Intercooler finally done

Joined
Jul 3, 2004
Messages
2,500
Location
Anchorage, AK
Well, it is finally done. So far pretty impressed with the results. Can't do much testing as it is pretty cold and the roads are less than ideal for "horsing" around:D
First pic is of the intercooler installed, like posted before.
Second pic is of the plumbing on the drivers side. I drilled and taped a hole on the pipe right next to the intake for the boost gauge and what other thing was hocked up to at this point.
Third pic is of the passenger side.
Fourth pic is of the turbo compressor and what all I did there. I removed the compressor housing and rotated the outlet downward facing the engine mount on that side. I then had to fab up a fancy curved mount to mount to the other hole for the braket holding the wastegate controller. Had a very leaky water coolant conection at the turbo middle section since there was no gasket and the surface was not flush anymore. Had to cut up a new gasket to seal this. I also added a manuel boost control in the line going to the waste gate controller.
intercooler 018b.jpg
intercooler 021b.jpg
 
Last edited:

Stone

Moderator
 
Joined
May 13, 2004
Messages
3,130
Location
BC, Canada
Wow, you got it done! Can't wait to hear what kind of numbers/report you can give us when you can really test her out.
 
Joined
Jul 3, 2004
Messages
2,500
Location
Anchorage, AK
continuation

The fourth picture is below:)
Now for the rest of the story. First drive I blew off a silicone connector maybe half mile down the road. Opened the hood to see what happend and noticed the afformentioned water connection for the turbo cooling leaking real bad. Found a hose come off of one of the tubing. So drove back to the garage and fabed up a gasket for the water leak and reset all the silicone conections. left again for home and checked everything at the gas station to fill up for drive home. I turned in the manuel boost controller a little since I was only getting about 4psi max. Everything was still together under the hood and no water leak.
After adjusting the manuel boost controller, I was now getting about 10psi max boost, about 1in more than before.
Driving steady at 55mph on flat ground, boost was about 4psi and EGT about 375. With a little incline, EGT would creep up to about 400. I think before at cruise I would get about 500 on the EGT. The highest EGT I got was 600 with rpm at about 1700 and alot of throttle, boost about 4psi. The one dry hill I found I was able to put the pedle down firmly and got 10psi boost and still about 500EGT. Before at about 9psi on a good hill climg I would get easy 900EGT. I filled up tonight at about 230mi. for the trip home and got 24mpg, the best I have gotten yet, that with half tank of #1 and #2 diesel with a squirt of magic diesel alixier. I drove no faster than 55mph and had alot of 40-45mph in the curves. Had a stretch of about 4mi that I drove about 25mph in 4hi due to rain on ice.
Tomorrow I will take all the tubing apart again and scuff up the ends that the silicone connectors will be seated on to try and get better sealing. I used polished aluminum tubing in 2.5in dia. Stupid idea to use polished tubing with silicone connectors. Looks pretty though.
Anyway, I think I will leave the power where it's at till spring when we get dry roads again and can see the exhaust and see about increasing boost some more and probably fuel.
intercooler 023b.jpg
 

crushers

post ho
 
 
Joined
Feb 10, 2004
Messages
22,188
Location
Tara Ontario
looks good, congrates
and i love the numbers... so up to 14 psi when the roads are dry?
cheers and thanks for the write up...
 
Joined
Jul 3, 2004
Messages
2,500
Location
Anchorage, AK
Max boost I have seen so far was 10psi. 14 is definitely set-able:) but I don't think I will be going there any time soon. When you do get 10psi you can hear a slight wistle like the full size trucks and semi's do:D
 

Vegard

 
Joined
Jul 14, 2005
Messages
118
Location
Norway
Anyone know what the proper size of the IC core should be on a turboed 3B? Can it be too large?
 

VTCruiser

 
 
Joined
Sep 12, 2003
Messages
3,475
Location
Tacoma, WA
CID X RPM X VE = cfm
1728 X 2

CID = engine displacment (in^3)
RPM = revolutions per minute
VE = engine volumtric efficiency (1 for 100% theoretical)
1728 = in^3 to ft^3 conversion factor
2 = For 4 stroke engine, 2 revolutions per total displacement

Calculate minimum volumetric flow. The idea is the bigger the better while minimizing pressure drop over the IC.
 

crushers

post ho
 
 
Joined
Feb 10, 2004
Messages
22,188
Location
Tara Ontario
when i punched in my calculations for the intercooler fo rmy PZ turbo and contacted Bell Intercoolers i was told the formula for the gassers is wrong for a diesel since a diesel uses more air flow. i would contact Gerhard at Bell and ask him what works...
cheers
 

VTCruiser

 
 
