Compounding
Compounding
02-17-2014, 05:07 AM
#51
(02-15-2014, 10:43 AM)raysorenson Shadowmaker, can you explain why 3 bar is the bottom limit for sequential? Why not just set the primary wastegate for 1 bar and the secondary for 2 bar?
Shadowmaker stated that 3bar is bottom limit for compound charging.. There is practially no bottom limit for sequential (staged) turbos.
Forget boost and think about pressure ratios. 1bar boost is 2bar absolute pressure (PR 2,0). Compressors in series means pressure ratios are multiplied.
If HP turbo runs on PR 2,0 (1bar boost) and total boost is 2bar, the pressure ratio of LP turbo is only 1,5. Now look at the compressor maps and you'll see the problem..
Shadowmaker, any measurements yet on real life boost/emp ratios?
This post was last modified: 02-17-2014, 05:13 AM by muuris.
(02-15-2014, 10:43 AM)raysorenson Shadowmaker, can you explain why 3 bar is the bottom limit for sequential? Why not just set the primary wastegate for 1 bar and the secondary for 2 bar?
Shadowmaker stated that 3bar is bottom limit for compound charging.. There is practially no bottom limit for sequential (staged) turbos.
Forget boost and think about pressure ratios. 1bar boost is 2bar absolute pressure (PR 2,0). Compressors in series means pressure ratios are multiplied.
If HP turbo runs on PR 2,0 (1bar boost) and total boost is 2bar, the pressure ratio of LP turbo is only 1,5. Now look at the compressor maps and you'll see the problem..
Shadowmaker, any measurements yet on real life boost/emp ratios?
02-17-2014, 08:02 AM
#52
Installed:
OM606/722.6, big IC, W220 brakes.
Planned:
DIY manifold, compound, 722.6 controller, built IP.
[i]Less rust.. [/i]
In the 'Turbochargers' book I have from about the 1970's, it states that pressure ratios should aim to be approximately the same on each stage, though it doesn't say why. I'll scan in the paragraph when I dig it out..
Installed:
OM606/722.6, big IC, W220 brakes.
Planned:
DIY manifold, compound, 722.6 controller, built IP.
[i]Less rust.. [/i]
02-17-2014, 09:33 AM
#53
intend to go for one 606 bilding to replace my 605 , my idea is to go twin turbo,2 of the old G20 for each set of 3 cylinders, instead of one big for the 6. what u think of that? like in many things in mechanics that might be a good solution, i cant see why not.
Regards
FD,
Powered by tractor fuel
hello fine people,
intend to go for one 606 bilding to replace my 605 , my idea is to go twin turbo,2 of the old G20 for each set of 3 cylinders, instead of one big for the 6. what u think of that? like in many things in mechanics that might be a good solution, i cant see why not.
Regards
FD,
Powered by tractor fuel
02-17-2014, 10:29 AM
#54
This one,
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Kinugawa-Billet-...c9&vxp=mtr
And this one
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Kinugawa-Turboch...d7&vxp=mtr
For compounding
Both are journal bearing,,,,,
-------------------------------------------
2002. 09 Ssangyong Musso SUT
OM662STP + 7.5mm + TD06-25G with customized 84mm compressor(2.4Bar)
-------------------------------------------
2002. 12 Ssangyong Korando
OM662LA 2.9ltr + RS191 5.5mm stock
-------------------------------------------
I'm thinking about
This one,
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Kinugawa-Billet-...c9&vxp=mtr
And this one
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Kinugawa-Turboch...d7&vxp=mtr
For compounding
Both are journal bearing,,,,,
-------------------------------------------
2002. 09 Ssangyong Musso SUT
OM662STP + 7.5mm + TD06-25G with customized 84mm compressor(2.4Bar)
-------------------------------------------
2002. 12 Ssangyong Korando
OM662LA 2.9ltr + RS191 5.5mm stock
-------------------------------------------
02-17-2014, 12:17 PM
#55
(02-17-2014, 10:29 AM)pmj4147 I'm thinking aboutHere are my thoughts; the biggest one has a turbine that is too small(both cm2 and turbine wheel are too small) and the small turbo is not a high PR turbo. Don't know that brand.
This one,
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Kinugawa-Billet-...c9&vxp=mtr
And this one
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Kinugawa-Turboch...d7&vxp=mtr
For compounding
Both are journal bearing,,,,,
This post was last modified: 02-17-2014, 12:18 PM by erling66.
(02-17-2014, 10:29 AM)pmj4147 I'm thinking aboutHere are my thoughts; the biggest one has a turbine that is too small(both cm2 and turbine wheel are too small) and the small turbo is not a high PR turbo. Don't know that brand.
This one,
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Kinugawa-Billet-...c9&vxp=mtr
And this one
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Kinugawa-Turboch...d7&vxp=mtr
For compounding
Both are journal bearing,,,,,
02-17-2014, 03:06 PM
#56
(02-17-2014, 08:02 AM)Hario In the 'Turbochargers' book I have from about the 1970's, it states that pressure ratios should aim to be approximately the same on each stage, though it doesn't say why. I'll scan in the paragraph when I dig it out..
if the compressors is the same pressure ratio and you cool down the air between it will show the lowest energy consumption ruffly
(02-17-2014, 08:02 AM)Hario In the 'Turbochargers' book I have from about the 1970's, it states that pressure ratios should aim to be approximately the same on each stage, though it doesn't say why. I'll scan in the paragraph when I dig it out..
