10mm Element Thread
10mm Element Thread
11-09-2009, 04:34 PM
#52
Didn't I read somewhere that the rate of injection effects the efficiency of the engine or something, so bigger elements were better than small ones turned up?
That engine sounded pretty awful to me, but I'm hoping that its just because I'm not used to hearing one with no exhaust at all... Any updates on the leak or timing adjustments?
Ich liebe meine Autos!
1981 Mercedes-Benz 300SD | 156K Miles | 2nd Owner | EGR Disabled [Removal Pending] | ALDA Removed | Straight Pipes | GT2256V??? | Laser Interceptor | Engine swap over summer, hopefully with GT2256V attached...
1981 Mercedes-Benz 300SD | Odo Stopped at 160K (at least 50K more) | EGR Disabled | ALDA All The Way Out | Straight pipes | FM-870 Remote Start Alarm System | B100 Biodiesel | AC Fixed x2 | Trunk crushed in
| Retired to garage.Excessive speeding? It ain't excessive till I redline!
Sweet! Can't wait to see what kind of power you get outta this!
Didn't I read somewhere that the rate of injection effects the efficiency of the engine or something, so bigger elements were better than small ones turned up?
That engine sounded pretty awful to me, but I'm hoping that its just because I'm not used to hearing one with no exhaust at all... Any updates on the leak or timing adjustments?
Ich liebe meine Autos!
1981 Mercedes-Benz 300SD | 156K Miles | 2nd Owner | EGR Disabled [Removal Pending] | ALDA Removed | Straight Pipes | GT2256V??? | Laser Interceptor | Engine swap over summer, hopefully with GT2256V attached...
1981 Mercedes-Benz 300SD | Odo Stopped at 160K (at least 50K more) | EGR Disabled | ALDA All The Way Out | Straight pipes | FM-870 Remote Start Alarm System | B100 Biodiesel | AC Fixed x2 | Trunk crushed in
| Retired to garage.Excessive speeding? It ain't excessive till I redline!
11-09-2009, 05:24 PM
#53
GREASY_BEAST
11-09-2009, 05:24 PM #53Does someone have hard numbers on the internal limits of the stock 617? I remember reading a number like 400N*m (~300ft*lb) for the torque output... If that is the case, then the 617 is limited to pretty low HP numbers and it doesn't matter how big a turbo you hang on it... anyone know for sure, or do we have to break an engine to find out?
11-10-2009, 12:50 AM
#54
(11-09-2009, 05:24 PM)GREASY_BEAST Does someone have hard numbers on the internal limits of the stock 617? I remember reading a number like 400N*m (~300ft*lb) for the torque output... If that is the case, then the 617 is limited to pretty low HP numbers and it doesn't matter how big a turbo you hang on it... anyone know for sure, or do we have to break an engine to find out?
Hi,
torque is in direct relation with the amount of fuel.
250 Nm corresponds to approx. 55 ccm/1000 revs.
400 Nm will roughly need 90 ccm/1000 revs.
Yesterday night I had the MW65 Holly IP running the first time. The current adjustment is 78 ccm/1000 revs and it did not smoke even without ADLA mounted. VTG with vanes fixed open, free flow exhaust, just running a couple of minutes after cold start, no driving.
I am sure even more fuel is possible.
Tom
This post was last modified: 11-11-2009, 03:32 AM by tomnik.
(11-09-2009, 05:24 PM)GREASY_BEAST Does someone have hard numbers on the internal limits of the stock 617? I remember reading a number like 400N*m (~300ft*lb) for the torque output... If that is the case, then the 617 is limited to pretty low HP numbers and it doesn't matter how big a turbo you hang on it... anyone know for sure, or do we have to break an engine to find out?
Hi,
torque is in direct relation with the amount of fuel.
250 Nm corresponds to approx. 55 ccm/1000 revs.
400 Nm will roughly need 90 ccm/1000 revs.
Yesterday night I had the MW65 Holly IP running the first time. The current adjustment is 78 ccm/1000 revs and it did not smoke even without ADLA mounted. VTG with vanes fixed open, free flow exhaust, just running a couple of minutes after cold start, no driving.
I am sure even more fuel is possible.
Tom
11-10-2009, 01:11 AM
#55
1987 300SDL 6spd manual om606.962 swap project
1985 300td euro 5spd wagon running
willbhere4u
11-10-2009, 01:11 AM #55yes videos please! what is the basic cost of buying elements and then setting up a pump???
1987 300SDL 6spd manual om606.962 swap project
1985 300td euro 5spd wagon running
11-10-2009, 03:16 AM
#56
(11-10-2009, 12:50 AM)tomnik Hi,
torque is in direct relation with the amount of fuel.
250 Nm corresponds to approx. 55 ccm/1000 revs.
400 Nm will roughly need 90 ccm/1000 revs.
Yesterday night I had the MW65 Holly IP running the first time. The current adjustment is 78 ccm/1000 revs and it did not smoke even without ADLA mounted. VTG with vanes fixed open, free flow exhaust, just running a couple of minutes after cold start, no driving.
I am sure even more fuel is possible.
I'll try to post a short video later.
Tom
Thats interesting info, Tomnik, thank you. I can't wait to see video! I was mostly concerned in my question, however, about how much torque the crankshaft be subjected to without breaking. If I remember correctly it wasn't a very big number, but I don't remember the source of this information.
GREASY_BEAST
11-10-2009, 03:16 AM #56(11-10-2009, 12:50 AM)tomnik Hi,
torque is in direct relation with the amount of fuel.