Joined
Sep 12, 2003
Messages
3,475
Location
Tacoma, WA
interesting, i wonder how that is. it's strictly volume so i would think the RPM and displacement would be all the engine specs you need. did explain what is different in the calculations? how much of a difference was there between you calculation and his?
 

brownbear

Mod in Hibernation
Moderator
 
Joined
Sep 6, 2004
Messages
6,672
Location
North West Ontario
crushers said:
when i punched in my calculations for the intercooler fo rmy PZ turbo and contacted Bell Intercoolers i was told the formula for the gassers is wrong for a diesel since a diesel uses more air flow. i would contact Gerhard at Bell and ask him what works...
cheers
not saying that isn't correct.....but I have heard that when you find a turbo for diesel you are looking for one off of a gas engine quite a bit smaller. As the gasser has more flow.

for example on a 3.4L 3B we look for a turbo off of a 2.0-2.5L gasser.

Does this jive? Everything I have read has lead to this. And when I worked calculations with the turbo shop it was semi confrimed. Semi........
 
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
170
Location
Denver again
I believe this formula should work for both types of combustion. All the equation basically says is Displacement (volume) x RPM (how many times the volume is filled) = Cubic feet per min.(total air flowed through the said volume). Of course as VTcruiser states we must divide by 2 because it’s a 4-stroke engine. The volumetric efficiency (VE) takes into account energy lost. It’s kind of a fudge factor. I think it’s for loss due to stuff like the timing of valves opening and closing, restrictions to airflow (intake and exhaust), and heat generated. From what I have read diesel engines have a higher VE than gassers but I am not sure how much.
I think problems with multiple variables (RPM, Displacement, and VE) are best understood by looking at them graphically. So I Exceled it. I just made some VE numbers up for the sake of argument. I think 75% is reasonable for a gasser and I gave the diesel only a 5% advantage.
If you compare the CFM’s between a theoretical 3B (3.4L at 4000 RPM with 100% VE) and a theoretical gasser (2.5L at 5500 RPM (redline?) with 100% VE) the numbers are very close (about 240CFM upper yellow line). That’s why the 2.0-2.5L rule-of-thumb Brownbear stated works.
To say a gasser out flows a diesel can be slightly misleading. A gas motor will be able to rev higher than a diesel. So assuming the same displacement, then yes the gas motor is able to flow more air. But diesels have a higher VE. Because of this if you compare a gasser and a diesel with the same displacement at the same RPM then the diesel is flowing more air. Also look at the more “realistic” 3B with 80% VE at 4000RPM vs. the gasser with 75% VE at 5500 RPM, now the 3B is actually out flowing the gasser by about 10CFM (lower yellow line).

To summarize:
Graphs allow us to understand complex relationships between variables.
A gas engine can rev higher therefore flowing more air than a diesel with the same displacement.
But a diesel flows more air than a gas engine with the same displacement at the same RPM due to their higher VE.
Diesels Rule.
I am a physics geek.

-Noah
CFM.jpg
 

VTCruiser

 
 
Joined
Sep 12, 2003
Messages
3,475
Location
Tacoma, WA
agreed, the key is redline rpm. a gas engine will typically flow more air than a diesel engine of equal displacement primarily because the diesel turns lower rpms. Also, keep in mind VE often decreases as rpm increases but by assuming 100% theoretical at redline you get an over estimated flow so you are sure not to select an IC that will be too restrictive.
 

Greg_B

 
 
 
Joined
Mar 28, 2002
Messages
4,546
Remember too to consider air density as part of the equation, as the gasser is air throttled.

For a good primer on air density read

this: http://www.bankspower.com/tech_howairflows.cfm

And this:http://www.bankspower.com/Tech_SecrettoMakingPower.cfm

And this:http://www.bankspower.com/Tech_firstair-thenfuel.cfm

There is more reading at other sites, but that is a good start.

Behemoth60 made mention and linked to an interactive site a while back, however I have not had time to put my mind to it...

hth's

gb
 

VTCruiser

 
 
Joined
Sep 12, 2003
Messages
3,475
Location
Tacoma, WA
thats good info. the cfm flow ratings on IC cores are volume only, no mass or density considered, though that's defitely important to remember in regards to ICs in general.
 

crushers

post ho
 
 
Joined
Feb 10, 2004
Messages
22,188
Location
Tara Ontario
i have no first hand experience to go by at this time but once the trayback is returned to me then i can install this one that was "profesionally designed and calculated to work with this engine.
it was designed to give only 1/4 psi drop from the turbo to the throttle body and yet drop the air temp from 72C to 30C (if i remember this correctly).
cheers
 
Top Bottom