Landracing Forum

Bonneville Salt Flats Discussion => Build Diaries => Topic started by: wobblywalrus on June 14, 2009, 02:03:12 PM

Title: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 14, 2009, 02:03:12 PM
This build diary shows how we handle basic problems.  It is intended for people new to racing and low budget guys and ladies like oursevles.  Nothing fancy here.

The Triumph swingarm was extended 3 inches.  It was cut and a 3-inch lengths of rectangular tube were spliced in using butt welds.  The butt welds are probably good enough but I would be in real bad trouble if there was a fracture at or near the weld.  We added four gusset plates across the butt welds, one on each side of the swingarm, for safety's sake.  Our welder calls them "fish plates."

The modified arms are longer and the swingarm assembly will be more flexible unless strength is added.  I looked at two options.  One was to build a "C" shaped truss under or over the swingarm.  The other was to add a "C" shaped box section.  I drew up free-body diagrams showing the forces, reactions, and moments in the swingarm.  This is complicated so I looked at brake load, power load, weight load, and torsional twisting load separately.  The box added the most strength in the right places with the least amount of added metal.  The Triumph has a McCandliss style twin shock swingarm with 2-inch deep rectangular tubing.  A McCandliss swingarm made from smaller diameter round tube or a single shock cantilever arm are different animals.  The added box might not be the best option for them.

The added box was discussed with the welder.  He made some suggestions and gave me some sheet steel that is compatible with the Triumph metal.  We are a low budget operation so I cut and bent the pieces.  I work for free so this saved money.  The welder welded everything up.  A big problem that none of us anticipated was contraction during welding.  The arms pulled toward each other.  The welder spent a lot of time dealing with this issue and getting everything right.  I did not ask what he did and I do not want to know.  I do know that a lot of heat, force, cussing, and cigars were used.

I seldom get everything right the first time around so I do not invest much money in paint.  I use a paint system that is inexpensive and easily patched after future changes.  It is to clean the metal as good as I can, spray on red primer, follow with gray primer, and topcoat with satin black.  I use Rustoleum rattle can paint.  This was how my parents did it.  It can look good if the blemishes are sanded smooth between coats.   

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 17, 2009, 01:14:30 AM
The paint is drying on the swingarm.  Now it is time to start work on the triple clamps.  The aluminum billets arrived from Fastenal and they must be trimmed to size.

Aluminum can gall onto a saw blade and it can plug the teeth.  This makes it difficult to cut and some alloys are worse than others.  A lubricant helps and kerosene is a traditional choice.  Kerosene soaks into clothes and workbenches and the odor can be a problem in a home workshop.  My cutting lubricant is an odorless kerosene-like oil used in Aladdin kerosene lamps.  A coarse blade such as Milwaukee 5091 8/12T resists clogging and slower cutting speeds help prevent galling.

The billet is clamped in a vice and blue tape is used to mark the cut edge.  The tape is on the cut side that must be straight.  It is easy to control the cut by following the tape.  The backside is a different matter.  Sawzall blades are hard to control in thick metal and they wander.  A guide is clamped onto the backside.  The guide is a piece of strap and it is clamped on the cut side that must be straight.  Experience shows that the guide bar must be steel and not aluminum.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: McRat on June 17, 2009, 01:57:31 AM
Hotrodding at it's finest. :cheers:

For aluminum gauling on blades, I like beeswax or other solid wax sticks.  Less mess, works better than liquids.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Dr Goggles on June 17, 2009, 02:46:28 AM
Hotrodding at it's finest. :cheers:
For aluminum gauling on blades, I like beeswax or other solid wax sticks.  Less mess, works better than liquids.

....tapping fluid, wd40, all work ......ask Grumm441 about cutting big Al stock and he'll tell you a story about a a friend of his who uses a circular saw :-o
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 19, 2009, 10:29:44 PM
Marking the billets is today's job.  The blocks have three irregular sawed sides and one smooth as-rolled side.  The smooth side is the "true side"   Measurements will be taken from the true side and the square will be placed against this side when lines are scribed across the part.

It is important to place reference points on the part for future measurements.  At least one mark on each face should be located in a place where it will not be removed during future work.  I measure halfway across the billet and scribe a line perpendicular to the true side.  The clamps are 3.980 inches from front to back.  I punch a reference point 1.990 inches (half of 3.980) away from the true side on the scribed line.  This is the exact center of the part.  I do this on all four faces.  These points will not be disturbed and future measurments will be taken from them.  Next I measure and mark the centers of the steering stem and the fork tubes. 

My scribed reference lines and punched reference points are accurate to within 1/50 of an inch.  I use a dial caliper to measure and check distances and and I use a magnifying glass to make sure they are "spot on."  Usually I punch and scribe the reference marks on a part in the afternoon then I check the layout calculations and the reference marks the next morning.  One attached picture shows the reference points and another shows an arc being scribed around a reference point using dividers.

We installed a steering damper on Werner's woodpecker bike.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: interested bystander on June 19, 2009, 10:52:35 PM
Dried out dial soap is a good aluminum lubricant, but the beeswax solution - it's kinda "GREEN" too - is hard to argue against.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 20, 2009, 08:18:46 PM
The clamp bolts will be recessed Allen head screws.  The screw heads will project 1/16 inch out from the triple clamp face.  Eight 1/2-inch diameter by 0.25 inch deep counterbores are needed.  These are made with a 1/2 inch diameter cabinet maker's Brad Point Wood Doweling Bit.  These bits work OK in aluminum.  Harder metals will ruin them.  I set the drill press for a slow 280 rpm so I will not burn up the bit.

The drill press table is adjusted so it is square with the drill press spindle.  The billet is clamped in a machinist's vice.  The vice and part are adjusted so the face and true edge are square to the table.  All of this assures that the counterbore will be square with the part.

The initial pilot hole is 1/16 inch diameter and about 1/4 inch deep.  I softly position the little drill in the punch mark on the part.  I check to make sure everything is OK with my magnifying glass, then I turn on the motor and drill the hole.  I enlarge the initial pilot hole with a 3/32 inch drill.

Now I chuck up the doweling bit and I ink the part.  I install a magnetic dial indicator base on the drill press pillar and I position a dial indicator so it measues downward movement of the drill press spindle.

I slowly feed the doweling bit down into the part.  At first only the brad point cuts.  Then I see marks on the inked part that show that the bit is starting to cut a bore.  I look at the dial indicator while I slowly lower the bit into the part.  The dial indicator hand moves 2-1/2 revolutions then I stop boring.  The bore is now 0.25 inches deep.

The doweling bit is removed and I drill the pilot hole for the screw thread tap and the clearance hole for the screw shank. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on June 20, 2009, 09:36:57 PM
You might consider using an aircraft counterbore (AKA spotfacer); it cuts smoothly and leaves a flat- bottom hole with a radiused corner. They are used with a pilot which centers the counterbore to the hole. There are even types that can cut a counterbore on the back side of a hole.

 Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 22, 2009, 01:54:12 AM
These aircraft counterbores look good.  I will try one.  Do you know about a grinding wheel that works good on aluminum?

The parts were shaped this weekend.  The sawzall with steel backing guide was used for many cuts.  Lines of drill holes were used for other cuts.  A jigsaw was used to cut between the holes.  All cuts were made 1/32 inch outside of the finished face.  The saw marks were filed and ground away and the part is close to the desired finished size.

I made a few mistakes and some aluminum will need to be welded on to the part.  This can distort the part, so I will have the welding done before the fork tube and steering stem holes are line bored.

Werner finished his mount and he put the fairing on his bike.  He sawed the center brace out of a set of motocross handlebars, then he turned them upside down and bolted them on.   

    The part was saw could not be used for some of the cuts Some cu 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on June 22, 2009, 07:57:23 PM
Wobbly;

No, every grinding wheel I've tried was gummed up by the aluminum. I do use belt & disc sanders on aluminum and it works reasonably well in coarse grades.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on June 22, 2009, 09:26:13 PM
Sanding discs lubricated with A-9, an aluminum tapping and cutting fluid, will give a really nice matte finish which can then be polished if desired. I'm sure Alumitap would give a similar result.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 24, 2009, 12:25:01 AM
The belt sander idea worked good.  This winter when I get some $ I will try the aluminum cutting fluid.  During lunch I saw the post about Jessie Jame's instantaneous speed attempt.  The exact opposite is Werner.  He is making his parts from scrap and mowing lawns and cleaning storm gutters to buy what he cannot make.  I help with a few things like the steering damper.

He bought a plastic fairing for around $50.  It is an EMGO.  It is made to mount on a headlight, so he made a headlight shaped mount for his Honda.  He beat a piece of scrap into a dish for a "lens."  The fairing slides onto the mount and two aluminum straps hold it in place.  The 15-year old fits perfect in behind the fairing with the low bars.  Kids are so flexible. 

He calls the woodpeckers on the fairing "Honda Birds."  Neither of us know Honda got involved with birds.  If anyone knows, please tell us.  Tomorrow he is going to cover his fuel lines with fireproof tubing.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 26, 2009, 01:53:02 AM
Fire sleeve insulation is required on fuel lines by AMA/BUB regulations.  We use XRP Performance Products XRP-4.  There are many other suitable brands.  Our local speed shop sells the sleeve by the foot.  The hose has a teflon impregnated cover and fiberglass insulation.

My trick to install this sleeve is to push a large pencil through the sleeve and follow it with the fuel line.  It is hard to push the hose through the sleeve by itself.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 26, 2009, 01:56:43 AM
I forgot the pictures.  Here they are.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 15, 2009, 01:53:01 AM
A lot of internet research went into this attempt to cure the speed wobble.  Typing "BMW Speed Wobble" into a search engine provided all sorts of info.  One item mentioned was the importance of having the holes in the triple clamps in proper alignment.  The dimensions between the hole centerlines in each clamp should be within a couple of thousands of an inch, ideally, according to the posted advice.

The fork hole centers were specified to be 3.376 inches from the part centerline with a plus or minus .001 inch tolerance.  The steering stem center was specified to be on the part centerline with a tolerance of  plus or minus .001 inches to the right or left.  There were similar tolerances for the distances from the true faces on the front of the clamps.  This meant that the holes in the upper and lower clamps would not be more than .002 inches different.  These were tight tolerances.

The machinist stacked the clamps one on top of the other and line bored the fork tube and steering stem holes through both parts at the same time.  This assured that the holes in the top and bottom clamps would be within the specified tolerances.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 18, 2009, 02:19:17 AM
The bottom of the lower triple clamp needed to be milled to provide clearance.  This would mean a trip to the machine shop.  Neil from Arizona mentioned a milling cutter in an earlier post on this build diary.  This made me think about milling the part on my drill press.  It would be bush engineering, but it would save time and money.

The local Fastenal shop ordered me a 4 tooth by 1/2 inch diameter end mill cutter.  I made sure the cutter would make plunge cuts.  Not all end mill cutters will plunge.  The 1/2 inch size is the biggest I use on a drill press based on experience.  The stronger vertical milling machines are needed for the bigger cutters.

I taped a piece of graph paper with a 1/4 inch square grid on the drill press table.  Then I clamped on a guide bar with two clamps.  The bar was lined up with the grid on the paper.  Next, I clamped the part onto the table with two husky C clamps.  The part rested against the guide bar and a pen mark on the part was aligned with a line on the grid paper.  The stop was set so the cutter would not go deeper than the desired 1/4 inch.

I slid the part along the guide and plunged the mill cutter into the part at 1/4 inch intervals.  The pen mark on the part was aligned with the graph paper grid to help me space the cuts.  I would rotate the drill press table after each row was cut to the position of the next row.  The rows were 1/4 inch apart.  There were 16 plunges per square inch.  The part was clamped down with two clamps during all cuts.

I am careful around machine tools and extra careful when I use them for purposes that they were not intended.  The job took about half an evening.  It turned out well. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 19, 2009, 02:26:24 AM
Race bikes are taken apart and put together a lot, especially this one.  The forks need to be taken off to remove the fairing.  This means the triple clamp bolts will be loosened and tightened at least twice a year, if not more often.  Past experience shows that repeatedly screwing and unscrewing steel bolts in aluminum parts will eventually create enough wear to cause a stripped thread.  Murphy's law also applies.  The stripped thread will occur when there is no time to fix it or the tools to do the job.  Stainless threaded inserts were installed in all twelve of the triple clamp bolt holes to prevent stripping.  I used Recoil inserts from Australia.  They are sold by Fastenal and Ace Hardware.  There are other brands that work, too.

Using hardened washers under the triple clamp bolts has been recommended to me.  It seems to be a good idea.  I could not find hardened stainless steel washers.  Metric 8 mm hole diameter stainless steel washers are available and they are nice and thick.  These washers are too wide to fit in the 0.5 inch diameter counterbores for the Allen bolts.  They were ground on a grinding wheel to reduce the outer diameter using the little tool shown in the photos.

The inserts, washers, and some anti-sieze on the bolts will make these connections corrosion resistant, strong, and trouble-free.   

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 20, 2009, 01:08:30 AM
Sooner or later a project gets done.  The clamps are finished for now.  This winter the bottom clamp will be milled to lighten it and both will be polished and painted black.

The only machine work was line boring the three clamp holes.  All else was done by hand, a drill press, a Sawzall, or a bench grinder.  We had to do it this way for budget reasons.  If Santa Claus brought a Bridgeport mill this Christmas he would not be turned away.  Machine tools are great things.  Believe me!     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 21, 2009, 02:04:05 AM
The "W" shaped thing on the top of the bottom clamp is a steering stop.  It contacts a tab on the frame and it prevents the forks from turning far enough to dent the tank.  Four Allen bolts hold the stop to the clamp.  Force applied to the stop will try to shear the bolts.  It is good practice to reinforce bolted connections with pins when they need to resist shear.  Hardened split pins are good for this application.  Long split pins are shown in the picture.  They cannot be cut with a saw so I trim two of them to 3/4 inches length with a cutoff wheel on an air grinder.  Then I champfer the cut ends to match the manufactured ends.

Next I drill two 1/4-inch diameter holes in the stop plate 5/16 inch deep.  These holes are at the areas that I want to reinforce with the split pins.  I put two 1/4 inch diameter cabinetmaker's doweling pins in the holes.  These are available at almost all shops selling hardwoods and woodworking tools.

Now, I lightly tighten the stop to the clamp with the four bolts.  A good whack with a mallet, and the doweling pins dimple the clamp.  I take the stop off and I take out the doweling pins.  Holes 1/4 inch diameter and 1/2 inch deep are drilled in the clamp at the dimples.  The split pins are tapped into the holes.  A picture shows the doweling pin dimple and a hole with a split pin.  The last step is to bolt the stop onto the clamp with the two split pins in place.

The doweling pin method works in aluminum.  Steel dulls the doweling pins and they do not leave a mark.   

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 22, 2009, 02:22:14 AM
This build diary shows basic shop work.  Common screwups are mentioned, too.  Things do not work right all of the time.

The Recoil thread inserts did not work well.  The bolts would not easily screw into five of the nine inserts.  I had to carefully run a tap through the installed inserts to clean up the threads.  Then the bolts could be screwed in.  The ninth insert was a problem.  The tap got tangled up in the insert when I tried to remove it.  The tap broke deep inside the threaded hole.

The proper tap removal method would be to take the forks apart and bring the triple clamp to a specialist with an electric zapper.  They would blast the tap into smoke and ions with a strong electric current.  Ever mindfull of our team's lack of money and time, I opted for another procedure.  The Hillbilly method.  Hee Haw!  Tools for this travesty are drift punches, a big hammer, a magnet, needlenose pliers, and an ice pick or screwdriver.  This is brutal.  I put on my safety glasses.

Taps are made from high carbon or alloy steel.  They are brittle.  I put a drift punch in the hole and gave the broken tap a number of good whacks.  I stuck the magnet into the hole and pulled out some shattered tap fragments, I pried loose a few coil threads with the ice pick, and I pulled them out with pliers.  A flashlight helped.  I repeated the pound, pick, pull process for seven or eight more times, then voila!  The hole was clean.  A new thread insert is needed.  This is a project for another day.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 25, 2009, 02:19:52 AM
It is important to align the forks correctly during assembly.  Misaligned forks can cause a rough ride and all sorts of strange handling problems.  This is one of many methods.

First, I make sure the steering stem bearings are in good condition and not loose, the fork tubes are not bent, and there are no cracks in the frame near the steering head.  Then, I remove the springs and drain the fork oil and I insert the tubes into the clamps.

The triple clamp billets have true faces as described earlier.  Portions of the true faces have been preserved throughout fabrication process.  They are crosshatched with marking pen in the attached photo.  The machining dimensions for the fork tube and steering stem holes were measured from these true faces.  The distances between the true faces and the fork tube centerlines are the same, plus or minus a couple of thousanths of an inch.  The true faces will be used to align the triple clamps.

I put a piece of flat glass against the clamps and I twist the clamps until all of both true faces touch the glass.  How do I know the glass is flat?  Flat glass will not rock if placed against the clamps when turned sideways or upside down.  Warped glass will not rock if placed against the clamps one way and it will rock if it is put up against the clamps another way.  I tighten the triple clamp bolts to keep them in alignment.

Now, I put on the front wheel and tighten the front wheel axle nut to the correct torque setting.  I leave the clamp bolt loose on the bottom of the other fork tube.  I raise the front wheel to almost full compression and set it on a crate.  I grab the loose fork tube and wiggle it back and forth to center it on the front axle.  Then I torque down the Allen bolt and both tubes are now clamped to the axle.

Next I measure the gap between the inside of the fork tube and the wheel spacer and I write it down in my notebook.  I will space the fork tube this distance from the wheel spacer in the future when I change tires, etc.

Now I check to make sure that my front fender and fork brace do not spread the forks apart or pull them together.  Occasionally shims or grinding are needed to make them fit.  The last step is to refit the springs and to fill the forks with oil.

 

 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: oz on July 27, 2009, 03:41:11 PM
Nessecity "I am sure i have spelt that wrong" is the mother of invention nicely done. Broken taps are a real pain i have used the same method and its usually on the last hole you were going to tap,worse still if its a blind hole.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 28, 2009, 02:57:14 AM
Yes, it was the last hole where everything went bad.  The longer swingarm was put on this weekend with the longer chain, chaingaurd, brake hose, shocks and fender.  This afternoon I took it out on our local mountain route for a good thrash after work.  I was expecting it to be slow handling but stable, sort of like the Titanic.  I was wrong.  Instead, it was very stable with light precise handling and good roadholding.  Very fast because I did not need to slow down much for corners.  Tomorrow I will take it to Portland and back on the interstate for a final high speed test.  Then, an engine tune and service, and the street hardware will come off and the tin will go on.

The chassis changes this year are based on advice from experts who race these things, posts on this forum, and my desire to try new ideas.  In the past I increased rake to get more trail and stability.  On this build I did not change the rake.  Instead I made some triple clamps to decrease the offset.  This increased the trail.  The final result was a bike that was stable and handled well.  It did not have the heavy steering associated with lots of rake.  The swingarm was lengthened three inches and the overall percentage of trail to wheelbase is 8 percent.

This is my first experience with radial tires.  They grip really good and they work best with a fluid and smooth cornering style.  Lateral chassis stability is very important with these tires.  The Triumph frame and modified swingarm are plenty strong but the forks were flexy. Making the forks stiffer using the new clamps helped a lot.  It took that change to bring out the best in the radial tires.

The real test will be at the Speed Trials.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 30, 2009, 11:14:24 PM
The new triple clamps should grip the fork tubes as tightly as the original Triumph items.  Triumph use galvanized 10 millimeter diameter by 1.25 millimeter pitch Allen bolts with a 27 Newton-meter dry tightening torque.  What is the gripping force, I wonder?

I download a tightening torque chart from www.rpmmech.com/docs/tightening_torque.pdf   These charts are not uncommon in the mechanical engineering world.  The metric unit chart for M10x1.25 bolts lists the clamp loads for various strength bolts.  I plot them up as shown on the attached chart.  A 13.5 kiloNewton (3030 pound) load corresponds to a 27 Newton-meter tightening torque.

It is during the 4th July weekend when I do this and in a patriotic moment I decide to use American size bolts in the new clamps.  Three eighths inch diameter bolts with Unified National Fine (UNF) threads are similar to the metric size.  I am not thinking clearly and I drill and tap the holes for 5/16 inch diameter bolts with Unified National Coarse (UNC) threads.  A smaller size.  Then I helicoil the threads.  This makes it almost impossible to make the holes bigger for the 3/8 inch bolts.  What do I do?

I download the tightening chart from RPM Mechanical for 5/16 UNC bolts and plot up the clamp loads for various torques as shown on the attachment.  A 15.5 foot-pound tightening torque corresponds to a 3030 pound clamp load.  These charts are for typical galvanized bolts with clean, dry, and rolled threads in good condition.  I will use anti-seize, a lubricant.  A rule-of thumb is to reduce the bolt torque when the threads are lubed.  I use a typical reduction value of 75%.  The tightening torque will be .75 x 15.5 = 11.6 foot-pounds.  I will use 12 foot-pounds.  It is easier to remember.

Tensile stresses in the bolts produces the clamp loads and the clamp loads make the gripping power.  A Grade 2 5/16 NC bolt produces a 2162 pound clamp force, maximum, using the RPM Mechanical chart.  It is too weak.  A Grade 5 bolt produces 3341 pounds clamping force, maximum.  This exceeds the 3030 pound clamp load that I need, so Grade 5 bolts will be used.

The helicoils are stainless steel and I like to use stainless bolts.  Thread galling can be a problem with stainless steel bolts tightened greater than Grade 3 limits, based on my experience.  The situation is worse when the threaded parts are similar stainless alloys, and the bolts and helicoils are.  The anti-sieze will prevent this problem but I might forget to use it.  I will use galvanized Grade 5 carbon steel bolts.  This should work OK with no seizing, I hope.

The attachments are too big.  I will shrink them and include them in the next reply.
   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 30, 2009, 11:37:06 PM
There must be a way to reduce a scanned chart to less than 500 KB, but I cannot figure it out.  Instead I took photos, cropped them and here they are.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on July 31, 2009, 12:03:57 AM
Wobbly;

Ultimate tensile strength and clamping force are one thing but consider the fatigue strength of a bolt operating at close to its ultimate limit-- I'd use a grade 8 bolt instead of a grade 5; the difference in cost is small but the additional safety is worth a lot.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 31, 2009, 08:09:08 PM
Thanks for this advice.  Grade 8 it will be. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 07, 2009, 01:16:36 AM
The crush and removal method for a broken tap was presented in a recent build diary entry.  This procedure can be used for other purposes.

The Triumph steering head bearings were replaced several months ago.  The bottom bearing outer race was easily removed using a slide hammer bearing puller.  The top outer race was a different matter.  The flange that supported the race had the same inner diameter as the race.  The bearing puller could not hook under the race.  What was Triumph thing about when they designed this?

Several removal methods were tried and none worked.  As a last resort, a section of the race was ground 'paper thin" with the air grinder.  Care was used to assure that none of the surrounding housing was disturbed.  The thin part of the race was whacked with a center punch.  The hardened race steel was brittle and it shattered.  The bearing race was easily pried out.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on August 07, 2009, 09:37:31 AM
Another commonly used method is to run a weld bead around the inside of the race. When the race cools it shrinks and simply falls out.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 08, 2009, 02:42:00 PM
Does the weld method work with arc, gas, or either?  It sure seems to be a quicker procedure than the one I used.  Especially for larger bearing races.

A few entries ago I mentioned how I damaged a helical coil insert and how I broke a tap inside of the coil when I tried to clean up the threads.  I was cleaning the threads because the triple clamp bolts were binding in the coil inserts.  I did some asking around and research.  This is what I learned.

Helical coil inserts, like everything else, have their good and bad aspects.  They are very sensitive to the quality of the leading edge of the first screw thread that contacts the coil.  In general, there are few problems with manufactured bolts having undamaged rolled threads.  Being a cheapskate, I did not buy new bolts of the correct length for this project.  Instead, I used a sawzall to shorten a bunch of rolled thread bolts that were left over from an earlier project.  Then tried to grind and trim the bolt ends to the correct shape.  It was hard to do and it was especially difficult with the stainless steel bolts I used.  The leading edges of the bolt threads were far from perfect.  I bought some Grade 8 bolts with rolled threads in the correct length and it was readily apparent.  The untrimmed bolts did not bind in the coil inserts, unlike my trimmed bolts.

Fixing the stripped threads where I removed the tap and helicoil was a problem.  Most of the 5/16 x 18 threaded inserts I found had external threads with 1/2 inch or 7/16 outside diameters.  Drilling and tapping for these inserts would make the bolt hole too large where the bottom of the Allen head screw contacts the clamp.  Eventually I found some narrow inserts called Time Serts.  I ground the shoulder off of the upper end of the Time-Sert.  The ground shoulder had the same diameter as the outside diameter of the Time-Sert threads.  Then I drilled the unthreaded portion of the triple clamp hole under the bolt head to 25/64 inches diameter.  The Time-Sert would fit through this hole, barely.  Next, I drilled and tapped the threaded portion of the hole with the Time-Sert drill and tap.  Now I installed the insert.

The Time-Sert works OK.  I was able to tighten the Allen bolt to the correct torque and the fork tube is firmly clamped in place.  In hindsight, I would have used Time-Serts in all of the holes, initially, instead of helical coil inserts.   

Tser would   Then I drilled the hole in the nonthreaded portion of the clamp to the same diameter.  Next, I drilled and tapped the threaded portion of the bolt hole for the Time-Sert.hreaded the o to outer mushroo   Allen head aand the hole I could install one of these, but the Allen bolt aleen  f g the

bolI got by with this shortenin  ilI had fron an earlisawed the had a bunch of  that are .  scoi
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on August 08, 2009, 06:19:31 PM
Either should work. I usually use either tig or mig. The problem with the gas is that you want to heat the race to red without transferring a lot of heat to the seat. What you're actually accomplishing is shrinking the seat. That's why you let everything cool before dropping the seat out.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 11, 2009, 02:27:55 AM
The fork bolts are all figured out, everything is tested on the street, and its time to prepare for the Speed Trials.  A day or so spent at preventing corrosion now will save many days spent on restoration later.

Lots of salt and brine gets kicked up by the back wheel.  I make a full coverage fender liner out of duck tape.  All of the gaps and cracks around the fender edges are sealed.  The shocks are covered, too.

The rims are taped.  Masking tape is used.  It is easier to mold around the spokes than duck tape.

There is a lot of aluminum on this bike.  The inside of all metalwork is sprayed with ACF 50.  It is expensive but it does what I want it to do.  I get it at the local airport.  I spray ACF-50 all around under the engine and on the oil radiator.  Then I take off the countershaft cover and spray it in there.

The metalwork outsides get a good coat of wax.

I peel off the tape right after I get home.  It is easier to do then.  The tape glue adheres to the bike, rather than the tape, if I wait too long.  Power washers, especially on the hot setting, make a steamy salty spray and they will get salt into everything.  Lots of cold running water works best with no spraying.  I like to carefully wash the salt down.  To do this, I start at the top of the bike and work downward.

 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 13, 2009, 08:28:59 PM
My street test route has a long, steep, and straight downhill section.  I head down it and I remove my hands from the handlebars.  I need to lean to one side to keep the bike going straight.  This tells me the front and rear wheels are not aligned.

I used the index marks on the swingarm and chain adjusters when I set the chain tension.  Perhaps the marks are no longer properly aligned.  The swingarm was extended and some things must have been slightly out of place when everything was welded together.  Now the string procedure is needed to align the rear wheel.  The rims need to be true and the tires must to be correctly seated on the rims if this procedure is to work.  They are, so I am ready.  I hunt around for some string.  Some mason's twine will work fine.

I wrap the string around the front and rear wheels, then I look down the string on each side of the bike.  The front tire is not as wide as the rear, so this is what I want to see:  the string wraps around the front edges of the front tire, it passes by the rear edges of the front tire with gaps between the string and the tire (the gaps are the same on either side), it bends slightly where it passes over the front edge of the rear tire (the bends are the same on both sides), an it wraps around the rear of the rear tire.