250 Nm corresponds to approx. 55 ccm/1000 revs.
400 Nm will roughly need 90 ccm/1000 revs.
Yesterday night I had the MW65 Holly IP running the first time. The current adjustment is 78 ccm/1000 revs and it did not smoke even without ADLA mounted. VTG with vanes fixed open, free flow exhaust, just running a couple of minutes after cold start, no driving.
I am sure even more fuel is possible.
I'll try to post a short video later.
Tom
Thats interesting info, Tomnik, thank you. I can't wait to see video! I was mostly concerned in my question, however, about how much torque the crankshaft be subjected to without breaking. If I remember correctly it wasn't a very big number, but I don't remember the source of this information.
11-10-2009, 07:58 AM
#57
[/quote]
I would like to find out where you got that information. Talking with a few of the older guys around the shop here they seem to believe that the crank is the strongest part of the 617. They seem to believe that there will be head gasket issues before we reach mechanical failure. But who really wants to put all these "guesses" to the test?
Thats interesting info, Tomnik, thank you. I can't wait to see video! I was mostly concerned in my question, however, about how much torque the crankshaft be subjected to without breaking. If I remember correctly it wasn't a very big number, but I don't remember the source of this information.
[/quote]
I would like to find out where you got that information. Talking with a few of the older guys around the shop here they seem to believe that the crank is the strongest part of the 617. They seem to believe that there will be head gasket issues before we reach mechanical failure. But who really wants to put all these "guesses" to the test?
11-10-2009, 04:09 PM
#59
(11-09-2009, 11:48 AM)benztek what size turbo is going to be needed to make use of all the extra fuel?IF this works out, I am planning on trying to compund an he351ve and a gt2256v. And yeah, tubular header for sure. But that will be a whole 'nuther adventure, and thread.
(11-09-2009, 02:29 PM)ForcedInduction Myna's 7mm pump supports 450hp on a 5-cylinder, 10mm elements can pump a hair over twice that amount of fuel.Do we know that the strokes are the same between the M and MW pumps? It seems that the M pumps deliver more hp per mm^2 of plunger size. from my back-of-the-envelope calc scaling HP by the plunger area, 10mm should be good for ~460hp with the MW. However it doesnt seem right that the M would have roughly double the stroke of the MW. What else could account for the discrepancy?
(11-09-2009, 02:33 PM)winmutt Have your tried dialing the rack dampener all the way in?in order to preserve the sanity of my neighbors (and cats) I need to get the thing muffled somehow before I start it up on a more frequent basis in order to 'tune it up'. But ill see if i can try that out tomorrow.
GREASY_BEAST anyone know for sure, or do we have to break an engine to find out?I have accepted the fact that I will probably end up breaking something (or many things) as a result of this project.
benztek But who really wants to put all these "guesses" to the test?I do!
(11-09-2009, 11:48 AM)benztek what size turbo is going to be needed to make use of all the extra fuel?IF this works out, I am planning on trying to compund an he351ve and a gt2256v. And yeah, tubular header for sure. But that will be a whole 'nuther adventure, and thread.
(11-09-2009, 02:29 PM)ForcedInduction Myna's 7mm pump supports 450hp on a 5-cylinder, 10mm elements can pump a hair over twice that amount of fuel.Do we know that the strokes are the same between the M and MW pumps? It seems that the M pumps deliver more hp per mm^2 of plunger size. from my back-of-the-envelope calc scaling HP by the plunger area, 10mm should be good for ~460hp with the MW. However it doesnt seem right that the M would have roughly double the stroke of the MW. What else could account for the discrepancy?
(11-09-2009, 02:33 PM)winmutt Have your tried dialing the rack dampener all the way in?in order to preserve the sanity of my neighbors (and cats) I need to get the thing muffled somehow before I start it up on a more frequent basis in order to 'tune it up'. But ill see if i can try that out tomorrow.
GREASY_BEAST anyone know for sure, or do we have to break an engine to find out?I have accepted the fact that I will probably end up breaking something (or many things) as a result of this project.
benztek But who really wants to put all these "guesses" to the test?I do!
11-10-2009, 04:26 PM
#60
(11-10-2009, 04:09 PM)shredator Do we know that the strokes are the same between the M and MW pumps?
Both are an 8mm stroke.
ForcedInduction
11-10-2009, 04:26 PM
#60
(11-10-2009, 04:09 PM)shredator Do we know that the strokes are the same between the M and MW pumps?
Both are an 8mm stroke.
11-10-2009, 04:58 PM
#61
1987 300SDL 6spd manual om606.962 swap project
1985 300td euro 5spd wagon running
willbhere4u
11-10-2009, 04:58 PM #61well you cant brag about power! untill you blow something up!!!! lol looking forward to seeing this build!!!
1987 300SDL 6spd manual om606.962 swap project
1985 300td euro 5spd wagon running
11-11-2009, 03:49 AM
#62
here is the little video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLY8jWDlR-w
The engine started up approx. 20 sec before the video start for the first time after installing the MW65 Holly IP. The bench data of this IP are posted earlier. Begin of delivery not checked and adjusted yet.
Tom
Hi,
here is the little video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLY8jWDlR-w
The engine started up approx. 20 sec before the video start for the first time after installing the MW65 Holly IP. The bench data of this IP are posted earlier. Begin of delivery not checked and adjusted yet.
Tom
11-11-2009, 10:22 AM
#64
Up to this point everything has been all talk and speculation without any real results. I sure hope you guys have dynos nearby when you get the cars together! Best of luck to the both of you in keeping these projects rolling!Tomnik, I like the socket on the valve cover to show how smooth the engine is.