02-20-2014, 06:33 PM
#57
Let's say a N/A 3000cc engine consumes 200cfm @ 4000rpm, at which point the large turbo mentioned sbove spools.
if that same engine is turbocharged with 15 psi, (that's double the air intake of the NA engine) it would then consume 400cfm @ 4000rpm, or, assuming all things being equal: 200cfm @ 2000rpm, allowing the HX50 to spool.
I say consume air, fully aware exhaust volume increases much beyond this but you get the idea.
I think from loads of research, people compound obviously to achieve the high manifold pressures that can make big power from a diesel engine. But they do it because it can be done from second hand parts found dirt cheap!
Here in the UK I've costed compounding my next project to be around £1500 for a w202 (C250), and another £500 in parts for the compound installation: used turbo etc, where else can you get a 50 psi boosted daily vehicle for £2k (excluding IP), I think it's awesome.
Feeding the LP with flow from a turbine and a wastegate is obviously bad for flow, but as with the lesser need for high lift cams in a forced induction application, the gasses are being pumped and we are not relying on atmospheric pressure to move things along so we just don't worry much about it.
Ops didn't mean to rant.. Ha
H
This post was last modified: 02-22-2014, 08:31 AM by Hario'.
Installed:
OM606/722.6, big IC, W220 brakes.
Planned:
DIY manifold, compound, 722.6 controller, built IP.
[i]Less rust.. [/i]
I think some people don't realise the physics behind why the secondary (Lets say HX50) turbo spools quicker when compounded compared to on its own.
Let's say a N/A 3000cc engine consumes 200cfm @ 4000rpm, at which point the large turbo mentioned sbove spools.
if that same engine is turbocharged with 15 psi, (that's double the air intake of the NA engine) it would then consume 400cfm @ 4000rpm, or, assuming all things being equal: 200cfm @ 2000rpm, allowing the HX50 to spool.
I say consume air, fully aware exhaust volume increases much beyond this but you get the idea.
I think from loads of research, people compound obviously to achieve the high manifold pressures that can make big power from a diesel engine. But they do it because it can be done from second hand parts found dirt cheap!
Here in the UK I've costed compounding my next project to be around £1500 for a w202 (C250), and another £500 in parts for the compound installation: used turbo etc, where else can you get a 50 psi boosted daily vehicle for £2k (excluding IP), I think it's awesome.
Feeding the LP with flow from a turbine and a wastegate is obviously bad for flow, but as with the lesser need for high lift cams in a forced induction application, the gasses are being pumped and we are not relying on atmospheric pressure to move things along so we just don't worry much about it.
Ops didn't mean to rant.. Ha
H
Installed:
OM606/722.6, big IC, W220 brakes.
Planned:
DIY manifold, compound, 722.6 controller, built IP.
[i]Less rust.. [/i]
02-21-2014, 10:58 AM
#58
(02-20-2014, 06:33 PM)Hario I think some people don't realise the physics behind why the secondary (Lets say HX50) turbo spools quicker when compounded compared to on its own.
Let's say a N/A 3000cc engine consumes 200cfm @ 4000rpm, at which point the large turbo mentioned sbove spools.
if that same engine is turbocharged with 15 psi, (that's double the air intake of the NA engine) it would then consume 400cfm @ 4000rpm, or, assuming all things being equal: 200cfm @ 2000rpm, allowing the HX50 to spool.
I say consume air, fully aware exhaust volume increases much beyond this but you get the idea.
I think from loads of research, people compound obviously to achieve the high manifold pressures that can make big power from a diesel engine. But they do it because it can be done from second hand parts found dirt cheap!
Here in the UK I've costed compounding my next project to be around £1500 for a w202 (C250), and another £500 in parts for the compound installation: used turbo etc, where else can you get a 50 psi boosted daily vehicle for £2k (excluding IP), I think it's awesome.
Feeding the LP with flow from a turbine and a wastegate is obviously bad for flow, but as with the lesser need for high lift cams in a forced induction application, the gasses are being pumped and we are not relying on atmospheric pressure to move things along so we just don't worry much about it.
Os didn't mean to rant.. Ha
H
Very nice write up
'82 300D -3" straight pipe, ALDA deleted, 3in1 glowshift gauge, HX30, egr-less manifold, A/W intercooler
'14 Ram 6.7l cummins -G56 handshaker, wishing it was deleted
(02-20-2014, 06:33 PM)Hario I think some people don't realise the physics behind why the secondary (Lets say HX50) turbo spools quicker when compounded compared to on its own.
Let's say a N/A 3000cc engine consumes 200cfm @ 4000rpm, at which point the large turbo mentioned sbove spools.
if that same engine is turbocharged with 15 psi, (that's double the air intake of the NA engine) it would then consume 400cfm @ 4000rpm, or, assuming all things being equal: 200cfm @ 2000rpm, allowing the HX50 to spool.
I say consume air, fully aware exhaust volume increases much beyond this but you get the idea.
I think from loads of research, people compound obviously to achieve the high manifold pressures that can make big power from a diesel engine. But they do it because it can be done from second hand parts found dirt cheap!
Here in the UK I've costed compounding my next project to be around £1500 for a w202 (C250), and another £500 in parts for the compound installation: used turbo etc, where else can you get a 50 psi boosted daily vehicle for £2k (excluding IP), I think it's awesome.