I do not see what I desire.  The string on one side is bent a lot where it passes by the rear tire, and the string on the other side is straight.  The wheels are out of alignment.  Now I tighten one of the chain adjuster bolts until the bends in the string are the same on both sides.  I check the chain tension and then I tighten the axle nut and safety wire it.

The string is a pain to use every time I adjust the chain.  I measure the gaps between the chain adjusters and the swingarm on both sides of the bike with dial calipers.  The gap on one side is 0.050 inches greater than the gap on the other side.  I write this down in my notebook.  Now, every time I adjust the chain I make sure the gap on one side is 0.050 inches more than the gap on the opposite side.  This will keep the wheels in alignment.   

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 16, 2009, 01:26:33 PM
The "New Economic Reality" hit our household today.  We work the in the same jobs as always, with the same responsibilities and worries, and a lot less pay.  It looks like the Triumf and Honda will be thrashed, bashed, and crashed for at least a few more years.  Joe Amo's record on his old bike really raised our team morale.  Along the theme of low budget, here is the compressor story.

We did not have air in the cellar for years.  Sears had a little one-horsepower three-gallon compressor for sale a few years ago.  A good price, so I bought it.  It was too small to do much besides inflate tires and blow the dust off of parts.  It was pretty useless, really.  I did not have the space and money for a big compressor, and I had all of $100 invested in the little guy.

My wife and I watched for sales at Sears.  Months later the compressors were marked down.  It was time to strike.  We came home with a nice shiny one-horsepower seven-gallon compressor.  This is a fairly useless tool by itself, but it does not work alone.  Both compressors are hooked together with a hose and they work like a two-horsepower ten-gallon job.  They have enough blow to run all of my air tools with no problems.  The picture shows them together on the floor.  Actually, most of the time they are crammed up on a shelf under a heating duct.  It is easy to find room for two small compressors.  We take the little one with us to Bonneville. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 22, 2009, 02:06:01 AM
A tethered ignition cut-off switch kills the engine when you fall off of the bike.  They are required by the BUB Speed Trials rules and they are a good idea, even if they are not mandatory.  There are two types.  The choice depends on the power generation system for the ignition. 

Werner needs to fit a tethered switch to his Honda.  The key switch for the ignition will be replaced.  He uses a multimeter to determine that current does not flow through the key switch when it is turned on.  He will use a "magneto" type tethered switch.  Current does not pass through the magneto switch during normal operation and the switch conducts current when the lanyard is pulled.  Werner uses an EMGO tethered switch.  He ordered it from Pingel.

The Triumph has an alternator and battery ignition.  It uses an "alternator" type tethered switch.  Current passes through the switch during normal operation and current is blocked when the lanyard is pulled.  The Triumph switch is homemade.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: saltwheels262 on August 22, 2009, 01:20:55 PM
sometimes those cheap ones will make or break a
connection with a slight movement of the red cap.

franey
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 23, 2009, 02:00:03 PM
Thanks for the advice.  Werner got a good one but he will be careful.

The BUB/AMA rules require a steering damper.  The Triumph uses a Norman Hyde shock absorber type.  It works good.  There is no room on Werner's Honda for this damper type so we ordered a Scott"s rotary style damper.  The damper body is clamped to the handlebars.  A peg is clamped to the frame at the top of the steering head.  A lever transmits force between the peg and a spindle in the damper.

We sent out a small fortune to order this thing and it arrived in a little box complete with installation instructions for another type of Honda.  We filed and ground on various parts and finally got it to fit.  It worked great in the driveway.  Werner took the bike out into the dez for a trail ride.  The peg shifted up off of the steering stem and the damper would not work.  We rechecked the tightness of the clamp around the top of the steering stem and he went out again.   The same problem occurred.  Werner made some "L" shaped tabs and he screwed them on either side if the peg clamp.  Then he bent a rod into a "U" shape and threaded the ends.  The rod goes around the bottom of the steering head.  The peg does not come loose now.

Werner is young and curious.  He turned the damping screws in and out.  We wanted to reset the high speed damping back to the default setting but there are no instructions about how to do this.  We guessed at a setting.

The BUB/AMA rules state that the damper cannot act as a fork stop.  The damper, as supplied by Scott's, was the fork stop.  This is another piece of poor engineering.  I made a little two piece block that clamps over the original Honda fork stop.  It makes the stop wider.  Now the triple clamp stop tabs contact the frame.

The low speed damper knob does not turn.  There is some sort of defect.  We will take it apart this winter and we will fix it.  This damper gets the official Team Go Dog, Go recommendation for material that needs to be melted down and made into something useful.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 26, 2009, 02:02:17 AM
A final check.  This is done about three weeks before we leave, ideally.  I do the same routine every year.  The bike is uncovered and I get out the big gear bag.  It is empty and it has enough room for all of my riding gear and it has a pouch in the side for papers.  I find the current rule book.  Emphasis is on "current."  I have read it while building the bike and I reread every section that applies to the bike and myself, including rules of conduct, etc.  I make sure all of my riding gear is OK and I put it in the bag.  The helmet certifications have changed.  My old lid is obsolete.  I go out and buy a new one.  I check everything on the bike to make sure it meets the rules.  Then I make sure all of the correct paperwork is in the bag.  A few years ago I got a copy of the BUB Scrutineer's checklist.  Now I also check that everything is OK on the bike and my riding gear using the Scrutineer's list.  Last, I check the BUB rider's handbook.

It is amazing what I find during these final checks.  We think everything is OK before the check, but things are overlooked.  We sawed off two inches of Werner's rear fender.  It stuck out past the back of the wheel.  We made a chain guard.  A task that we forgot to do.  I drained the gas out of the Triumph.  Now we are ready to go. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 06, 2009, 07:54:58 PM
Werner ran just over 60mph on his bike for an AMA record in his class.  I am a proud father and I will let him post his own story.

The Triumph was ready, sort of.  The cam chain is badly worn.  I discovered this during a last minute valve adjustment.  The cam trailed several degrees behind the crank.  I heard the chain whipping around when I rode the bike but I did not know how serious the problem was.  My plan was to make two runs, maximum.  It was not worth the danger of a broken chain to make any more.

In the past I wound out forth gear and made a high speed shift to fifth.  This made the bike jiggle and increased the chances of a high speed wobble.  I would not do this anymore.  Also, I would slowly reduce the power during the mile after the traps.  This would keep the bike's nose high and it would reduce the chance of a wobble.  I would pull of of the course between mile 4 and 5.  Also, I would tuck down and look through the windshield.  I was always afraid to do this in the past.  I practiced it this summer on the street.  I am used to doing it.

The last year's last run ended in a bad speed wobble.  I have raced enough now to know how dangerous it really is. This was a new chassis setup and I did not know how it would act.  I was really scared and I wanted to puke while I was at mile 0 and waiting my turn to go.  The starter flagged me to the line and my head cleared.   He waved me off.  I slowly accelerated through all five gears.  At mile 1.5 Bonnie was at about 5,000 rpm in fifth at half throttle.  I made sure I was pointed straight down the middle of the course, I snuggled down behind the shield, and I pulled the throttle to the stop.  The bike moved out.  It was at top speed just before mile 2 pulling 7,000 rpm.  This is the perfect engine speed for sustained use.  Everything was dead steady.  No goofy handling.  I zinged through the traps and slowed the bike down under power.  No speed wobble.  I was still alive and very happy.  On the salt I cannot tell how fast I am going.  My daughter, Gretchen, brought me the timing slip.  127 mph.  This was 7 mph faster than last year.  I could not believe it.

Now for the return run.  I did exactly what I did before.  I had my hand on the clutch lever.  I would pull it in quick if the cam chain snapped.  The engine stayed together.  123 mph against a 4 mph headwind.  They measured the engine in impound on Tuesday afternoon and it passed.  790 cc is well below the 1000 cc class limit.

I looked at the data on the timing slips and I thought about it while driving back to Oregon.  We had no money for engine work and none was done.  The engine is the same as last year with 6,000 additional street miles.  The changes that possibly increased speed are lower bars from a 2009 Thruxton so I can tuck better, Nology ignition coils and wires, a Metzeler radial front tire, and the new streamlined back end.

Lots of folks helped me and I have thanked them personally or I will thank them soon.  Thanks to all that have helped me on this forum, either by direct advice or by posting things for others that have helped me.  These were the fastest times of my life and it was on a steady handling bike.  It does not get better than this.   
 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Cole222 on September 06, 2009, 09:47:25 PM
It was nice to meet you and Werner: Congratulations to both of you for a successful week!
Cole
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 07, 2009, 03:17:18 PM
Thanks, Cole.  We left on Wednesday morning.  We had to get home for family matters.  Werner's record held.  A really fast Ducate ran in my class on Wednesday afternoon and Thursday.  The days of records for me are over.  I race for personal bests and fun from now on.

This winter the engine will get some stronger rods, an 865cc kit with 10.5 to 1 compression, and a new cam chain.  Tom Mellor gave our pit helpers some advice on aero.  They told me what he suggested.  The fairing will be redone this winter.  This build diary will show the basics of engine teardown and the other things we do.

Werner is not sure about what he wants to do for next year.  Tell us how you did.  Your turbo Triumph looks to be real interesting.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 11, 2009, 12:33:45 AM
A good racing chain is an investment.  Salt is very corrosive to chains.  The crystalline structures of the chain's hardened surfaces are especially susceptible to rusting.

Initially, the chain is lubed with a light oil that is rich in moly, graphite, or both.  I use an oil for machine guns that my oldest son found at the local army surplus store.  A hot machine gun mechanism has heat and impact like a racing chain, in my thinking.

A noted racer mentioned in this forum the use of WD40 to lube chains between runs.  This is a good idea.  WD40 is designed to displace water and it is especially useful if the chain is moist or wet.  Unfortunately, WD40 is not designed to be a really high performance lubricant, and I apply another application of gun oil over it if I am energetic.

The chain is pulled off immediately after the last run and it is put into a plastic bag.  I fill the bag with water as shown in the photo.  The water dissolves the salt.  I use a non O-ring chain so the water can get in between the rollers.  Sometimes I use a double rinse if the chain is very salty.  Then I hang the chain up to dry, as shown.  The dry chain is oiled, wrapped in oily paper, and tucked away for next year.  This method works well.  The chain will give me a lot of good service.  It might last longer than me.
 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 21, 2009, 12:34:16 AM
The Speed Trials records were posted.  The 125 mph average we ran this this year was not good enough to keep the record.  Especially when the competition ran over 180 mph.  Ouch!  No more records for me.  I race for grins and giggles now.

Awhile back I brought a few little Bonneville salt chunks home for keepsakes.  I could not figure out where to put them so I laid them on the back porch railing.  They slowly disappeared.  I noticed that during more humid days there was moisture or a small puddle under the salt.

The salt absorbed water from the atmosphere.  Some of the salt dissolved when enough water was absorbed.  The salt water soaked into the wood.  The salt did not disappear, it simply changed location.  Now it is in the wood.

This is what happens to a salty bike in a humid climate.  The salt dissolves into a liquid and it penetrates into the cracks and crevices.  It seeps under plating and it gets into electrical components.  This salt water is very corrosive.  A lot of the dry salt we see in mechanisms was originally salt water that seeped in previously and the water has since evaporated.

The trick to minimize damage is to get the salt off of the bike pronto.  I take the bike apart enough to get into all the cracks and crevices with lots of cold running water.  I do not splash water onto electrical parts.  Then I clean and wax everything, lube as needed, and put it all back together.  This takes a whole bunch of time when I would rather be doing something else but it saves money and work in the long term.  The Triumph is a crusty crustacean when I bring it back from the speed trials and I get it cleaned up within two or three weeks.  The reward is worth it.  There is nothing like a clean shiny bike ready to go for the last few weeks of warm weather.  Two photos are shown to provide inspiration.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 25, 2009, 12:05:46 PM
Street tires were needed to replace the knobbys on Werner's bike.  A 300 x 19 rib front and a 3.50 x 16 block pattern rear, to be exact.  None of the local shops had them.  We could order a front tire from a high quality manufacturer but it would cost a lot of money that we did not have.  We resorted to one of the modern era's most useful tools, the internet.  It ranks right up there with the twist-off beer bottle cap.  We searched all of the major internet tire suppliers and had no luck.  No value-oriented, otherwise known as cheap, tires. 

A senior engineer at my job showed me a trick a few years ago, and it is the topic of this post.  It is to type into a search engine any numbers or words unique to the item I am looking for.  I typed in "300 x 19" and "3.50 x 16."  I scanned the info that came up and I figured out that Chen Shing made some tires in this size at one time but they no longer make street tires.  I found a source for the front tire.  Domiracer had one in stock.  Voila, half of the problem was solved.  I also found the Ching Shen model number for the rear tire.  I typed it in and found a tire listed by some folks who sold Sears Allstate bike parts.  Allstates had twin cylinder engines made by Puke of Germany with two pistons sharing a common combustion chamber.  These "twingles" were really good bikes, as I remember.  They had the rear tire in stock.  Problem solved.

This little trick has saved me a lot of time over the years.

  made sining made some at one time, but they no longer make street tires, and we found the old Cheng Shen tire model number..  We

A senior engineer at my job showed me a trick years ago, and it is the topic of this post.  Heenginsome  cheaopo turned to the internet.    q some f and
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 04, 2009, 11:24:49 PM
The Triumph in this build diary is a 2003 T-100 790cc twin.  Later they were enlarged to 865cc and they were fitted with bigger carbs.  A really clean, stored indoors, very low mileage example is for sale at Cascade Moto-Classics in Beaverton, Oregon info@cascademoto.com (503) 574-3353

This bike is black and red and it is the last model with carburettors and the last made completely in England.   The airbox restrictor plates are removed and it has Norman Hyde Toga pipes.  Maximum torque is 52.28 lbs-ft at 5,900 rpm and 62.52 hp at 7,100 rpm.  These are good numbers for a near-standard T-100.  I know about this bike's history, and unlike mine, this bike has not been thrashed or raced.  It will make someone a happy owner.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 07, 2009, 12:08:39 AM
Lots of copper washers are used when the Triumph is switched from street bike to salt dog and back to road trim.  Oil drain washers, brake line washers, etc.  The old washers are compressed and work hardened.  They are not good at sealing when they are in this state.  I put the used washers on a wire and heat them up to orange hot.  Then I dunk them in water.  This anneals them, makes them soft, and they are ready to be used again.  I keep the washers on two metal clips.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 12, 2009, 11:32:14 PM
It is time to do some engine work on the Bonneville.  The cam chain is worn and whipping around, and the standard pistons and rods have been run for three years at Bonneville and 21,000 miles on the street.  The 2008 runs were real brutal.  Compression is fine and there is no piston slap. I simply want to put in racing quality components.  A fragged piston or snapped rod would end my land speed career.

The big decision.  Should I build a hot engine and go for records in my 1,000cc modern engine classes?  Should I build a strong, but not radical, street motor?  All of us face this decision.  I have a few times.  A hot engine requires a lot of money, hours with the spanners, and maintenance.  This time, for once in my life, I decided to put thought before action.

The benchmark in my class, a threat to all records I could attempt or set, would be a new BMW S 1000 RR.  I would have to equal or exceed this bike.  Advertised specs are 190.42 horsepower at 13,000 rpm for an engine just under 1,000 cc.

Consider volumetric efficiency.  I could bore and stroke the Triumph out to 1,000 cc and produce 120 hp, naturally aspirated.  This would take lots of money and I would need to tear it down after every session on the salt to check the bearings, etc.  Volumetric efficiency would be about 120 hp per liter.  The BMW has about 190 hp per liter when you roll it off the showroom floor.

Let's look at redline rpm.  Assuming two engines have equal volumetric efficiency, the one with a higher redline can run gearing with a greater numerical ratio.  This engine will exert more leverage on the track and it can go faster.  Right now I run the Bonnie between 7,000 and 8,000 rpm through the mile.  Folks with higher tuned Bonnies stretch them out to 9,000 rpm.  The BMW, out of the crate, has an advertised redline of 13,000 rpm.  Clearly, the Bonnie has no hope of being a serious land speed racer.  This has been for awhile, and is getting to be more so, the era of the four.

The one thing the Bonnie is real good at is racing for the pleasure of going faster every year.  It is relatively easy to work on and not very expensive to hop up.  Besides, it is paid for and a harmless old guy on a slow bike can run in most events.  Elvington and Lake Gairdner await.

This winter the engine rebuild will be posted.  It will be basic, but folks who have not torn down a motor might learn something.  Lots of younger people have not taken an engine apart.  It will be awhile.  I have to save up money for the parts.   

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 13, 2009, 11:39:05 PM
This Bonneville has never idled smoothly and occasionally it dies at stoplights.  Porting the engine and installing pod air filters made it worse.  Just before the BUB Trials, I remembered a trick we used on BSA's, Triumphs, and Nortens years ago.  It works on twins whose pistons go up and down together and fire on alternate strokes.  I have also used it on four cylinder Hondas, cylinders 1 and 4 are connected and 2 and 3.

First, I drill and tap a hose fitting on each manifold.  They should be the same distance from the intake valve on each cylinder.  The Triumph has these already installed at the factory.  Then, I synchronize the carbs with a vacuum gauge.  Last, I do not cap the hose fittings.  Instead, I connect the two pipe fittings with a piece of fuel line.

This little fix smoothed out the Triumph and gave 2 or 3 more miles per gallon.  This is not unusual. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 17, 2009, 03:37:50 PM
Economic reality being what it is, the engine project is now the bare minimum that is needed to race next year.  A new cam chain will be installed, along with new racing rods and larger high compression pistons.

Land speed racing puts a lot of strain on the engine.  Triumph pistons are forged.  I do not know about their long term durability, although they have been OK so far.  I do not want to take chances.  Racing grade pistons are not available in the 790 cc size, but there are some for the 865 cc engines.  I looked at the cost of boring out the 790 jugs and putting in sleeves for 865 cc pistons.  The sleeves would be steel or iron.  The Triumph cylinders are not sleeved.  The bores are a hard plating on the casting and this gives excellent heat dissipation.  I do not want to have a seizure on the salt, and learn the hard way, why Triumph does the things they do.  I ordered a new set of 865 barrels.  They are the same casting as the 790 cc jug with bigger holes.

I could order the pistons directly from South Bay Triumph and put them in myself.  Barrels and pistons are manufactured items and it can be assumed they will be slightly bigger or smaller than the design dimensions. I will send the barrels down to South Bay and ask them to fit a set of pistons and to make sure the skirt to barrel clearances are the best that they can be.  This will be work for them and I will gladly pay for it.  South Bay has Carillo racing rods.  I will order a set, also.

Rod and crank bearings are plain shell inserts.  The crank is hard plated and it cannot be ground to fit undersize shells.  I always put in new shells regardless of whether or not they are worn beyond the limits.  My goal is to get maximum life from the expensive crankshaft.  Oil filters do not sieve out all of the abrasive contaminants.  Some get through and they inbed themselves in the soft bearing shells.  These particles can grind away at the crank journals and reduce their life.  New bearing shells, renewed periodically, can save $ in the long run.

In past years when I had more money and less time, I would send the crank and cases out to a shop with a stock of bearings and ask them to fit them.  These Triumphs are so reliable that our local dealer does not have bearing shells.  I will need to send the engine parts far away.  Now, with more time and less money, I will save shipping costs by bringing the crank, cases, and rods down to our local machine shop.  They will measure them and I will order the right sizes.

All of this takes some planning at the kitchen table.  I read the engine section of the manual completely and order all of the parts they say should be replaced, such as lock washers, gaskets, seals, etc.  I make sure that I will have all of the tools that I need.  I order all of the stuff that I know I will need beforehand.  This minimizes downtime. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 19, 2009, 01:45:32 AM
It will take a few months to save up the money for rods and pistons.  Now is the perfect time to work on streamlining the streamlining.  Looking at the bike from above, the fairing lower half has a wedge shape with the pointy end facing forward.  This seemed like a good idea at the time.  Now I know better.  The streamlining should give the bike an egg shape with the blunt end facing forward.  The fairing sides need to be curved inward.

Sheet metal must be removed from the rear of the the fairing side.  The rivet line between the old and new sections should match the rest of the fairing.  Tape is laid across the fairing using a trial and error method.  Finally a nice looking seam is marked.  The sheet metal is cut away to the rear of the tape line.

The aluminum bar at the upper fairing edge needs to be bent in a gentle inward curve.  The bar has lightening holes in it.  The metal will tear at the outside of the bend near a lightening hole if I am not careful.  I need to keep the metal on the outside of the bend from stretching while I compress the metal on the inside of the bend.  A steel strap is tightly clamped on both sides of the bend to the outside edge of the bar.  It will not stretch.  The bar is annealed on the inside of the bend.  Lots of force is used three times, with three heatings, to bend the bar into a gentle curve.  Compression bending is a lot of work, but there is no danger of overstretching the bar on the outside of the bend.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 22, 2009, 02:22:36 AM
In my youth I had more strength than brains.  I did a lot of cold bending.  This takes a lot of force and often the items a part is attached to are bent while straightening the desired piece.  Then I discovered heat.  I heated all sorts of parts to red or orange hot and bent them with little force.  Unfortunately I annealed them and they lost their temper and strength.  Some alloys did not glow red hot.  Instead, they did not glow at all, then they got hot enough and they melted.  I learned not to take the torch to parts with "magnesium" stamped on them.

I did learn that a little heat combined with moderate force works best.  My usual method now is to:  clamp the part so the sections that are not to be bent are fixed in place, apply moderate pressure to the part and at the same time apply heat, heat and apply force until the metal relaxes into the desired position, and remove the heat and force.  I use as little heat as possible so the metal does not lose its temper.  Often I do not know how the metal will act.  I start with propane and see if it will do the job.  Then, I use a hotter gas like map gas, if needed.

This method seems to take three or four hands; one or two to steady the work, one to apply the bending force, and one to hold the torch.  Unfortunately, I am not a four handed monkey, so I use all sorts of straps to act as surrogate hands.  The pictures show some methods I used to bend a piece on the Triumph fairing.  Note the little bending tool I made from a bearing puller.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 29, 2009, 10:38:40 PM
The aluminum frame started out being the bare minimum that was needed to hang the sheet metal on the bike.  Then the bike was ridden over some rough roads and the fairing bounced and flexed around.  Braces were added as needed to stop the flexing.  Lots of drilling was used to minimize weight.  Backwoods engineering.

The thicker sheet aluminum is 0.030" thick.  It is used in stressed areas.  The remainder is 0.020" thick.  Thin 0.015" aluminum works, too.  It dents easily so I do not use it for this land speed fairing.  This thinner stock would be used for a drag or road race fairing.  Light weight is critical for these applications.  Welding 0.020" aluminum is too difficult for me.  I use pop rivets to join the panels.

The aluminum pieces are laid over each other like fish scales.  The upper edge of one plate overlaps the lower edge the other plate by 1/2 inch.  A guide bar is clamped on the fairing to show me the curvature and location of the far edge of the plate row.  Arrows are drawn on the bar to show me where each plate corner should be.  Plates are shaped and added, one by one, until the row is complete.  The guide bar is moved so it lines up with the edge of the next row, and the procedure is repeated.

I could use a lot fewer and bigger plates than I do.  The bigger ones take a lot more skill and patience to make than I have.  I do this after work in the evenings when I am tired and my thinking is done for the day.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 02, 2009, 12:55:42 AM
A local shop is interested in Werner's racing.  They asked him for a resume.  It is not a job resume.  They want to sponsor him.  Does anyone know how to write a sponsor resume?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 1212FBGS on November 02, 2009, 03:55:01 AM
yep.....
kent
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 02, 2009, 10:14:25 PM
oh can you send us a copy of one that someone else did so we can see what we should do
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 04, 2009, 10:37:50 PM
The object of the fairing rebuild is to reduce the frontal area and to lower the drag coefficient.  The fairing has flared sides and this creates a large turbulent wake behind the bike.  Making this turbulence requires a lot of the engine's energy, and I have better uses for it, like going faster!

The bottom of the fairing remains flared.  It does this so my feet are kept in out of the wind.  The mid section curves around the engine.  The wind should be parallel to the bike's sides when it spills off from the fairing trailing edge.  One side of the fairing has been reworked in the photos and the other side remains flared.  The flared side will be rebuilt in the next few weeks so both sides will be matching.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 12, 2009, 11:33:49 PM
Beating up poor innocent metal pieces is a big part of Team Go Dog, Go.  We cannot buy much so we make everything we can.  The next few posts show the basics.  These are intended for folks starting out with racing.

Anvils are a good place to start.  I do not like to beat hardened steel on my anvil.  The struck object can leave a scar on the top face.  Also, I do not like to beat stuff with heavy blows on the anvil for the same reason.  A section of railroad rail is used for this rough work.  Not all train track is the same size,  this is a chunk of the Southern Pacific mainline through Salem.  It is nice and heavy and it does not slide about on the workbench.  The anvil is a Chinese job.  I said to myself "I'll buy this thing, how could anyone screw up when making an anvil?"  The grey paint covers a layer of filler over a very rough cast surface.  I should have bought an old American anvil.

Hammers are essential.  These are three ball peins of different weights.  Never hit the hammer directly on the anvil or track.  Always have some object between the two.

The little vice is a 4-inch model.  It is mounted on a workbench corner a few inches above belly button height.  This makes close and intricate work comfortable and easy to see.

The big bruiser is a 5-inch heavy duty model.  It is solidly mounted on a workbench at butt height.  The bench is solidly weighted down by the drill press, air compressors, the bench grinder, and all sorts of other junk.  The vice corner sticks out into the shop so it can be reached from three sides.  This low height and location makes the vice easy to use for heavy bending and other work.

Many of us are on a budget and these tools seem to be expensive.  They are when they are new and I buy some stuff retail.  A lot of my other tools are bought used, scrounged from old abandoned buildings, or given to me.  Tools do not need to be new and cost a lot to be good.  A lot of the old stuff is better quality. 

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 17, 2009, 11:15:17 PM
Fire is another tool.  The firewrench.  I have a couple of bottles of propane on hand.  This is a cooler burning gas and it is useful for annealing aluminum sheet, lighting barbecues and cigars, killing spiders, and other light work.  It is in the blue bottle in the photo.  The yellow bottle in the photo is full of map gas.  It burns hotter and it is the most useful for bending.  I use a lot of it.  In general, I find that using a hot torch is best.  I can work quickly and keep the heat in the desired area and it does not spread through the part.

A pencil tip is often sold in starter kits.  It is easily controlled and it is useful for soldering.  It is not much good for heating prior to bending.  It is shown in the photo attached to the propane bottle.  A heavy duty tip is most useful for heating and annealing.  I use it 90 percent of the time.  It is attached to the yellow bottle.  We call it the blowtorch.  The spreader works with the blowtorch to fan out the flame.  It is great for thawing pipes and burning off paint.

There are jets for these things.  They look like motorcycle main jets, and the correct jet needs to be used with each tip.  These torches are not expensive and I find it handy to set up separate pencil and blow torches.  This makes it much easier to change from one flame type to another.

There are some things to remember when using these tools.  First, have a fire extinguisher handy.  Second, be careful.  In an ideal world these torches will turn off when the valve is shut.  In reality, occasionally they will not close all of the way and the flame will retreat into the tip but it will not go out.  Also, sometimes the gas will leak out of the bottle if the torch is attached overnight.  I always unscrew the torch from the bottle immediately when I am finished.  In the next post some metal will be bent.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 26, 2009, 11:06:31 PM
Anyone who has made the aluminum bars like I use with the holes drilled in them knows how hard it is to bend them.  They tend to tear at the outside of the bends near a hole.  The cross-section is the smaller where there are holes and the bar is weaker.  The bars should be bent then drilled.

Sometimes a drilled bar needs to be bent.  Several posts previous I showed how to bend a bar with a piece of metal clamped to the outside edge.  This forces the inside edge to compress when the bar is bent.  Another way is to apply bending pressure and to heat the inside of the bend with map gas.  The heat will soften the metal on the inside and it will compress.  This will not work well with propane.  The hotter map gas is needed.  The photo shows the compressed sections near the holes on the inside of the bend.