John Robbins
'05 E320 CDI - 118k - Faaaaaast!!
'87 300TD - 317k - Cracked head... but an OM606 is on the way!
'79 300SD - 295k - Bad engine = project car!
Shredator and Tomnik, a big THANK YOU for being pioneers in actually doing something significant for real power. Up to this point everything has been all talk and speculation without any real results. I sure hope you guys have dynos nearby when you get the cars together! Best of luck to the both of you in keeping these projects rolling!
Tomnik, I like the socket on the valve cover to show how smooth the engine is.
John Robbins
'05 E320 CDI - 118k - Faaaaaast!!
'87 300TD - 317k - Cracked head... but an OM606 is on the way!
'79 300SD - 295k - Bad engine = project car!
11-11-2009, 11:03 AM
#65
(11-11-2009, 10:22 AM)Tymbrymi Tomnik, I like the socket on the valve cover to show how smooth the engine is.
No kidding, I wish mine was that smooth. It was before I turned the elements. Are the Holly elements a drop in or do you have to remove the crank?
1987 300D Sturmmachine
1991 300D Nearly Perfect
1985 300D Weekend/Camping/Dog car
1974 L508D Motoroam Monarch "NightMare"
OBK #42
(11-11-2009, 10:22 AM)Tymbrymi Tomnik, I like the socket on the valve cover to show how smooth the engine is.
No kidding, I wish mine was that smooth. It was before I turned the elements. Are the Holly elements a drop in or do you have to remove the crank?
1987 300D Sturmmachine
1991 300D Nearly Perfect
1985 300D Weekend/Camping/Dog car
1974 L508D Motoroam Monarch "NightMare"
OBK #42
11-11-2009, 03:05 PM
#66
(11-11-2009, 11:03 AM)winmutt No kidding, I wish mine was that smooth. It was before I turned the elements. Are the Holly elements a drop in or do you have to remove the crank?
All element swaps need the cam to be removed. On the MW the cylinder only but not for the plunger.
The smooth run is balanced quantities (see my bench post earlier) and correct start of delivery of the single cylinders. No miracle, just good quality elements and correct work on the bench.
Tom
(11-11-2009, 11:03 AM)winmutt No kidding, I wish mine was that smooth. It was before I turned the elements. Are the Holly elements a drop in or do you have to remove the crank?
All element swaps need the cam to be removed. On the MW the cylinder only but not for the plunger.
The smooth run is balanced quantities (see my bench post earlier) and correct start of delivery of the single cylinders. No miracle, just good quality elements and correct work on the bench.
Tom
11-11-2009, 04:52 PM
#67
Even with the advanced timing, the engine still smokes at idle more than it should. Should I keep advancing the timing? retard the timing? it seems to me that the larger elements would provide a faster injection, and not need as much advance. if there was too much fuel, the engine would just idle faster right? could it be caused by me running it with the intake and exhaust manifolds open causing the engine to breathe oxygen-depleated air? Im baffled.
I tried advancing the timing to ~27btdc, and messed around with the damper screw. neither really seemed to make a big difference. This morning, I really tried to concentrate on listening to the klatter sound from the engine instead the gurgle from the exhaust. once I did this, I realized that the idle quality and throttle response are not really that bad. I cant say for certain if it is really any worse than the stock engine. Ill make another vid once I get the thing muffled, and let other folks judge.
Even with the advanced timing, the engine still smokes at idle more than it should. Should I keep advancing the timing? retard the timing? it seems to me that the larger elements would provide a faster injection, and not need as much advance. if there was too much fuel, the engine would just idle faster right? could it be caused by me running it with the intake and exhaust manifolds open causing the engine to breathe oxygen-depleated air? Im baffled.
11-11-2009, 08:00 PM
#68
1987 300SDL 6spd manual om606.962 swap project
1985 300td euro 5spd wagon running
willbhere4u
11-11-2009, 08:00 PM #68I would get the intake and exhaust separated and see ho it runs it needs some cool fresh air!!!
1987 300SDL 6spd manual om606.962 swap project
1985 300td euro 5spd wagon running
11-11-2009, 08:21 PM
#69
(11-11-2009, 08:00 PM)willbhere4u I would get the intake and exhaust separated and see ho it runs it needs some cool fresh air!!!
I would leave the timing stock for now, and get it driving before messing around too much. Timing shouldn't change all that much with bigger elements. The fact that its idling so smoothly, responding so well to throttle inputs, AND returning to idle so well, is encouraging. The smoke might seem worse than it actually is with the manifolds off and it "in your face" like that. See what it looks like with the exhaust, turbo, and intake hooked up. Even if it does smoke a little... you have limitless power on tap with the mere turn of a screw.
GREASY_BEAST
11-11-2009, 08:21 PM #69(11-11-2009, 08:00 PM)willbhere4u I would get the intake and exhaust separated and see ho it runs it needs some cool fresh air!!!
I would leave the timing stock for now, and get it driving before messing around too much. Timing shouldn't change all that much with bigger elements. The fact that its idling so smoothly, responding so well to throttle inputs, AND returning to idle so well, is encouraging. The smoke might seem worse than it actually is with the manifolds off and it "in your face" like that. See what it looks like with the exhaust, turbo, and intake hooked up. Even if it does smoke a little... you have limitless power on tap with the mere turn of a screw.
