Volumetric Efficiency Comparo
#32
What I meant was that an early statement said that for non turbo cars, that max VE would be say 130. So take any non turbo car that has the same performance as say a 996tt or 997tt (standard), then would that same car have a similar VE e.g. 185?
#33
Can you explain that in English for me - the formula
#34
Sorry guys, I have a question on Ve: in A. Graham Bell's forced induction book I found some suggested Ve values for 4 valve engines: 90% through 105% depending on the level of modifications operated on the engine...And he uses these values to calculate the necessary compressor CFM when trying to match engine/turbo.
How can I relate the values you are calculating to those suggested in the book?
How can I relate the values you are calculating to those suggested in the book?
#35
Sorry guys, I have a question on Ve: in A. Graham Bell's forced induction book I found some suggested Ve values for 4 valve engines: 90% through 105% depending on the level of modifications operated on the engine...And he uses these values to calculate the necessary compressor CFM when trying to match engine/turbo.
How can I relate the values you are calculating to those suggested in the book?
How can I relate the values you are calculating to those suggested in the book?
#36
wa = actual engine airflow (lb/min)
hp = horsepower at the crank
AFR = air fuel ratio
BSFC = brake specific fuel consumption which you divide by 60 to convert to min. (typical turbo engine is .45 to .60)
hp = horsepower at the crank
AFR = air fuel ratio
BSFC = brake specific fuel consumption which you divide by 60 to convert to min. (typical turbo engine is .45 to .60)
#37
depends on the fuel used, but figure an aggressive tune and race fuel .45 to .50
#38
Mike was kind enough to send me a datalog of one his runs. So I compared his VEs (996t, A28s) to mine (997.1t, upgraded vtgs). Mike ran a very fast 5.5s 60-130 (4th gear, 0 shift) and my set-up did a 6.9 (4th, gear, 0 shift). While there is nothing better than real-world data, VEs are interesting in that engine output can be compared without secondary factors like car weight, tailwind, % decline, etc... There is a pretty dramatic difference in VEs as would be expected but look at the low-mid range and area under the curve. Very impressive. For reference, a completely stock 997.1t VE will max out around 185.
Thanks again Mike for sharing your data with me. Happy New Year Bro!
Thanks again Mike for sharing your data with me. Happy New Year Bro!
Why cant i see the graph!
#40
Sorry guys, I have a question on Ve: in A. Graham Bell's forced induction book I found some suggested Ve values for 4 valve engines: 90% through 105% depending on the level of modifications operated on the engine...And he uses these values to calculate the necessary compressor CFM when trying to match engine/turbo.
How can I relate the values you are calculating to those suggested in the book?
How can I relate the values you are calculating to those suggested in the book?
After you add the turbo's, the VEs obviously go up. We're are measuring VEs for different set-ups, post-mod. The goal, of course, is to maximize VEs across the rpm power range. You could measure VEs after installing different supporting mods like ICs to see which might be more effective under different conditions. Just because an IC may be controlling IATs better at X hp does not mean that it will be suitable at higher hp due to flow restrictions. VEs will tell you this.
#43
Have you guys gotten over 700whp out of VTG's?
#44
From the looks of it, it seems that you get better power even well below 750--lol.
#45
Given that
Where:
r is the fuel consumption rate in grams per second (g·s-1) P is the power produced in watts where P = τω How do you know what the fuel consumption of your engine is ie r
Frank