The typical bench mounted swivel vise is too weak for bending metal.  The swivel tends to rotate.  Adding a brace prevents this.  The far end of the brace shown in the photo is clamped to the workbench.

In one photo I am heating the inside of a bend while I am pulling the bar toward me.  The orange tool I am using to pull the bar is a concrete reinforcing rod bender.  These are inexpensive and they can be bought from construction supply stores.  They are a handy tool for a fabricator.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Dakzila on November 27, 2009, 12:30:45 PM
Wobbly,

Great thread..finally got a chance to read the whole thing this morning.

 Some really good info for a racers like me that only has a drill press, compressor, vice and a "fire wrench" (love that term, don't know why I've never heard it before) in the garage. 

Keep the updates coming....


Buzz
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 30, 2009, 01:46:50 AM
Thanks for the compliment, Buzz.  This was my wife Rose's idea.  She said us old folks can build all of this stuff but young people do not have shop classes available in school and often no guys around to show them things.

The next few posts are on metal shaping.  Most auto repair uses hand held dollies that are placed behind or under the car body and the hammer is hit against the other side of the metal.  Bike work typically involves taking the part off and working on it on a bench.  On-the-body and bench work use different tools and methods.  Bench work is discussed here.  The November 2009 "BSH" (Back Street Heroes) magazine has an article showing how a fender is made using an arbor press.  Borders bookstore has these British magazines.

A shot bag and pear mallet are basic shaping tools.  First, a piece of metal is cut out larger than the finished part.  It will be trimmed to final size later.  The edges are smoothed so they will not cut or abrade the bag.  The metal should be wiped clean before it is pounded.  Dirt will harm the tools.

Sheet metal is rolled into size and it has some temper due to work hardening.  It can be shaped to some degree on a shot bag without annealing.  There will come a time when it no longer stretches and forms under the mallet.  It has work hardened and it needs to be heated and annealed.  This should be done as needed, between shaping sessions, until the piece has its final shape.  Shot bags wear out fast if the mallet swinger wails on them.  It is best to use moderate effort and lots of heat.  I always cool the part before I put it on the bag.

A big 16" by 16" shot bag works best for me.  I have not had much luck with the little ones, although a 12" by 12" model did work OK in the past.  I have not had good results with the real small ones.  Shot bags and pear mallets can be found at www.eastwood.com and www.hammersource.com. 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 03, 2009, 10:15:02 PM
The finish hammer is used to make panels with very slight curvature.  It can make a very smooth panel if used with care.  In the past I used this method to hammer out some patch panels for a car fender.  The finish hammer has a very slight convex curvature on its round head.  Like all body work hammers, it should be used for body work, only.  Never strike the hammer directly against the anvil or dolly.

The backing can be an anvil, leather, or rubber.  It is good to experiment and see which works best for the metal and desired degree of curvature.  Leather, an anvil, and hard rubber were experimented with as backing for this panel.  This old piece of rubber conveyor belt worked best.  It provided the desired curve with hardly any hammer marks.

The first step is to cut the panel out to a size larger than the finished part.  It will be trimmed to size later.  I rarely anneal a part that is hammered to a slight curvature.  Usually I can get the curve I need without it.

Second, carefully hammer the part out.  Blows that are too heavy will leave rings.  Correct blows will leave small depressions.

Next, use a soft and flat rubber mallet to smooth out any imperfections.  The part can be trimmed, welded on and polished, or it can be lightly sanded and riveted on, as I have done with my panel.



 

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 07, 2009, 01:42:13 AM
A knife like sheet metal edge can be dangerous in a crash or other mishap.  It is best to fold the edge over a wire so it is not sharp.  This is easy to do on straight edges but it is a challenge on curves.  Here is how I do it.  First, the piece is cut out oversize.  The black felt pin line on the photo shows where the edge will be after the piece is finished. 

Next, the bend is started with a pair of pliers.  The metal is stiff.  The edge is annealed with map gas and it is bent some more.  Finally, the edge is bent as far as possible with pliers.  Sometimes the part starts to curl like a potato chip.  I anneal the wire, too, so it is pliable.  I always use an aluminum wire with an aluminum panel.  Both the sheet and wire should be the same metal.  I stuff the wire into the trough.

Now it is time to use the peck hammer.  This is a pointy hammer with a flat spot on the tip about 1/8 inch wide.  I peck the edge down and trap the wire inside.  Finally, I anneal the edge with map gas and I flatten the part with the round head.  All of this work takes a gentle touch.       

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 07, 2009, 01:43:54 AM
Two more photos.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 16, 2009, 09:29:17 PM
Is anyone familiar with the Hinckley Bonnevilles?  I need some help.

My plan was to install Carillo rods and 10.5 to 1 forged pistons this year.  No $$ for this.  Instead, I ordered another set of standard Triumph rods and 10.1 to 1 standard Triumph pistons.  My original set of rods and pistons has gone 20,000 street miles and ten runs down the salt and they look fine, but I am concerned about fatigue.  Hopefully the new standard parts will keep me racing for a few more years.

I gear the bike to run between 7,000 and 8,000 rpm flat out with 7,500 rpm being the target.  Does anyone have more experience with this?  Am I being too conservative?  Or, am I lucky that I have not blown the thing apart?

 

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fredvance on December 16, 2009, 09:36:52 PM
You might contact Jon Minonno or Ed Mabry, they know more about LSR Triumphs than anybody.

  Fred
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: DSR Bruts on December 18, 2009, 11:11:38 PM
Wobbly, I comend you for doing a great job on your build site.  I am in the same position financially as alot of other guys who make their living selling aftermarket accessories and race parts......along with everyone else, so spending a little money this year is the same as spending alot of money last year.  I enjoy reading on how you do things....alot of wisdom.  I did all the metal work on my roadster starting with a totally junk body fished out of a dumpster and the frame from a old circle track racer....when I picked them up, both of the former owners just laughed and scratched their heads.  I scrounged the doors and built the deck lid and lower deck lid panel from scratch.  I want to skin the deck lid and louver it for looks, but haven't gotten good enough to do it yet....out of steel.  I learned alot hammer welding the body back together and straightening the frame.  I haven't done much aluminum work, but hammered out the tonneau cover last year, hamering it around the edge of the body, gently so I didn't bend the already painted bodywork.  I built my hood by bending it over the edge of a door piled up with steel with foam on the edges to get the right bend on the top, and made patterns for the sides and had them bent at a fab shop.  Thanks for the great bloog and great ideas.....Keep It Up!  Bill
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: SPARKY on December 19, 2009, 12:58:47 AM
As we progress with 2 II we will be spending a lot of time revisting yours and Willies sights over and over---thanks for taking the time to show us how to GITER done!!!!!!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 20, 2009, 02:03:40 PM
Its nice to see folks scrounging and fabricating.  There would be a lot fewer people racing if we did not do this.  My brother made driveable cars by welding together good parts of wrecked ones and I know how much work it is.  A lot.

The way I do things is not the best.  Instead it is based on some personal limitations.  I have only one good eye and I have poor depth perception when I am welding.  I simply cannot weld the thin 0.020 aluminum sheet.  Thick sheet that I can weld will make things too heavy.  Thus, the pop rivets.  My basement is really crowded.  A person with room in their shop can fabricate an english wheel to roll out the metal.  I typed "english wheel' onto the internet a while ago and saw all sorts of wheels and there was enough info for me to make the frame, at least.  Nice smooth curves like those on Marlo Triet's liner look like wheel work, but I do not know for sure.  Welding equipment and a wheel are good investments for a serious fabricator.

There are a few more sheet metal hammering posts on their way after I redo the pipes in the basement.  We had a lot break during the freeze.  I bypassed the breaks with garden hoses and parts from a defunct fish aquarium.  Cold water comes out of some hot faucets and vice versa.  It looks like a permanent fix to me and I can get back to working on the bike.  Unfortunately, the building inspection folks and my family have other ideas and I am redoing everything according to code.  The house is a hundred years old and the pipes are rusted up and funky.  There are some lead drain pipes.  I am keeping the lead and wrought iron drains for historical preservation and redoing everything else in new materials.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Dakzila on December 21, 2009, 02:50:28 PM
Three words......

Relocate
Relocate
Relocate

It never snows (or gets cold) in Nevada or California)  :-D

I'm afraid if I lived up there I'd not get anything done come winter time.

Anyway hang in there and keep warm.  See you in the spring thaw....

Buzz
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 24, 2010, 07:14:29 PM
The end is in sight for the house repair.  It should be done in three weeks.  Then it will be time to torture innocent sheet metal and to redo the engine.  South Bay Triumph sent the cams out to be ground into the "316" profile.

There is a good article on South Bay Triumph's land speed record attempts and success at the 2009 BUB Trials in this month's (January) Motorcycle Sport and Leisure, a British magazine.  Alan Cathcart wrote the piece and he set the world records.  There is a lot of good info in there for anyone who races a Hinckley twin.

Team Go Dog, Go! is not mentioned in the article.  The Bonnie is the blue and white T-100 in one of the photos and I am the guy in the black shirt talking to an older gent.  The Bonneville is described as Tom Mellor's bike.  Tom's bike is much nicer than mine and it is #240.  Tom has had an influence on the Bonnie.  The fairing work done a few months ago is based on his advice. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bak189 on January 24, 2010, 07:59:53 PM
Right.......Relocate.....Relocate.......We go to Wrightwood, CA (in the mountains) during the summer.........
Go Apache Junction AZ. in the winter........and if we want rain we go to Hilversum, in the Netherlands.......
Hey, it's only money and you can't take it with you....................(Kent told me that...so I believe him).....

PS. Good luck with your Tri...........I have a Triple, and it is a great bike.......I also have a couple of "old"
Tri. Twins (1954....1966) for SALE for you Tri. lovers.....................................................................
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: joea on January 24, 2010, 10:52:37 PM
bak, can you send me some brownies next time your out there...?

im always much happier with their recipe.........than mine...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bak189 on January 24, 2010, 11:35:33 PM
Yes, Joea......they know how to make them over there.....Health Food................................................
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: k.h. on January 25, 2010, 12:54:29 AM
bak, can we still buy 16-inch motorcycle tires for wire wheels, vintage sidecar type stuff? 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bak189 on January 25, 2010, 02:11:47 PM
Yes, you can.....on a annual basis Dunlap makes a limited run of 350-16 sidecar racing tires for use in Vintage Racing.........However they only come in the 350 size........A lot of us used a 275-16 on the front in the "old days"............................ but they are not being made......Check with your Dunlap M/C tire dealer.......................................
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: John Noonan on January 25, 2010, 02:36:48 PM
Yes, you can.....on a annual basis Dunlap makes a limited run of 350-16 sidecar racing tires for use in Vintage Racing.........However they only come in the 350 size........A lot of us used a 275-16 on the front in the "old days"............................ but they are not being made......Check with your Dunlap M/C tire dealer.......................................

Also may want to try the "Dunlop" dealers as well..


John
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: k.h. on January 25, 2010, 03:03:26 PM
Will do.  Regards,
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bak189 on January 25, 2010, 10:29:38 PM
Many years back at Daytona one of the great GP star riders of the time the late Barry Sheen from the UK.
had a rear tire blow while "at full chat" on the banking..........after that mishap he called them........
Dunflop tires...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 31, 2010, 01:09:25 PM
It has been six months since my union signed the 2-year contract with the wage and hour cuts.  We are racing this year.  Our sponsors helped out, we are doing less work to the bikes than we planned, and we found some money to buy parts and the entry fees.  The unforseen side effects of the finding money part of this may interest others.  Its the off season, so why not?

A look at the monthly budget showed a lot of money spent on beer, fast food, and gasoline.  We are typical Americans.  My doctor wants me to qiut drinking.  This might be fatal.  Maybe he wants to get rid of me?  The beer got cut down to a six pack a week with a couple of extra cheater bottles.  Eight 12 oz bottles a week, max.  Money saved.

Next is gas (petrol).  One tank a month in the truck, max.  I have not been able to do this with the Bonneville apart, but I am getting close.  We make a monthly trip to the big city to shop.   We drive to the nearest streetcar station, buy a day pass, and use buses, trolleys, and streetcars to go all around Portland to all of the stores.  I will do this on the day of the N.W. Bonneville Reunion.  Its fun.  Sometimes I will do the same in Salem using my bicycle.  Salem is a lot smaller.  I use the internet to order some things to save long trips.  More $ saved.

Food.  The goal is no fast or restaurant victuals, except once a month.  The wife or husband also needs to do this to make it work.  Frozen food and premade stuff at the supermarket will not work.  It is as expensive as eating out.  We use basic raw ingredients on sale.  The doctor always tells me to eat healthy and he sends me to the clinic's diet expert.  She gives me a list of healthy things to cook and eat.  I put them in a drawer when I get home.  A quick rummage through the drawer, below the old cegars, candy bar wrappers, wine corks, and beer bottle openers were fifteen years of healthy food info.  I cannot remember more than a few things, so I memorized "no added salt, use olive oil instead of lard or butter, lots of fruit and veggies, and whole grains such as brown rice and whole wheat."

It takes time to cook this food.  It also took time to drive to, and wait at the burger basket and chicken shack.  Sort of breaks even, time wise.  As for money, it saves big dollars.  Last week I had saved enough to buy a pair of high compression racing pistons with teflon coating.  The thing that might interest members on this forum are the food part.  I still eat like a horse, but I am eating different food.  It is not a diet in this respect.  Diets are not successful for me in the long term for some reason, and this is.  I eat three meals a day and get full.  My tastes have changed so I actually prefer the healthy food and I feel a lot better.  Lots of walrus lard has been sacrificed to the gods of speed.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bak189 on January 31, 2010, 04:25:04 PM
One really big way to save dollars.........don't go to the doctor...........................................................
Money saved.....................................
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 04, 2010, 10:30:02 PM
The www.landracing.com stickers arrived by post a few days ago.  Thanks Slim.  They are definitely bumper stickers for a car or truck.  They are very big.  And so rectangular.  Egad.  What would they say in Paree'?  Its time for some style.

First, a sticker is cut and rearranged on a piece of white card stock.  This is the master.

Next, the paper is selected.  I use the el-cheapo sticker paper I bought for the children.  The stickers will last for a season.  Heavy duty decal paper is available on the internet.  It is much more expensive and it lasts a lot longer.

Next, the master is scanned into the computer as a jpg image.  Then the photo printing program is used to print out two images per page.  "Plain white" is selected as the paper type.

Finally the stickers are cut out of the sticker paper.  A little bit of the white paper is left attached to be a border.  Now we have motorcycle size stickers.



Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 14, 2010, 03:10:13 PM
My hearing is going bad, I think.  Last week my wife was talking to me a few times in conversations with the words "lamp" and "fix."  I do not remember much more than that.  This morning I went down to work on the fairing and there was a lampshade on it and a lamp on the workbench.  These must be visual cues that there is something I need to do right away.

The recent post about the landracing stickers addressed only a small part of the things that can be done with computer graphics.  This is another application.  Our local Triumph shop gives us a lot of help but they do not have a sticker or decal to put on the bike.  We scan one of their gift cards.  Then, we enlarge it on the computer screen in "Microsoft Paint."  Werner removes the "Gift Card" writing from the checkerboard area using Paint.  This week he will put a Triumph logo on the checkerboard pattern.  He will write "Triumph" in Microsoft Word and use cut and paste to put it on the checkerboard pattern.

The edited image can be used to make a sticker.  It can also be used on a decal.  Decal paper for computer printers is available and one source is www.decalpaper.com.  The decal can be printed, cut out, applied, and clear coated.  This is a great tool for the restorer.  As an example, a scratched decal on a sidecover or a picture in a book can be scanned, any damage "repaired" in Paint, and it can be reprinted as a new decal.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on February 14, 2010, 08:05:31 PM
Wobbly, where have I ever referred to the bumper stickers as anything BUT bumper stickers -- which, by my understanding, are rectangular.  There -- that's said.

Now -- I don't say that they shouldn't be cut up and used more artistically.  Look at a few of these photos and see what Debbie Dross did with ours production bike.

(http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii147/SeldomSeenSlim/SpeedWeek%202009/IMG_0699.jpg)

(http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii147/SeldomSeenSlim/SpeedWeek%202009/IMG_0728.jpg)

(http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii147/SeldomSeenSlim/SpeedWeek%202009/IMG_0608.jpg)

If I had the bike at hand I'd go around and shoot a few more photos -- but you see that we didn't hold to the rectangular-only stricture (that I didn't express, anyway).  If you want fancy shapes -- hey, the guys at Signs Unlimited can make anything you want - as can your local sign shop, no doubt.  Let us see what you come up with, please.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 20, 2010, 12:35:28 AM
That is a nice looking bike and stickers, Slim.  It is nice to see people running the big Kawasakis.

One of the last sheet metal beating posts showed how to use a finish hammer on a soft backing.  This is a good way to make gentle curves.  Sometimes a more severe curve is needed.  The dolly I use for this, most of the time, is a football dolly.  It has a spike on it that can be held in the hand or in a vice.  A piece of thick leather helps to keep it in place if it is vice mounted.  This dolly was bought at Harbor Freight.

Never strike the hammer directly on the dolly.  Always have some metal between the two.

The bump hammer is used.  This is one of my NAPA auto parts hammers.  The one in the photo has a slightly convex curvature on the round face.  The concave hammer face used with the convex dolly thins the metal without severe dents.  This is especially nice for a piece that will be polished.

A football shaped dent is made when striking sheet metal positioned over some areas of the dolly.  The football dents can be used to make pieces with varying degrees of curvature.  The drawing shows this.  The piece will curve more along one axis than the other.

The hammer is the "dumpy" style.  It has a short and compact head, and it is useful for working in tight places such as inside fenders. 

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 20, 2010, 01:43:54 PM
The BUB regulations were e-mailed out to the folks on the list yesterday.   Experience has taught me to sit down by the fire in the rocker and to read every sentence and word that pertians to me and my class, and to do this right when I get the regs, not later.

Buried deep in the regs is a new change.  Production (P) engines are not allowed in special construction modified partial streamliners (APS).  My bike has been close to being an APS.  I decided to cross over the line and build it into a 1000cc APS-P for 2010.  An open class, at least until now.  Now I am in RWB class.

This is not good news for me, but I am learning about it now, and not later.  This will save me a lot of fabrication time and some money.  The message I have is, read the regs that apply to you completely, even the sections that you have read before many times.  Read them carefully, and do it as soon as they are sent out. 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on February 20, 2010, 01:56:46 PM
Walrus........I am impressed.

It appears to me that you have access to HUME CAD v4.0 r-e.

You used it well in your earlier post.

I wish you had stopped at my place on your way to Humes to get your copy of the program.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on February 20, 2010, 03:02:11 PM
WW, I've gotta ask -- if you know the answer -- what do they mean by "production engines" and them not being allowed in the APS class?  You can't use a bone-stock engine that came with that bike, or you can't use any engine from the manufacturer of the frame, or what?  Do they want only modified engines in the class?  If so -- what stops an entrant from changing it from production by using a modified oil filter or something relatively minor, like that?  It's not "production" any more.

Got a clue to share?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bak189 on February 20, 2010, 04:33:31 PM
Got questions.......ask Drew and/or Delvene......................................................


Also Willie and the boys will like this one.................If you do not use a passenger
no sidecar fender is required for the BUB..................
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 20, 2010, 08:20:14 PM
Slim, a production engine can run on gasoline, only.  It needs to be the same engine originally installed in the motorcycle.  The displacement cannot be over the class limit.  Original eqiupment cylinders, heads, cases, carburetion or throttle body, kick starter, or electric starter.  My engine, and I am building it now, will be a standard 865 cc Triumph except for high compression Arias pistons, light wristpins, 1 mm larger intake valves, a port job, and a hot street cam.  In 2011 I will build a set of racing pipes with meggas.  Tuned for top end power.  This is something I always wanted to do.  This is my basic transportation, so these mods will be all I do.  The new Bonnies are sweet bikes and I do not want to screw this one up with big mods.   

The next step up in the AMA rules is the AG class engine.  It is unlimited design.  "Construction will be the vast majority of engine parts."  No turbo or superchargers, but fuel injection is allowed.  The record in the APS-AG class is 168.139 mph.  It was set by a Triumph in 1975!  Another Bonneville like mine, but an earlier Meriden built model.  That record is out of my reach.  I will run in the 130's this year if my calcs are correct.  An AG engine would be a bit much for the road.

I am, and will be, solidly in the production class, enginewise.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WhizzbangK.C. on February 20, 2010, 11:29:36 PM
Wobbly,

FWIW, last year we asked the same question in regards to Brian's XR500, and got the same answer that you're coming up with now. It seems that it's not so much a rule change as a clarification. The thinking appears to be that if you're going to go to the trouble of building a special construction chassis, why would you even think about running a production engine.

We didn't necessarily agree with that point of view, but it is what it is and we want to play the game so we'll go by the rules.  :-P Brian's just running in a class to get as many runs in as possible and going for personal best with the XR.

Our opinion on the matter remains that special chassis and streamlining is a valid means to increase speed, and doing it with an engine under "production" limitations is a fair challenge to anyone that wants to play. Not trying to beat a dead horse, because it's all been hashed out before, just agreeing with you. There are no records for any APS-P or PP bikes, and I guess it can make sense since P requires intake and exhaust to appear stock for the model of the bike, as well as the outside of the engine. Since by definition APS is special construction frame, there is no "stock" model bike to reference.

Hell, just build it and come play for personal best, you know you'll still have the time of your life, and it wouldn't be the same without you and the kids there.

Don't do RWB, go ahead and register for a class and get the unlimited runs on the longer course. Don't forget, RWB only gets 2 runs, and starts from the 1 mile instead of the 0. Better bang for your buck registered in a class.

See ya on the salt.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 23, 2010, 01:19:28 AM
Thanks for the encouragement, KC, I will run in MPS-P, my favorite class.

There is another build diary, My Indian Low Tech Racer.  It has a recent post of albums by Mr. Frank Kletchkus, a professional photographer.  His work is very good.  A certain belly tank is featured in one album.  Another album, The Evolution of Mr Squiggles," shows several bikes on Lake Gairdner.  Many aluminum streamlining styles are used.  One has hammered and welded panels.  It is a good example of what can be done with this method.

Hammers are the primary tools for this work.  They should be smooth.  Any imperfections in the hammer face will leave marks on the work after every blow and polishing will be difficult.  Metal working hammers often have soft tempers and the faces are easily marred.  One photo shows a used dolly and one of my prize hammers  It was used by another team Go Dog Go member to pound a chisel.  This is typical damage seen on used tools.  Both items need to be dressed.

Dressing is when the tool faces are shaped to the desired profiles and polished.  It is used to repair damage and for other reasons.  Most often a different profile is needed.  Sometimes the hammer, as manufactured, is not profiled correctly.  Almost all of my hammers have been dressed at least once.

Softer hammers such as this finishing hammer can be filed to the correct shape before they are polished.  The picture shows it and a mill file with a bastard single cut.  This file type works well.  All of the imperfections are filed out and it is polished with emery cloth.

Some panels near the fairing nose required a tight curvature.  I did not have a hammer with a concave head of the right shape.  An air grinder and a lot of patience was used to make one out of a convex finishing head, as shown in the photo.  The final step is to polish the face.

Body hammers are easily damaged and they should not be tossed in the box or drawer with other tools.  Mine are lightly rubbed with oil after each use and stored in a large drawer where they will not bang into each other.  All of this post also applies to dollies.

.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 01, 2010, 12:11:52 AM
The fairing was built around a crash bar.  The steering damper mounted to the bar and I tied the bike to the trailer using the bar.  Last year I saw how Tom Mellor ties down his modified partial streamliner.  He connects the tie downs to tbe bike's mid section and he runs the ties out through his leg slots to the trailer edges.  I will do the same.

The crash bar is an aerodynamic problem.  It is in exactly the wrong place.  Fast moving and highly concentrated air flow hits the bar as shown in the sketch.  The bar's exposed frontal area is small but aerodynamically it acts like a much larger obstruction.  It looks fruity, a crash bar on a land speed bike.  It must go.

The tie down hooks stretched the metal around the bar.  Metal smooth faced hammers are used to thin metal and they cannot shrink it.  A shrinking hammer will be used.  This is a Martin hammer.  The waffle end is for shrinking and the other end is a trim peck.  It is used to tap dents out of auto trim.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on March 01, 2010, 12:27:47 AM
Wobbly.....I am impressed. That bar flow diagram was probably done with Hume CAD v4.0 r-e.

I'm overjoyed that the people that saw the presentation of that program jumped on the application

and are using it to design and explain complex situations.

Ms. Rack ordered a program for every student in her Pre-School class. As a reward I provided a

box of wash-off 16 color crayons for each child. 

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stan Back on March 01, 2010, 11:24:55 AM
Froyd --

What's the rubber end on the stylus for?

Stainley
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on March 01, 2010, 12:25:12 PM
Measure once.....erase twice.

The basic premise of the program.

frYod
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 02, 2010, 10:27:21 PM
The Rev, Grumm, and Goggles are on their way to the lake with the belly tank, a new engine, and the Tasmanian computer chip.  They pulled it all together and are going for the big record.  They have plucky spirits and hopefully all will go well.

Stretched sheet metal is shrunk using compression force to thicken the metal.  This is difficult.  Smooth faced metal hammers are not used.  They thin the metal and this is not desired.  The first step is to anneal the metal using heat.  This softens it and it is an essential step.

A dolly is placed behind the stretched metal to provide backing.  A shoe dolly is used.  It looks like the toe end of a shoe, hence the name.

The metal is flattened using a mallet.  This Sears #38292 mallet has the right weight for most metalwork.  The two heads have different hardnesses and both are correct for many uses.

The highly stretched areas do not contract under the mallet.  The metal is reheated again and the shrinking hammer is used.  A few gentle pecks are all that is needed.  The mallet is used as backing.  I always anneal the metal before using the shrinking hammer.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 03, 2010, 11:05:57 PM
The Feb 2010 issue of the English magazine "Back Street Heroes" is on American news stands.  There is an excellent article about the BUB meet.  A familiar Triumph is on Page 103.

The final step is to tap out the last few irregularities with the pear hammer against the dolly.  Some scratches with coarse sandpaper make the repaired area look like the rest of the fairing.  This is the last sheet metal post for now.  The fairing is done for this year except for some mounting brackets.

This afternoon I watched a DVD "Shaping Aluminum with Hand Tools" about sheet metal work.  It is quite good and I learned a lot.  The DVD is available from www.covell.biz. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 06, 2010, 12:35:06 AM
The little parts make a difference.  The crash bar was removed and brackets are needed to mount the fairing to the frame.  Life will be exciting if the new mount fails, so care is needed in its design and construction.  A single mount would work.  It would go between the fork tubes and it would connect the fairing to the frame.  The safer way would be to make two mounts, and to make them strong enough so that one could do the job alone, if needed.  In the engineering world, this is called "redundancy."  It is an extra safeguard against catastrophic failure.

Normally I use all sorts of scrounged up metal.  These are important parts so I use some new aluminum angle of known parentage.  The alloy is 6061 or 6063, I forget which.  This is no problem, either is OK for this application.  A good reference for alloys and their properties is John Bradley's "The Racing Motorcycle - Volume 2" ISBN 0 9512929 3 5.

The brackets must be cut to shape.  Square cornered cuts will concentrate stresses and this could promote metal fatigue and cracking.  A hole saw is used to make circular openings in the part at corner locations.  The cuts meet the hole edges.  These rounded corners do not concentrate stresses.  The plugs cut from the holes are saved for later use as spacers or washers.

The brackets are drilled for bolts and screws, sanded, and they are ready to go.

     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Geo on March 06, 2010, 08:25:50 AM
Wobbly,

Nicely done!  Thanks for showing us how you made the brackets.

Geo
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 09, 2010, 01:16:47 AM
This build is a lot of farmyard engineering.  I am glad it helps, Geo.  Reading about the other builds has made a big difference for the better with our program.