11-12-2009, 02:27 AM
#71
(11-09-2009, 05:24 PM)GREASY_BEAST Does someone have hard numbers on the internal limits of the stock 617? I remember reading a number like 400N*m (~300ft*lb) for the torque output... If that is the case, then the 617 is limited to pretty low HP numbers and it doesn't matter how big a turbo you hang on it... anyone know for sure, or do we have to break an engine to find out?
I think you got that from the C111. Hopefully, thats not the maximum possible torque.
This post was last modified: 11-12-2009, 02:28 AM by 300SD81.
Ich liebe meine Autos!
1981 Mercedes-Benz 300SD | 156K Miles | 2nd Owner | EGR Disabled [Removal Pending] | ALDA Removed | Straight Pipes | GT2256V??? | Laser Interceptor | Engine swap over summer, hopefully with GT2256V attached...
1981 Mercedes-Benz 300SD | Odo Stopped at 160K (at least 50K more) | EGR Disabled | ALDA All The Way Out | Straight pipes | FM-870 Remote Start Alarm System | B100 Biodiesel | AC Fixed x2 | Trunk crushed in
| Retired to garage.Excessive speeding? It ain't excessive till I redline!
(11-09-2009, 05:24 PM)GREASY_BEAST Does someone have hard numbers on the internal limits of the stock 617? I remember reading a number like 400N*m (~300ft*lb) for the torque output... If that is the case, then the 617 is limited to pretty low HP numbers and it doesn't matter how big a turbo you hang on it... anyone know for sure, or do we have to break an engine to find out?
I think you got that from the C111. Hopefully, thats not the maximum possible torque.
Ich liebe meine Autos!
1981 Mercedes-Benz 300SD | 156K Miles | 2nd Owner | EGR Disabled [Removal Pending] | ALDA Removed | Straight Pipes | GT2256V??? | Laser Interceptor | Engine swap over summer, hopefully with GT2256V attached...
1981 Mercedes-Benz 300SD | Odo Stopped at 160K (at least 50K more) | EGR Disabled | ALDA All The Way Out | Straight pipes | FM-870 Remote Start Alarm System | B100 Biodiesel | AC Fixed x2 | Trunk crushed in
| Retired to garage.Excessive speeding? It ain't excessive till I redline!
11-12-2009, 05:26 AM
#72
(11-12-2009, 02:27 AM)300SD81 Hopefully, thats not the maximum possible torque.
Thats because it used a big non-wastegated turbo. If a wastegated or VNT turbo were used, the torque peak would increase and shift to a much lower RPM with the same fueling settings.
ForcedInduction
11-12-2009, 05:26 AM
#72
(11-12-2009, 02:27 AM)300SD81 Hopefully, thats not the maximum possible torque.
Thats because it used a big non-wastegated turbo. If a wastegated or VNT turbo were used, the torque peak would increase and shift to a much lower RPM with the same fueling settings.
11-12-2009, 10:39 PM
#73
(11-12-2009, 05:26 AM)ForcedInduction the torque peak would increase and shift to a much lower RPM with the same fueling settings.
Which might make the crank very, very unhappy... and the trans, rear tires, etc.. that is, you would be limited in max HP by the virtue of too much low end torque. Apparently people who tune 1.9L VWs have a similar problem, too much torque too low.
This post was last modified: 11-12-2009, 10:40 PM by GREASY_BEAST.
GREASY_BEAST
11-12-2009, 10:39 PM #73(11-12-2009, 05:26 AM)ForcedInduction the torque peak would increase and shift to a much lower RPM with the same fueling settings.
Which might make the crank very, very unhappy... and the trans, rear tires, etc.. that is, you would be limited in max HP by the virtue of too much low end torque. Apparently people who tune 1.9L VWs have a similar problem, too much torque too low.
11-12-2009, 10:53 PM
#74
ForcedInduction
11-12-2009, 10:53 PM
#74
A simple RPM switch can take care of that. Limit boost until a safe RPM and the aneroid will keep smoke under control.
11-12-2009, 11:04 PM
#75
plus the Mercedes has a big beefy crank!!! I would be more worried about rods or pistons before the crank and they are pretty stout as well!!!
1987 300SDL 6spd manual om606.962 swap project
1985 300td euro 5spd wagon running
willbhere4u
11-12-2009, 11:04 PM #75In all of my racing years I have never seen a crank fail!!!! and I have seen a suzuki 1.3 Huyabusa turbo put 600hp on a dyno!!!!
plus the Mercedes has a big beefy crank!!! I would be more worried about rods or pistons before the crank and they are pretty stout as well!!!
1987 300SDL 6spd manual om606.962 swap project
1985 300td euro 5spd wagon running
11-13-2009, 11:11 AM
#77
John Robbins
'05 E320 CDI - 118k - Faaaaaast!!
'87 300TD - 317k - Cracked head... but an OM606 is on the way!
'79 300SD - 295k - Bad engine = project car!
Don't forget that power is torque x RPM. If all you're going to do is the stock max RPM, it will of course be limited by the torque. If you spin the engine like the Finns do then you can make some of their HP numbers. Admittedly, the 617 probably won't spin as fast as a 603, but we certainly have overhead in the RPM department.
John Robbins
'05 E320 CDI - 118k - Faaaaaast!!
'87 300TD - 317k - Cracked head... but an OM606 is on the way!
'79 300SD - 295k - Bad engine = project car!
11-14-2009, 12:34 AM
#78
GREASY_BEAST
11-14-2009, 12:34 AM #78Guess I'm wrong about the crank then.. I swear I remember reading some speculation about it. In any case, it seems we are about to learn a whole lot about the performance potential of the 617!