Feeding the LP with flow from a turbine and a wastegate is obviously bad for flow, but as with the lesser need for high lift cams in a forced induction application, the gasses are being pumped and we are not relying on atmospheric pressure to move things along so we just don't worry much about it.
Os didn't mean to rant.. Ha
H
Very nice write up
'82 300D -3" straight pipe, ALDA deleted, 3in1 glowshift gauge, HX30, egr-less manifold, A/W intercooler
'14 Ram 6.7l cummins -G56 handshaker, wishing it was deleted
02-21-2014, 11:37 AM
#59
(02-20-2014, 06:33 PM)Hario I think some people don't realise the physics behind why the secondary (Lets say HX50) turbo spools quicker when compounded compared to on its own.
Let's say a N/A 3000cc engine consumes 200cfm @ 4000rpm, at which point the large turbo mentioned sbove spools.
if that same engine is turbocharged with 15 psi, (that's double the air intake of the NA engine) it would then consume 400cfm @ 4000rpm, or, assuming all things being equal: 200cfm @ 2000rpm, allowing the HX50 to spool.
I say consume air, fully aware exhaust volume increases much beyond this but you get the idea.
I think from loads of research, people compound obviously to achieve the high manifold pressures that can make big power from a diesel engine. But they do it because it can be done from second hand parts found dirt cheap!
Here in the UK I've costed compounding my next project to be around £1500 for a w202 (C250), and another £500 in parts for the compound installation: used turbo etc, where else can you get a 50 psi boosted daily vehicle for £2k (excluding IP), I think it's awesome.
Feeding the LP with flow from a turbine and a wastegate is obviously bad for flow, but as with the lesser need for high lift cams in a forced induction application, the gasses are being pumped and we are not relying on atmospheric pressure to move things along so we just don't worry much about it.
Os didn't mean to rant.. Ha
H
F-tune Performance
![[Image: V-band_om606.jpg]](http://www.f-tune.se/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/V-band_om606.jpg)
![[Image: GTX3582R.jpg]](http://www.f-tune.se/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/GTX3582R.jpg)
![[Image: gs6-53dz_gearbox.jpg]](http://www.f-tune.se/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/gs6-53dz_gearbox.jpg)
I can help you out with all your manual transmission, clutch, flywheel, intake and exhaust manifold issues.
+1 nice write up.
(02-20-2014, 06:33 PM)Hario I think some people don't realise the physics behind why the secondary (Lets say HX50) turbo spools quicker when compounded compared to on its own.
Let's say a N/A 3000cc engine consumes 200cfm @ 4000rpm, at which point the large turbo mentioned sbove spools.
if that same engine is turbocharged with 15 psi, (that's double the air intake of the NA engine) it would then consume 400cfm @ 4000rpm, or, assuming all things being equal: 200cfm @ 2000rpm, allowing the HX50 to spool.
I say consume air, fully aware exhaust volume increases much beyond this but you get the idea.
I think from loads of research, people compound obviously to achieve the high manifold pressures that can make big power from a diesel engine. But they do it because it can be done from second hand parts found dirt cheap!
Here in the UK I've costed compounding my next project to be around £1500 for a w202 (C250), and another £500 in parts for the compound installation: used turbo etc, where else can you get a 50 psi boosted daily vehicle for £2k (excluding IP), I think it's awesome.
Feeding the LP with flow from a turbine and a wastegate is obviously bad for flow, but as with the lesser need for high lift cams in a forced induction application, the gasses are being pumped and we are not relying on atmospheric pressure to move things along so we just don't worry much about it.
Os didn't mean to rant.. Ha
H
F-tune Performance
I can help you out with all your manual transmission, clutch, flywheel, intake and exhaust manifold issues.
02-22-2014, 08:38 AM
#60
![[Image: %24(KGrHqUOKjsE4i2zIyZFBOOdhPZC5!~~0_12.JPG]](http://i.ebayimg.com/00/%24(KGrHqUOKjsE4i2zIyZFBOOdhPZC5!~~0_12.JPG)
This is a kit to make a compound upgrade of the stock turbo setup. So naturally they are keeping as much stock as possible. My question now is would it not be better to push air through the bigger turbo?
In the picture they are pushing the big turbos air through the stock turbos compressor housing. I have all the time thought about this the other way around.
F-tune Performance
I can help you out with all your manual transmission, clutch, flywheel, intake and exhaust manifold issues.
I found this picture online.
This is a kit to make a compound upgrade of the stock turbo setup. So naturally they are keeping as much stock as possible. My question now is would it not be better to push air through the bigger turbo?
In the picture they are pushing the big turbos air through the stock turbos compressor housing. I have all the time thought about this the other way around.
F-tune Performance
I can help you out with all your manual transmission, clutch, flywheel, intake and exhaust manifold issues.
02-22-2014, 08:54 AM
#61
Nothing wrong there. Everything seems right.
What engine is this kit for?
(02-22-2014, 08:38 AM)F.R.A.S I found this picture online.
This is a kit to make a compound upgrade of the stock turbo setup. So naturally they are keeping as much stock as possible. My question now is would it not be better to push air through the bigger turbo?
In the picture they are pushing the big turbos air through the stock turbos compressor housing. I have all the time thought about this the other way around.