The new Hinckley Bonnevilles are porky.  Triumph has tried to give them responsive sport bike handling by providing steering geometry with minimal trail.  A heavy bike with quick steering is never a good setup and this one was marginal for street use and terrible for LSR.  Weaving and wobbling were not uncommon.  A few years ago, the steering damper was in good condition and set at its hardest setting and the bike was hard to steer.  It could get into a tank slapper speed wobble.  Eventually the problem was fixed, and this is discussed earlier in this build diary.  The bike has not wobbled lately but I still do not trust it.  To me, the steering damper is important.

Years ago I made an aluminum mounting bracket.  I was in a hurry, aluminum is easy to work with, and it does not need to be primed or painted.  No design or calculations were done, as is typical with almost everything we build.  Unfortunately aluminum has some disadvantages.  Among metals, it is not the strongest or least susceptible to fatigue failure.  I asked myself the basic questions.

Is it redundant?  No, if it fails there is no backup.

What happens if it fails?  Major excitement for the Walrus.

Does it flex under load?  Yes, a little bit.

Is it subject to cyclic loading?  Yes.

The answer is to make a steel bracket.  It will not flex and this mild steel is extremely resistant to fatigue. No worries now.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 13, 2010, 02:14:06 AM
Lots of parts I make.  I enjoy it.  There are times, though, when I get really tired of fabricating things and I want to buy something fancy, a piece made by someone else who knows what they are doing.  Welded pipes are an example.  My welds look like bird droppings.  I am the world's worst welder.

Triumph commissioned Arrow to make them some pipes.  They are stainless steel pipes made from welded sections.  The ends unbolt so they can be run as open megaphones.  The two-into-two header pipes for Bonnevilles have 1.59 inch outside diameters.  This is perfect for land speed based on the handy chart at http://www.victorylibrary.com/brit/mega-c.htm  This pipe primary diameter is OK for up to 7,500 rpm for an 865cc twin and that is plenty for me.  I do not let the engine go higher than 8,000 rpm.

So I took off from work early and headed up to Beaverton to order a set.  They are big $ but they will bolt on and fit.  No welding, grinding, etc.  The shop had a display set hanging on the wall.  Customers had been fiddling with the pipes for years, taking them down off of the hooks and putting them back.  The lady behind the counter said "I'll make you a good deal on these.  There are some little dents and scratches."  Heck, my bike and I have all sorts of big dents and scratches.  No problemo.  I bought them real quick before she could change her mind.  Some times the moon and stars line up and the backwoods guy gets a break.   

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 14, 2010, 08:45:22 PM
The windshield has a large beaded edge.  The portion of the bead on the outside is in the path of high speed laminar airflow.  It has to go.

The bead outer part is removed with an air grinder.  This leaves a rough surface.  The surface is smoothed with a bastard cut mill file.  The double cut bastard teeth leave a distinctive scratchy pattern on the plastic.  The scratches are removed with a fine single cut mill file.  The single cut filing is done at a 90 degree angle to the bastard filing, and it is done until the double cut filing scratches are gone.

Sanding is next.  The sanding is done with 220 grit sandpaper at a 90 degree angle to the single cut file marks.  All file marks are removed.  Then, the sanding is repeated with 280 grit in a 90 degree angle to the previous coarser grit sanding.  All coarser sanding marks are removed.  This process is repeated through these grit sizes:  220, 280, 320, 400, and 600.  I use 220 grit carpenter's paper, and for the finer sizes, K&S Engineeering "Flex-i-Grit" sanding film.  The fine stuff is available at the local hobby shop.  I always wash and wipe all grit off the windshield and my hands before I start with the next size finer paper.

Now I use a cloth mop wheel loaded with black emery.  I make one pass buffing in one direction, then another pass buffing at a 90 degree angle to the previous pass.  This is done until the sanding marks are gone.  It takes a long time.  Now I switch to a finer mop and repeat.  One pass in one direction and another at 90 degrees to the previous.  Two passes per grade for those finer than black emery.  I use these in order, from coarse to fine:  black emery, white rouge, tripoli, green rouge, red rouge, and blue rouge.

Sears carries the emery and rouge sticks, along with the mop wheels.  I use a separate mop for each grade.  The mops and sticks are stored in individual sealed bags so they do not pick up abrasive grinder dust.  I wash my hands and the windshield when I switch grades.  This hygiene is very important.  Scratches from stray coarser particles can ruin a job and much rework is needed.

Finally, the windshield is polished with Meguiar's Mirror Glaze plastic cleaner followed by Mirror Glaze plastic polish.  I buy this at the airport.  The repaired area looks better than the rest of the windshield.  Job done.   

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on March 15, 2010, 04:15:21 AM
Nice attention to detail Wobbly.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Dr Goggles on March 15, 2010, 06:38:34 AM
  black emery, white rouge, tripoli, green rouge, red rouge, and blue rouge.

Sears carries the emery and rouge sticks,   This hygiene is very important.    I buy this at the airport.

hey, I just took out some of what you'd written.....sounds like a big night out :-D :-D :-D.......however on a more serious note....those nicely radiused al brackets are fine , clever work...........I love this diary and love the writing Wobbly, thanks, keep it up.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 16, 2010, 01:49:49 AM
Yes, I have heard, that in some places and on some nights, there can be wild things happening in airport lounges.

"Model and Pattern Making for Vintage Vehicles" is the presentation topic this Saturday, 20 March, at 10:00 AM, in the North West Vintage Car and Motor Cycle Museum at Antique Powerland in Brooks, Oregon.  www.nwcarandcycle.org  This is a talk about making patterns and casting parts for vehicles and other uses.     

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 17, 2010, 12:55:46 AM
The fairing is done.  It is a good feeling to actually finish something.  Five or so years ago I was struggling with the fairing aero design.  The pointy and wedge shaped fairings were not looking good.  Too much energy lost in rearward turbulence.  The air should be traveling parallel to the line of travel when it flows across the fairing trailing edges.  One of my old hot-rod books discussed the Batchelor-Xydias So-Cal streamliner.  It was a pioneer design having a boxy shape with rounded corners.  It was extremely fast in its day.  I did a lot of figuring and this shape looked best.  The initial shape had some aero problems and they have been worked out over the years.  The hippopotamus look.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 18, 2010, 11:00:55 PM
The salt quickly strips the zinc plating from parts.  The zinc oxidizes more readily than the underlaying steel.  It sacrifices itself to protect the steel and it is effective until it is used up.  Normally the parts are replated, but this costs a lot of money, and some parts are hard to replate.  These braided oil lines and banjos are examples.  The Team Go Dog, Go! low budget method is used instead.

First, the parts are removed and cleaned.  Pieces with some intact plating are cleaned with a brass brush.  This removes the rust and it leaves the plating.  Parts with all, or almost all, of the plating gone are cleaned using a wire wheel or similar.

Next, the parts, including nuts and bolts, are sprayed with cold galvanize. 

Last, the parts are sprayed with a light paint coat.  "Cast Iron" color resembles Triumph anodizing.  Silver look like zinc plate.  The paint top coat greatly extends the coating's life.

Wrenches and other abuse knocks off some of the zinc.  This is not a problem.  The part will be protected as long as there is zinc on it.



 



 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 21, 2010, 04:03:27 PM
Engine port work is sometimes called "free horsepower."  It is a means to get more performance from an engine without a lot of added cost.  There are several kinds of port work, and they vary in complexity.  The simplest option is leaving the ports alone.  This is a good idea on engines whose ports are at optimum shape when they come from the factory.  My old BSA Spitfire was an example and the BSA Gold Star is another.

Blueprinting is the next most complex example.  The ports are smoothed and cleaned to remove manufacturing defects.  This can be done by the home mechanic.  It can provide better performance and often it is all that is needed.

The porting job is more extensive.  The ports are reshaped to provide optimum flow.  This is best done by a professional using a flow bench.  The ports can be opened in the appropriate areas, and ports on multiple cylinder engines will have similar flow characteristics.  This provides smooth running and better performance.  This is the best option for most street engines.  It provides better performance throughout the power band.

The most radical job is Bonneville porting.  The ports are opened way up to flow as much air as possible.  The atmosphere at the salt flats does not contain much oxygen and naturally aspirated engines need all of the air they can get.  This work is best done by a professional that is experienced with LSR.  My Bonneville has LSR porting done by South Bay Triumph.  The benefits are at higher RPM.  Low to mid range power is not significantly improved.  This is excellent for lake racing.

Engineers imagine ports where the holes in the head match the holes in the intake and exhaust manifolds.  They imagine smooth shape transitions throughout the intake and exhaust tracts, and the openings in the steel valve seat inserts are always aligned with the ports in the aluminum head casting.  This is seen on the Honda 450 engineering drawing.  Making a manufactured item match the original design is called "blueprinting."  Old drawings and plans were on blueprints. 

Werner's cylinder head was made by people in a hurry.  It is awful.  The next few posts will show how it is reshaped so it matches the engineer's original concept.  Blueprints are no longer used, but we have one on our shop wall.  It as a steam locomotive.   

    a       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on March 21, 2010, 07:20:05 PM
WW, thanks very much for the nice textual explanation.  My dad, in Austria, has been wondering why people do such a goofy-sounding modification - especially if it doesn't gain much, as he says.  I cut and pasted -- and sent it to him.

By the way, his initials are WW.  What a coincidence, hey?

Thanks again.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 22, 2010, 09:36:55 PM
Opposites attract.  One of my parents was of German background.  "Don't monkey with it.  You are not worthy.  The people that made it know what is best."  I heard this a lot.  The teutonic stuff is well designed and there is a bit of truth to this.  The other parent was of strong British descent.  She loved drag racing and had no problems with redoing anything.  An English trait.  This is appropriate, the British things needed a lot of hands on work to live with.  More budding mechanics were educated by owning a British sports car than any trade school.

Port work requires special tools.  One is a good light.  The one I use has a circular florescent bulb with a 3-diopter lens in the center.  This provides +75 percent magnification.  Another 8 diopter lens can be added to give +275% magnification.  Great for brain surgery.  The light is made by Dazor in St. Louis at www.dazor.com.

A nicked intake valve is shown in a photo.  Valves undergo a lot of heating and cooling cycles and a crack could grow from this nick, with horrible results.  This is one example of the light's uses.  Inspection.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 24, 2010, 01:38:54 AM
Grinding and polishing tools, along with fingers and sandpaper, do the job.  An air grinder is shown with a few bits, burrs, and grinding stones.  Some of the most useful are the flame shaped bit for cutting and the bristle wheel for polishing.  I could not find mine to show in the picture.  They are shown in the Fastenal catalog.  The little Dremel electric tool is handy and it is most practical for little ports.

Holding a tool for a long time is tiring.  I attach the air hose to the ceiling and the tool hangs down from it.  I hang the Dremel tool from the ceiling, too.  The photo shows the setup ready to go.  The light is on and the tools are ready.

The new high quality synthetic sandpapers work very well on metal.  The coarse 80 grit works best for me. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on March 24, 2010, 11:39:26 AM
Wobbly, you are doing a fine job.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 25, 2010, 01:45:14 AM
Thanks Freud.  Some of this stuff I learned in dinosaur times.  Maybe someone will tell us about new and better ways to do things.  The following must be on a spreadsheet somewhere.

Some figuring is needed before the cutting and grinding commences.

The intake valve closes and a pressure wave reflects back along the inlet tract.  The pressure wave exits the velocity stack and another pressure wave is reflected back into the intake tract.  The pressure wave, if it arrives at the wrong time, can hinder flow into the cylinder through the open intake valve.  The wave, if it arrives at the desired time, can push additional mixture past the intake valve and into the cylinder.  The intake tract length can be adjusted so the pressure wave arrives at the intake valve at the correct moment.  This is ram tuning.

There are some pretty fancy formulae to figure out intake tract length based on cam timing and other factors.  This is a bit complicated for this post.  A simple method will be explained.  It gets a person close to the optimum solution.  This procedure is from a 1970 article "Four Stroke Tuning" by Jerry Branch and Le Roi Smith in Petersen Publishing's "Motorcycle Repair Manual."  Jerry Branch was an expert in engine air flow.  This is, as Jerry says, "A formula from an English engineer" and it is best suited for racing engines.

First, the speed of sound is needed at the race location.  Bonneville is at 4200 feet elevation and it is 70 degrees when we race, on the average.  The speed of sound is 1090 feet per second in these conditions.  This is "V" in the equation.  Next the engine speed is needed during the peak ram effect.  This is a matter of personal preference.  I use 80% of redline for initial trials.  0.80 x 9,000 = 7,200 rpm for the little Honda.  This is "N".  "L" is the intake tract length in inches.

The formula is L = (90 X V) / N       L = (90 x 1090) / 7,200 = 13 5/8 inches for the little Honda.   

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 27, 2010, 01:42:49 PM
The speed of sound in the previous post was from an online calculator I found on the internet with no supporting calculations or data to substantiate it.  This was a dumb move on my part.  I went back and did some research in my old books and on the internet.  The calculator at www.sengpielaudio.com seems to be a lot better.  It uses the classic accepted formula.  The speeds of sound are 1110 feet per second in 50 degree F air to 1170 feet per second in 110 degree F air, with a variation of 10 feet per second per 10 degrees F in between.  Against intuition, the sound speed is primarily related to temperature, and it is minimally affected by barometiric pressure or humidity.  Branch used 1100 feet per second in his article.  We usually ride in 70 degree weather, on the average.  The sound speed is 1130 feet per second.  Werner's ideal intake tract length is 90 x 1130 / 7200 = 14.13 inches.

A wire is bent to match the middle of the inlet tract.  One end is at the face of the intake valve.  The other end sticks out of the intake port.  A roach clip is clamped onto the wire and it is flush with the end on the intake tract.  The wire is straightened out and measured.  It is 4.50 inches long.  The carb is 3.19 inches long.  These added together are 7.69 inches.  There are 14.13 - 7.69 = 6.44 inches between the carb end and the ideal inlet tract length. 

Werner made a velocity stack bell out of an old copper pipe,  We will make new bells in 5.44, 6.44, and 7.44 inch lengths for the dyno testing.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 30, 2010, 01:25:41 AM
The inlet calculations show that the velocity stack length can be tuned to give the desired ram air effect.  The carb manifold is not too long.  The manifold needs to be enlarged slightly, about .5 to 1 mm, throughout its length.  Then, both manifold ends will be the same diameter as the carb.

It is difficult to remove a small amount of metal over a large area with a cutter or burr.  They are best for cutting larger amounts of metal from small areas, such as enlarging cavities.  The sanding flapwheel is used to enlarge the manifold.  It removes metal evenly from a large surface area.  The inside calipers are used to periodically check the inside diameter.

The flapwheel is part of a family of tools that are not cutters or burrs, as shown in the photo.  The flapwheel is a metal removal tool.  The spidery looking detail abrasive brush is another metal removal tool.  Both of these tools can be used to smooth out cutter and burr worked areas.  The donut looking spongy things are finishing abrasive brushes.  They are not for removing metal, but they work great for finishing the ports.  The finer black one is excellent for carbon removal.  The wire brushes can be used to polish out small imperfections.  They are delicate tools and they are not suited for heavy work.

Light always seems to be a problem when doing this work.  The little headband light is a great help.  These lights use LED bulbs and they go for a long time without needing recharging.

The manifold is enlarged to match the carb inside diameter and it is smoothed using abrasive brushes and sandpaper.  There are no casting marks or other imperfections.  It is done and now it is time to work on the inlet port.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 03, 2010, 01:44:22 AM
The web address http://yamaha-motor.com/sport/products/modelinnovation/209/0/innovation.aspx shows the 2010 YZ450F motocrosser.  The engine is tilted backwards and the exhaust pipes exit the rear of the cylinder head.  All of this provides straight ports that flow well.  A future trend?

A problem with port work is knowing where to stop.  It is not good to enlarge the port and bore out into a water passage, etc.  Werner's intake and exhaust ports have big lumps in them near the valve guides, as shown in the photo.  It would increase flow if I ground them down.  The valve spring pockets are above the lumps.  Can I smooth out these lumps without breaking out into the valve spring pockets?

A heavy duty piece of paper is taped onto the drill press table and the cylinder head is placed on it.  Two magnetic dial indicator stands with pointers are put on the table.  The upper pointer sticks into the bottom of the valve spring pocket, and the lower pointer touches the underside of the lump, as shown in the pictures.

The outline of one indicator base is outlined using a fine pencil.  The pointer base is demagnetized and it is removed, along with the cylinder head.  The pointer base is carefully placed back on its outline.  Now it is in its original position.  The gap between the pointers is measured.  The gap distance is the same as the metal thickness between the outside of the lump and the inside of the valve spring pocket.  The distance is only 3/32 of an inch.  This is not very much metal.  I will not grind down the lumps.



 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 03, 2010, 01:46:01 AM
The last two photos for the previous post
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 04, 2010, 03:17:52 PM
The port throat is the area just upstream of the valve seat on the intake port, and the reverse on the outlet port.  The most common error from sloppy manufacturing is to not align the steel valve seats with the aluminum head casting.  The seats on this little bike were 1mm offset from the casting.  This is a lot of error in these small ports and it retards airflow in a critical area.  Cutters or burrs are used to remove aluminum, as needed, to match the seat to the head.  Grinder bits are used to remove valve seat material.  Care is used to make sure the portion of the seat that is contaced by the valve is not harmed.  The photo shows a completed job of matching the intake valve seat to the intake port.  Work is in progress on the exhaust valve seat.  The black is laundry marker ink.  This is used so I can easily see the high and low spots on the port and seat while grinding and cutting.

Next, the exhaust pipe header inner diameter is checked and it is reasonable for the type of use.  The info on the website a few posts previous is used.  There is a large weld at the inside of the header entrance.  It is ground down.  Some restraint is used.  Enough weld remains to hold the pipe together.  The exhaust port exit is matched to the exhaust pipe and the exhaust pipe gasket.  There is a smooth transition from the cylinder head to the header.     

The last step is to smooth all casting marks and defects out of the ports.  Usually this is a sandpaper and fingers job.  It is something intellectual to do while watching Sponge Bob reruns.  Feel is the best quality control here.  Surfaces in the ports should feel nice and smooth to the touch.  Occasionally there are places that are hard to sand with fingers.  Sandpaper on a chopstick will help.

Almost all shop manuals for modern motorcycles show a multi-angle valve job and they give recommended valve seat widths.  The Honda manual does, and the seats on this bike are slightly wide.  It is important that the seat widths are correct in order to have best performance.  We will do this in the future when the bike needs a valve job.  The seats are good enough for now, and the valves are lapped in using conventional methods.  This concludes port blueprinting part of this build.

The Triumph has ten runs down the salt and 20,000 street miles.  It is time for a new cam chain and a look-see inside the engine.  Of course, I am a typical hot rod guy, and there is no way that engine is going back together without some performance mods.   

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 06, 2010, 12:39:40 AM
About this time last year, Mr. Noonan was responding to a question about tire pressure.  He runs between 30 and 40 psi in his tires.  This is a lot lower than the pressures I was using.  Also, I made the switch to a radial rear tire from a bias ply.  The first time I ran the setup was in 2009.  It works very well.  I have more traction and control.

My tire slip factor must be recalculated.  It is an essential part of the basic gearing formula for engine RPM vs speed.  My 2009 down run was 127.2 mph and the tach showed a steady 7,500 rpm through the mile.  I was very tired on my return run and I did not look at the tach.  I wanted to get off the bike, finish the displacement check, have a stiff drink, and go home.  The slip factor is redone based on the one run.  Several runs should be made to get a good idea about the factor, and this will be done this year.

The basic gearing formula is shown with all of the factors.  The gear ratios are from the shop manual.  The tire circumference was measured using Rosie's dress tape.  These formulae are bike specific, and they are for "Bonnie" the Triumph.  My dirt bike "Thrasher" has its own equations.  The slip formula includes tire slip and tachometer error.  I always use the same tach so this is not a problem.

The new slip factor is 3% for good salt.  As a reference, my old slip factors were 5% with the bias ply tire and 45 or 50 psi on good salt, 7% for slightly wet salt, and 10% for sloppy wet salt that I should not have been racing on.           
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 07, 2010, 01:51:45 AM
The engine speeds for seven of ten Bonneville runs are calculated from the data we recorded and the time slips.  This is shown on the sheet.  I usually try to run at 7,500 rpm.  This is my target RPM and I adjust the gearing to get as close as possible.  This rpm give me nice fast runs and it does not put a heavy strain on the engine.  In a pinch, and only if bringing home a record will depend on it, I will put on a one tooth bigger rear sprocket and go for broke.  This will get me a few mph but it is not good for the engine.  It will be just over 8,000 rpm and right near red line.

The rpm data helps me to make decisions about the new build.  One of the original 790 cc pistons is shown in the photo.  There is a small crack in the skirt and a chip is missing from the corner.  This is a cast piston.  It is showing damage from use and it has not been over 7,500 rpm.  It would probably fail at 8,000 rpm.  Unfortunately, I bought another set of larger cast pistons for the new build.  They will not be used.

Will forged racing pistons, which are stronger, be the answer?  Forged pistons should be good for up to 4000 feet per minute average piston speed in sustained use and work at up to 5,000 feet per minute in intermittent bursts.  The average piston speed formula is:  V = S x R /6.  V = average piston speed in feet per minute, S = engine stroke in inches, and R = engine speed in revolutions per minute.

The Bonneville's connecting rods will break at about 9,000 rpm, so the rev limiter is set at 8,300 rpm.  The engine cannot exceed this speed.  Using an 8,300 rpm engine speed and the 2.68 inch stroke:  V = 2.68 x 8,300 / 6 = 3,700 feet per minute.  This is well under 4,000 feet per minute.  Good quality forged pistons should be safe for this bike. 

 



Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 08, 2010, 10:45:21 PM
The average piston speed formula tells me what I should do in terms of periodic piston inspection and replacement.  Cast pistons, as a rule of thumb, I consider reliable with little or no inspection at sustained speeds up to 75 percent of 4,000 feet per second maximum, with occasional bursts over that speed.  3,000 feet per second is 75% of the 4,000 feet per second maximum.  Periodic inspection and replacement is the rule for average speeds over 3,000 feet per second, and the frequency of inspection and replacement increases as piston speeds near 4,000 feet per second.   Let's say I continue to use these cast pistons.  They would be replaced every ten runs, based on the very tiny skirt crack that I saw, and I would continue to keep the rpm below 7,500.

Forged racing pistons follow the same rule for me, except I do not worry about them unless sustained average piston speeds are more than 75% of 5,000 feet per second, or 3,750 feet per second.  This corresponds to 8,400 rpm on the Triumph.

This rule of thumb has helped me quite a bit during my younger years when I did most of my tuning, and it worked good for me for this Triumph in land speed use.  It is a lot cheaper to replace parts before they break.
 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 10, 2010, 11:42:43 AM
The engine part of this build diary appears to be a set of random events.  It follows a logical pattern, sort of.

High engine speeds (RPM) for sustained periods seem to be the main killer of naturally aspirated motors in LSR, based on what I learned before the engine tear down.  A history of engine rpm is needed to make decisions during the engine work.  I had tachometer data from only a few runs.  The tach info that I had was used to figure out tire slip/tachometer error factors.  These factors, along with the gearing data that I wrote down, and the speeds on the time slips, gives me the info to figure out a history of run rpm.

Next, I have a realistic discussion with myself about what I can, and want, to do with this bike.  It can never compete head to head against the modern water cooled Japanese fours.  They produce much more power than the Triumph and I can never get the power I need.  In addition, this engine work is costing me big money and using a lot of time.  In the interests of family finances and marital stability the engine must stay together for at least another five years.  This is the goal.  As much power as I can get and no tear down for five years.

The weak link in these engines is the cam chain.  Mine needed replacement after ten runs and I cannot find a high performance chain.  The history shows me that it took ten runs to wear out the chain at engine speeds up to 7,500 rpm.  High engine RPM and number of runs kills these chains, so I will continue to use 7,500 rpm as a target during my runs with the rev limiter set at 8,300 rpm.  Also, I will limit myself to ten runs down the salt in the next five years.

Now I have my upper rpm limit.  This is the first step in tuning.  I know that I need to get as much power and reliability as I can within that limit.   

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Geo on April 10, 2010, 01:29:59 PM
Quote
I have a realistic discussion with myself about what I can, and want, to do

Wobbly,

Thanks for having this conversation within earshot!  Love your reasoning.  Keep it up.

Geo
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 1212FBGS on April 11, 2010, 04:25:31 AM
wobbly
with a good seasoned block i would run those cast pistons.... especially on a slow rev'n NA motor.... look under the dome... I'm sure it is undercut and lighter around the pin area than the forged... the cast probably has less material under the dome and can dissipate the heat to the rings better than most mass forged slugs.... you can run a tighter clearance with them than a forging.... I would have to look at your cracked piston but i doubt it was due to piston speed... cast pistons spin to 13, 14 and even 15g all day long in those new sportbikes, so i have doubt.... we use power adders like NOS and turbos so we need a strong dome and ring lands so we use forged but on a NA motor like yours i would prefer cast
Kent
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 11, 2010, 01:51:10 PM
Kent, Triumph might have recognized a problem with those 790 cc pistons.  They went to much better cast pistons when they went to 865 cc.  Like you say, they should be OK for 7,500 rpm.  I have a set.  There were other reasons I used forged jobs.

About 40 years ago I was explaining to my father some hop up that I was going to do to my Matchless or 305 Honda Superhawk.  My father said something like "Look, someone smarter than you designed that thing from the top of the rocker cover to the bottom of the oil pan to handle the loads and stresses based on the power it has.  You are going to double some loads and you will be chasing problems from the rocker cover to the bottom of the pan."

About two years ago I did the math to figure out that the 790 cc pistons were over stressed and I would need to look at options.  The 790 cc engines were only used for a couple of years and there are no high strength pistons for that bore.  Stronger parts were available but they were all in big bore or stroker kits.  I looked at these setups using math and my experience with air cooled engines.  During all of this I remembered my father's words.

One option I looked at was reducing bore diameter, having custom pistons made, and doing other work to make a modified 750 cc engine.  This seems to be the best approach to making this motor into a heavily built LSR engine.  The use of a larger engine as a platform to build a smaller racing motor is something I always look at, and it is a minority viewpoint, for sure.   The task at hand is to build a nice street engine, and a racing motor is in the distant future.

Back before the recession I bought a new 865 cc cylinder block and a set of new 865 cc cast pistons.  They are much better quality.  A look at the piston side shows a nice radius where the 709 cc piston had a 90 degree cut.  A view of the piston bottom shows less sharp radii.  These larger pistons have fewer places with stress concentrations.  I expected to have no problems with running them at 7,500 rpm and I would take the cylinders off and inspect them if I ran over 8,000 rpm.

There are problems with these pistons.  They are only available in a 9.1 to 1 compression ratio.  I am installing a higher performance cams and the valves will be open for longer times.  Less air will stay in the cylinders at lower to mid rpm for combustion.  In effect, the cams will be lowering my compression ratio at the engine rpms I use on the street.  Another problem with the cast pistons is they have no gudgeon pin offset.  The piston, pin, and connecting rod all change direction at the same time at top and bottom dead center.  This puts a heavy instantaneous load on the rod big end bearing.  I was prepared to live with both of these problems.

South Bay Triumph recently developed high compression (10.5 to 1) pistons for an 865 cc engine.  They are forged Arias pistons with slightly offset pins.  The pistons and connecting rods reverse direction over a slightly longer period with these offset pins.  It reduces the instantaneous loads on the rod bearings.  This is a good thing for a LSR engine.  The pistons are also designed so there are much fewer sharp corners for stress concentration.  I ordered a set with teflon coating on the pins and pistons.  Now I will have no problems, that I know about, in the pistons and cylinders.   

 

 

I al  appeared to be the best sleeving th 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 13, 2010, 01:35:02 AM
The old saying "its better to find the sabertooth tiger than it is for the tiger to find you" applies to this part of the build.  Finding all of these problems is not pleasant, but it is better than the alternative.  I hope that I find all of them.

