). All told I can make a rough guess of about 16-19L of coolant in the system.

-------------------

So guys/gals, whatcha think??

I'm going to attach a quick back of napkin sketch as well.

-Matt
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.

Last edited by Matty_STi; 02-15-2013 at 09:02 PM.
Matty_STi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2013, 04:54 AM   #2
Matty_STi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 333602
Join Date: Sep 2012
Chapter/Region: W. Canada
Vehicle:
2012 STi
DGM

Default

Forgot to attach pic.

Also my artistic talents lie in music not drawing so be kind.

Matty_STi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2013, 09:46 AM   #3
matts
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 322939
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: midwest
Vehicle:
10 WRX
96 LSi

Default

I think the biggest issue with this idea will be getting the chiller liquid to ambient temp. With all the heat generated by the engine you will need a totally separate chiller system segregated from the hot engine compartment.

This will likely require some sort of refridgeration unit. If the extra weight and electrical load on the charging system do not negate the performance gains, it might work.

Just my .02
matts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2013, 10:01 AM   #4
slowgenius
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 48350
Join Date: Nov 2003
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Pittsburgh
Vehicle:
04 WRX

Default

Check out the Moore Performance quickest forester thread in proven power bragging forum. It has two awic cores used as plenums as you have drawn installed.


Im sure they can steer you in the right direction in this regard, they make custom awic setups for subarus. The pictures on the last page dont really show you all the details, but you can get an idea of whats going on.

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=2079759

Last edited by slowgenius; 02-02-2013 at 11:51 AM.
slowgenius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2013, 11:40 AM   #5
mekilljoydammit
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 258151
Join Date: Sep 2010
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Wisconsin
Default

Just to point out, the plenum is also there to act as a heimholtz resonator. Though honestly for boosted applications, you can go with things that are theoretically compromised; look at the stock manifold plenum volume. Lots of modern supercharged applications move AWICs into the plenum area in OEM cars, so it's not that crazy.
mekilljoydammit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2013, 11:49 AM   #6
TIGWERKS
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 256615
Join Date: Sep 2010
Default

I mentioned this as an idea on the rear engine turbo setup I built but due to the height restrictions above the motor it wasn't pursued. This isn't really anything new as itmisndone in the v8 world already.
TIGWERKS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2013, 02:16 PM   #7
Matty_STi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 333602
Join Date: Sep 2012
Chapter/Region: W. Canada
Vehicle:
2012 STi
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by matts View Post
I think the biggest issue with this idea will be getting the chiller liquid to ambient temp. With all the heat generated by the engine you will need a totally separate chiller system segregated from the hot engine compartment.

This will likely require some sort of refridgeration unit. If the extra weight and electrical load on the charging system do not negate the performance gains, it might work.

Just my .02
Reservoir and pump will be located in the trunk for weight distribution and to keep it away from the engine heat.

The coolant loop will go Reservoir -> Pump -> IC -> Heat Exchanger -> back to Reservoir.

No need for any sort of refrigeration unit.

I may experiment with different cooling fluids as there are things more effective than water out there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mekilljoydammit View Post
Just to point out, the plenum is also there to act as a heimholtz resonator. Though honestly for boosted applications, you can go with things that are theoretically compromised; look at the stock manifold plenum volume. Lots of modern supercharged applications move AWICs into the plenum area in OEM cars, so it's not that crazy.
Yes it is a helmholtz resonator, but that is only effective at certain points in the RPM band and thus you are dealing with fractional relations of the resonate frequency. Because of the small size of the plenum you are stuck with tuning to partial frequency/wavelength and thus the effect is far less pronounced then one would hope. The higher in revs you go the further apart those fractions gets, and unlike an acoustic system where you get the benefits of the Fletcher-Munson curve there is no loudness equivalent in a straight pressure system. So tuning for higher in the rev band will leave islands of efficiency further and further apart. Worse there will be dips in efficiency caused by those resonances backing up on each other cancelling out and creating destructive interference. If i am tuning this like I would an acoustic system I would need much more volume and and much more complicated set of resonance chambers to create additional points of resonance so as to even out the gains in efficiency while lessening the islands of destructive interference. And unlike and acoustic system this has to work over a much broader frequency range. When I am doing speaker design I am focusing on small segments of frequency range to allow for a set of components and physical design parameters to work in a narrow band of maximum efficiency. Thus I need to create multiple "systems" that work in concert (ha!) that have equal (or near equal) efficiency in their set frequency range. An intake plenum has to work across a frequency spectrum far broader than what I would want to subject most speaker drivers too. And of course when you try to shoe horn (HA! *because I build horns lots) a driver into a broad band application you are left with a system that isn't really all that great at anything and is generally sort of average for the most part (excluding issues of cross overs and wave form integration from separate drivers and all that). Single driver systems that are very good and efficient are also massive with typical back chambers with huge volume (and I mean huge volume these aren't things you can hide in a corner they will dominate the room) and complicated expansion ratios. Of course with those big back chamber horns the top of the frequency band drops off like a rock. You can't get a single chamber design have any sort of even frequency efficiency despite what some engineers and designers say (other than Tom Danley who is a friggin wizard). Soooo that leads me to the point I want to make - I won't be trying to create a helmholtz resonator in fact I want to discourage resonance and instead create a system where there is no islands of efficiency. If there is a point where things are more efficient then that energy is being pulled from somewhere else and there will be a drop of efficiency elsewhere in the frequency spectrum. In other words, no free ride. - (I'm an acoustic engineer for those that want to know, amongst my many other hats that I wear)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TIGWERKS View Post
I mentioned this as an idea on the rear engine turbo setup I built but due to the height restrictions above the motor it wasn't pursued. This isn't really anything new as itmisndone in the v8 world already.
Yeah I was thinking of the big roots blower V8 drag cars too.