'05 Jeep Liberty CRD - 160k
'06.5 VW Jetta TDI - 230k
'82 MB 300TD - 116k (motor going to raysorenson)
'81 MB 300TD - 195k (parting out)
'71 Jeep DJ5 - diesel conversion project
It looks like the bigger turbo is on the bottom being fed by the smaller one on top.
Nothing wrong there. Everything seems right.
What engine is this kit for?
(02-22-2014, 08:38 AM)F.R.A.S I found this picture online.
This is a kit to make a compound upgrade of the stock turbo setup. So naturally they are keeping as much stock as possible. My question now is would it not be better to push air through the bigger turbo?
In the picture they are pushing the big turbos air through the stock turbos compressor housing. I have all the time thought about this the other way around.
'05 Jeep Liberty CRD - 160k
'06.5 VW Jetta TDI - 230k
'82 MB 300TD - 116k (motor going to raysorenson)
'81 MB 300TD - 195k (parting out)
'71 Jeep DJ5 - diesel conversion project
02-22-2014, 10:05 AM
#62
Some American truck I believe.
(02-22-2014, 08:54 AM)CRD4x4 It looks like the bigger turbo is on the bottom being fed by the smaller one on top.
Nothing wrong there. Everything seems right.
What engine is this kit for?
F-tune Performance
I can help you out with all your manual transmission, clutch, flywheel, intake and exhaust manifold issues.
I'm talking about the air, not exhaust gases. Would it not be better to feed the bigger compressor with the small turbos airflow? When the big turbo starts to boost 3bar and has to push trough the small compressor as it is right now that must be a bottle neck...
Some American truck I believe.
(02-22-2014, 08:54 AM)CRD4x4 It looks like the bigger turbo is on the bottom being fed by the smaller one on top.
Nothing wrong there. Everything seems right.
What engine is this kit for?
F-tune Performance
I can help you out with all your manual transmission, clutch, flywheel, intake and exhaust manifold issues.
02-22-2014, 10:14 AM
#63
That's the way I understand it at least
'82 300D -3" straight pipe, ALDA deleted, 3in1 glowshift gauge, HX30, egr-less manifold, A/W intercooler
'14 Ram 6.7l cummins -G56 handshaker, wishing it was deleted
Cause the big charger is the atmospheric charger, it's there to over come the natural barometric pressure of 14.7psi or 1bar. The small charger allows for faster spool, and as it makes boost it, so does the larger turbo via exhaust gas from the small one. As the big one starts building boost the small charger compounds it like a two stage air compressor.
That's the way I understand it at least
'82 300D -3" straight pipe, ALDA deleted, 3in1 glowshift gauge, HX30, egr-less manifold, A/W intercooler
'14 Ram 6.7l cummins -G56 handshaker, wishing it was deleted
02-22-2014, 10:32 AM
#64
The closer to atmospheric a compressor is, the bigger it's VOLUME capability needs to be because it's inlet pressure is lower.
Aircraft jet engines use compound compression stages to achieve high combustion pressures, if you've ever seen a cutaway of a jet engine, compressor wheels always start large at the inlet and reduce in size towards the combustion chamber, and the turbine stages increase in size away from the combustion chamber as exhaust energy to drive them reduces and more surface area is needed.
That sweet compound setup in the picture above looks a lot like the bolt on kit for the 5.9 cummins.
Ive started a propoganda campain at work to convince my colleagues why STD is the way forwards, but it takes so long to explain inline diesel IP tuning that most of them loose interest, there are 25 engineers in my office and I've converted 1 so far.. Lol.
Rant again lol.
This post was last modified: 02-22-2014, 10:36 AM by Hario'.
Installed:
OM606/722.6, big IC, W220 brakes.
Planned:
DIY manifold, compound, 722.6 controller, built IP.
[i]Less rust.. [/i]
The high pressure turbo compressor can be smaller because it is flowing already compressed air, it is flowing a smaller VOLUME because the large low pressure compressor has compressed it to a higher DENSITY.
The closer to atmospheric a compressor is, the bigger it's VOLUME capability needs to be because it's inlet pressure is lower.
Aircraft jet engines use compound compression stages to achieve high combustion pressures, if you've ever seen a cutaway of a jet engine, compressor wheels always start large at the inlet and reduce in size towards the combustion chamber, and the turbine stages increase in size away from the combustion chamber as exhaust energy to drive them reduces and more surface area is needed.
That sweet compound setup in the picture above looks a lot like the bolt on kit for the 5.9 cummins.
Ive started a propoganda campain at work to convince my colleagues why STD is the way forwards, but it takes so long to explain inline diesel IP tuning that most of them loose interest, there are 25 engineers in my office and I've converted 1 so far.. Lol.
Rant again lol.
Installed:
OM606/722.6, big IC, W220 brakes.
Planned:
DIY manifold, compound, 722.6 controller, built IP.
[i]Less rust.. [/i]
02-22-2014, 05:57 PM
#65
I'm gently thinking of using 2 turbo's. But, one thing keeps guessing me... The feeding from the big turbo to the small turbo. Wouldn't that be a serious flow reduction in high rpm? And wouldn't it overspeed the small turbo? And bypassing the hot side with a waste gate also doesn't satisfy me. I want like a throttle body style valve in my exhaust before the big turbo. No flow problems there. EDH performance was using a similar setup with his bad ass triple turbo setup I thought.
02-22-2014, 07:05 PM
#66
but the guy who doesn't ask have a long road to knowledge.When thinking of my previous thoughts here I with the post below just figured some shit out.