It was a pleasant evening.  All chores were done and I slipped down into the basement for some quality time with the scoot.  It was time to pull the rods off of the crank and to put in some new bearing shells.  Easy enough, but then I noticed black stains on my hands.  They looked like that Arco Graphite oil that was popular years ago.  Serious swearing echoed from the basement walls.  Rick Vogelin, in his "The Step-by-Step Guide to Engine Blueprinting" says it best.  "Black carbon deposits around the big end of used connecting rods are warning signs that the overheated bearing was on the verge of spinning."  This is a problem I need to fix.  The increased loads from the new motor will spin the bearings, for sure.  New barrels cost $1,706, crankcases $3,861, rods $139 ea, etc.  I need to get this one fixed right the first time.  Fortunately I was warned ahead of time, and I have some advice.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 15, 2010, 01:52:43 AM
The rod big end bearing is like the eleventh piglet on a ten tit sow.  It gets what the others leave.  In this case, the rod bearings are the last in line and they get the oil that does not go through the main bearings.  The rod journal holes will be chamfered to slightly increase oil flow into the rod bearings and to spread the oil out more evenly.  This will improve the bearing lubrication.

Only the rod bearing journal oil holes are chamfered.  The main bearings look fine and I do not want to increase flow through them.  I will put new inserts on the main bearings to minimize flow though them and to keep the oil pressure up.  This will assure that the rod bearings are getting their full share.

A chainsaw sharpening stone is used for the initial rough chamfering.  A grit impregnated rubber bit is used for the final polishing.  This larger opening will help to lubricate the rod bearings.  The rod bearing oil holes are enlarged in some extremely high performance uses, but this engine does not need that.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 18, 2010, 01:35:20 AM
The Triumph oiling system is completely different from the old Triumphs.  I study it and decide to chamfer all of the crankshaft oil holes.  Triumph make rod bearing shells in slightly different sizes.  They are coded with paint marks.  My original shells are red.  I order and will install white shells.  This will give me 0.0003 inches additional bearing clearance.  There will be increased oil flow through these looser bearings and the oil will carry away more heat.  South Bay Triumph recommended this fix.

The next step is expensive.  It is a set of Carillo top loading connecting rods.  These rods unbolt from the top and the rod bearings can be inspected and replaced without removing the engine from the frame.  Will my new heavier forged pistons increase rod bearing stresses enough to warrant the Carillos?  What about future changes, will they also increase rod bearing stresses?  It is time to do some figuring.

First, I need to determine the reciprocating mass.  This is the piston, rings, gudgeon pin, clips, and the upper portion of the connecting rod.  I weigh the pistons, rods, and the small end of a connecting rod. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 21, 2010, 01:12:37 AM
Five engine build alternatives will be examined.  The old 790 cc engine will be the baseline.  I have its history.  The second is the 865 cc engine with the better quality cast pistons.  Third is an 865 cc engine with forged pistons.  Hopefully it will be what I race this year.  An engine with a 994 cc big bore kit will be looked at.  I dream about this.  Maybe I will find buried treasure in the back yard.  Last, I will examine a 750 cc small bore high rpm engine, out of curiosity.

Three engine speeds will be used.  7,500 rpm is my current target speed.  The 8,400 rpm rev limiter speed will be looked at, too.  The engine should not blow up at this speed.  The last speed is 9,000 rpm.  This would be the redline for a future race engine.

Rod big end bearing loads will be figured for the point near top dead center where the rod and piston are subject to the highest inertial tensile loads.  Loads will also be figured for the big end bearing near bottom dead center where the rod is at its highest compression due to inertial loads.  I will also look at rod loads when the piston is applying maximum force due to combustion, if I can remember how to do it.

A long time ago I was 17 and I bought a new copy of the Fall 1970 "Motorcycle Sport Quarterly" by Petersen Publishing.  An article "Engine Science" by Phil Vincent is in there.  Most of the equations I use are in the article and a few are my own.

The piston is reciprocating mass.  It goes back and forth.  The crankshaft is rotating mass.  It spins.  The connecting rod is both.  The small end is reciprocating mass and the big end is rotating mass.  I use the old style method of hanging the rod and measuring the small end weight on a scale.  The small end is considered to be reciprocating mass along with the piston, rings, and pin.  The 750 cc and 994 cc piston masses are estimated using a ratio of bore areas.  These are approximations. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on April 21, 2010, 10:10:22 PM
Wobbly,
Upon further consideration, I think you will realize that for the purposes of big-end bearing load calculations the entire connecting rod mass should be used.  After all, the "vertical" velocity and acceleration of the con-rod CG is essentially the same as that of the piston near TDC and BDC.  (They would be identical in all positions for an infinitely long con-rod. The entire rod is travelling upward and has to be decelerated, brought to a stop, and then accelerated downward.  And vice-versa at BDC.)

For the purpose of crankshaft balance calcs, a portion of the con-rod (i.e., the big end) is considered to be rotating mass.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 21, 2010, 11:26:18 PM
When I started doing this I used the entire rod mass as reciprocating weight in the calcs.  A fellow told me that the rod big end is being swung around rather than pushed downward and stopped suddenly.  He convinced me to do calcs using both rotating weight and reciprocating weight.

I dug out the old article by Vincent and he says in the topic "The Limits of Piston Speed and Acceleration" the following:  "Fortunately, we have evolved a formula, as shown just above, which enables the maximum inertia loads at TDC to be calculated with accuracy, the weight W being the weight of all reciprocating metal beyond the section being calculated.  In the case of piston-pin bearing calculations it is the weight of the piston and the pin, except the pin is ignored for the loads on the bearings in the piston bosses.  For the big end, the weight of the connecting rod is also added in."

Vincent's formula was going to be on the third page of these calcs.  Clearly I was using it incorrectly and making things extra complicated.  Interested Bystander, thanks for telling me this.  A revised Page 1 will follow.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 22, 2010, 01:59:02 AM
The entire connecting rod and piston mass is reciprocating mass, and it is listed as such on the new Page 1.  Additional input into Vincent's inertia equation is on Page 2.

The 123 mm connecting rod length and the 68 mm stroke are listed on Page 2.  The connecting rod length divided by the stroke is 123 / 68 = 1.81.
This is the connecting rod ratio and it will be discussed in more detail in subsequent posts.  It is important for engine tuning.

The relationships between connecting rod ratios and engine performance are discussed in the article "Torque and Horsepower" by Donny Petersen in the June 2010 American Iron magazine.  This issue also has an article about the BUB meet and a nice piece about dyno tuning.  It is on the newsstands now.


Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 23, 2010, 12:55:14 AM
This third page is the maximum inertia equation from Phil Vincent's article.  The equation illustrates an important aspect of the inertial forces on the rod bearings and other parts of the connecting rod/piston assembly.  Inertial loads vary in a geometric ratio to the inertia constant, the crank radius, and the reciprocating mass weight, and the loads vary in an exponential ratio to engine rpm.

A stroker crankshaft is made for these bikes.  I could use this crank with the standard length connecting rods and special 865 cc pistons.  The gudgeon pins in the custom made pistons would be 3.2 mm closer to the piston crown than it is with the standard pistons.  The stroker pistons would weigh the same as the forged 865 cc pistons.  This option is analysed in the example.  The example shows that a stroke increase can cause greater inertial loads at a given rpm.



 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 24, 2010, 02:04:42 AM
The calculation results are summarized.  Currently I am focusing on connecting rod reliability, and especially on the connecting rod lower end bearing. My plan is to use the standard Triumph connecting rods and to swap them out for new ones every ten runs.  My target rpm is 7,500 and red line is 8,400 rpm.  The percentages are all of the options compared to the inertia loads from the 790 cc pistons at 7,500 rpm.  I know the engine condition at this rpm with the 790 pistons.

First, I look at the 865 cc cast pistons.  They weigh the same as the standard 790 cc pistons and they do not increase inertial loads.  The loads at the 8,400 rpm red line are 26 percent higher than they are at the target rpm.  I am comfortable with this setup and the boxes are highlighed in orange.  The white bearings and chamfered oil holes will make it reliable.

Now, I examine the 865 cc forged pistons.  They are slightly heavier than the cast ones.  The inertia loads at 8,500 rpm is 29 percent higher than the 790 cc pistons at the target rpm.  I will reprogram the rev limiter to lower the red line 100 rpm to 8,300.  Now the maximum inertia loads will be the same as the 790 cc engine.

My 947 cc stroker crank idea using the 865 cc forged pistons is next.  The inertial loads are far higher.  This is a dangerous setup and the boxes are highlighted in red.  There is a possibility of broken rods, pistons, etc.  I do not want to go there.  Some of this higher inertia is due to the piston accelerating harder to travel the longer stroke.  The rod length to stroke ratio of the stroked engine is 123 mm / 74.4 mm = 1.65  This is lower than the standard engine rod length to stroke ratio of 123 mm / 68 mm = 1.81  Engines with low ratios tend to have high piston acceleration rates and other characteristics that are not good for a LSR motor.  I am not literate enough to explain this.  See http://ftlracing.com/tech/engine/rsratio.html  The stroker crank idea will not become reality.

Now the 994 cc big bore kit.  This option provides a lot of extra displacement with minimal increases in inertia loads.  There is a 9 percent increase at the 7,500 rpm target.  I can set the rev limiter to 8,000 rpm.  This will limit the inertia load at red line to 25 percent higher than the 790 cc pistons at 7,500 rpm.  I can live easily with this lower redline in exchange for a lot more power.  I like these big jugs.  This will be a future hop-up if I find the money.

My 750 cc small bore screamer is next.  There is a small decrease in inertial loads as compared to the 790 cc setup.  There will be a lot less power.  This idea seemed good when I thought about it, but the calculations show otherwise.

A fellow racer said "wind that sucker up to 9,000 rpm and it will haul a__"  The inertial loads at this rpm are much greater than at the lower engine speeds.  Carillo rods will be needed, the engine will must be torn apart after every race for rod bearing inspection, and cam chain life will be short.  Nine grand is an option for a dedicated racer with lots of time and money.

The white bearings, chamfered oil holes, relatively light 865 cc pistons, 7,500 rpm target, and 8,300 rpm red line will give me the rod big end bearing life that I need.  Now it is time to figure out the fourth of five reliability issues, the rod little end.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 28, 2010, 09:38:01 PM
The partially seized gudgeon pin is the fourth of the five reliability issues.  It seized and then freed itself.  Lucky me. 

First, I figure out the probable cause.  The Triumph production tolerances are 0.0006 to 0.0015 inch.  Mine are definitely on the tighter side of this range and they are not the 0.001 to 0.0015 inch that I want for racing.  It is probable that the small end did not have enough clearance to account for heat expansion and lubrication needs.

Top end breakups are a problem for many builders on this forum, and they are much better and more experienced than me.  The Triumph transmission is just behind and below the pistons and rods and breakage will dump metal chunks into the spinning gears.  The engine will lock up and pulling in the clutch will not free it.  A big crash will result.  Entertaining to watch but no fun to be in.  It is time for expert advice.  I do not want to figure this one out on my own.

First, the small ends will be bronze bushed.  Bronze and the hardened steel pins are dissimilar metals.  They will have more resistance to seizing than the two hardened steel surfaces on the standard Triumph setup.

Second, the bronze bushings will be honed to exactly the correct clearances for racing.

Third, the pins will be teflon coated.  This gives some added lubrication.

I can do all of these with the standard Triumph rods.  The problem is that I will need to do it every ten runs when I replace the rods because of fatigue concerns.   Another problem with the standard rods is that I need to pull the engine completely out of the frame to inspect the rod big end bearings.  Also, the Triumph rods will not be adequate when I install the big bore kit in the future.  A set of Carillo rods is the answer.  They have all of the features that I need and they are top loading.  I can inspect the rod bearings with the engine in the frame.  Money well spent, I say.

It is nice to call someone on the phone who understands land speed racing.  It is different as far as engine building is concerned.  South Bay Triumph helped me to figure out most of this and they developed the parts.  A lot of this setup is what they use on their bikes, so I will know it will work on mine.  There will be fewer worries when the starter waves me off for that long hard run down the salt. 

   

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 30, 2010, 01:51:28 AM
Engines are full of hardened steel parts and the hardening is most often on the surface, only.  The hardened surface can flake from these parts for many reasons, such as poor alignment, overloading, a bad design, normal wear, or inadequate hardening.  The lost particles are hardened steel and they are very abrasive.  They can wear and damage the engine.  A complete inspection of all parts for hardened surface spalls is part of this build.  The backlash gears on each cam have some spalling on the teeth.

The probable cause is overload.  Triumph recommends substantial preload on the springs that push the backlash gears against the cam gears.  It is easy to install the cams with less spring pressure.  The backlash gear is not twisted quite as tight against the internal spring when the cams are installed.  In the future I will use this reduced preload when I use the factory cams.  I will use new gears, too.

The backlash gears, springs, and washers are removed for this racing build.  They create internal friction and add considerable weight to the camshaft rotating masses.  I was worried about some bad rattling with the gears out, but the designer said the high performance cams are designed so they do not have backlash under normal operating conditions.  This is the last of the reliability issues.

A fellow on this forum was commenting on a blown up engine in another build.  He said "What are you going to do different?"  That sums up this part of the build.  It is identifying reliability issues and figuring out solutions.  Next is the fun part, the tuning. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 01, 2010, 01:51:29 AM
This Triumph will be tuned in the old American street rod style.  It will be a fast runner with a solid engine and nothing spectacular.  The streamlining is the ticket to speed here, not the engine.  I am an average guy and not an expert tuner.  This is a diary of what I do and it is not always the best.

The basic tuning decisions are based on math calculations and dyno data.  Mostly, I look at the dyno curve shapes.  I never base any decisions on comparisons of the peak torque and horsepower unless I am comparing back to back runs in the same dyno session.  My habit is to tune for horsepower using the torque curve.  The flatter torque curve is easier for me to interpret than the sloping horsepower curve.

The dotted torque curve is for the new 790 cc Bonneville with the smog control air injection system removed, the snorkel taken off of the air box, and glass pack mufflers.  It ran just under 100 mph at BUB in 2007.  Peak torque was low in the powerband at 49 percent of redline, and the redline was a sedate 7,300 rpm.

Lots of fiddling around and trying different things, and finally I had the 790 cc engine making good power.  The head was given a land speed style port job by South Bay Triumph and 1mm larger intake valves.  A British Customs ignition box was installed with 3 degrees more spark advance and a 1,100 rpm higher redline.  The peak torque was moved up to between 75 to 85 percent of redline.  This is exactly what I wanted.  A big surge of torque high up in the powerband where I need it to punch through the wind.  Usually I like the peak to occur at 500 to 1,000 rpm lower than my target rpm.  In this case the torque started to trail off at 500 rpm lower than the target.

The goal of the new build is to duplicate this torque curve shape with a lot more torque under the curve.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 03, 2010, 03:00:07 PM
My general rule-of-thumb for cast pistons is that they will go up to 3,000 feet per second average piston speed with no reliability issues and they will work at up to 4,000 rpm with periodic inspection and replacement, with both occurring more often as the engine speeds get closer to 4,000 feet per second.  I fellow forum member mentioned that Suzuki cast pistons are functional at high rpm.  The things that a lot of these forum members do with their big Kawasaki and Suzuki bikes are beyond my comprehension.  I said to myself, "Yea, these guys do this, but I in my world I race a Triumph with funky Triumph pistons."

The American Historical Motorcycle Racing Association held an event at Portland International Raceway.  This is a lousy track for watching a bike race.  Barriers, fences, and distance keep the spectators far away from the action.  Yesterday we found a little spot near the end of the straightaway where we stood on top of a barrier and actually saw the race from a reasonably close distance.  We saw Tom Mellor and his land speed racing Triumph Trident in road race trim.  The triples are very fast and they have a special sound.  There is a Battle of the Twins class called the Transatlantic Challenge.  Hinckley Triumph 865 cc twins and Harley Sportster twins up to 1200 cc compete.  The bikes engines are basically standard.  The fastest Triumph led the race and it was ahead of the others by a long distance.  It was through the straightaway before the rest of the pack was in sight.  This bike is very well set up and ridden according to a team member.  It uses standard Triumph pistons and connecting rods with the rev limiter at the standard Triumph Thruxton 8,200 rpm.  These Triumph cast pistons are working OK for them and the average piston speed is 3,670 feet per second at redline by my calculations.

The new Triumph works stay current with modern technology and they put it into their bikes as much as possible.  It appears that they are using some of the newer methods to cast pistons and they are nice and strong.  This tuning part of the build diary will look at various options and the standard 865 cc 9.1 to 1 cast pistons will be one of them.  They are a practical choice.

We talked a bit about tuning the Hinckley twins, the team member and me.  He mentioned that the race gas they use is slightly corrosive.  After each race they drain the float bowls and pull the caps off of the hose spigots on the inlet tracts.  They spray WD-40 or similar through the hose spigots and into the inlet tracts with the engine turning.  This lubricates the top end and reduces corrosion.  I mentioned that my intake valve seats showed some corrosion and he said this would help.  Also, he said the race gas can get into the spark plug threads, cause corrosion, and the plugs will be difficult to remove.  He suggested using anti-sieze on the spark plugs or removing them after the race.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 05, 2010, 01:45:17 AM
There are three tuning options that I am looking at, 865 cc engines with one of two different compression ratios, or a 994 cc big bore motor.  Will my 36 millimeter diameter constant velocity carburetors work with these engines or will I need something different?  I want to duplicate the 790 cc motor torque curve shape where the torque peaks at 6,600 rpm.

The formula I use is from the 1970 Peterson Publishing "Motorcycle Repair Manual" article "Four-Stroke Theory" by Jerry Branch and Le Roi Smith.  It is based on work done by Phillip E. Irving.  Mr. Irving, along with Phillip Vincent, were the chief engineers at the Vincent works at Stevenage in the English midlands.  Mr. Irving was Australian by nationality.

The carburetors at the time the formula was developed were almost all of the slide and needle variety.  The constant velocity carbs with a rotating throttle plate, such as those on the Hinckley Bonneville, were very rarely used on motorcycles in those days.  I reduce the carburetor opening size for these calculations to account for the obstruction of the throttle plate.  This is my own idea and it is not part of Irving's original formula.

The heart of the concept represented by this formula is, to quote Branch and Smith "To get acceptable fuel mixture (atomization) and vaporization within the combustion chamber by the time of ignition, considerable air velocity is necessary.  P.E. Irving has found this means a nominal mean air velocity of 300 ft./sec. through the throat, or the point of maximum engine torque."

This is a most useful formula.  It tells me that my standard carbs are almost large enough for the 790 cc engine and they will be on the smallish side for an 865 cc engine.  It also shows that a big bore motor will certainly need bigger carbs.  Large 39 mm diameter Keihin carbs are available.  They are a bit big for the 865 cc engine with peak torque at 6,600 rpm.  At 7,500 rpm peak torque they will have 300 feet per second velocity.  Just right.

Standard carb bodies are a requirement for a production class engine in the AMA/BUB series.  The speed that I will need to get a record will require an engine that works hard and is near to the 1000 cc class displacement limit.  The standard carbs are far too small for this monster engine.  A serious attempt at a 1000 cc class record with a production engine is not possible with this bike.  This is more good info for me to have.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 06, 2010, 01:34:59 AM
The second page of yesterday's post had an error.  "SQ IN" is supposed to be "IN" as shown on the attached revised page.

The standard carburetors will be used this year.  They will need to be rejetted.  A guesstimate will be made and the final sizing will be done on a dyno.  Most of my concerns are about the main and pilot jets.  This bike has constant velocity carburetors and the needle or the needle jet seldom need to be adjusted.

The first step in the estimating is to account for the cylinder diameter change.  The average air velocity formula works well for this.  It can also be used to estimate the jetting changes due to rpm or stroke differences.  The average flow velocity is calculated for both the existing engine and the new build.  The ratio of the two is assumed to reflect the changes in fuel demand.

The Keihin jets use a numbering system that is not directly related to flow capacity, unlike Mikuni jets.  A conversion chart is used to find the Mikuni jet that is similar to the Keihin jet in the existing carb.  The average velocity ratio is used to estimate an appropriate Mikuni jet.  The conversion chart is used again to determine an equivalent Keihin jet.  A comprehensive chart is at http://www.jetsrus.com/FAQ_mikuni_vs_dynojet_vs_keihin_sizes.htm

The new build will have more compression and a cam.  My guess is one or two sizes larger on the main jet to account for this.  All of this is an educated guess.  The final jet selection will be done using a fuel/air ratio trace from the dyno session.  I will bring some other jets to the dyno session to make sure that I will have the right ones.  My guess is one more size on the pilot jets will be OK.

The estimating method shown is only valid for changes to the engine and reuse of the existing carb.  It cannot be used to estimate jet sizes in a replacement carb of a different size or type. 

A booklet on Hinckley Bonneville carb tuning is available for downloading from the jenksbolts.com website.  The booklet is "Carburetor Tuning Notes" in their "Engine and Carburetor tuning" section.  This is a good book for for any Bonnie owner. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 08, 2010, 01:01:55 AM
The last few years I have been riding on the street with oiled gauze pod air filters and salt flats jetting.  Fuel economy is lousy and the filters do not work well.  Dirt gets past them.  Cylinder wall and piston scratching was seen during the last teardown.

I will do two carb setups.  One will be for the street, runway racing, and Elmo.  The standard carbs are OK for this and I will use them with the air filter box and an oiled foam filter.  My friends say these filters trap all of the dirt and they work better than the oiled gauze types.  I will run the glass pack mufflers with this setup.  This is what I will test out at Bonneville this year.

Next year I will fit a set of 35 millimeter Keihin CR smoothbore racing carbs and open velocity stacks.  This will help the performance and it will be used for racing on salt flats, only.  I will run some tuned reverse cone meggas with the smoothbore carbs.

An old hot rod trick is to flatten the throttle plate spindle so it creates less resistance to flow.  I did this a lot on older engines.  These carbs came from the factory with that done.  The photos illustrate it.  When I did this, after I reinstalled the throttle plate, I would mushroom the threaded ends of the screws that hold the throttle plate to the spindle.  It is bad if one of those screws comes undone.

The thingy on the side of the carb is the throttle position sensor.  In all of my years messing around with these Triumphs, I have found instructions on how to adjust this thing in one place.  It is on the website http://www.triumphtwinpower.com/tps_adjustment.php
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 14, 2010, 01:21:44 AM
Does anyone who understands the new FIM twin cylinder class want to give me some advice?  I am trying to figure the FIM stuff out and I am not having a lot of success.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 17, 2010, 12:56:46 AM
The standard air box has a removable restrictor plate.  This plate reduces peak power according to dyno tests done here in Oregon and other places.  One photo shows the plate in place within the air box.  The plate is shown in another photo.  It is easily pulled out and it will be saved.  The left side of the air box is removed to pull out the plate.  The right side does not need to be taken off.

The air box has a snorkel shaped inlet and it also restricts horsepower.  It is replaced by a more efficient bell mouth inlet.  Mine is from Norman Hyde in the United Kingdom.  It is shown in a photo.



   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 22, 2010, 12:20:16 PM
A mistake on the previous post, last sentence.  I like more lobe separation, not less, for this application.  Now I need to make another choice.  The 865 cc pistons increase the displacement 9.5 percent and the 988 pistons increase displacement 25 percent.  The 790 cc cam had adequate breathing at the 7,500 rpm target engine speed I used.  These questions I need to answer.  Will the new cam give me adequate breathing at a 7,500 rpm target speed with 865 or 988 cc displacement increases using the valves I have, or do I need a bigger valves?  Cams are a complex subject and I need to make things simple so I can arrive at an answer.  I need to work quickly using the tools that I have, the kitchen table, a pencil, graph paper, a calculator, three bottles of beer, and a pot of coffee.  It will take two posts to show what I do.

First, I plot degrees duration on the x axis and inches lift on the y axis on some graph paper.  Next, I plot the cam opening, maximum lift, and cam closing points on the graphs.  These lifts and durations are from the cam data and the worksheets.  Now I plot the valve lift curves on the graphs.  These curves can be based on real data obtained by using a dial indicator to measure valve movement and a degree wheel to measure rotation.  My engine is apart so I cannot do this.  I draw the lines on the paper using a french curve and an approximation of a sine wave pattern.  An educated guess and it is good enough for now.

The flow through the valve opening is assumed to occur at 0.050 inch lift or more.  Lines are drawn across the curves at this lift.  I measure the areas under the curves and above the lines in square inches then I convert these measured areas to inches lift x degrees duration.

Now, I figure out the valve perimeters and multiply them by the lift x duration values.  This is on the worksheet.  This tells me, in a rough, approximate, and abstract way, the opening areas between the valves and the seats.

     

 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on May 25, 2010, 02:44:23 AM
The partially seized gudgeon pin is the fourth of the five reliability issues.  It seized and then freed itself.  Lucky me. 

First, I figure out the probable cause.  The Triumph production tolerances are 0.0006 to 0.0015 inch.  Mine are definitely on the tighter side of this range and they are not the 0.001 to 0.0015 inch that I want for racing.  It is probable that the small end did not have enough clearance to account for heat expansion and lubrication needs.

Top end breakups are a problem for many builders on this forum, and they are much better and more experienced than me.  The Triumph transmission is just behind and below the pistons and rods and breakage will dump metal chunks into the spinning gears.  The engine will lock up and pulling in the clutch will not free it.  A big crash will result.  Entertaining to watch but no fun to be in.  It is time for expert advice.  I do not want to figure this one out on my own.

First, the small ends will be bronze bushed.  Bronze and the hardened steel pins are dissimilar metals.  They will have more resistance to seizing than the two hardened steel surfaces on the standard Triumph setup.
 

I just did a recall on a pre production Aprilia with the Piaggio 850 V twin and 3500 Klms on the clock
It involved replacing the crank and wrist pins
The new crank supplied had bronze bushes in the small ends
And the wrist pins that came out had obvious wear on them

G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 26, 2010, 12:36:04 AM
Grumm, the Triumph rod small end holes and gudgeon pins were both hardened steel, too.  The Carillo rods have bronze bushes just like the replacement Aprilia rods.  These dissimilar metals and teflon coated pins are part of our solution.

The pins were not loose or worn on the Triumph.  The opposite.  The gudgeon pins were a tight interference fit in the pistons and the rod to pin clearances upon disassembly were a tight 0.00085 inches (both sides).  It appears that the pins did not readily float in the pistons and almost all rotating movement occurred between the small end bearings and the gudgeon pins.  All of this rotation in sliding fit plain bearings with minimal clearance and similar metals was my problem, I think.

The gudgeon pins have a slight interference fit in the new Arias racing pistons and there are oil passages and oil grooves to keep the pins lubricated so they can rotate.  The rotation occurs between the gudgeon pins and the small end bearings and also between the pins and the pistons.  All of this oil and rotating movement spread out among more surfaces is a good thing for a racing engine.  Pistons like this may be something to consider if the problem persists.

Those Aprilias are impressive bikes.  I wish I had one but it is a good thing that I do not.  I get into enough trouble now and a lot of power is exactly what I do not need.   

The big bore engine will need a hotter cam or bigger valves, or both.  I want to get the breathing ratios up to at least as good as the little 790cc motor.  I work backwards through the formulae on the most recent posts.  Eventually I calculate valve sizes that will give me the correct breathing ratios.  6 mm bigger on the intake and 4 mm bigger on the exhaust.  These bigger valves are available and South Bay Triumph can fit them.  Now I have a plan for the next build that will happen five years down the road.  Big bore pistons in a billet block with bigger valves and a pair of 39 mm carbs.  That is all that I will need.     


 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on May 26, 2010, 04:00:04 AM
Wobbly
The 850 Mana is pretty lame compared with the other aprilias
It has  CVT Auto , which is good for me due to a lack of working parts, and screw and locknut valve adjustment
I just wish I had taken some pics
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 27, 2010, 10:25:20 PM
Yesterday was great.  The Triumph engine was together.  It was almost bedtime and all I needed to do was to adjust the valves.  My radio antenna is a wire hanging from the ceiling and I adjusted it.  I was holding a steel washer and talking to Werner.  Multi tasking.  Guys are not supposed to do this.  I dropped the damn washer.  It bounces off of my arm.  There are thousands of places it could land.  It drops right in to the hole in the middle of the engine where the cam chain goes.  It tinkled down like a coin in a vending machine.  It was a stainless washer so no magnet would pull it out.