--------------

So no nays yet, seems fairly positive response thus far.

And I didn't mean crazy as in "HOLY CRAP I THOUGHT OF SOMETHING NO ONE ELSE DID!! ZOMG!!" I am really not that egotistical (close but not quite ). I was thinking crazy in terms of I wasn't seeing this being done on subarus though that moore forester is pretty damn sexy! I didn't know about that rig until today, super cool build!

Thoughts - comments - flames ?

- Matt
Matty_STi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2013, 02:55 PM   #8
TIGWERKS
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 256615
Join Date: Sep 2010
Default

Go for it, I have intake manifold flanges mostly drawn up in solidworks but need to do a few minor things before I can fool around with intake stuff.
TIGWERKS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2013, 03:42 PM   #9
Matty_STi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 333602
Join Date: Sep 2012
Chapter/Region: W. Canada
Vehicle:
2012 STi
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TIGWERKS View Post
Go for it, I have intake manifold flanges mostly drawn up in solidworks but need to do a few minor things before I can fool around with intake stuff.
What engine were you planning on trying this on?
Matty_STi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2013, 04:13 PM   #10
railguy
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 53756
Join Date: Jan 2004
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: MAIC
Vehicle:
2002 WRX
WRB

Default

Isnt this being done in the build for that guy with the 22b thread from turkey?
railguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2013, 05:31 PM   #11
mekilljoydammit
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 258151
Join Date: Sep 2010
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Wisconsin
Default

Well sure, any sort of acoustic tuning on manifolds affects things differently across various areas of the powerband. One of the reasons why various variable geometry solutions are popular in OEMs nowadays. You can also ignore a lot of the lower RPM areas and so on... anyway. Building manifolds seems to be one of those things where a lot of people try to come at it from a theoretical basis and have it not actually work that well.

Oh, turbulence in the runners isn't actually that great of a thing on a large scale basis; it's going to be disrupting the ability to flow well. Mostly it seems to be a matter of keeping a bit of roughness to the walls to create a thicker boundary layer and so keep fuel from dropping out of suspension, but there's plenty of turbulence created in the cylinder created by the way the port empties into it.
mekilljoydammit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2013, 04:50 PM   #12
Matty_STi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 333602
Join Date: Sep 2012
Chapter/Region: W. Canada
Vehicle:
2012 STi
DGM

Default

So I've had a quick back and forth with Dale at Moore Performance (nice guy!) and he's given me some stuff to think about.

I think this project could turn out quite well and will save me a tonne of hassle trying to get an AWIC setup and custom manifold setup sorted out.

Time to start drawing up plans and playing around with ideas. I will update this thread as time allows and with any changes that happen.. If this project falls on it's face I will just ask dale to make me one! hahaha

Any more details that anyone wants to add are more than welcome!

-Matt

Last edited by Matty_STi; 02-12-2013 at 08:01 PM.
Matty_STi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2013, 06:58 PM   #13
Moore Performance
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 231489
Join Date: Dec 2009
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matty_STi View Post
So I've had a quick back and forth with Dale at Moore Performance (nice guy!) and he's given me some stuff to think about.

I think this project could turn out quite while and will save me a tonne of hassle trying to get an AWIC setup and custom manifold setup sorted out.