Over speeding (revving) the small turbo was one of my concerns to. But if reverting the airflow you are getting another big problem. All the air that the big turbo can deliver will have to be sucked through the small turbo and that's not gonna happen.
As it is in the pictures in this thread the small turbo sucks air though the path of least resistants = the big turbo. When the big turbo starts to make some boost it is like a previous post stated, already compressed air that's going trough the small turbo.
I have thought about a lot of ways to make this setup more efficient, but trust me, that is to costly for most people and to hard fabrication for even more people... The only good solution that's cost efficient is to compound with a supercharger (Eaton m90 goes for $200 on eBay) and a turbo. I think that's the path I'm taking.
But for a 1500hp setup a supercharger AND a compound turbo installation would be awesome to watch. Maybe a supercharger and TWIN compound installations
(02-22-2014, 05:57 PM)Tito I'm gently thinking of using 2 turbo's. But, one thing keeps guessing me... The feeding from the big turbo to the small turbo. Wouldn't that be a serious flow reduction in high rpm? And wouldn't it overspeed the small turbo? And bypassing the hot side with a waste gate also doesn't satisfy me. I want like a throttle body style valve in my exhaust before the big turbo. No flow problems there. EDH performance was using a similar setup with his bad ass triple turbo setup I thought.
F-tune Performance
I can help you out with all your manual transmission, clutch, flywheel, intake and exhaust manifold issues.
I'm starting to think 'compounding' in this thread and I like to thank everybody that helped this happen. I'm a bit slow I know but the guy who doesn't ask have a long road to knowledge.
When thinking of my previous thoughts here I with the post below just figured some shit out.
Over speeding (revving) the small turbo was one of my concerns to. But if reverting the airflow you are getting another big problem. All the air that the big turbo can deliver will have to be sucked through the small turbo and that's not gonna happen.
As it is in the pictures in this thread the small turbo sucks air though the path of least resistants = the big turbo. When the big turbo starts to make some boost it is like a previous post stated, already compressed air that's going trough the small turbo.
I have thought about a lot of ways to make this setup more efficient, but trust me, that is to costly for most people and to hard fabrication for even more people... The only good solution that's cost efficient is to compound with a supercharger (Eaton m90 goes for $200 on eBay) and a turbo. I think that's the path I'm taking.
But for a 1500hp setup a supercharger AND a compound turbo installation would be awesome to watch. Maybe a supercharger and TWIN compound installations
(02-22-2014, 05:57 PM)Tito I'm gently thinking of using 2 turbo's. But, one thing keeps guessing me... The feeding from the big turbo to the small turbo. Wouldn't that be a serious flow reduction in high rpm? And wouldn't it overspeed the small turbo? And bypassing the hot side with a waste gate also doesn't satisfy me. I want like a throttle body style valve in my exhaust before the big turbo. No flow problems there. EDH performance was using a similar setup with his bad ass triple turbo setup I thought.
F-tune Performance
I can help you out with all your manual transmission, clutch, flywheel, intake and exhaust manifold issues.
![[Image: 20140222_222043_zps116fd8e6.jpg]](http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w20/stamsaas/Ke70/20140222_222043_zps116fd8e6.jpg)
02-23-2014, 06:35 PM
#69
(02-15-2014, 10:43 AM)raysorenson Your build is *beautiful* but that intercooler (and it's placement) makes my head explode! How high does IAT get after a few donuts? EDIT, nevermind, that's one of 2 intercoolers, the final IC is huge.
Yes, this one is intercooler and there is also aftercooler that seems to be efficient enough to keep IATs down even on its own. Time to time this "car" has to do long WOT periods without really moving anywhere, so e-fans are the only possible solution. That picture was taken during intercooler fabrication and is still missing the fan, which will be pushing air downwards through that cooler (and hopefully take some heat away from the engine caused by the ex-mani setup).
Muuris, no data yet. They actually tried once to do that and upped boost to around 4bar. Some of the gauges wasn't co-operating, so they had to leave it to another time. According to them the engine is working really nice and smoking with WOT was reduced even more.
Fras, now that you understand why the big turbo is spooling a lot earlier on a compound setup than on its own, you still need to understand how the compressor side is working. Hario said it well, but maybe this analog will help you: Just think that the big turbo is like shovelin sawdust like hell which is then compressed back to solid wood. Now the second turbo is like throwing a wood into fire now and then to match the mass of that sawdust shoveled. This is why the second turbo (called HP= high pressure) can be smaller without restricting the flow, the air going through it is already compressed. Furthermore if you calculate their sizes correctly to each other, you can achieve very high PRs with very low EMPs to pump air efficiently through the engine plus you can have a very wide operating range. If you calculate it wrong you can get very high PRs, but EMPs will rocket skyhigh. Oh, and I have seen many supercharger/turbo setups with OM606, just not one that would work properly.
BTW you should all get your pig flu shots if you haven't already. It's vicious illness.
This post was last modified: 02-24-2014, 02:11 AM by shadowmaker.
shadowmaker
02-23-2014, 06:35 PM #69(02-15-2014, 10:43 AM)raysorenson Your build is *beautiful* but that intercooler (and it's placement) makes my head explode! How high does IAT get after a few donuts? EDIT, nevermind, that's one of 2 intercoolers, the final IC is huge.