Cripes, as they say down under.  There was no way I was going to turn that 200 + pound motor over and shake it out.  I hung the engine from a sawbuck and pulled the sump plate.  There is was.  The washer.  Some days a fellow is better off if he stays in bed.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Dakzila on May 28, 2010, 10:53:46 AM
 :cheers:  Congrats on the easy fix....we all know it could have been worst, right?

Ron
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 29, 2010, 12:13:50 AM
Yea, at least I knew where the washer fell.

This year I am racing under a different sanctioning organization.  They are a bit fussy.  Riders need to take a physical exam.  Folks over 50 need a cardiovascular treadmill stress test.  They have this backwards.  Younger guys should take the test.  Older fellas and gals are not in shape for that kind of thing.

As always I prepare.  I stayed up past midnight last night and had a big lunch an hour before the test.  The nurse was in her 40's, with a trim figure and big green eyes.  Her assistant wired me up and she asked me a few questions.  I explained why I was taking the test.  She said "You like pizza and beer?"  I said "Yes, of course.  They are the staples of life.  How did you know?"  She said "All you motorcycle guys puke this up when you are in the ER (emergency room)."  I wanted to be somewhere else.  Then she said  "Most people in here are sick or have something wrong with them.  You are in reasonably good shape.  We will see what you can do."  Egad, now I know what my Triumph feels like.

The treadmill is a device like a belt sander turned upside down.  There are some handlebars in front of it to hang onto.  A person stands on the belt and walks or runs in place.  They turn it on and it is "Feets, do your stuff."  At first it is not too bad.  A walk is all I need.  Then she turns up the speed a bit.  Now I am walking real fast.  I do not run.  I try to look super cool and composed but this is starting to be tiring.  Then she tilts the blasted thing.  I am walking uphill fast.  About 30+ years ago I did this and it was no fun then.  At least I am not carrying a pack this time.  Finally I see black spots in front of my eyes, I am dizzy, and my legs start to cramp.  I say "I give up.  Turn it off."  She says "You passed, but your doctor will tell you the definite answer.  Toward the end you were a little hypertensive."  I do not know what hypertensive is and I do not want to find out.

Words of advice.  Never say you ride a motorcycle.  Say "Nurse, I just ate a big meal.  Projectile vomiting is never pleasant.  Just do the minimum possible to see that I can pass the test.  I will make sure I do not erupt, and if I do, it will not be in your direction."

   

 

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on May 29, 2010, 07:52:54 AM
WW, you didn't tell the entire story -- at least not from my experience on the "stress test" treadmill.

When I've taken the tests (twice) I get to the spot "...Finally I see black spots..." and say I give up -- that's when the attending nurse suddenly sprouts horns and a forked tail and tells me "Good.  Now that we've got your heart going full-blast -- we need to have you continue at this rate for at least two minutes."  This is the point when i remind myself that at least I'm doing this foolishness in a hospital, 'cause when I suffer the heart attack that's only a few seconds away -- at least I'll be near help and maybe I won't simply die.  She eventually does relent and tell me I can get off the treadmill and onto the autopsy table (I'm sure they have an autopsy table there --saves time for the mortician) -- when I manage to stagger the two feet to said table I crash onto it and lie there panting and listening to the scary clatter of the pneumatic drill in the next room (and then I realize it's not an air hammer -- that noise is my heart!).

A week or two later comes the even-worse part of the story.  That's when the doctor reviews the results of the test and says something like "Well, this test showed what might be an issue, so I'd like to have a follow-up test done in two more months."  I don't know why he tells me that -- he knows that I'm about to use the double-bitted axe that I've carried with me into the Doc's exam room. . .
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 31, 2010, 02:12:58 AM
Geez, I guess I had it easy. 

The hubub about racing tires in SCTA racing made me me curious about my bike's tires.  The back tire on the Bonnie was H rated.  This tire is certified to 130 mph sustained speed, maximum.  Hopefully I will be faster than 130 this year.  It is time for a new tire.

The old tire is a 130/80 x 17 steel belted Metzeler radial.  Front tires are available in this size with high speed ratings.  I need a rear tire and I do not want to experiment.  The Metzeler Roadtech is an excellent tire.  I have one on the front.  There are no 130/80 x 17 rear tires, but there are 150/70 x 17 ZR rated rears.  This tire has a height and circumference that is similar to the 130/80 x 17 tire.  I bought one and it is wider and it fit.  There were no clearance problems.  Now I have back and front tires certified for up to 150 mph.  Both are Roadtech Metzelers and they work well together.

Early this evening I got the Triumph running.  Rosie was watching the bike go together so she got to go on the first ride with the new engine.  We went to Borders Books.  It was raining and I could not pay much attention to the bike.   



  eThis might be dangerous .   tire

  is approved rated up to a 130 mph maximum sustained speed and I hope 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: saltwheels262 on June 01, 2010, 09:36:10 AM
curious as to what the tie wraps on the
spokes do.

haven't seen that before.

franey
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bvillercr on June 01, 2010, 11:58:54 AM
I've seen it done on dirt bikes, it is used to keep them from vibrating loose. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: sheribuchta on June 01, 2010, 12:26:27 PM
wobbly  the zr rated is good to 200mph                                    willie buchta
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 02, 2010, 02:16:32 AM
Willy, that is nice to know and thanks for telling me.  This tire will never see 200 mph but I feel good knowing that it can do it.  A good quality tire.

Franey, spoke wrapping is something I always did with my dirt racing bikes.  I continue to do it on the Triumph.  Factory spokes on the rear wheels of these bikes are not the most reliable.  They are known to break and the tie wraps keep them from flopping around if they do.  These spokes are heavy duty ones from Buchanan Wheel in Azusa and they should not break, but I tie them anyhow.

We look down a two stroke's cylinder.  We see that the piston does not start to compress the mixture until it passes the port tops during its upward movement.  A similar thing happens with four strokes, to some degree.  The intake valve is open at bottom dead center and it does not close until after the piston has started to move upward.  The four stroke compression ratio that considers the timing of the intake valve closing, along with the engine's bore, stroke, and connecting rod length is the dynamic compression ratio.  I never figured out how to do this using pencil and paper.  Fortunately, now we have on-line calculators.  My favorite is at www.rbracing-rsr.com.  It also considers the effects of altitude.

The intake valve on the #813 cam closes at 49 degrees after bottom dead center (ABDC).  This figure is shown on the cam data sheet.  The intake valve closing on the original 790cc cam is not given in the cam data at the 0.050 inches lift value we use in the USA.  It is listed at 1mm lift.  It takes a bit of figuring to determine the closing.  Charts from previous posts are used and the 790cc intake valve closes at 37 degrees (ABDC) at 0.050 inches lift.

Experience with my 305 Honda Superhawk and BSA Spitfire showed me that putting a cam in an engine with a longer duration, alone, gives mixed results.  The engine runs great when the engine is "on the cam" and it is a bit dull and lifeless at the other engine speeds.  This is not good for a street engine built for top end power.  The engine will spend the majority of its life running in the doldrums below the speeds where the cam works best.

Lessons are learned.  Now I pay a lot of attention to dynamic compression ratio.  The 790cc engine had a 8.6 to 1 dynamic compression ratio at near sea level altitudes as shown in the table.  The 865 cc 9.1 to 1 cast pistons with the #813 cams would give me a lower 8.0 to 1 ratio.  Not good.  This would give me the same problems I had with the Honda and BSA.  I sent the cast pistons back and ordered the 865 cc 10.5 to 1 forged pistons.  Now I have a higher 9.2 to 1 dynamic compression ratio.  This will give me more performance than the standard motor at all engine speeds.

The affects of altitude on dynamic ratios are for another post.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 03, 2010, 11:58:42 PM
Many years ago there were a number of street rodders in our neighborhood.  No one that I knew at the time had two cars.  The rod was also the daily transport.  A lot of the cars looked like the vehicles in the Venables Rods and Racing workshop.  Old Fords, Plymouths, etc.  A lot of these guys raced.  It was Sunday fun to them.  None of the cars had many wins.  These were street cars.  The Vietnam war ended this.  Most of the rodders left the 'hood.

My buddies and myself hit the streets during or a couple of years before the first Arab oil embargo.  We could not imagine that cheap or plentiful gasoline would ever happen again.  We were into bikes by necessity.  Cars and especially hot rods were not part of our lives.  One old hot rod was occasionally filled with gas and we siphoned the fuel out of it to fill our bikes.  It was the "mother ship" for us hoodlums.

The Triumph, with its 865 cc forged pistons and #813 cams, is built in the old hot rod tradition.  It is a street bike that sees some racing.  It has as many high performance parts as most race engines but it is not tuned for racing, only.  Compromises are made.  The bike has many other tasks on its list.  Next year I will put a set of 35 mm smooth bore carbs on it and I will tune the intake and exhaust.  That's about all of the engine related work for the next five years or so.

The 994 big bore engine is more of a Bonneville racing motor.  It will have about the same compression at Bonneville as my new build has in Oregon Willamette Valley.  The added displacement and compression will help make up for the power loss due to the thinner atmosphere.  Anyone building one of these Triumphs for the salt should consider the bigger engine.

This concludes the tuning part of the build.  Now, a few posts will be about putting the engine together. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: saltwheels262 on June 04, 2010, 04:36:43 PM
both answers on spokes sound
good to me.

franey
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 05, 2010, 12:57:55 AM
Now it is time to build the motor.  These posts, as with all others, are intended to show the basic things that every racer does.  Nothing fancy.

Manuals are an essential starting point.  The Triumph manual is a handy reference for an experienced mechanic.  It is a quick reference for most tasks.  The Haynes manual has the same information as the Triumph manual plus a lot more.  It shows a lot of procedures.  I use them both.

The Triumph manual is organized into chapters such as "Fuel and Exhaust," "Final Drive," etc.  My notebook is organized with the same sections.  All notes and other data for the parts covered in the Final Drive chapter are in my Final Drive notebook section.  This organization helps immensely.  I do not keep expenditure receipts.  Some things I would rather forget.

The critical engine parts have arrived from South Bay Triumph.  I asked them to make sure the bores were the right size for the pistons and to hone as needed, to check the rod small end to gudgeon pin clearances and to hone as needed, and to check and set the ring end gaps.  These are special racing parts and I do not have the experience to do this.

It has been a long time since I was a machinist and I have lost the feel that is needed to measure parts to tenths.  Thousandths is the best I can do.  I bring the pins, rods, pistons, and barrels to my machinist and he fills out many of the blanks on my 2010 Clearances form.  I measure the ring gaps and the crank and rod bearing clearances.  This form is vital as a reference for the future.     

 

     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Dr Goggles on June 05, 2010, 02:52:30 AM
  I do not keep expenditure receipts.  Some things I would rather forget.

That's the least of your problems....As far as relationships go the kind of money that LSR gobbles up is practically a war crime, if you keep ANY evidence of cost make sure it is in a code that even you will forget, that way even if the cojones are being twisted you won't give it up :evil:.......besides what's the point in writing something on one side of a ledger to which there will NEVER be anything on the other :roll:

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 06, 2010, 03:18:56 AM
Yes, racing costs big money.  We need to look at the good side, we would be spending the money somewhere, like on loose wimmen, gambling, or booze.  Racing keeps us out of trouble.

The engine had a little oil leak that I fixed and I have been running it about town for the last week.  Today it stopped raining and I took it out on the open road.  I cannot run it hard now, it is in the "break-in" period.  The engine runs very strong up to about 3,000 rpm.  It goes flat and stutters, then it runs like a rocket above 4,000 rpm.  I tried a few things and eliminated carb jetting as a problem.  Jetting changes do not make it run better.   

Years ago I had this same difficulty on a couple of engines that I put cams into.  It seemed like, at a certain rpm, there was a pressure wave traveling back from the closing intake valve that was confusing the carburetor.  My cure at that time was to either learn to live with the problem or to switch to a different cam.

Does anyone have any suggestions?



 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WhizzbangK.C. on June 06, 2010, 03:32:36 PM
Yes, racing costs big money.  We need to look at the good side, we would be spending the money somewhere, like on loose wimmen, gambling, or booze.  Racing keeps us out of trouble.

The engine had a little oil leak that I fixed and I have been running it about town for the last week.  Today it stopped raining and I took it out on the open road.  I cannot run it hard now, it is in the "break-in" period.  The engine runs very strong up to about 3,000 rpm.  It goes flat and stutters, then it runs like a rocket above 4,000 rpm.  I tried a few things and eliminated carb jetting as a problem.  Jetting changes do not make it run better.   

Years ago I had this same difficulty on a couple of engines that I put cams into.  It seemed like, at a certain rpm, there was a pressure wave traveling back from the closing intake valve that was confusing the carburetor.  My cure at that time was to either learn to live with the problem or to switch to a different cam.

Does anyone have any suggestions?



 

It sounds to me like your having a problem with reversion. I believe that I suffered from the same problem last year and it prevented me from getting into top gear since my RPM dropped into the reversion zone on that upshift and it would not pull. You may remember that my bike had a very long intake between the carb and the head, and a relatively short exhaust. I'm blaming my problem on that combination. I was experimenting with the pressure waves, and I was getting positive pressure in the intake in the upper 3rd of the rpm range, and it pulled like a freight train once there, but if I can't get to that range in top gear it's not doing me any good.

For this year I'm going back to having the carb mounted at the head, and will play around with exhaust length to optimize the midrange, and hopefully get it to pull top gear and really bump my record to something a little more respectable, LOL.

You might find that the easiest way to correct your problem is by playing with the exhaust configuration. On Harleys with drag pipes I've experienced similar issues to what you describe and found that adding or modifying baffles helped. The trick as I understand it is to make the low pressure portion of the exhaust pressure waves hit the exhaust port at the same time that the cam is on overlap. This will have the effect of sucking the intake charge into the cylinder. If the high pressure wave is at the exhaust port it pushes back through the valves and doesn't let enough fresh air/fuel mixture in. A little exhaust tuning might just be the ticket for you.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RidgeRunner on June 06, 2010, 10:58:36 PM
     Jim McFarland offers some thoughts on reversion in the August 2010 issue of Circle Track magazine, pages 16 & 18.

     I used to get a lot of "stand off" just outside the inlet to the carb on my BB34 BSA single back in the early 70's.  Always figured the fuel wasn't doing much good out there [holed the piston more than once], suspected the reground cams might not have been optimal for the rest of the combination, life got in the way before I ever really figured out what was happening.

                             Ed
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 07, 2010, 01:53:17 AM
Thanks, Ed and Ed.  Thanks for the tips.  I read up on reversion today and that is what it is.  I remember the Gold Stars, too.  They had a problem with this.  Fortunately I have all sorts of intake and exhaust parts laying about and a couple of months before BUB.  It is time for me to get the magazine and start to figure out a solution.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 08, 2010, 01:32:34 AM
This morning I pulled the noise baffles out and the Arrow pipes are straight through glass packs.  Nothing in the exhaust path.  The bike runs very good.  It is break in time so I shut down at 5,500 rpm.  It was pulling hard.  Lots of power and no stumbling.  It is quite loud so I am trying different baffle shapes.  It was reversion.

Hours, days, and years I work on the inert Triumph.  Lots of futile paths and wasted tiime and money.  Fleetingly and without warning, the monster awakes, and my fiendish dreams come true.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 09, 2010, 01:10:24 AM
Geez, I read about reversion and a lot of my bikes had problems with this.  We said the "pipes and cams were fighting each other" in our backcountry talk.  It seems to affect cammed engines the most and back pressure and reflected pressure waves are the major causes.

The mufflers are straight through glass packs and the baffles fit in the ends.  It came with eight 10 mm diameter circular holes per baffle.  I drilled another eight in each one and I enlarged every other hole to 12 mm.  This reduces back pressure.

The baffle end was flat and it was perpendicular to the flow direction.  A source of reflected waves.  I made some pointy ends out of rod stock and bolted them to the baffles.  Hopefully the points will not reflect pressure waves directly back to the valves.

Right before the test ride the rain started.  This is Oregon.  Tomorrow I will see if these work.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fredvance on June 09, 2010, 10:10:45 AM
Why dont you just remove the baffle??
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 11, 2010, 02:08:04 AM
Fred, the baffle is only for street and road riding.

The rocket nose cone things helped a lot.  This showed me that a reflected wave was the source of most of my trouble.  The cones reflected the waves to the muffler core sides rather than straight back to the exhaust valve.  Now I tried something different.  I drilled 1/2 inch holes in the baffle ends.  This change also reduced the reflected wave and it lessened the back pressure, too.  This modification helped a lot.

Next, I pulled out the carb slides and replaced them with a set of slides that I drilled.  The air hole shown is drilled out from 2.5 mm to 3 mm using a #32 drill bit.  This trick I learned from the Jenks Bolts carb tuning pamphlet mentioned in a previous post.  The bike ran even better in the reversion zone.

The engine ran better, but it was not smooth in the 3,000 to 4,000 rpm zone, especially at 1/4 to 1/3 throttle.  These Bonnevilles wear out their jet needles and needle jets and they run rich at lower throttle openings when this happens.  My bike has 20,000 miles on it and it is overdue for a set of needles and jets.  I had a set of new jets and I installed them.  This made the bike run really well.  The reversion problem is fixed.

 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 12, 2010, 01:21:33 AM
Dyno work costs a lot of money and I pay by the hour.  The best situation is a short jetting session that accomplishes what I want.  This is what I am doing, or have done during the last few years, to prepare.

1)  I sort out the mickey mouse problems as best as I can, such as the reversion.
2)  I check and set the float levels and replace worn carb parts as needed.  The new needle jets are examples.
3)  The pilot jets are covered by aluminum plugs.  I drill them out and remove them.  Now the pilot jets can be easily changed.
4)  The cheezy soft phillips screws on the float bowls and carb tops are replaced with stanless steel allen bolts.
5)  I fill the bike with clean fresh unleaded non-etanol premium before the test.
6)  I bring a selection of jets in the sizes that I might need.

Now the mechanic can strip and rejet the carbs without taking them off of the bike or removing the seat and gas tank.  This saves me a lot of $$.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 15, 2010, 01:52:14 AM
The rod small big end bearings should be checked annually on a highly modified Triumph that is raced hard.  This is a big job with standard connecting rods.  The connecting rod bolt heads are on the bottom of the rods, and bearing inspection or renewal requires that the engine be removed from the frame and the cases be split.

The connecting rod bolt heads are on the top of the Carrillo rods.  The head, cylinders, and rods can be removed while the engine is in the frame.  These top loading rods save a lot of work.  The bearing inspection process is tricky and South Bay Triumph gave me some help.  I could not figure this out on my own.  It will take two posts to show the procedure.

First, I wash a ratchet strap so it is clean.  The strap I use held a Hinckley Triumph in its packing crate.  Usually the Triumph shop will give these away if asked.  I thread the strap under the crankshaft rod journal.

Now, I put a set of new bearing shells in the rod and I tighten the cap down so the bearing shells are centered.  I grease the lower shell with assembly lube and I unbolt the cap from the rod.

Finally, I slide the lower cap into position between the strap and the rod journal.

 
     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Dr Goggles on June 15, 2010, 02:23:34 AM
.4)  The cheezy soft phillips screws on the float bowls and carb tops are replaced with stanless steel allen bolts

...when I was working for an importer it seemed almost every Bonnie that came out of the crate( yes, the splinteriest wood ever!) had to have the fuel bowls removed to get the varnish out of them before they'd run on two...got good at it after a while, also got good at holding the pipes on start up and if the temps were different then quickly shutting it down so it wouldn't be too hot to work on( best bike to burn yourself on, witness dark spot on the outside of my right forearm where it stuck to a pipe.....I had a blister half the size of my hand there....)...anyway, I always marvelled that they'd found something even SOFTER than the stuff they made the carbies out of to make the fuel bowl screws out of...it seemed that if you imagined a screwdriver while you were standing next to the bike they would burr.......
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 15, 2010, 10:37:10 PM
Doc, the carbs, soft screws aside, have given me remarkably good service.  I am a carburetor tuning klutz and these things seem to work good in spite of my best efforts to mess them up.

The big end cap is positioned on the strap so the rod will be straight up when it is bolted on.  The strap is tightened using the ratchet.  The cap is tightened against the journal enough to keep it from wiggling around.

A piece of plastigage is put on the rod.  It is held on with a small dab of grease.

The rod is positioned on the cap and the bolts are tightened as per Carrillo's instructions.  The bolts are loosened and the rod is pulled off of the cap. 

The bearing clearance is measured.  It is 0.050 mm, approximately.  This is within the 0.036 to 0.066 mm Triumph standard clearance and it is well below the 0.100 mm Triumph maximum service limit.  Normally my bike would have the "red" bearings with tighter clearances.  It came with red shells from the factory.  I am installing the looser "white" bearing shells.  This will give me additional clearance for oil flow and it is a modification for racing.

The plastigage is cleaned off, the top shell half is covered with assembly lube, and the rod is reinstalled.  It is installed in the right direction.  Carrillo has some instructions about this.  The strap is removed and the rod big end side clearances are checked.  Everything is OK.  Now it is time to move on to another step.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 17, 2010, 09:21:52 PM
The rods are in and now it is time to fit the pistons and cylinder.  On the bench I fit the inner circlips, check the ring end gaps, and fit the rings.  Now I wrap strips of white plastic around the rings and I wrap a couple of zip ties around the plastic.  The plastic is some slippery white stuff I find at the hobby shop.  "Evergreen" brand. 

Fitting the pins is the next step.  They, and the small end bushings, are covered with assembly lube.  I never use force to install or remove gudgeon pins.  Instead, I warm the pistons with a heat gun or hair dryer.  The pins slip right into the hot pistons with a squeeze from the thumb.  The pistons are supported by two wood strips.

The cylinders are washed in hot soapy water to remove the grit from inside the hone marks.  The bores are wiped with automatic transmission fluid, and the pistons, too.  The base gasket is placed and the barrels are lowered down over the pistons.  The zip ties are cut and removed along with the white plastic strips.  The job is done.

The pistons and pins are teflon coated.  This installation method does not harm the coating.

The little studs and nuts holding the cylinders to the cases on old British twins gave me trouble and bolt metal fatigue was a topic on this forum about a year ago.  I did quite a bit of research on the subject.  The cylinder studs and the eight big bolts holding the crankcases together near the crank bearings were replaced.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on June 18, 2010, 01:50:00 AM
Uuuuum

Did you check the bearing crush?
G

From Clevites Site

Bearing crush is what holds the bearing in place. The tang on the shell that fits the saddle is only for locating the bearing during assembly.This crush, as shown on a connecting rod, is critical to bearing installation.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 18, 2010, 11:04:12 PM
Sort of.  I centered the shells in the rods and caps and noted that a little bit of the shells stuck up past the cap and rod mating faces.  This showed me that the bearing shells would be crushed when everything was tightened.  The amount the shells stuck out resembled what I am used to seeing.  I grunted with pleasure and continued the assembly.  I should have done something more accurate than this but I do not know how to do it.  I will learn.  Are there any references that show how to do it?

     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on June 19, 2010, 12:10:51 AM
Sort of.  I centered the shells in the rods and caps and noted that a little bit of the shells stuck up past the cap and rod mating faces.  This showed me that the bearing shells would be crushed when everything was tightened.  The amount the shells stuck out resembled what I am used to seeing.  I grunted with pleasure and continued the assembly. 

Sounds good to me
I generally put the bearings in the rod while very carefully holding it in a soft jawed vice
Torque both bolts up, check the rod bolt stretch, then undo one of the bolts about one or so turns and measure the gap with a feeler gauge.
But I like your method as well, however I am more recently finding  problems with the calibration of my eyes. In  fact I am having problems reading the numbers on the feeler gauges.

the only even half decent thing i could find online was this on ACL's site
http://www.acl.com.au/web/acl00056.nsf/a7d23b8ace0d7e31ca2560d3001fb663/b90f8e875ec620b44a25669d0014af37?OpenDocument
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 19, 2010, 12:58:18 PM
Thanks for the info.  This will be handy on the next build.  My eyes are a problem, too.  Bifocals and a magnifying glass help.  My wife uses reading glasses for up close things.  We will need to work on bigger engines with bigger parts when we get older.

The cam is a bumpy thing that opens and closed the valves.  The ramps on the cam flanks bring some civility to the process.  They raise and lower the valves from their seats with gentle actions.  Everything works well if the valve springs are strong enough to keep the rocker arm, cam follower, etc in contact with the cam when the valve closes.  The follower will not be in contact with the cam flank if there is a weak spring.  The cam lobe will rotate out from under the follower and the valve will be slammed shut by the spring, alone.  There will be a power loss and the valve head can break off of the stem when this happens.  Experience has shown my wallet and me the consequences of weak valve springs.

A minimum valve spring free length is listed in most of our shop manuals and I measure the springs against that specification.  I always do strength tests for racing engines.  This is how I did it for this build.  It will take two posts to show this, one today and one tomorrow.

Some asking around tell me that standard Triumph springs are adequate for my hot street cam and the engine speeds allowed by the rev limiter.  There are no spring strength specs in my manuals.  I buy two new springs.  Their strengths will give me a basis for decisions.

I take one of the handles off of my drill press and screw off the knob.  This gives me a threaded rod.  A nylock nut goes on top of the rod and and then the valve spring and a couple of washers go onto the rod.  The agglomeration is hung through a hole on the drill press table and a screw eye is threaded on the rod.  Two hooks are hung from the eye.  A dial indicator is placed above the hanger and the tip rests on the rod top.

I hunt around for a weight that will compress the spring 1/8 to 1/4 or so of the distance to coil bind.  A 25 # weight does the trick.  I mark it.  It is the preloading weight and it is always hung first. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 21, 2010, 01:02:39 AM
The dial indicator reading is recorded for the preload weight.  Now all of the rest are put on for 85# total.  The dial indicator is read and recorded a second time.  This is done for all eight valve springs.  I am getting tired ... I fell like I have been lifting weights.  I am glad I do not have a 32 valve V-8.

The difference in dial indicator readings is the distance the spring compressed under load.  All springs are OK.  I replace the weakest old spring with the strongest new spring.  The spring strength records are put in the notebook.  The tests will be done again during the next tear down to see if there are any changes. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 22, 2010, 11:47:23 PM
The Triumph is at the end of the break in period.  Overall, the new motor did not meet my expectations.  The power at low to moderate rpm was less or equal to the old build and the baffles made things worse.  My tuning during the last few weeks made the situation better, but still for street use, I did not gain anything.

This evening, after work, I took it on a 50 mile test loop of back roads in the Cascade mountains and foothills.  No baffles this time.  There is this two lane road.  I crest a hill and I can see for miles across the wheat fields and the road stretches out straight before me.  Policemens are never there.  No hiding places.  No deer or other critters.  I checked the mirrors and no one was following, then I turned the Triumph loose.  Not much happened.  Then, suddenly, this horrible howl came out of the intakes and I was gone.  The road got narrow really quick and I had to shift fast to keep up with the engine.  It was scary.  The power is there.  It is hiding up high in the rev range where I need it for B-ville.  Mission accomplished.  The #813 cam is responsible for this madness and the next few posts will address basic cam setup.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 24, 2010, 01:27:23 AM
The #813 cams have more valve lift than the standard cams.  This check makes sure that the new cams do not bang the valve spring retainers into the valve guide oil seals.  The chart shows a measurement A and B.  A is measured as shown in the picture.  B is too, and the valve is closed when this is done.  C is from the cam data sheet.  Some simple arithmetic gives the distance D.  This is the clearance between the spring retainer bottom and the valve guide seal top.  The cam manufacturer recommends that D be greater than 0.030 inches.

Let's imagine that I want to install a cam with higher lift in the future.  The shortest D distance is 0.087 inches.  0.087 - 0.030 = 0.057 inches.  The higher lift cam should not provide more than 0.057 inches additional lift.  More lift than 0.057 inches may be is possible if modified valve spring keepers or valve guides are installed.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 25, 2010, 01:59:03 AM
The next step is to verify that the new higher lift cam does not cause coil bind.  Also, the spring compressed lengths will be calculated to see if any springs need to be shimmed.