11-14-2009, 02:58 AM
#79
For a start, there's a difference between having torque and having usable torque.
If you double the torque, you double the amount of torsional oscillation, unless you also double the flywheel inertia (or already have a monster flywheel) then you can get severe vibration problems at low rpms.
This is where I'm currently at. I can get 17psi boost at 1400rpm and 20psi from about 1700rpm, but can't use it smoothly until I'm closer to 2000rpm.
Secondly, more torque down low is far more useful than higher revs in real driving. Unless you're doing 1/4 miles and dyno runs of course.
Thirdly, cylinder pressure. You guys are running indirect injection engines with high compression. The combination of fuel loading, boost and timing is going to have to be balanced carefully. Whether you guys find the top end or bottom end is the weak point will be interesting. Retarding injection timing might be needed to save the day.
This post was last modified: 11-14-2009, 02:59 AM by Kiwibacon.
As the owner of a 3.9L diesel with 520+Nm (from 330ish stock) I'll give some of my findings.
For a start, there's a difference between having torque and having usable torque.
If you double the torque, you double the amount of torsional oscillation, unless you also double the flywheel inertia (or already have a monster flywheel) then you can get severe vibration problems at low rpms.
This is where I'm currently at. I can get 17psi boost at 1400rpm and 20psi from about 1700rpm, but can't use it smoothly until I'm closer to 2000rpm.
Secondly, more torque down low is far more useful than higher revs in real driving. Unless you're doing 1/4 miles and dyno runs of course.
Thirdly, cylinder pressure. You guys are running indirect injection engines with high compression. The combination of fuel loading, boost and timing is going to have to be balanced carefully. Whether you guys find the top end or bottom end is the weak point will be interesting. Retarding injection timing might be needed to save the day.
11-14-2009, 03:08 AM
#80
(11-14-2009, 02:58 AM)Kiwibacon Retarding injection timing might be needed to save the day.
I don't know about that.
Listen to the timing nailing of this 445hp OM605.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VwpNktflAw
Granted, its probably got really beefed internals to handle the power so smoothly....
ForcedInduction
11-14-2009, 03:08 AM
#80
(11-14-2009, 02:58 AM)Kiwibacon Retarding injection timing might be needed to save the day.
I don't know about that.
Listen to the timing nailing of this 445hp OM605.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VwpNktflAw
Granted, its probably got really beefed internals to handle the power so smoothly....
11-14-2009, 03:22 AM
#81
(11-14-2009, 03:08 AM)ForcedInduction(11-14-2009, 02:58 AM)Kiwibacon Retarding injection timing might be needed to save the day.
I don't know about that.
Listen to the timing nailing of this 445hp OM605.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VwpNktflAw
Granted, its probably got really beefed internals to handle the power so smoothly....
You call that smoothly?
It's not about the noise though, it's about internal stress. Shifting the pressure pulse further after TDC reduces stress a lot. The alternatives like reducing compression ratio are a lot more involved.
(11-14-2009, 03:08 AM)ForcedInduction(11-14-2009, 02:58 AM)Kiwibacon Retarding injection timing might be needed to save the day.
I don't know about that.
Listen to the timing nailing of this 445hp OM605.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VwpNktflAw
Granted, its probably got really beefed internals to handle the power so smoothly....
You call that smoothly?
It's not about the noise though, it's about internal stress. Shifting the pressure pulse further after TDC reduces stress a lot. The alternatives like reducing compression ratio are a lot more involved.
11-15-2009, 02:32 AM
#82
(11-14-2009, 03:22 AM)Kiwibacon It's not about the noise though, it's about internal stress. Shifting the pressure pulse further after TDC reduces stress a lot. The alternatives like reducing compression ratio are a lot more involved.
Kiwi,
this is what runs my brain hot since days. I am currently searching for a optimal end of injection depending on engine crank position. This came in my head when reviewing the calculation of the larger elements. The duration for injection is shorter and now I wonder how much I can retard the timing with larger elements to end my injection earlier than stock (for more complete burning of the fuel) AND to start injection later with the larger elements to get additional benefits regarding efficiency and engine stress (besides a very smooth run).
If I don't find information in some books I will make the calculation with an IP on the table.
Tom
(11-14-2009, 03:22 AM)Kiwibacon It's not about the noise though, it's about internal stress. Shifting the pressure pulse further after TDC reduces stress a lot. The alternatives like reducing compression ratio are a lot more involved.
Kiwi,
this is what runs my brain hot since days. I am currently searching for a optimal end of injection depending on engine crank position. This came in my head when reviewing the calculation of the larger elements. The duration for injection is shorter and now I wonder how much I can retard the timing with larger elements to end my injection earlier than stock (for more complete burning of the fuel) AND to start injection later with the larger elements to get additional benefits regarding efficiency and engine stress (besides a very smooth run).
If I don't find information in some books I will make the calculation with an IP on the table.
Tom
11-15-2009, 02:58 AM
#83
(11-15-2009, 02:32 AM)tomnik Kiwi,
this is what runs my brain hot since days. I am currently searching for a optimal end of injection depending on engine crank position. This came in my head when reviewing the calculation of the larger elements. The duration for injection is shorter and now I wonder how much I can retard the timing with larger elements to end my injection earlier than stock (for more complete burning of the fuel) AND to start injection later with the larger elements to get additional benefits regarding efficiency and engine stress (besides a very smooth run).
If I don't find information in some books I will make the calculation with an IP on the table.
Tom
This is my thinking also.