Time to start drawing up plans and playing around with ideas. I will update this thread as time allows and with any changes that happen.. If this project falls on it's face I will just ask dale to make me one! hahaha

Any more details that anyone wants to add are more than welcome!

-Matt
Good chatting with you last week, Matt!

I say you run with some of the ideas that we discussed and give your own setup a go! If not, here's what we've been kicking around as a collaborative with composites maven Carbotron


As it looks, this particular A2W/Manifold will be tested with an EFR based twin-scroll setup.
Moore Performance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2013, 08:00 PM   #14
Matty_STi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 333602
Join Date: Sep 2012
Chapter/Region: W. Canada
Vehicle:
2012 STi
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moore Performance View Post
Good chatting with you last week, Matt!

I say you run with some of the ideas that we discussed and give your own setup a go! If not, here's what we've been kicking around as a collaborative with composites maven Carbotron

As it looks, this particular A2W/Manifold will be tested with an EFR based twin-scroll setup.
Beautiful piece!

I spent all weekend thinking about it and have been playing around with some sim'd and cardboard/foam mock ups (yeah I know cardboard and foam but any composite work I do I make models with cardboard and foam - or at least I will until I can buy a 3D printer.... oh that'd be sweet )..

I was trying to figure out the best spot for my throttle body, if I wanted it after the last bend or before (like on yours).. My thinking was that the air entering the manifold would be a bit happier with the TB right against it preventing turbulence induced from the TB from messing with flow in the pipe.. The air leaving the TB would have a large expansion spot and then hit the vanes of the IC smoothing air flow meaning the turbulence would have less of a chance of messing with the flow like it would in the smaller linear space of the pre-TB pipe. The sims I was playing with didn't really give me a lot of insight though, in all honesty I doubt it would make much of a difference if any at all in either direction... Probably easier to setup and take less space to do it your way lol.

I love the look of those plenums, nice smooth transitions bet they flow great!

Hopefully I can mock one up and post some pics in the next 2-3 weeks (no I will not post up what I taped together lol) and compare notes. Also means I will have to build flow bench to test this on... YAY! more projects!!

Thanks again!!

Matt
Matty_STi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2013, 11:38 PM   #15
Ryze
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 257552
Join Date: Sep 2010
Default

First I would like to say I DID NOT read all the details but I have some information, and take it whats its worth because Im not sure your exact application (daily driver, drag race car, road race car, etc etc)
I will tell you right now from experience building and tuning multiple LSJ powered cars (Ion Redline and cobaltss/sc) That have w2a intercoolers inside the intake manifold. That the air inside the manifold stopped at idle (think stop and go lights) will still heat soak even though the fluid is running through the intercooler core. No air flow over the intercooler = no cooling effect, same as a2a.

I have datalogs to prove that, if I must.

daily driving you will also have a tough time getting IAT's down to ambient or below temps without some sort of cooling (ICE box, killer chiller etc etc) which is mostly impractical for most daily drivers
Ryze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 12:13 AM   #16
RaceFaceXC
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 165749
Join Date: Dec 2007
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: stupid Florida
Vehicle:
2007 No YELLING
on the bus!

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matty_STi View Post
If this project falls on it's face I will just ask dale to make me one! hahaha

Any more details that anyone wants to add are more than welcome!

-Matt
Some aircraft engines use an intercooler after TB design. (See Teledyne-Continental GTSIO-520-H) They run at a constant speed. No gear changes, no on/off throttle. What would an intercooler after TB design that fits under the hood, is efficient to cool the intake charge and doesn't kill throttle response be like?
RaceFaceXC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 02:57 AM   #17
Matty_STi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 333602
Join Date: Sep 2012
Chapter/Region: W. Canada
Vehicle:
2012 STi
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryze View Post
First I would like to say I DID NOT read all the details but I have some information, and take it whats its worth because Im not sure your exact application (daily driver, drag race car, road race car, etc etc)
I will tell you right now from experience building and tuning multiple LSJ powered cars (Ion Redline and cobaltss/sc) That have w2a intercoolers inside the intake manifold. That the air inside the manifold stopped at idle (think stop and go lights) will still heat soak even though the fluid is running through the intercooler core. No air flow over the intercooler = no cooling effect, same as a2a.

I have datalogs to prove that, if I must.

daily driving you will also have a tough time getting IAT's down to ambient or below temps without some sort of cooling (ICE box, killer chiller etc etc) which is mostly impractical for most daily drivers
Thanks for the post. That's why I made this thread. Discussion is a good thing!

This is a 650whp build that will be a daily driver which sees lots of varied track time (not really drag though).