Coil bind occurs when the spring is compressed to the extent that all of the the coils are touching each other.  The spring is solid.  Coil bind can damage the engine.  The cam manufacturer recommends 0.015 inches gap between each coil at a  minimum.  A spring is compressed in a vise until coil bind and its length is measured.  0.015 inches is added to the compressed spring length for each coil gap.  The minimum spring compressed length is 1.082 inches as shown on the top ot the calculation page.

The distance A between the retainer spring seat and the valve tip is measured.  This is different than the "A" used in the retainer to seal gap clearance calcs in the previous post.  Distance B is measured, too.  It is the distance between the lower spring seat and the talve tip when the valve is closed.  Distance C is from the cam data card.  Some simple math tells me the compressed length for each spring.  All are less than the 1.082 inch minimum.  Not good.

Now I compress a spring to 1.037 inches in a vice.  This is the most highly compressed spring.  The gaps between the middle coils are 0.025 inches and the coils near the ends are at coil bind.  Not ideal, but the spring is not at coil bind.  The springs will work OK.

Now I look at the compressed spring lengths again.  Are any springs not compressed enough?  If so, I will put a shim under them to compress them to the same length as the others.  The shims look like machined steel washers.  No springs are long enough to require a shim.

These little calculations tell me a third thing.  The #813 cam has the most lift that the standard valve train can tolerate.  Any more lift will cause coil bind in the standard Triumph valve springs.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 29, 2010, 01:19:05 PM
The valves and springs are installed.  The next task is to check to see that the valve heads do not contact each other.  This can happen during the overlap phase of the valve opening and closing cycles.  A few months ago I did calculated the larger valve sizes I would need with a big bore kit.  I also check to see if there is enough clearance to use these larger valves with this cam.  I forgot to take pictures when I did this.  Some other pictures will be used.

The head is off of the engine and the cams are installed in the head along with the correctly timed drive gears.  This is like in the picture except the cam chain is not hooked up.  There are hexes on the cam shafts.  One of the cams is slowly turned with a wrench and the other cam revolves, too. 

The other picture shows the cylinder head underside and the valves are closed in the photo.  The clearance is measured between the valve heads at the time when both valves are being lifted by the cams.  The cam data card lists the minimum clearance.  There is plenty of clearance on this engine for the valves that I have and the bigger valves that I might use in the future.

This should be done carefully.  Sometimes radically tuned engines will have valves that contact each other.  In these cases the cams are adjusted, usually by spreading the lobe center angles, so the valves do not hit each other.       

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 29, 2010, 02:14:44 PM
This post is not on the subject of cams.  The bike engine is together and ready to start.  I disable the ignition and the carbs are not installed.  There are some items to check before it runs under its own power.

Rarely an oil pump will be encountered that needs to be primed before it will pull oil from the sump.  I have been advised that this might occur with the Hinckley Bonneville.  The pumps will be primed and it is a good idea for all engines when it can be done.  There are two oil pumps.  One I prime by pouring oil into the radiator from the top and the lube flows down into the pump.  The other I prime by pouring oil down onto the hole for the feed line to the oil pressure indicator light switch.  The pumps are primed and I fill the engine.  All oil feed line bolts are finger tight at this stage.

Now I slowly rotate the engine and everything turns freely in all gears and in neutral.  It is possible to put together a trans so it shifts into two gears at the same time and it locks up.  It is good to make sure this does not happen before the bike is ridden.

Both spark plugs are pulled and a compression gauge is installed on one cylinder.  I hook up the battery and spin the engine to get a compression reading.  210 psi.  Good.   Now the gauge is switched.  210 psi on the other.  Good, too.  The plugs are installed.

Oil is weeping from all fittings.  The oil is circulating to everywhere that it should.  The fittings are tightened up and the engine is installed into the frame.   

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 30, 2010, 11:41:31 AM
The valve head to piston clearances are checked.  Many methods have been used over the years and this one works best for me.  First, I clean all oil off the piston crowns and I put on dabs of soft modeling clay.  Then, I rub some oil on the valve heads.  I do not want the clay to stick to the valves.  Some method is needed to turn the crank.  I do not use the starter motor.  An allen wrench is used to turn the crank.  This hand method is what I want.  I will stop turning if I feel any resistance from a valve hitting a piston.

The Triumph valves are necked so the stems near the heads are narrower than the stems in the valve guides.  This improves airflow and it makes them lighter but they are easily bent.  Most of my experience with bending valves is when they nip up against the side of the valve pockets in the piston crowns.  I am very careful now.  I shim the head above the cylinders with three washers each on six of the eight studs and I do not bolt the head down.   I hook up the cams to the cam chain and drive gears.  Now I hold the head down on the cylinders with my hand and I slowly rotate the crank.  The only resistance that I should feel is the clay being squished.  Any harder resistance is a danger sign and I need to stop turning the crank.

Now I remove the drive gears and I pull the head off.  I cut the clay across the marks where the valves touched the clay.  Examining the cut clay shows me my clearances.  The clearances seem to be OK.  The process is repeated with only one washer on each stud and clearances look good.  Then is is repeated a final time with only the head gasket on and 5 lbs-ft torque on the head bolts.

The cam data card gives the minimum valve head to piston crown clearance.  All are OK.  I note that I will also have sufficient clearances with the larger valves that I am considering for the future. 

An additional step would be done if the clearances were near or at the minimum.  I would retard both cams one tooth and recheck the clearances.  This would resemble the engine if the cam chain was very worn.  I would change the chain before it was this badly worn, however. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 01, 2010, 07:30:54 PM
Cam timing was going to be the last post on cams.  The cams on these silly bikes are installed as provided.  They cannot be degreed in or adjusted, unlike the old Triumphs.  Such is progress.  A few thoughts about cams before moving on to other subjects.

The cams are part of an engine system composed of the velocity stacks, carbs, intake runners, ports and valves, pistons, exhaust, and ignition.  On the Triumph the cams and pistons are designed to work with each other.  Logical thinking extends no further.  The velocity stacks are "lucky" and I always run them, I have a bazillion jets for the carbs and they are paid for so they will be used another year, the intake runners are my work and I cannot toss them, although I should, the valve and port work is permanent and it cannot be undone, the pipes are a set of titanium Italian beauties that I got on a once-in-a-lifetime deal, and ignition black boxes are a mystery to me so I leave them alone.  Needless to say, this hokey combo does not give me optimum performance.  Maybe I will be lucky and go faster than last year.

The smart way to do this is to talk with the person that developed the cam and use the intake, exhaust, etc. that they used to develop the big horsepower when they designed the cam.  This way, everything should work together.

I always talk to the person that developed the cam before I buy.  A lot of the discussion is about whether or not it will do want I want.  All of the "fitting" topics shown in the previous posts are discussed.  Any engine work that is needed to get the bump sticks into the engine is talked about.  An "understanding" is reached.  Both of us agree about the work that I am expected to do, or to pay for, to install the cam.

Sometimes things do not go exactly according to everyone's best intentions.  Valves bang into pistons, springs bind, etc.  The cam must be reground or exchanged for another one if this occurs. Some additional engine work might be needed, like relieving pistons or shortening valve guides.  I always work with a reputable shop that will treat me fairly if this happens.

Last, cam work is not for the last minute.  Plenty of months should be scheduled to order and install the little devils.  Time to deal with the unexpected in essential.  This is all that I know about cams.     

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 02, 2010, 06:00:10 PM
These last few days I have been at a family reunion in the hill country east of Sacramento.  It is my turn to go into town for supplies.  A bottle of bourbon is on the shopping list.  Into the likker store I go.  A big shelf of bourbons await.  What brand do I pick?  There are these bottles of Old Crow.  The bird on the label was just like the bird on the belly tank.  That stuff powers the old four cylinder engine in the tank, and probably the driver, too, I figure.  It must be good enough to fuel my relatives, so I bought a bottle.  Never underestimate the power of advertising.

Sometimes bike cases do not split easily.  The Triumph cases are very stubborn and a new pair costs $3,500.  These cases must be opened with care.  First, I reread the crankcase sections of both manuals and I look everything over real good.  I am looking for some bolts that I forgot to undo.  All bolts are removed so it is the gasket cement that is holding the cases together.

Now I find two turnbuckles, four bolts, and four carabiner clips.  Two bolts are inserted through the engine mount holes in each case and the other hardware is arranged as shown in the pictures.

The turnbuckles are turned so they expand and they put tension on the to crankcases.  Now I tap the cases around the joints and at other places with a piece of wood.  Lots of tension and shocks from the wood eventually make the crankcases pop apart.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: theazoldcrow on July 03, 2010, 11:12:32 AM
 :cheers:  Very good choice of likkers!!!      The Arizona "Old Crow"!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 12, 2010, 02:26:02 AM
The whiskey was for my mother.  She is 89 years old, in good shape, and she takes no medications.  Maybe a drink or three a day keeps the doctor away.

The engine break in lubrication was discussed with the cam grinder and the piston and ring supplier.  Some special things were done based on their concerns and recommendations.

Break in oil is a big concern.  The Triumph uses synthetic oil and it is difficult or impossible to seat piston rings in an engine running synthetic.  I did two things to make sure the rings seated.  First, the pistons, rings, and bore were oiled with automatic transmission fluid when they were assembled.

Second, a basic mineral oil was used for the break in.  The rings would seat with this oil.  Unfortunately, this modern motor oil did not have enough zinc and phosphorous to protect the cams and followers.  Flat tappet engines like the Triumph motor need about 1,600 parts per million (ppm) zinc and 1,300 to 1,400 ppm phosphorous based on some notes I made years ago.  My notes also say that the levels should not be higher than 2,000 ppm for one of these metals or "chunking" will occur.  I did not write down if this limit was for zinc or phosphorous.  Some Red Line "Engine Oil Break-In Additive" was used to bring the zinc and phosphorous contents up to the desired levels.  I used instructions in http://www.nitemareperformance.150m.com/ZDDP.html  The break in oil was used for 500 miles and it was drained.

The oil filter was changed and the regular engine oil was added.  I take advantage if the new filter element materials and I use Purolator "Pure One" or Mobil 1 "Extended Performance" filters.  This time I installed a Mobil 1 M1-108 filter.  I install a new filter during every oil change.

These engines lube the clutch, transmission, and primary gears with the engine oil.  This is not an ideal situation and the engine oil should have an additive package that is specifically designed for this.  Triumph recommends the oil meet API SG, API SH, and JASO MA specifications.  These are stringent specs.  I use Mobil 1 Racing 4T.  It meets these specs, it is designed to lubricate engines with gearboxes and clutches sharing the same oil, and the zinc content is 1,600 ppm and the phosphorous content is 1,700 ppm, as per info on the Mobil 1 website.  These metal contents are what I need.

Triumph are vague about the required oil weight.  The owners handbook recommends 15W/50, and the shop manual asks for 10W/40 or 15W/40.  These engines do not run hot and the 10W/40 is what I use and it seems to work well.  Thinner oil means requires less horsepower to pump and fling around in the engine.

This post simply tells about what I do.  It is not an endorsement for specific products.  There are others that will work just as good as the ones that I use.   

 

     



   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 12, 2010, 11:47:19 PM
The break in period is an important time for an engine and motorcycle.  The machined and ground parts rub against each other and the rough surfaces wear and become smoother, the brake pads seat, the tires scuff in, etc.  The people who supplied the pistons, rings, and cam were consulted about the break in procedures they preferred.  This is the important first step.  For example, the engine speed was kept above 2,000 rpm for the first 15 minutes of operation based on instructions from the cam grinder.

It is important to seat the piston rings before the cylinder hone marks are worn smooth.  Combustion chamber pressure does this.  The combustion pressure pushes the rings outward against the cylinder walls and this helps them seat.  Combustion chamber pressures are often highest when the engine is run hard at lower speeds.  At first, I gave the engine a few short bursts of throttle at lower to mid engine speeds.  Blasting around the neighborhood, it was.  I gradually increased the intensity and duration of these bursts as the engine broke in.  At 600 miles I was riding as I normally do.  The things I avoided during the earlier portion of the break in period were high rpm and sustained operation under heavy loads.

The old British bikes needed top to bottom service after break in, such as a complete screw and bolt tightening, cylinder head and cylinder base nut retorque, etc.  These new Bonnevilles do not need all of this attention.  All I did was synchronize the carbs, lube and adjust the chain, change the oil and filter, check the spokes, adjust the cables, and make sure the valve clearances were OK.  That's all.

My bike has over 20,000 miles on it and it was assembled with looser racing tolerances.  It is ready to race after the initial 500 mile break in.  The bikes as new are built like the old air cooled BMW's.  They are assembled with tight tolerances and they should not be raced until they are fully broken in.  My best guess is about 3,000 miles of normal street use is a good break in period before any racing.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 14, 2010, 12:50:03 AM
The Triumph and me will be racing under a different sanctioning body this year.  I do not know how fussy they will be about technical matters and I am replacing some of the hillbilly "get 'er done" things I use.  The engine kill switch was an item I made from an aftermarket fuse block and stuff laying around the shop.  It worked OK but it looked hokey.  The replacement is a Pingel switch I bought from Tiger Racing at www.TigerRacingProducts.com  Pingel has two grades of kill switches and racers have advised me to use their best switch.  The switch is shown on the Triumph seat.

The switch connects into the ignition wiring with a standard automotive connector.  Normally I zip tie the wires to the frame on both sides of the connector.  This makes sure the connector will not be pulled apart.  I could only zip tie the wires to the frame on one side of the connector, so I put a tie on the connector.  This will make sure it is not accidentally pulled apart.

The switch is shown when it is ready to be used.  The telephone cord is tied to a zip tie on my right wrist.  The clip is pulled out from under the spring loaded button when I fall off.  The button snaps down and the ignition circuit is opened.  No electricity flows to the ignition coil and the engine stops.  The telephone cord tucks away near the headlight for street use.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Queeziryder on July 14, 2010, 06:47:12 AM
Hi WW,
With regard to the lanyard on your kill switch;
The problem with that type of stretchy plastic cord, is that they break if you do not pull them out exactly squarely to the r-clip on the end. :-o
It's far safer to use a length of leather cord, or something similar with a high breaking strength. :-D
The stretchy plastic type was frowned upon by scrutineers in the UK for drag racing, after a couple of rider "get offs" where the bike kept running. :roll:

Best of luck
Neil
 :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 14, 2010, 08:26:32 PM
Thanks Neil.  I will use a cord.  Your motto at the bottom of your post sums up my attitude, too.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on July 14, 2010, 08:40:50 PM
Hi WW,
With regard to the lanyard on your kill switch;
The problem with that type of stretchy plastic cord, is that they break if you do not pull them out exactly squarely to the r-clip on the end. :-o
It's far safer to use a length of leather cord, or something similar with a high breaking strength. :-D
The stretchy plastic type was frowned upon by scrutineers in the UK for drag racing, after a couple of rider "get offs" where the bike kept running. :roll:

Best of luck
Neil
 :cheers:

I've found those curly cords that motorcycles use to remind them there is a disc brke lock on work well as they have a wire up the inside?
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 14, 2010, 09:39:22 PM
Years ago in machine shop class they had safety movies.  Some poor guy was working on a lathe and he got his necktie caught in his work.  The last thing he saw was an up close view of the turning chuck.  That movie made an impression on me.  The lanyard tether is a dangling thing that can get caught in the chain, spinning wheel, etc.  Tomorrow I will try a few lanyards and figure out which one pulls the pin and is weak enough to break if it gets caught in the chain.

The bike runs like a Kawasaki 500cc blue streak triple.  Tomorrow I take it to the dyno tuner and someone smarter than me will try to tame the beast.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 16, 2010, 01:43:03 AM
Today I noticed that I am getting grey fast and wrinkly around the eyes.  I wear a hat often and smile with my mouth closed.  My hair quantity and tooth count are personal matters.  My attitude to racing has changed, too.  I am very careful and I scare easily, and sometimes I pursue my goals with grim determination, although I still have fun.  My goals have changed, too.  Simply racing in Australia, riding around the Isle'o'Man, and getting into the USFRA 130 club.  What made me think about this was a recent post by a newer member about setting a 300+ mph record in a Studebaker on his first visit to the salt.  I sure miss those days of youthful and boundless optimism, a time when everything is possible.

Today was dyno day.  The next two or three posts will show what happened.  Maybe this info will help a person who has not used this tuning instrument.

Preparation includes making sure that all systems are OK except for the one that needs to be analyzed.  Dyno work is expensive and it saves $ if it is focused on a specific problem.  In my session the goal is jetting the carbs.  This bike is built and raced in the old street rod tradition.  Normally it has air cleaners and exhaust baffles.  The filters are pulled and replaced with velocity stacks and the baffles are removed, and then it is race time.  The carbs are jetted for the stacks and open pipes.  One picture shows the table out in front of the shop with the baffles, filters, etc.  I make the change from street to racing configuration right after I arrive at the shop.   

It is nice to be able to compare a current dyno session result to a previous one.  I always use the same fuel type, as much as practical.  In my case it is unleaded ethanol-free premium.  I type "ethanol free gas oregon" into my search engine.  All sorts of websites that list places where I can get gas without corn likker are listed.  I fill up a 5-gallon jerry can with the gas, drain the old gas from my tank, and refill it with the good stuff.

The mechanic rolls Bonnie onto the dyno and clamps the front wheel into a vise and an exhaust gas sampler is put into the muffler.  A roller is centered under the rear wheel.  The torque that is transmitted to the roller is measured and this is called "rear wheel torque."  The amount of torque that is transmitted is affected by many things in the driveline, such as chain type and condition, tire pressure, and tyre type.  In order to compare session results to each other, I always use the same type of power transmission components, such as an x-ring chain in good condition and a radial tire inflated to 38 psi.  Some people have a tire that is used for dyno work, only.  My dyno tire is in the attic.  I am too lazy to put it on.

The dyno is a computerized system.  My run from three years ago is retrieved from the files and the mechanic discusses it with me.  The run data lists the work that was done to the motor at that time, the carb settings, the atmospheric conditions, and it gives output for fuel/air, torque, and horsepower.  The mechanic asks about my new engine build and he records the data.  I describe my problems with poor performance and say that it has something to do with the carbs.     



     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 16, 2010, 09:54:38 PM
The mechanic asks me what jetting do I want.  I say "Jet it like a street bike.  This will be close enough for B'ville. I will fine tune the main jets when I am on the salt."  He can give me horsepower curves that are calculated by up to six different methods.  I ask for data figured by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) procedure.  All of my old data is SAE and I can compare.  The dark blue horsepower curves on the printouts show the same dyno run.  The SAE method calculates 70.64 horses and the DIN, a European standard, calculates 72.34 horses.

The bike is shown in the dyno room.  It is a hot and noisy place.  I am sent to the showroom while the work is being done.  There is a new Bonneville there and it is painted in the 1960 color scheme.  The new tanks have a funny shape and I could learn to like it.  There is a fuel injection system in and under that tank.  No carbs.
 
The intial run on Bonnie yields 42 horsepower.  The mechanic discovers that the diaphragm for the vacuum operated slide on one carb was pinched during an improper installation.  The slide would not lift properly.  That was my big mistake.  He installed the diaphragm correctly.  The jetting is next.     

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 18, 2010, 01:21:26 AM
The baffles are pulled out of the pipes and the velocity stacks are installed.  I ask the mechanic to jet it like a street bike and I say I will fine tune the main jets at B'ville.  I will never run the bike this way on the street, I use air filters and my quiet street pipes.  My jetting is just right, or very close, on the salt using the race gas.  This method works because of the difference in the oxygen contents of unleaded premium and race gas.

There are two subtle things about jetting this race engine that are not obvious, but they are very important.  First, it is assumed that the air/fuel mixture ratio shown on the printout is that of the exhaust gas, and it is not always the mixture in the cylinder and combustion chamber.  This cam has significant overlap and at some engine speeds the resonance in the intake and exhaust systems might blow fresh air/fuel mixture through the inlet valve and right out past the exhaust valve and down the exhaust.  At other engine speeds the reverse could happen, and the exhaust could be pulled back through the inlet valve and it can contaminate the fuel/air mixture.  For these reasons and others, the indicated fuel air mixture is not always the mixture that is being combusted.  This problem is overcome by different methods.  The mechanic doing this work prefers to determine optimal jetting by comparing the power curves that are produced by the different jets.  Years ago I watched a dyno operator that measured temperature to arrive at the optimal mixture settings.

Second, it is hard to find the best fuel/air ratio unless the ratios that are too rich and too lean are known.  Assuming the initial run indicates a lean condition, the mechanic will gradually decrease the fuel/air ratio until the mixture is obviously too rich.  Then, the jetting combination that produces the best mixture, between being too rich or lean, will be chosen.  Conversely, if the initial mixture is rich, the mixture will be made leaner until it is obviously too lean, then the intermediate size jets producing the best fuel/air ratio will be selected.  The attached printout shows the power difference, almost 1 horsepower, caused by simply moving the needle jet clip one notch.



Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 18, 2010, 02:15:48 PM
Heidi Rose, my oldest girl, is taking her motorcycle training course this weekend.  She is on the little red Suzuki.  This afternoon we will go to the Kawasaki shop and look at the 250 Ninja. 

The jetting is done and I have a torque curve for the new build.  This curve gives me a lot of useful information.  The torque peaks at 5,800 rpm and it drops off rapidly.  My target rpm, and this is the engine speed I try to run at through the measured mile, is 7,500 rpm.  The new build and the old one have the same torque at this rpm.

First, a look at sprocket sizes for this year's BUB meet.  Last year I ran 127.14 mph at 7,450 rpm using 19 and 43 tooth engine and wheel sprockets, respectively.  The new build has the same torque at that engine speed as the old motor.  It is likely that I will not go faster with the old 19/43 combo.  This year I will use 19/42 chainwheels.  The engine will be turning less rpm when I get to top speed.  The peak torque for the new build is at lower RPM, too, so this gearing change is a better match for the new build.

Will I go faster?  All of the gears, sprockets, wheels, etc. in the bike are levers, and the 19/42 gearing will give the pistons less leverage to move the bike across the salt.  This may offset the greater torque and result in speeds similar to last year's.  I hope for more speed, but the reality is, I probably will not get it.

The second thing I see in this dyno printout is the need to do more work.  Torque should fall off after 7,000 rpm, rather than 6,000 rpm.  More torque at higher rpm = increased horsepower = greater speed.  Less restrictive carbs and tuned intakes and exhausts will do this.  This will be next winter's project.

The dyno work took 7 hours at $80 per.  Big dollars, and is it worth it?  The bike I brought into the shop had a power band like a Kawasaki triple and made a trifling 42 horsepower.   It was thrilling to ride and it felt fast, but in reality, it was not.  It came out of the shop correctly jetted with 70 horsepower.  I have the info I need to set my gearing for next year, and I know what changes I need to do to the torque curve to go faster.  Money well spent.

This engine build has cost a lot of money and it required some very special parts and a lot of good advice.  We got a break on some part costs, a few things were given to us, and there was a donation of many hours of dyno time.  The team Go Dog, Go mutts would be sleeping under the porch all summer if it was not for this help.  Special thanks to Cascade Moto Classics of Beaverton, Oregon, South Bay Triumph of Lomita, California, and folks on this forum.  We are ready to go!   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: SlyOneJr on July 18, 2010, 02:28:48 PM
Tell her that the Ninja 250 can also work as a LSR bike, just as Slim and Nancy and Racer X on here. I'm planning on using the motor to power a Lakester myself. Nice little bikes!

Jeff
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on July 18, 2010, 04:03:56 PM
Congratulations to heidi Rose for taking the MSF course.  I never did -- and still would take it if they'd let me in.  (I say that 'cause the course is only offered for a few months here and "newbies" get first dibs on the openings.  There are never opening for already-licensed bike riders.  Too dang bad. . .).

Anyway, WW, keep this in mind -- that you might have let the cat out of Pandora's box and now it's too late.  Nancy had never been on a motorcycle 'til she met me.  She took the MSF course about eight years ago -- and now she holds a record over 200 mph.  Best wishes to both of you!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 21, 2010, 01:37:36 AM
The trip home was a lot of fun after the jetting.  There was a lot of power and noise.  The bike has a sharp exhaust note and it reminds me of the howls from cats making love.  It was entertaining for awhile and then it started to drive me nuttier.  About halfway home I pulled to the road side and I put in the baffles.  The bike ran OK at low rpm with the baffles and at higher er engine speeds it would sputter.  I could not go faster than 50 mph.  I pulled to the roadside again and I pulled the baffles out.  The baffles were covered with black soot and fresh gasoline was dripping from the filters.  This bike, with the baffles in, was obviously having reversion and standoff.  The bike must work well and be quiet at the same time.

Reversion is a reverse flow through the intake tracts from the intake valves out toward the bell mouths.  It can force clouds of unburned fuel out of the carburetor intakes.  The mixture can be suspended in the intake streams just outside of the bellmouths, hence the term standoff.  The standoff was saturating the air filters with gasoline.

Reversion starts in the exhaust system.  The exhaust gases travel travel down the headers and through the mufflers in waves.  There are pressure waves when the gas is pushed out of the exhaust ports and these waves are interspersed with vacuum waves.  The pressure waves suddenly expand when they exit the mufflers and this creates another set of pressure and vacuum waves that are reflected back into the exhaust system.  These pressure and vacuum waves interact with the opening and closing exhaust valves in different ways.

The exhaust and intake valves are open at the same time during the overlap part of the valve opening and closing cycles.  Valve overlap is hard to quantify.  I express overlap as inches lift x degree crank rotation.  Graphs of valve lift versus rotation during overlap have triangle shapes.  I call these overlap triangles.  See attached sketch.  The overlap period is a time when the exhaust gas that is pushed into the combustion chamber can travel past the inlet valve and into the inlet tract.  The #813 cam in 865 cc Build 1 has 0.53 inches lift x degree duration and the Triumph 790 cc cam has much less, at about 0.35 inches lift x degree rotation.  The new cam creates a much larger opening during the overlap period.

Note the torque curves on the torque comparison chart in the previous post.  Many factors contribute to the dips and bumps in these curves.  Reversion is the main cause of the the big dips at the lower-midrange engine speeds.  The 865 cc engine build has a much deeper dip.  Contributing factors are the larger overlap window to convey reversion waves and the more intense exhaust pressure waves created by the larger and higher compression engine.

The baffles are reflective surfaces and they increased the intensity of the waves traveling back through the exhaust system.  The torque curve shows that the reversion dip was present when the baffles were out and baffles simply made the problem worse.  The next posts will show how I fixed the problem.             

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: octane on July 21, 2010, 07:53:19 AM
Wobbly !...just to let you know that I enjoy intensely reading your posts here ( and elsewhere, for that matter )!

(Some of it goes right over my head, but that's my problem.)


Thanks !
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: charlie101 on July 21, 2010, 10:48:17 AM
Wobbly, would you please make the last image of your notes larger if you can, 58 kb is too small  it only shows up as pixels when I try to enlarge. 75 to 80 kb is better as previous pics. Your notes especially is highly regarded and much appreciated.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 22, 2010, 12:45:35 AM
The overlap triangles are included in a bigger format.  Hopefully this works.  The old Triumph twins had independent exhaust and intake cams and there was a feature that allowed them to be adjusted.  Cam timing during overlap was an important part of performance tuning.  I put a dial indicator on the valve keeper and a degree wheel on the crank to determine the cam timing.  This time, I made some educated guesses based on the timing card data and estimated the cam timing curves.  This will illustrate the idea I am talking about.  The actual measured overlap triangles may be a bit different.

Years ago, about 45 to be exact, my buddies and I were thrashing and crashing Triumph and BSA twins.  One day I crumpled up my header pipe and I scrounged a replacement from my friend.  His header pipe was from a later model A-65 and it had a cross-over pipe between the headers and in front of the cylinder head.  I had to replace both headers because my older pipes did not have the cross-over.

My bike had a cammy Spitfire engine and it was hard to ride.  It had dips and peaks on the torque curve.  The torque curve was much smoother after I installed my friend's header pipes and it was the cross-over pipe that made the difference.  The later model Triumph twins had cross-over pipes, too, and we put them on a few bikes in order to make them more manageable.