My 4wd runs an A pump with 10mm elements. Stock injection volumes are around 70 cc/1000 shots. A pumps with I think 9mm elements have been measured at 140cc/1000 shots max.
I don't know how the A pump compares to yours for stroke.
(11-15-2009, 02:32 AM)tomnik Kiwi,
this is what runs my brain hot since days. I am currently searching for a optimal end of injection depending on engine crank position. This came in my head when reviewing the calculation of the larger elements. The duration for injection is shorter and now I wonder how much I can retard the timing with larger elements to end my injection earlier than stock (for more complete burning of the fuel) AND to start injection later with the larger elements to get additional benefits regarding efficiency and engine stress (besides a very smooth run).
If I don't find information in some books I will make the calculation with an IP on the table.
Tom
This is my thinking also.
My 4wd runs an A pump with 10mm elements. Stock injection volumes are around 70 cc/1000 shots. A pumps with I think 9mm elements have been measured at 140cc/1000 shots max.
I don't know how the A pump compares to yours for stroke.
11-15-2009, 05:56 AM
#84
We learned that a maxed out IP with small elements will produce black smoke instead of giving all the power of the added fuel, so end of injection is probably too later to burn completely even with enough air.
Now my intention is to first fix a max volume and depending on that retiming the IP direction late. At the end of the day there will be a table with max volumes and related timing (for the same element of course).
The question still is: How is the range of injection placed over engine crank position? Is the 24 deg BOD only because of the burning velocity of diesel?
On veggie which is way slower in burning the difference of engine run is not so big. But why then the 24 deg BOD?
Trial and error looking for the lowest EGT when changing timing step by step??
Tom
it's not only the volume, but the higher the volume (max. full load setting) the later the end of injection on the same IP with the same elements.
We learned that a maxed out IP with small elements will produce black smoke instead of giving all the power of the added fuel, so end of injection is probably too later to burn completely even with enough air.
Now my intention is to first fix a max volume and depending on that retiming the IP direction late. At the end of the day there will be a table with max volumes and related timing (for the same element of course).
The question still is: How is the range of injection placed over engine crank position? Is the 24 deg BOD only because of the burning velocity of diesel?
On veggie which is way slower in burning the difference of engine run is not so big. But why then the 24 deg BOD?
Trial and error looking for the lowest EGT when changing timing step by step??
Tom
11-15-2009, 03:46 PM
#85
(11-15-2009, 05:56 AM)tomnik iIs the 24 deg BOD only because of the burning velocity of diesel?
On veggie which is way slower in burning the difference of engine run is not so big. But why then the 24 deg BOD?
Trial and error looking for the lowest EGT when changing timing step by step??
Tom
Ignition/burn characteristics also depend on the specific heat capacity of the fuel, and cylinder temperature at crank position (theta). Injecting all the fuel really quickly too early will probably result in nailing/grey-black smoke (like when the timing on stock elements is too advanced). I agree that the timing should be retarded slightly (probably), but I would venture a guess that to calculate this would be VERY involved. It is probably better to just look at EGTs, smoke, and running characteristics of the engine over the entire RPM range to obtain a good timing range by trial and error.
Also, with the bigger elements, increasing the injection pressure should not be necessary to obtain better atomization, and is probably a bad idea because the big elements already put a LOT more stress on the IP camshaft. Inherently better atomization is another thing that makes me lean towards retarded timing giving better running characteristics... Although I'm not a diesel engine guru...
However, if you look at the original poster's video, that engine runs pretty damn well, just a little smoky. This means that any timing adjustment that needs to be made shouldn't be too severe (if a timing adjustment would actually solve the "problem").
This post was last modified: 11-15-2009, 03:49 PM by GREASY_BEAST.
GREASY_BEAST
11-15-2009, 03:46 PM #85(11-15-2009, 05:56 AM)tomnik iIs the 24 deg BOD only because of the burning velocity of diesel?
On veggie which is way slower in burning the difference of engine run is not so big. But why then the 24 deg BOD?
Trial and error looking for the lowest EGT when changing timing step by step??
Tom
Ignition/burn characteristics also depend on the specific heat capacity of the fuel, and cylinder temperature at crank position (theta). Injecting all the fuel really quickly too early will probably result in nailing/grey-black smoke (like when the timing on stock elements is too advanced). I agree that the timing should be retarded slightly (probably), but I would venture a guess that to calculate this would be VERY involved. It is probably better to just look at EGTs, smoke, and running characteristics of the engine over the entire RPM range to obtain a good timing range by trial and error.
Also, with the bigger elements, increasing the injection pressure should not be necessary to obtain better atomization, and is probably a bad idea because the big elements already put a LOT more stress on the IP camshaft. Inherently better atomization is another thing that makes me lean towards retarded timing giving better running characteristics... Although I'm not a diesel engine guru...
However, if you look at the original poster's video, that engine runs pretty damn well, just a little smoky. This means that any timing adjustment that needs to be made shouldn't be too severe (if a timing adjustment would actually solve the "problem").
11-15-2009, 04:32 PM
#86
Personally I find black smoke appalling. It's bad for the air we breathe, bad for your engine and bad for the public perception of diesel engines. The same people run dirty tunes which belch black smoke are often the ones who complain about the availability of diesel vehicles in the US.
The problems from too far retarded are poor starting and white smoke. If you're not getting either of those then there's scope to retard injection timing further.
Personally I find black smoke appalling. It's bad for the air we breathe, bad for your engine and bad for the public perception of diesel engines. The same people run dirty tunes which belch black smoke are often the ones who complain about the availability of diesel vehicles in the US.