I'm not too worried about heat soaking as I will use a large heat exchanger and also have a large reservoir that won't be in the engine bay but in the trunk. The heat exchanger will also be before the reservoir so that I am not sending heat into that cooked area. I will also have small fans for the heat exchanger.

The issue with awic setups is too small heat exchanger and too small coolant storage. I doubt I will ever worry about heat soak. This build is going to have a very very big focus on heat management, coolant flow, coolant storage and air flow (both aero and for coolant). Sounds like the setups you've dealt with just don't have the necessary cooling capacity (or there is something else at play).

I've dealt with quite a few awic setups and heat soak has never been an issue for me. If air is sitting in a space and a coolant media is acting on it the coolant will still cool that air. If the coolant media isn't allowed to expel the heat it's gained then I can see how you'd get the problems you've talked about.

Matt
Matty_STi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 06:08 PM   #18
Moore Performance
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 231489
Join Date: Dec 2009
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa
Default

^^^^

Nice to see that you're already making progress on this Matt.

Agreed on the heat exchanger size and overall coolant capacity. I will however in a sense agree Ryze that you have to be more mindful of heat transfer if you do an in-manifold design since the core isn't as isolated from the engine's heat (as it would be, say, in a typical top mount location, connected to the throttle body with tubing and silicone).

Point is, If you are integrating TGV's into the design then look hard at the Turn in Concepts' composite pieces, or at minimum do a nice phenolic in there. We didn't have room for a spacer without severely modifying the hood... and there is a serious heat transfer that occurs due to aluminum's wondrous conductivity.

We built this manifold pre-TIC composite TGV; had these been out int he marketplace, the bottom end-tank/injector holder assembly would have been a composite unit. It's worth noting that AL's conductivity can be used to one's advantage if icy water is primarily run through the cores - connecting the ic assemblies directly to the heads isn't a bad thought in this case and would probably be worth testing for a hardcore drag/high speed car.
Moore Performance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 06:34 PM   #19
Matty_STi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 333602
Join Date: Sep 2012
Chapter/Region: W. Canada
Vehicle:
2012 STi
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moore Performance View Post
^^^^

Nice to see that you're already making progress on this Matt.

Agreed on the heat exchanger size and overall coolant capacity. I will however in a sense agree Ryze that you have to be more mindful of heat transfer if you do an in-manifold design since the core isn't as isolated from the engine's heat (as it would be, say, in a typical top mount location, connected to the throttle body with tubing and silicone).

Point is, If you are integrating TGV's into the design then look hard at the Turn in Concepts' composite pieces, or at minimum do a nice phenolic in there. We didn't have room for a spacer without severely modifying the hood... and there is a serious heat transfer that occurs due to aluminum's wondrous conductivity.

We built this manifold pre-TIC composite TGV; had these been out int he marketplace, the bottom end-tank/injector holder assembly would have been a composite unit. It's worth noting that AL's conductivity can be used to one's advantage if icy water is primarily run through the cores - connecting the ic assemblies directly to the heads isn't a bad thought in this case and would probably be worth testing for a hardcore drag/high speed car.
I think with the composite intake runners (probably use carbon fiber-aramid layup as it will be far better at vibration resistance and also stresses from varied boost levels and more resistance to work stress failures) the amount of thermal conduction will be very very low.

You guys are right about worrying about the placement and the core warming from convection and radiation. I was thinking of creating a carbon fiber heat shield to place underneath the manifold-core-plenum. I could also use one of those gold heat reflective pads and also some sort of thermal barrier coating like swaintech makes. The top of the manifold-core-plenum I will likely cost with an emissive coating like swaintech a BBE.

I could always get crazy and use copper heat sinks and pull the heat away from the actual outer shell of the manifold-plenum.

I could also do the manifold-plenum in carbon-aramid and essentially have the only metallic piece be the Core itself. So the whole entity would be CF-aramid (end tanks, runners, heat shield, piping, the shell around the core, etc). That's a lot more work. But not too crazy. End tanks would be some work but probably pretty easy to mold up. The shell of the core and heat shields will be flat panels so easy enough. Piping and runners are really the most work (and the most intimidating part of the build) and what I was always going to do in composite and of course the pieces I was most worried about not working properly.

I will so a small phenolic spacer between runner and the rest of the motor just for that extra bit of thermal "space".

So guys, should I do the whole thing in composite(like described above)? LOL

This is a great discussion too lets keep the ideas "flowing"! HA!!!

-Matt
Matty_STi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2013, 05:07 PM   #20
Moore Performance
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 231489
Join Date: Dec 2009
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa
Default

^^ I don't think full carbon is a bad idea. I'm no composites expert, so I'll try and get the head of Carbotron to say a bit or two on the subject. Make tons of sense for the runner taper, thermal management and general flow.