Yes, this one is intercooler and there is also aftercooler that seems to be efficient enough to keep IATs down even on its own. Time to time this "car" has to do long WOT periods without really moving anywhere, so e-fans are the only possible solution. That picture was taken during intercooler fabrication and is still missing the fan, which will be pushing air downwards through that cooler (and hopefully take some heat away from the engine caused by the ex-mani setup).
Muuris, no data yet. They actually tried once to do that and upped boost to around 4bar. Some of the gauges wasn't co-operating, so they had to leave it to another time. According to them the engine is working really nice and smoking with WOT was reduced even more.
Fras, now that you understand why the big turbo is spooling a lot earlier on a compound setup than on its own, you still need to understand how the compressor side is working. Hario said it well, but maybe this analog will help you: Just think that the big turbo is like shovelin sawdust like hell which is then compressed back to solid wood. Now the second turbo is like throwing a wood into fire now and then to match the mass of that sawdust shoveled. This is why the second turbo (called HP= high pressure) can be smaller without restricting the flow, the air going through it is already compressed. Furthermore if you calculate their sizes correctly to each other, you can achieve very high PRs with very low EMPs to pump air efficiently through the engine plus you can have a very wide operating range. If you calculate it wrong you can get very high PRs, but EMPs will rocket skyhigh. Oh, and I have seen many supercharger/turbo setups with OM606, just not one that would work properly.
BTW you should all get your pig flu shots if you haven't already. It's vicious illness.
02-24-2014, 04:38 AM
#70
(02-23-2014, 06:35 PM)shadowmaker Fras, now that you understand why the big turbo is spooling a lot earlier on a compound setup than on its own, you still need to understand how the compressor side is working. Hario said it well, but maybe this analog will help you: Just think that the big turbo is like shovelin sawdust like hell which is then compressed back to solid wood. Now the second turbo is like throwing a wood into fire now and then to match the mass of that sawdust shoveled. This is why the second turbo (called HP= high pressure) can be smaller without restricting the flow, the air going through it is already compressed. Furthermore if you calculate their sizes correctly to each other, you can achieve very high PRs with very low EMPs to pump air efficiently through the engine plus you can have a very wide operating range. If you calculate it wrong you can get very high PRs, but EMPs will rocket skyhigh. Oh, and I have seen many supercharger/turbo setups with OM606, just not one that would work properly.
F-tune Performance
I can help you out with all your manual transmission, clutch, flywheel, intake and exhaust manifold issues.
Thanks for the write up man.
(02-23-2014, 06:35 PM)shadowmaker Fras, now that you understand why the big turbo is spooling a lot earlier on a compound setup than on its own, you still need to understand how the compressor side is working. Hario said it well, but maybe this analog will help you: Just think that the big turbo is like shovelin sawdust like hell which is then compressed back to solid wood. Now the second turbo is like throwing a wood into fire now and then to match the mass of that sawdust shoveled. This is why the second turbo (called HP= high pressure) can be smaller without restricting the flow, the air going through it is already compressed. Furthermore if you calculate their sizes correctly to each other, you can achieve very high PRs with very low EMPs to pump air efficiently through the engine plus you can have a very wide operating range. If you calculate it wrong you can get very high PRs, but EMPs will rocket skyhigh. Oh, and I have seen many supercharger/turbo setups with OM606, just not one that would work properly.
F-tune Performance
I can help you out with all your manual transmission, clutch, flywheel, intake and exhaust manifold issues.
02-24-2014, 10:55 AM
#71
(02-24-2014, 04:38 AM)F.R.A.S Thanks for the write up man.
No swet.
Like you, I also like optimizing things plus I'm a true believer in frequency pulse tuning when it comes to turbo engines.
Here's my Aprilia 1000cc.
![[Image: 060220113850.jpg]](http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f336/valonvieja/060220113850.jpg)
![[Image: IMG-20110130-00056.jpg]](http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f336/valonvieja/IMG-20110130-00056.jpg)
Dual plenum intake for my 2.5TDI van targetting 5000rpm area (had 370hp/850Nm, now aiming for more with DLC- coated titanium wrist pins + piston mods, custom rods, crank lightening/shaping, compound setup, Evo3 head with valves so big that they can't fit inside the bore without relocation, girdle, pump mods, bigger nozzles, dogbox transmission... ).
![[Image: 18082009952.jpg]](http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f336/valonvieja/18082009952.jpg)
5-1 manifold with 8 degree collector for my van also targetting 5000rpm area (compound turbo setup is in the cargo area).
![[Image: 18022009383-pieni.jpg]](http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f336/valonvieja/18022009383-pieni.jpg)
5-1 manifold (14 degree collector angle) and 3,5" DP for my 4WD gasser.
![[Image: 130220126046.jpg]](http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f336/valonvieja/130220126046.jpg)
And they all fit even though the turbo weights 35kg alone.
![[Image: 130220126038.jpg]](http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f336/valonvieja/130220126038.jpg)
But all this is kind of pointless, when you compare the outcome with a properly adjusted compound turbo setup. That second turbo added just overtakes pulse tuning by at least ten times.
shadowmaker
02-24-2014, 10:55 AM #71(02-24-2014, 04:38 AM)F.R.A.S Thanks for the write up man.
No swet.
Like you, I also like optimizing things plus I'm a true believer in frequency pulse tuning when it comes to turbo engines.
Here's my Aprilia 1000cc.