11-20-2009, 02:43 PM
#88
bolted the turbo back up. Need to order the hoses and fittings necessary to supply oil to the turbo from the new filters. Unfortunately, money has been diverted out of the car fund and into the not-going-into-debt-while-keeping-the-fiancee-happy-during-the-holidays fund. So things will have to wait a while. yeah I can hear you all making those whip-crack noises. ha ha.
11-21-2009, 03:22 AM
#89
(11-20-2009, 02:43 PM)shredator bolted the turbo back up. Need to order the hoses and fittings necessary to supply oil to the turbo from the new filters. Unfortunately, money has been diverted out of the car fund and into the not-going-into-debt-while-keeping-the-fiancee-happy-during-the-holidays fund. So things will have to wait a while. yeah I can hear you all making those whip-crack noises. ha ha.
Comeon! Hose clamps and fuel injection hose will hold for a few minute test run
Ich liebe meine Autos!
1981 Mercedes-Benz 300SD | 156K Miles | 2nd Owner | EGR Disabled [Removal Pending] | ALDA Removed | Straight Pipes | GT2256V??? | Laser Interceptor | Engine swap over summer, hopefully with GT2256V attached...
1981 Mercedes-Benz 300SD | Odo Stopped at 160K (at least 50K more) | EGR Disabled | ALDA All The Way Out | Straight pipes | FM-870 Remote Start Alarm System | B100 Biodiesel | AC Fixed x2 | Trunk crushed in
| Retired to garage.Excessive speeding? It ain't excessive till I redline!
(11-20-2009, 02:43 PM)shredator bolted the turbo back up. Need to order the hoses and fittings necessary to supply oil to the turbo from the new filters. Unfortunately, money has been diverted out of the car fund and into the not-going-into-debt-while-keeping-the-fiancee-happy-during-the-holidays fund. So things will have to wait a while. yeah I can hear you all making those whip-crack noises. ha ha.
Comeon! Hose clamps and fuel injection hose will hold for a few minute test run
Ich liebe meine Autos!
1981 Mercedes-Benz 300SD | 156K Miles | 2nd Owner | EGR Disabled [Removal Pending] | ALDA Removed | Straight Pipes | GT2256V??? | Laser Interceptor | Engine swap over summer, hopefully with GT2256V attached...
1981 Mercedes-Benz 300SD | Odo Stopped at 160K (at least 50K more) | EGR Disabled | ALDA All The Way Out | Straight pipes | FM-870 Remote Start Alarm System | B100 Biodiesel | AC Fixed x2 | Trunk crushed in
| Retired to garage.Excessive speeding? It ain't excessive till I redline!
11-21-2009, 11:55 AM
#90
[/quote]
Please don't do this!!
Take your time, shredator. Awesome project.
GREASY_BEAST
11-21-2009, 11:55 AM #90Comeon! Hose clamps and fuel injection hose will hold for a few minute test run
[/quote]
Please don't do this!! Take your time, shredator. Awesome project.
12-23-2009, 04:09 PM
#93
(11-09-2009, 02:29 PM)ForcedInduction There is no possible way the engine can handle anything remotely close to what 10mm elements can pump out. Myna's 7mm pump supports 450hp on a 5-cylinder, 10mm elements can pump a hair over twice that amount of fuel.
Bigger elements provide shorter injection for the same volume. That's gotta be a bonus as the revs rise and the injection window gets shorter.
(11-09-2009, 02:29 PM)ForcedInduction There is no possible way the engine can handle anything remotely close to what 10mm elements can pump out. Myna's 7mm pump supports 450hp on a 5-cylinder, 10mm elements can pump a hair over twice that amount of fuel.
Bigger elements provide shorter injection for the same volume. That's gotta be a bonus as the revs rise and the injection window gets shorter.
12-23-2009, 05:37 PM
#94
(12-23-2009, 04:09 PM)Kiwibacon Bigger elements provide shorter injection for the same volume. That's gotta be a bonus as the revs rise and the injection window gets shorter.
why?
GREASY_BEAST
12-23-2009, 05:37 PM #94(12-23-2009, 04:09 PM)Kiwibacon Bigger elements provide shorter injection for the same volume. That's gotta be a bonus as the revs rise and the injection window gets shorter.
why?
12-23-2009, 06:26 PM
#95
(12-23-2009, 04:09 PM)Kiwibacon That's gotta be a bonus as the revs rise and the injection window gets shorter.
It can also quench the flame front. Until shredator gets it running with higher power, we won't know.
ForcedInduction
12-23-2009, 06:26 PM
#95
(12-23-2009, 04:09 PM)Kiwibacon That's gotta be a bonus as the revs rise and the injection window gets shorter.
It can also quench the flame front. Until shredator gets it running with higher power, we won't know.
12-23-2009, 11:28 PM
#96
(12-23-2009, 05:37 PM)GREASY_BEAST(12-23-2009, 04:09 PM)Kiwibacon Bigger elements provide shorter injection for the same volume. That's gotta be a bonus as the revs rise and the injection window gets shorter.
why?
Because diesel burns at a fixed speed, so as your rpms rise injection has to be advanced more and more to get peak pressure happening just after TDC. Eventually you're advanced so far that you can't burn the fuel that's injected then, it gets charred and exits the engine as black smoke. Wasted fuel.
Shorter injection time means you don't need to advance quite as far, resulting in less black smoke and wasted fuel. Cleaner burn, more power from the same fuel etc.