Will this car have A/C ?
Moore Performance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2013, 05:16 PM   #21
Matty_STi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 333602
Join Date: Sep 2012
Chapter/Region: W. Canada
Vehicle:
2012 STi
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moore Performance View Post
^^ I don't think full carbon is a bad idea. I'm no composites expert, so I'll try and get the head of Carbotron to say a bit or two on the subject. Make tons of sense for the runner taper, thermal management and general flow.

Will this car have A/C ?
Cool. Look forward to what they have to say.

Yes I'm going to keep AC.
2012 usdm sti for those that want to know.

-Matt
Matty_STi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2013, 05:59 PM   #22
Moore Performance
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 231489
Join Date: Dec 2009
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matty_STi View Post
Cool. Look forward to what they have to say.

Yes I'm going to keep AC.
2012 usdm sti for those that want to know.

-Matt
In that case, you could do an awesome tapered carbon runner, bonded to aluminum everywhere else. Simple phenolic to the head, and your carbon fiber heat shield. Then use the cooling properties of the A/C system to make heat-soak a non-factor at lower speed (i.e. lower flow through the heat exchanger).

of course all carbon would be much more baller....but if you're looking for an effective alternative this wouldn't be bad.
Moore Performance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2013, 09:00 PM   #23
Matty_STi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 333602
Join Date: Sep 2012
Chapter/Region: W. Canada
Vehicle:
2012 STi
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moore Performance View Post
In that case, you could do an awesome tapered carbon runner, bonded to aluminum everywhere else. Simple phenolic to the head, and your carbon fiber heat shield. Then use the cooling properties of the A/C system to make heat-soak a non-factor at lower speed (i.e. lower flow through the heat exchanger).

of course all carbon would be much more baller....but if you're looking for an effective alternative this wouldn't be bad.
lol yeah I am thinking CF for the whole job because super baller hahaha.


Honestly though I think the additional performance and heat resistance from a full CF setup would be worth it. Plus more uniform look.

-------------------

Not sure how much more the AC unit would contribute to cooling or really what would be the best way to utilize this? (honestly I have no idea)


As for flow through the heat exchanger:

I am leaning towards this pump: Meziere WP136S pump; 20GPM, 3000+ hrs service life
http://www.meziere.com/ps-892-860-wp136s.aspx


And quite a large heat exchanger: 26x7x2
http://www.frozenboost.com/product_i...80540435796d3f

With a couple 7 inch fans to move additional air. Though if my testing shows that a thicker core will benefit then I won't hesitate to go bigger. I am thinking that the 3.5 inch thick heat exchanger wouldn't be so horrible of an idea.


Reservoir will be in the trunk area and be 10L (2.64 gallons). All told I can make a rough guess of about 16-19L of coolant in the system. That is a pretty robust volume of coolant mass. It will be able to handle a large amount of thermal energy before becoming heat soaked. Hopefully with the big heat exchanger, fans and really high flow pump I should have no worries about heat soak.

(I am also going to add these details to the OP as well).

-Matt
Matty_STi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 05:35 PM   #24
Moore Performance
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 231489
Join Date: Dec 2009
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa
Default

Looks good!

You might want to consider a bigger heat exchanger. If not, at least upgrade the line sizes. 1/2" is not optimal. At least 3/4, and even bigger if you can make it happen.
Moore Performance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 06:39 PM   #25
Matty_STi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 333602
Join Date: Sep 2012
Chapter/Region: W. Canada
Vehicle:
2012 STi
DGM

Default

Hmmm totally didn't even think about line size.

Lower pressure higher flow will mean less heat is generated by pumped and also should be better at rejecting heat absorption after its cooled.

I'm not sure what I want to do about heat exchanger size. That's already fairly big and blocking a large part of the rad. Even though I'm going to use an upgrades rad I'm not sure what to do about heat exchanger size. Depth won't really add a whole lot of cooling per lb of exchanger weight versus a wider or taller one. Course wider or taller kills airflow to the rad. Hrmmm

Next up to figure out is TB

I was looking at the skunk2 72mm Dbw tb. But I think with this design that will be a bottle neck in a big way. Also drive by wire is a must. So much more cool things can be done with dbw versus cable actuated. And with a syvecs s8 i could really have fun! Domestic Big bore throttle bodies have been at the top of the list and seem to be fairly popular amongst the Audi and Volkswagen crowd.

-Matt
Matty_STi is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2014 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.