Dual plenum intake for my 2.5TDI van targetting 5000rpm area (had 370hp/850Nm, now aiming for more with DLC- coated titanium wrist pins + piston mods, custom rods, crank lightening/shaping, compound setup, Evo3 head with valves so big that they can't fit inside the bore without relocation, girdle, pump mods, bigger nozzles, dogbox transmission... ).
5-1 manifold with 8 degree collector for my van also targetting 5000rpm area (compound turbo setup is in the cargo area).
5-1 manifold (14 degree collector angle) and 3,5" DP for my 4WD gasser.
And they all fit even though the turbo weights 35kg alone.
But all this is kind of pointless, when you compare the outcome with a properly adjusted compound turbo setup. That second turbo added just overtakes pulse tuning by at least ten times.
02-24-2014, 03:02 PM
#72
How's the fragile Aprillia doing with the added power? I ride my self so always nice with some common ground
(02-24-2014, 10:55 AM)shadowmaker No swet.
Like you, I also like optimizing things plus I'm a true believer in frequency pulse tuning when it comes to turbo engines.
Here's my Aprilia 1000cc.
Dual plenum intake for my 2.5TDI van targetting 5000rpm area (had 370hp/850Nm, now aiming for more with DLC- coated titanium wrist pins + piston mods, custom rods, crank lightening/shaping, compound setup, Evo3 head with valves so big that they can't fit inside the bore without relocation, girdle, pump mods, bigger nozzles, dogbox transmission... ).
5-1 manifold with 8 degree collector for my van also targetting 5000rpm area (compound turbo setup is in the cargo area).
5-1 manifold (14 degree collector angle) and 3,5" DP for my 4WD gasser.
And they all fit even though the turbo weights 35kg alone.
But all this is kind of pointless, when you compare the outcome with a properly adjusted compound turbo setup. That second turbo added just overtakes pulse tuning by at least ten times.
F-tune Performance
I can help you out with all your manual transmission, clutch, flywheel, intake and exhaust manifold issues.
Looks like great fabrication mate.
How's the fragile Aprillia doing with the added power? I ride my self so always nice with some common ground
(02-24-2014, 10:55 AM)shadowmaker No swet.
Like you, I also like optimizing things plus I'm a true believer in frequency pulse tuning when it comes to turbo engines.
Here's my Aprilia 1000cc.
Dual plenum intake for my 2.5TDI van targetting 5000rpm area (had 370hp/850Nm, now aiming for more with DLC- coated titanium wrist pins + piston mods, custom rods, crank lightening/shaping, compound setup, Evo3 head with valves so big that they can't fit inside the bore without relocation, girdle, pump mods, bigger nozzles, dogbox transmission... ).
5-1 manifold with 8 degree collector for my van also targetting 5000rpm area (compound turbo setup is in the cargo area).
5-1 manifold (14 degree collector angle) and 3,5" DP for my 4WD gasser.
And they all fit even though the turbo weights 35kg alone.
But all this is kind of pointless, when you compare the outcome with a properly adjusted compound turbo setup. That second turbo added just overtakes pulse tuning by at least ten times.
F-tune Performance
I can help you out with all your manual transmission, clutch, flywheel, intake and exhaust manifold issues.
09-04-2014, 01:05 PM
#73
So due to the air being compressed twice and increasing its density, does this mean a k14 and hx35 compound setup will outflow a single hx40?
OK I think I understand this, let's see if I got it right... The exhaust spins up the small turbo which compresses air, which feeds the engine. The exhausted air is then routed to the big turbo and is then expelled. The engine then in turn increases its exhaust output and spins up the big turbo (quicker), the big turbo compresses air and feeds the charge to the small turbo, which compresses it further and feeds the engine. Am I correct?
So due to the air being compressed twice and increasing its density, does this mean a k14 and hx35 compound setup will outflow a single hx40?
09-04-2014, 05:26 PM
#74
(09-04-2014, 01:05 PM)hooblah So due to the air being compressed twice and increasing its density, does this mean a k14 and hx35 compound setup will outflow a single hx40?
Whether there is an engine downstream or another turbo, an HX35 will not outflow an HX40 at a given pressure ratio.
raysorenson
09-04-2014, 05:26 PM #74(09-04-2014, 01:05 PM)hooblah So due to the air being compressed twice and increasing its density, does this mean a k14 and hx35 compound setup will outflow a single hx40?
Whether there is an engine downstream or another turbo, an HX35 will not outflow an HX40 at a given pressure ratio.
09-05-2014, 07:52 AM
#76
(02-24-2014, 10:55 AM)shadowmaker(02-24-2014, 04:38 AM)F.R.A.S Thanks for the write up man.
No swet.
Like you, I also like optimizing things plus I'm a true believer in frequency pulse tuning when it comes to turbo engines.
Here's my Aprilia 1000cc.
Dual plenum intake for my 2.5TDI van targetting 5000rpm area (had 370hp/850Nm, now aiming for more with DLC- coated titanium wrist pins + piston mods, custom rods, crank lightening/shaping, compound setup, Evo3 head with valves so big that they can't fit inside the bore without relocation, girdle, pump mods, bigger nozzles, dogbox transmission... ).
5-1 manifold with 8 degree collector for my van also targetting 5000rpm area (compound turbo setup is in the cargo area).
5-1 manifold (14 degree collector angle) and 3,5" DP for my 4WD gasser.
And they all fit even though the turbo weights 35kg alone.