(12-23-2009, 05:37 PM)GREASY_BEAST(12-23-2009, 04:09 PM)Kiwibacon Bigger elements provide shorter injection for the same volume. That's gotta be a bonus as the revs rise and the injection window gets shorter.
why?
Because diesel burns at a fixed speed, so as your rpms rise injection has to be advanced more and more to get peak pressure happening just after TDC. Eventually you're advanced so far that you can't burn the fuel that's injected then, it gets charred and exits the engine as black smoke. Wasted fuel.
Shorter injection time means you don't need to advance quite as far, resulting in less black smoke and wasted fuel. Cleaner burn, more power from the same fuel etc.
12-24-2009, 12:22 AM
#97
(12-23-2009, 11:28 PM)Kiwibacon Because diesel burns at a fixed speed, so as your rpms rise injection has to be advanced more and more to get peak pressure happening just after TDC. Eventually you're advanced so far that you can't burn the fuel that's injected then, it gets charred and exits the engine as black smoke. Wasted fuel.
Shorter injection time means you don't need to advance quite as far, resulting in less black smoke and wasted fuel. Cleaner burn, more power from the same fuel etc.
Okay, now lets assume that the fuel all injects instantly (perfectly atomized). This is also bad, but the reason is more complicated. If fuel injects over some delta_t such that one end of the stream ignites before the other end has left the nozzle, this affects a situation analogous to pre-injection, and creates a flame front which propagates evenly. Right? What happens when all the fuel goes in before any of it ignites?
GREASY_BEAST
12-24-2009, 12:22 AM #97(12-23-2009, 11:28 PM)Kiwibacon Because diesel burns at a fixed speed, so as your rpms rise injection has to be advanced more and more to get peak pressure happening just after TDC. Eventually you're advanced so far that you can't burn the fuel that's injected then, it gets charred and exits the engine as black smoke. Wasted fuel.
Shorter injection time means you don't need to advance quite as far, resulting in less black smoke and wasted fuel. Cleaner burn, more power from the same fuel etc.
Okay, now lets assume that the fuel all injects instantly (perfectly atomized). This is also bad, but the reason is more complicated. If fuel injects over some delta_t such that one end of the stream ignites before the other end has left the nozzle, this affects a situation analogous to pre-injection, and creates a flame front which propagates evenly. Right? What happens when all the fuel goes in before any of it ignites?
12-24-2009, 07:57 AM
#98
you're not quite correct.
Begin of delivery is the same just the end of injection is earlier with larger elements. This could be used to delay begin of delivery and inject into a hotter cylinder atmosphere which is positive for ignition also positive is a better spray that comes from same quantity within shorter time.
Let's assume the pre spray ignites then you spray too much fuel into this flame (at that time we are already after TDC) we could risk that the amount of fuel does not burn well and fast enough to be complete before the valves open.
This is exactly the reason why I want to run a pressure data log of the cylinder inside pressure curve to see where I am.
Tom
Kiwi,
you're not quite correct.
Begin of delivery is the same just the end of injection is earlier with larger elements. This could be used to delay begin of delivery and inject into a hotter cylinder atmosphere which is positive for ignition also positive is a better spray that comes from same quantity within shorter time.
Let's assume the pre spray ignites then you spray too much fuel into this flame (at that time we are already after TDC) we could risk that the amount of fuel does not burn well and fast enough to be complete before the valves open.
This is exactly the reason why I want to run a pressure data log of the cylinder inside pressure curve to see where I am.
Tom
12-24-2009, 04:37 PM
#99
(12-24-2009, 07:57 AM)tomnik Kiwi,
you're not quite correct.
Begin of delivery is the same just the end of injection is earlier with larger elements.
Yes, this is what I mean. Because all the fuel is injected sooner, the injection doesn't have to start as early. This can help avoid the problems with very advanced injection at high rpms.
This will however mean a faster pressure rise and high peak forces on the engine.
Engines do suffer when we crank up the power.
How do you plan to log cylinder pressure? A transducer in the glow-plug hole?
This post was last modified: 12-24-2009, 04:41 PM by Kiwibacon.
(12-24-2009, 07:57 AM)tomnik Kiwi,
you're not quite correct.
Begin of delivery is the same just the end of injection is earlier with larger elements.
Yes, this is what I mean. Because all the fuel is injected sooner, the injection doesn't have to start as early. This can help avoid the problems with very advanced injection at high rpms.
This will however mean a faster pressure rise and high peak forces on the engine.
Engines do suffer when we crank up the power.
How do you plan to log cylinder pressure? A transducer in the glow-plug hole?
12-24-2009, 06:38 PM
#100
(12-24-2009, 04:37 PM)Kiwibacon This will however mean a faster pressure rise and high peak forces on the engine.
Engines do suffer when we crank up the power.
How do you plan to log cylinder pressure? A transducer in the glow-plug hole?
it will not suffer when the pressure peak comes in time with downwards movement of the piston. To get there it the pressure log is necessary.
yes, transducer in glow-plug hole.
I don't have the equipment but the local university might help.
Tom
(12-24-2009, 04:37 PM)Kiwibacon This will however mean a faster pressure rise and high peak forces on the engine.
Engines do suffer when we crank up the power.
How do you plan to log cylinder pressure? A transducer in the glow-plug hole?
it will not suffer when the pressure peak comes in time with downwards movement of the piston. To get there it the pressure log is necessary.
yes, transducer in glow-plug hole.
I don't have the equipment but the local university might help.
Tom
Users browsing this thread:
20 Guest(s)
20 Guest(s)
Users browsing this thread:
20 Guest(s)
20 Guest(s)