Brettus turbo 111 (the ultimate Renesis turbo ?)
#1851
Since you already have nozzles, and are on your way to Nobels price in research, you might want to try Hydrogen Peroxide(H2O2) in approx 30% concentration. If memory serves me right, it transit into H2O+O at 4-500°C, this requires energy, lowering the temperature, and on top of that you have added an extra O in liquid form(= very dense = just about no of the normal air is displaced = more air at ignition). I'm not sure if the alloys will be able to take H2O2, as it's very reactive with some.
#1852
Thread Starter
Boosted Kiwi
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 20,604
Likes: 1,535
From: Y-cat-o NZ
I wouldn't really do that if I were you, peroxide produces its own heat as it decomposes in fact it tends to explode and this will add to the shock and induce wear on the engine also if the peroxide is decomposed before going into the engine the water vapor and oxygen will be very hot and thus take up a lot of space and not very much could get into the chamber at a time and the amount it heats up upon reacting with the fuel wont be as dramatic and so the power would be low.
#1862
Thread Starter
Boosted Kiwi
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 20,604
Likes: 1,535
From: Y-cat-o NZ
I think you are right ...I need help !
Just another 'upgrade'. Thinking about how all the other 'upgrades' did stuff all I realised one thing that really did make a difference (in a bad way) was the smaller AR housing ..... so why not go bigger !?
Just another 'upgrade'. Thinking about how all the other 'upgrades' did stuff all I realised one thing that really did make a difference (in a bad way) was the smaller AR housing ..... so why not go bigger !?
The following users liked this post:
RotaryMachineRx (04-11-2019)
#1863
Brett,
So, is the whip down for upgrades...the turbine upgrade If so, how's it going? Curious what was the negative result of earlier swapping to the smaller AR housing. Obviously you're looking for improvements from a larger AR...what target objectives do you have in mind in terms of boost threshold, spool dynamics, top end
So, is the whip down for upgrades...the turbine upgrade If so, how's it going? Curious what was the negative result of earlier swapping to the smaller AR housing. Obviously you're looking for improvements from a larger AR...what target objectives do you have in mind in terms of boost threshold, spool dynamics, top end
#1864
Thread Starter
Boosted Kiwi
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 20,604
Likes: 1,535
From: Y-cat-o NZ
Brett,
So, is the whip down for upgrades...the turbine upgrade If so, how's it going? Curious what was the negative result of earlier swapping to the smaller AR housing. Obviously you're looking for improvements from a larger AR...what target objectives do you have in mind in terms of boost threshold, spool dynamics, top end
So, is the whip down for upgrades...the turbine upgrade If so, how's it going? Curious what was the negative result of earlier swapping to the smaller AR housing. Obviously you're looking for improvements from a larger AR...what target objectives do you have in mind in terms of boost threshold, spool dynamics, top end
The dynamics of my manifold design work in mysterious ways and it took me a long time to understand it . When I tried the smaller AR the minimal effect on spoolup was offset by lower torque , so I got less power per psi at both low rpm and high rpm.
With the larger AR I'm hoping for a small reduction in spoolup (14psi by 4000rpm vs current 3800) without a corresponding drop in torque. Up top I'm hoping to see the maf peak rpm go up 200-300 rpm which should give me an extra 20-30whp. All the other 'upgrades' I've done have had the effect of putting more air through the wastegate and moving the maf peak rpm down (producing the same whp but at a lower rpm) . Getting more air through the turbine SHOULD have the opposite effect . Fingers crossed.
As to why that happens ..... my theory is that the path through the manifold tubes that feed the turbine is way less restrictive/turbulent than that through the wastegate , so more air through the turbine is always going to be more efficient and make more power than more through the wastegate.
Last edited by Brettus; 04-26-2019 at 04:35 PM.
The following 2 users liked this post by Brettus:
jcbrx8 (04-27-2019),
RotaryMachineRx (04-26-2019)
#1865
Thread Starter
Boosted Kiwi
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 20,604
Likes: 1,535
From: Y-cat-o NZ
Just gunna park this here for future reference . Good info on Intercooler core design !
http://www.treadstoneperformance.com...install-84.pdf
http://www.treadstoneperformance.com...install-84.pdf
The following users liked this post:
jcbrx8 (05-23-2019)
#1866
But per Stroker's comment... did you experiment w/ increasing boost &/or timing while running W/M? If so, what were the results of your experimentation w/ W/M injection combined w/ increased boost &/or timing?
#1867
Thread Starter
Boosted Kiwi
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 20,604
Likes: 1,535
From: Y-cat-o NZ
I was really looking for some majic ....more power with same mass air flow . When I didn't see any I didn't try more boost or timing ...... If you believe my theory on the Renesis power 'cieling' you will understand why.
#1868
Except you didn’t try shoving more mass through, which is the only reason to employ that method. It’s not intended as a power enhancer in and of itself. It’s to safely allow more mass flow to achieve the power gain. Thus, your theory remains a theory.
#1869
Then your testing did not rule out power gains d/t increased timing or boost while injecting W/M for those with MAF headroom under the 400 HP level.
#1870
Thread Starter
Boosted Kiwi
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 20,604
Likes: 1,535
From: Y-cat-o NZ
If you are referring to my 'ceiling' theory ....then yes of course it's still a theory . That test was never trying to prove or disprove it so not sure why you would say that .....
Last edited by Brettus; 05-30-2019 at 09:45 PM.
#1871
Thread Starter
Boosted Kiwi
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 20,604
Likes: 1,535
From: Y-cat-o NZ
True ....but then again , I've already been down that track years ago and ended up ditching w/m . I never really trusted it on my setup. Then again what I had wasn't very sophisticated so .......
#1872
Know of anyone who has successfully run it?
#1873
Thread Starter
Boosted Kiwi
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 20,604
Likes: 1,535
From: Y-cat-o NZ
I'm investigating W/M injection vs. Ethanol mixing. W/M is attractive..., the thermodynamic theory is sound, but haven't found anyone to successfully run it on a Renesis. I'm wondering if the labyrinth of long and winding passage ways in our UIM/LIMs prohibit successful application.
Lot's of people run it ........... whether it is actually saving their engines ...I don't know.
#1874
Corrected ^
If we want to be completely technical/scientific, it is not a scientific theory until it is proven and can be repeatedly tested and confirmed, until then it is just a hypothesis...
No I have nothing productive to add to this conversation.
If we want to be completely technical/scientific, it is not a scientific theory until it is proven and can be repeatedly tested and confirmed, until then it is just a hypothesis...
No I have nothing productive to add to this conversation.
#1875
Thread Starter
Boosted Kiwi
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 20,604
Likes: 1,535
From: Y-cat-o NZ
It's actually closer to a theory by that definition RMRx . It has been repeatedly tested by quite a few people that have tried to make big power on a Renesis and failed. I would venture to say ......it's been tried more times than we all think it has. But no-one likes to admit failure so we never find out about most of them.
Last edited by Brettus; 05-31-2019 at 04:41 PM.
The following users liked this post:
RotaryMachineRx (06-03-2019)