But all this is kind of pointless, when you compare the outcome with a properly adjusted compound turbo setup. That second turbo added just overtakes pulse tuning by at least ten times.
Nice fab work! Gonna be a short life for that TRACS module though :-P
Duncansport
09-05-2014, 07:52 AM #76(02-24-2014, 10:55 AM)shadowmaker(02-24-2014, 04:38 AM)F.R.A.S Thanks for the write up man.
No swet.
Like you, I also like optimizing things plus I'm a true believer in frequency pulse tuning when it comes to turbo engines.
Here's my Aprilia 1000cc.
Dual plenum intake for my 2.5TDI van targetting 5000rpm area (had 370hp/850Nm, now aiming for more with DLC- coated titanium wrist pins + piston mods, custom rods, crank lightening/shaping, compound setup, Evo3 head with valves so big that they can't fit inside the bore without relocation, girdle, pump mods, bigger nozzles, dogbox transmission... ).
5-1 manifold with 8 degree collector for my van also targetting 5000rpm area (compound turbo setup is in the cargo area).
5-1 manifold (14 degree collector angle) and 3,5" DP for my 4WD gasser.
And they all fit even though the turbo weights 35kg alone.
But all this is kind of pointless, when you compare the outcome with a properly adjusted compound turbo setup. That second turbo added just overtakes pulse tuning by at least ten times.
Nice fab work! Gonna be a short life for that TRACS module though :-P
09-05-2014, 08:01 AM
#77
Yes, the hypothetical compound setup could massively outflow an hx40 at 3 bar if you make an assumption about the volume to be pressurized, ex: small displacement engine and/or low VE and/or limited RPMs. Regardless, compounding can not change the compressor map of the hx35, it only allows you to use an otherwise too large turbo for a given engine. Considering the 606, a compound setup with an hx35 as the LP turbo making a total boost of 3 bar would run out of breath far before an hx40 and max HP would be higher with the hx40.
raysorenson
09-05-2014, 08:01 AM #77We're not on the same page yet.
Yes, the hypothetical compound setup could massively outflow an hx40 at 3 bar if you make an assumption about the volume to be pressurized, ex: small displacement engine and/or low VE and/or limited RPMs. Regardless, compounding can not change the compressor map of the hx35, it only allows you to use an otherwise too large turbo for a given engine. Considering the 606, a compound setup with an hx35 as the LP turbo making a total boost of 3 bar would run out of breath far before an hx40 and max HP would be higher with the hx40.
09-05-2014, 11:44 AM
#78
Would a k14 be a suitable HP turbo if my LP turbo was a hx40? I'd imagine anything bigger would increase lag, which is what I'm trying to decrease or keep the same as the standard turbo. The only other option (IMO) would be to twincharge it.
OK that makes sense. Thanks.
Would a k14 be a suitable HP turbo if my LP turbo was a hx40? I'd imagine anything bigger would increase lag, which is what I'm trying to decrease or keep the same as the standard turbo. The only other option (IMO) would be to twincharge it.
09-06-2014, 03:45 AM
#79
(09-05-2014, 07:52 AM)Duncansport Nice fab work! Gonna be a short life for that TRACS module though :-P
It's all about heat control...
shadowmaker
09-06-2014, 03:45 AM #79(09-05-2014, 07:52 AM)Duncansport Nice fab work! Gonna be a short life for that TRACS module though :-P
It's all about heat control...
09-11-2014, 07:32 AM
#80
Installed:
OM606/722.6, big IC, W220 brakes.
Planned:
DIY manifold, compound, 722.6 controller, built IP.
[i]Less rust.. [/i]
hooblah that was my plan to compound using the K14, however there would need to be a significant diverting wategate in addition to the internal wastegate in the K14. I'm building it for an OM605 and using the central egr port for the WG, and a HX35, as the 40 is too many orders of magnitude bigger than the K14 IMHO..
Installed:
OM606/722.6, big IC, W220 brakes.
Planned:
DIY manifold, compound, 722.6 controller, built IP.
[i]Less rust.. [/i]
09-11-2014, 11:10 AM
#81
. An hx40 would do nicely, but as you say it's just too big for the k14. But I'm curious as to how it will perform and noones been able to tell me so far. What do you think?I've spoken with Hugh and he tells me after speaking to you he decided to go with an Eaton m112 and hx40 compound setup. What was the reason for this over a twin turbo setup?
Hey Harry, I was considering an hx35 but I thought ~350bhp might not be enough power . An hx40 would do nicely, but as you say it's just too big for the k14. But I'm curious as to how it will perform and noones been able to tell me so far. What do you think?
I've spoken with Hugh and he tells me after speaking to you he decided to go with an Eaton m112 and hx40 compound setup. What was the reason for this over a twin turbo setup?
09-16-2014, 07:00 AM
#82
Installed:
OM606/722.6, big IC, W220 brakes.
Planned:
DIY manifold, compound, 722.6 controller, built IP.
[i]Less rust.. [/i]
Because he'd already spent a fortune on a KKD tubular manifold for the Holset. And we like superchargers and fancied a challenge. Turbo compounding is far simpler and cheaper though, as only exhaust tubing needs to be fabricated, and old turbos are ditch cheap..
Installed:
OM606/722.6, big IC, W220 brakes.
Planned:
DIY manifold, compound, 722.6 controller, built IP.
[i]Less rust.. [/i]
Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)
1 Guest(s)
Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)
1 Guest(s)