These old memories were remembered when I got home last weekend.  I took off the sexy titanium Italian Arrow pipes and put them away.  I hunted around and found the frumpy steel Triumph header pipes out in the bone yard.  They have a cross-over pipe, and I polished them up and put them on.  A short romp around the neighborhood, sans mufflers, proved that the cross-over pipe trick worked again.  No reversion.

The principles are easy to understand.  Let's look at the right hand header.  Exhaust gas pressure and vacuum pulses travel down the right header and they pass over the cross-over pipe opening.  Pressure and vacuum pulses from the left header are coming in through the cross-over pipe.  These pulses are timed so the pulses coming in through the cross-over from the left header occur when pulses of the opposite type are passing by in the right header.  The pressure pulses partially neutralize the vacuum pulses, and vise versa.  The pressure and vacuum pulses in the headers downstream from the cross-over are less intense than they are upstream.

These less intense pulses travel down through the muffler and out of the exhaust.  They expand when they are no longer confined, and pressure and vacuum waves are created that travel back up the pipe.  The important thing is, the weaker pulses going out create weaker pulses going back in, and there is some further weakening of these pulses when they pass by the cross-over pipe openings on their return trips.  The weakened return pulses do not have enough energy to push the inlet charges back into the inlet tracts. Reduced or no reversion are the results.

 

     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 22, 2010, 10:10:53 PM
It was 1973 when I crashed my BSA and put on the new pipes.  This is 37 years ago.  My math was off and I like to keep things accurate.

Fortunately, there are all sorts of mufflers out in the bone pile.  I tried a few and one pair worked very well.  The bike is quiet and there is no reversion problem.  They are Triumph off-road mufflers.  They are straight through glass packs with a 1-inch inner diameter.

There are two things about these mufflers that make them work well with the long duration cams.  There are no obstructions that project into the exhaust openings.  A broom handle will pass through the entire length.  Also, the transition from the 1-1/2 inch diameter header to the 1-inch diameter muffler is gradual.  The lack of projections or abrupt transitions help to minimize reversion.  There are no surfaces or sharp transitions inside the exhaust to create pressure and vacuum waves.  Now the bike is quiet and it runs good.

Right now there are pod filters on the intakes and there is no runner length upstream from the carburetors.  Experts on these bikes recommend that I reinstall the air box for street use.  They say the bell mouths in the air box are another countermeasure against reversion.

The moral to the story.  Never toss anything.  There are advantages to having a small personal junkyard.  Who knows what parts will be handy in the future.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 26, 2010, 01:33:46 AM
It is getting close to salt time and the last minute thrash.  Will this bike withstand the rigors of LSR?  Is the engine put together OK?  Are the rods and pistons strong enough?  Yesterday my oldest daughter and me devised the Flower Picture Test.  We pottered around near the east side of town and photographed the flower fields.  This is what we saw. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 26, 2010, 01:37:14 AM
The bike survived the test.  A few more pix.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 26, 2010, 06:16:06 PM
"Remove the pod filters and put the air box back on.  This will improve your gas mileage and smooth out the power curve at low to mid range."  Two people with a lot of knowledge about these bikes tell me this.  I go out to the junk pile and find the air box.  A quick spray of Raid takes care of the resident arachnids and I put the air box back on.  Now the question is "Is my Unifilter oiled foam filter OK for a 70 horsepower engine, or do I need another type?"

I do not have a clue as to the answer, so I do my usual routine.  I go to Borders Books, buy a latte, and browse through the Transportation section.  I do this a lot so I know what books are there.  There is a new book that has been put on the shelf last week, I look in it, and it has the information I need.  The book is ISBN 978-1-934709-17-7 David Vizard's "How to Build Horsepower:  Proven Methods for Increasing Horsepower in Any Engine."  Mr. Vizard lives in America and he is originally from England.  Things I learned from his articles in Hot Rod and other magazines have been used previously in this build.

Air filter flow capacities are discussed in Chapter 2:  Primary Induction.  The oiled foam filter is not the optimum setup.  It can filter air for engines up to 3.5 horsepower per square inch filter area without measurable power loss based on Vizard's experience.  Now I measure the air filter area.  The area width is the circumference as shown in the photo.  The Triumph filter has a 6" x 10.125 " = 60 square inches area.  This filter is adequate for 60 x 3.5 = 210 horsepower engines.  My 70 horsepower motor is well below this and the oiled foam filter is OK.

The air box does make the engine run better.  There is no noticeable dip in the torque curve at the low to mid range transition.  Gas mileage is slightly better at 39 mpg on the highway.  I had my crab trap, crab pot, portable stove, and beer cooler on the bike when I recorded this mileage.  It was not very aerodynamic.  Mileage should be in the 40's for normal highway use.  It was always in the mid 30's with the pod filters.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: landsendlynda on July 26, 2010, 06:23:02 PM
So, WW....how was the crabbing?   :roll:

Lynda
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 28, 2010, 01:22:51 AM
All I caught was a little red rock crab and a starfish.  Really, all I wanted to do was be in the warm sunshine all day.  A rare treat that we get for a few months.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 28, 2010, 09:25:54 PM
This year I finished the build on the long block and it is tested and broken in.  The street induction and exhaust systems are figured out.  No more work is needed there.  Now it is time to get the racing induction and exhaust systems working.  The bike is about ten horsepower down from where it should be.  The standard carbs cannot flow enough air and correctly atomize the fuel mixture at high rpm.  This cannot be fixed.  I have enough money to get to Bonneville, barely.  The new book by Vizard gives me some ideas and I will do some low cost basic hot rod tricks.  Installing a fuel/air mixture meter is the first task.  Accurate jetting, done on the salt if needed, will help me to corral a few ponies.

Lots of high powered research goes into this task.  I go down to Performance Racing and Engineering, our local auto speed shop.  I say "What fuel/air gauge will work on that Triumph?"  The owner sez "They are using the Innovative Performance gauges."  I say "Order me one."  The owner says "What do you want to look at?"  I say "I can't see all that good, and I am looking through a dark face shield while wearing sunglasses and riding a jackhammer."  He says, "We will order you a dial gauge."  The next day I hand him some money and he gives me this box full of all sorts of wires, a gauge, and other strange stuff.  I have is G2 Gauge / LC-1 Kit P/N 3801  See www.innovativemotorsports.com  These folks are very prompt at replying to technical questions when I e-mail them.

The first task is to install the oxygen sensor bung hole.  The supplied bung hole is steel and it has M18 x 1.5 threads.  My pipes are titanium and I cannot weld steel to ti.  The Arrow pipes have bung holes for the fuel injection system oxygen sensors.  I am not using them and they have M 12 x 1.25 threads.  Innovative makes a special bung hole adapter for motorcycle pipes.  It is Part # 3801 and it has M 12 x 1.25 threads.  I install it and the M 18 x 1.5 bung plug that is supplied with the kit.  The first photo shows the standard bung hole and plug on top and the special item below.  The second picture shows the setup in place.   

   

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 31, 2010, 02:01:13 AM
My wife's family has a saying "The little bird told me to do it" or "it was the bird on my shoulder talking."  No one seems to know exactly where these little sayings came from.  Their best guess is that sometime in Teutonic history a guy was about to get into big trouble.  A little bird flew down and gave him some advice.  The things the bird said saved his butt.

This week I had a bird on each shoulder.  One bird says "You need to unlock the horsepower in that engine.  Buy the carbs.  Use the credit card."  The other bird said "Don't spend the money.  You are broke for all intents and purposes.  Go slow and be happy.  You need to grow up and be responsible."  The birds chirped away and I could not make a decision.  I do not have any common sense on motorcycle matters.  I presented both sides of the issue to my wife.  She said, "Order the things and hurry up. You need to get them on the bike and working before Bonneville."  It did not take me very long to make a decision.

The 35 mm Keihin smooth bores were what I was going to order.  South Bay Triumph said the 39 mm Keihin flat slides would work better for my intended use.  I ordered a set with the billet manifolds and I sent South Bay some info about my engine.  They will prejet the carbs, as best as they can, for running at Bonneville.  These carbs are specially made for Hinckley Bonneville.  The standard throttle cables, air box, and throttle position sensor can be used.  This is more last minute work.             
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: charlie101 on July 31, 2010, 10:48:14 AM
Can I borrow your wife for a while? :-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 01, 2010, 02:02:01 AM
I think I will keep her for awhile. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on August 01, 2010, 11:36:06 PM
The 35 mm Keihin smooth bores were what I was going to order.  South Bay Triumph said the 39 mm Keihin flat slides would work better for my intended use.  I ordered a set with the billet manifolds and I sent South Bay some info about my engine.  They will prejet the carbs, as best as they can, for running at Bonneville.  These carbs are specially made for Hinckley Bonneville.  The standard throttle cables, air box, and throttle position sensor can be used.  This is more last minute work.             

I run the 39FCR's on my Ducati 750GT and My Guzzi 850 GT , I also used to run a single 39FCR on my Benelli Scooter and a pair on my 750 monster. Now if I have project and it needs a carby my choice is easy. Great carbs, easy to setup, and work really well.  Funny really, as I used to work fro the Australian Dellorto Importer
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 03, 2010, 02:22:14 AM
It is nice to hear that these carbs work good.  I am a bit nervous about them.  They might be too big.  They are 1 -1/2 inches diameter, just like the Clubman racing Gold Star carbs, and the Goldie has a big 500cc cylinder, as compared to my little 432cc jugs.  The Gold Star is can be a high strung and difficult bike to ride. 

Copper is an easy material to work and finish.  Lots of shapes are available at the plumber's supply, such as the tubes and end caps that I used to make these two gage housings.  One is the air fuel ratio gage and the other has a LED that tells me if the system is "on."   The button on the little gage is for system calibration.  The gages are low so they will fit inside the race fairing.

Some flat sheet was needed for the brackets and small gage face.  I heated a pipe section to red hot and dropped it into a bucket full of water.  This annealed it.  Then I slit the pipe lengthwise and flattened it out into a sheet.  The handlebar clamps are Drag Specialties DS-302020 Miller's Mirror Clamp for use on 1" OD Tubing.  These clamps are handy when anything needs to be mounted on 1 inch diameter handlebars.  The brackets are attached to the cases with copper rivets from a saddle maker's supply.  Zip ties near the gages clamp the wires to the bar.  This prevents the wires from being pulled out of the gages if the wires are tugged.

The dial gage is a complex instrument.  It has a stepper motor and lots of intricate lighting components.  Bike vibration destroys a lot of gages and I did not want this one to break.  It is rubber mounted so it will last a long time.

 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on August 03, 2010, 02:51:04 AM
It is nice to hear that these carbs work good.  I am a bit nervous about them.  They might be too big.  They are 1 -1/2 inches diameter, just like the Clubman racing Gold Star carbs, and the Goldie has a big 500cc cylinder, as compared to my little 432cc jugs.  The Gold Star is can be a high strung and difficult bike to ride. 

The Benelli was the best example.
It was 432 cc and as it is a scooter, has a centrifugal clutch. This meant that the carb had too work smoothly throughout the rev range
With a small amount of jetting it worked really well, and made a noticeable increase in HP. But it did come standard with a Bing.

I needed to make a gauge housing for my 750GT
While thinking about it , i was in a camping store, looking for a tent, and noticed a whole lot of different size and shape stainless steel cups.
I went back to the car, got the gauge,  back to the shop, tried it in a few different cups, and $5.00 later , really nice gauge housing.
The guy in the shop thought i was some kind of nut case. He was probably right
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Dr Goggles on August 03, 2010, 03:02:36 AM
The guy in the shop thought i was some kind of nut case. He was probably right
G

....hey, he sounds like a smart guy,send me his number we'd probably get along.... :cheers: :-P

BTW Wobbly, that Benelli went like a bullet, I borrowed it once and the Colonel said, "keep both hands on the bars, no, I'm serious....keep both hands on the bars"....A young motocross gun at work laughed at me when I turned up at work on it, I made him ride it to the end of the driveway, he stopped laughing.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 07, 2010, 01:07:33 AM
So many, many things to do ... so little time!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on August 08, 2010, 01:31:08 AM
So many, many things to do ... so little time!

If it wasn't for the last minute, when would anything get done :cheers:
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 08, 2010, 11:42:26 AM
Usually I can avoid the last minute panic.  This is a time when I do not think and reason like I should.  Lately my battery is getting low and it will not start the engine.  I got all upset and was going to do some serious electrical diagnosis.  Triumph electrical parts are very expensive and I was worried.  Then I realized the loud racing pipes are on the bike and I keep the rpm low so I do not make noise and get people mad.  I was not spinning the engine fast enough to keep the battery charged.

Decades ago, I suffered through a few electrical engineering classes.  We built an intricate circuit in the lab and it took us civil engineering guys a week of afternoons to get it to work.  The entire mess of wires, resistors, and other goodies generated different electrical currents and impulses at various output nodes.  The professor OK'ed the circuit and then he said "put this little resistor in the circuit near the ground."  We did, and all of the circuit outputs were wrong.  The prof said something like "That simulates a bad ground.  Always make sure that everything is grounded OK.  Check the grounds first when things do not work."  He had us hook up the meters to the output terminals and then he moved a cord or wire around the circuit.  The cord carried electricity from an independent source and it did not touch the circuit.  The outputs changed.  Something was happening.  I am not sure what it was.  Since then, I always read the instructions very carefully for electronic stuff and I actually do everything they say.  Some of the minor things like grounding, component location on the vehicle, and cable routing seem to be pointless and optional, but they are very important.  There are a lot of instructions with this air / fuel mixture gage and I follow them.

The components share a common ground on the engine block.  Bike engines vibrate and the little wires from the components can fatigue and break at the junction where they connect to the ground lug.  I use a gold plated ground lug and some dielectric grease between the lug, bolt, and block.  This helps to minimize corrosion and the electrical resistance that it creates.  A short piece of copper mesh cable is installed between the little wires and the lug.  This cable flexes when the engine vibrates and it does not fatigue and break as quickly as a direct connection between the lug and the little wires.

Some of these materials are hard to find.  A dab of anti-flux on each side of the wire mesh keeps the solder from being absorbed throughout the entire cable.  The anti flux I use is from Allied Manufacturing in Bozeman, Montana www.alliedmfg.co  A good electronics solder is a big help.  The stuff I use is in the picture.  The mesh cable is Radio Shack desoldering cable.  Most of these goods are stocked in a model train and airplane shop. 
 

 

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 55chevr on August 08, 2010, 11:45:55 AM
I personally detest the "nick of time" struggle but seem to engage in it continuosly ...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 08, 2010, 03:25:29 PM
It is raining in the garage.  A good time to finish the gage posts.

The picture shows the ground on the bike.  A short piece of shrink tubing helps to keep the little wires from flexing where they are soldered onto the mesh.  The sensor is installed and the wires are covered with fuel line insulation where they are close to the cylinders.  This keeps them cooler.

My general philosophy on lake racer wiring is to use the minimum number of connectors, and the connectors that I do use are protected from the salt.  The wires for all components meet under the seat.  The connectors I use are little gold plated soldered on bullet jobs from Great Planes www.electrify.com.  They are very expensive.  They work good and this justifies their cost, although I would like to find more reasonably priced equivalents.  I use a small amount of dialectric grease on the connections.

The wire color coding does not match on the Innovative Motorsports components.  Green wires connect to browns, etc.  I make little tags that remind me how to connect everything together.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 08, 2010, 03:44:34 PM
The last gage post.  The wires are connected and the connectors, tags, etc are stuffed in a plastic bag.  The whole nest is put in a can.  Can choice is important.  This is a British bike so the Prince Albert can is appropriate.  Albert must be English.  Our royalty is Lady GaGa.  It is important to loosely seal the electrics so they are protected from the salt and there is enough air circulation to prevent condensation.

The gages work.  One tells me the indicated fuel-air mixture and the other shows me that the system is in operation.  All gages are prone to problems just like other systems.  I do not rely on them entirely.  I also look at the traditional mixture indicators such as the soot color on the spark plugs and muffler ends, too.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 11, 2010, 01:40:05 AM
We are down to the short strokes now.  Things are coming together at the last minute.  The monster carbs will be here on Friday.  A recent thread discussed the damage caused by salt entering the intakes.  I thought that salt was not abrasive and the scoring and wear on my previous engine was due to grit passing through the oiled gauze filter.  I was wrong, it was salt damage.  It is time for air filtration.

Do I run pod filters or the filter in the airbox?  I used the pod filters in the past because they were easily removed when I wanted to put on the velocity stacks.  I do not need them now.  My experience with air filters on other engines tells me to do these four things.  1)  Use an air box to shield the element from road grit, major dust, water, etc.  2)  Use the biggest filter that is practical.  3)  Locate the filter away from the carb in an air box so it is not subject to pulsing airflow.  4)  Position the element so the filtering surface is vertical.  All of these increase performance and lengthen filter life.  No more pod filters.  I will use the filter in the box.

The air inside that fairing is hot when I race and that is where the standard intake is located.  Cooler air is denser and it will make me go faster.  I estimate the air inside the fairing is around 80 degrees and it is usually about 70 degrees outside.  A graph in Vizard's book on Page 12 tells me the colder air will give me a 1% torque increase.  That is not a lot but I have a severe need for more power.  Now it is time for a cold air intake.

The internal noise baffle is removed from the air box.  The aluminum filter bell mouth is from Norman Hyde in England.  I enlarge the opening 1/16 inch all of the way around.  This gives me 11 percent more opening area.  Now I go down to the plumbing supply and get a rubber adapter for connecting a 3-inch to 4-inch drain pipe.  I cut and file the adapter so it fits on the bellmouth.

I always pause in my projects and say "How can I make this extra safe so nothing falls off onto the salt."  Originally the rubber bell was going to stick out of the rear fairing.  There would be nothing to keep it in place if it came loose from the bell mouth.  I changed the design so that the fairing will keep the rubber bell in place.  The hole in the fairing is smaller than the bell hole.  The last step was to make some bars to keep my leathers from plugging the intake hole.     

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 14, 2010, 01:51:43 AM
My life is a routine now.  I come home from work, take a 15 minute nap, do my chores, eat dinner, and go out and work on the bike, truck, or trailer.  Usually the bike.  About 10:30 I put the tools away, take a shower, check out the Speedweek news, the roadsters, Australian shenanigans, Sumo and Lars latest, and go to bed.  A lesson from my experience.  Concentrate on the engine, only, during the year for big motor work.  Do all of the other stuff like the exhaust, intake, carbs, etc during the next year.

The carbs arrived today just like South Bay Triumph said they would.  Is this Pandora's Box?  It is late in the game and I am tempted to put them on the shelf until next year.  Then I figure that I will learn a lot by using them this year and I had better put them on.  The box has the carbs, intake manifolds, filters, and velocity stacks.  A pretty complete kit.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 15, 2010, 12:21:50 AM
Today I got up early and took the new carbs apart, recorded the jet sizes and needle positions, checked the float levels, and synchronized the slides.  They would not fit with the standard air box so I went back to the foam pod filters.  The bike started once and it runs OK.  I do not have the rear wheel on it so I ran it on the stand.

The bike occasionally starts.  Most of the time the engine turns over and nothing happens.  Eventually the battery goes flat.  Sometimes it backfires.  Twice it has backfired and blown the carbs off of the manifolds.  I cannot find a choke system.  These are Keihin FCR flatslide sidedraft carbs.  Does anyone have advice?   I am too tired to post a photo.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Dr Goggles on August 15, 2010, 07:12:31 AM
  Is this Pandora's Box? 

The bike occasionally starts.  Most of the time the engine turns over and nothing happens.  Eventually the battery goes flat.  Sometimes it backfires.  Twice it has backfired and blown the carbs off of the manifolds.  I cannot find a choke system.  These are Keihin FCR flatslide sidedraft carbs.  Does anyone have advice?   I am too tired to post a photo.

No useful help from me, but thanks for a good solid laugh :-D We've all been there....
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Queeziryder on August 15, 2010, 08:44:51 AM
Today I got up early and took the new carbs apart, recorded the jet sizes and needle positions, checked the float levels, and synchronized the slides.  They would not fit with the standard air box so I went back to the foam pod filters.  The bike started once and it runs OK.  I do not have the rear wheel on it so I ran it on the stand.

The bike occasionally starts.  Most of the time the engine turns over and nothing happens.  Eventually the battery goes flat.  Sometimes it backfires.  Twice it has backfired and blown the carbs off of the manifolds.  I cannot find a choke system.  These are Keihin FCR flatslide sidedraft carbs.  Does anyone have advice?   I am too tired to post a photo.

High WW,
From memory the FCR flatslides do NOT have a choke facility, usually what you do (if their the sort with the accelerator pump) is to flick the throttle a couple of times to get some fuel into the system, then crank it over not touching the throttle until it catches, then hold it on a fast tick over until the engine is warm.

Hope this helps
Neil
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 55chevr on August 15, 2010, 12:34:42 PM
Been awhile since I played with Keihins but If these are CR-s there is no choke or enrichener circuit ... they are racing carburetors and do not need any stinking chokes ... pain in the Acura to start when temp is below 80 ... used to hold palm of hand over stacks to pull fuel in then blip the throttle continuously until engine developes heat ... make sure they are sinc'd or you will pull your hair out.  They will never idle.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 15, 2010, 07:16:45 PM
That 2 quick twists, hit the starter button, and do not open the throttle until the engine fires trick works!  Thanks for the info.  The lambda sensor says the mix is 10:1 at idle.  This thing will idle, sort of, after it is warm.  I remember some funky amal carb from my distant past with a remote float bowl.  On a gold star or a velocette, as I recall.  It would not let the engine idle and I held my hand over the bell mouth to keep the mixture rich for starting.  It took two people to start the bike.  To onlookers, it looked like I had my hand up the rider's arse when he kicked it over.  I was the new young guy and that was the types of jobs I did.

I typed "Keihin CRF hard starting" into a search engine and it appears that many other poor slobs are unfortunate enough to own these things.  This winter I will work out a sure fire way to make them work during a cold start.  Two of my friends from the Triumph club will be my pit crew this year.  We are going to find a roller starter somewhere.  That might help.

Anyone who knows how to put an enrichener or choke on these little heifers, please put on a post or send me a PM.       

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 55chevr on August 16, 2010, 06:25:07 AM
The CR Keihins are excellent high performance carburetors. They were designed for one purpose. Wide open throttle. Everything else is a compromise and wasnt part of the original intention. They are works of art to look at. When I ran them on a Z1 it was a rocket ship. Once you got it started.
Joe
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Dr Goggles on August 16, 2010, 08:06:57 AM
Anyone who knows how to put an enrichener or choke on these little heifers, please put on a post or send me a PM.

get a lid( steel or plastic) that fits over the bellmouth ,cut a disc to fit on top of it , put a small bolt through the middle , cut holes either with a small hole saw or a nibbler....then you'll be able to twist the top to change the open area and give you a choke you can whip off.

five bucks.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: blackslax on August 16, 2010, 08:08:09 AM
The connectors I use are little gold plated soldered on bullet jobs from Great Planes www.electrify.com. 


Is this link correct? It opens to any empty page for me.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on August 16, 2010, 08:16:23 AM
It should be "electrifly.com".
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: blackslax on August 16, 2010, 08:34:39 AM
It should be "electrifly.com".

Thanks pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 17, 2010, 02:53:39 AM
The people who developed these carbs put a lot of work into adapting them to fit a Triumph and they gave me a good deal on them.  The folks at South Bay Triumph have helped me a lot for many years, their parts work good and they always arrive on time.  Honestly, we would not be racing if they did not help.  My negative comments in the last posts about the carbs are from a short tempered and tired guy.  I am actually fortunate to have them.

Tomorrow I will buy a new battery, clean all of the grounds including the coil ground, and verify that the charging system is working OK.  Then I will try the choke trick.  The blipping the throttle method does not always work.  Sometimes it fouls the plug with raw gas.

Thanks for the advice.  I have some time to get this figured out.  The carbs will stay on the bike if I can devise a way to start it.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 18, 2010, 01:53:13 AM
The carb problem was ignored while I worked on the rest of the bike.  The gearing was changed and the back end was taped up.  The fuel flow to the carbs was not good.  The fuel line was kinked and I did not see this.  The kink was hidden by the fireproof cover as shown in the photo.  I put a spring around the fuel line in the kinked area and then I slipped the fireproof cover back on.  It will not kink now.

I always do a quick check of the ignition and charging systems if I have carburetor issues.  This sounds goofy, but experience is the best teacher.  I cleaned the engine ground and the ignition coil ground.  Then I wiped the coil off with a rag so it was clean on the outside and I cleaned the terminals and connectors.  Then I cleaned the fuse terminals and checked the charging system.  Some terminals were corroded.  The Honda shop load tested the battery and said it was good.  I cleaned the solenoid connections and the lug where the starter cable connects onto the starter motor.  Then I cleaned the two bolts that ground the starter motor to the engine block.

The engine started up instantly when I made the charging current test.  I took off the ammeter and it started perfectly again.  The temptation for a short blast around the neighborhood was too tempting.  It was getting dark, the bike is geared for Bonneville, and it has no lights or front brake.  I could not get up to speed but everything feels good.  Life is looking good for the Walrus right now.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Graham in Aus on August 18, 2010, 05:29:24 AM
Hi Wobbly! I'm a real fan of your meticulous analysis of all things mechanical and internal combustion, love the notes and calculations you produce.

So do you think the Carb issue was all down to the kinked fuel line? I for one am pleased things are looking good again! Of course you do realise the problems started when your partner 'pushed the envelope' and 'OK'd' the carb purchase!  :wink:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 20, 2010, 02:29:39 AM
I wish that I knew what I am doing.  The verdict is still out on the carbs.  A bad ground and maybe the kinked line caused trouble.  The bike starts four out of five times now and I am still working on the problem.  These are very good racing carbs if the starting problem is overlooked.  I do not want to give up on them.  These carb issues are minor compared to the tire problems at Speedweek.  Those shredded racing tires are scary.  I sure hope the experts figure out a solution.

The flatslides came with #135 Keihin hex main jets.  I want to have more jets in different sizes so I can rejet as needed on the salt.  I bought a pairs of 128's, 130's, 132's, 138's, 140's and 142's.  The local Honda shop sold me these.  They pulled them out of a plastic box with little compartments just like almost any other bike dealer in America. 

I laid the jets out in pairs in order from smallest to biggest.  Then I got out some saddlemaker's needles.  All sewing shops have some big needles like these.  I slid the jets onto the needle and used my thumb as an indicator of how far up the needle that they slid.  Bigger jets slide further up the needle.

Genuine Keihin jets have a little "K" next to the number and the number is marked on the side.  A pair of these jets had "128" stamped on the ends and no "K."  They slid up the needle farther than the Keihin 130's.  Obviously, they were too big.  They went into the reject pile.  Two jets said "AB142" and they had no "K"s.  They seemed to be the right size.  They slid farther up the needle than the Keihin 140's.  I put them in the good pile.  One jet marked "140RD" slid up the needle as far as a Keihin #142.  It was too big.  Another jet marked "130" was one size too small.  The rejects are shown in the bottom of a photo and the good jets on the top.  This trick was showed to me by a tuner years ago. 

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 55chevr on August 20, 2010, 05:41:10 AM
Have you considered rollers ... they make it a lot easier to start cantankerous bikes ... Joe
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 21, 2010, 02:14:55 AM
Joe, it starts every time now.  I learned the special secret procedure.  Now I can leave it parked with the key in it.  No one except me can start it.  I am going to learn about roller starters at the BUB meet.  Maybe Harbor Freight has one that I can afford.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Bruin on August 24, 2010, 11:55:09 PM
Nice tip with the needle for checking no-name jets. I've run into the same thing with K vs non-K jets. They are rare as hens teeth in our understocked bike shops so STD might have to make doo with some itty bitty drill bits. See ya at BUB.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 25, 2010, 02:26:54 AM
Bruin, we learned the same thing.  The original equipment Keihin jets are the right sizes.  It is the pattern jets made by others that are off.

These folks send me genuine jets with very quick shipment:  PJ Motorsports at PJMOTORSPORTS.com 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 28, 2010, 12:24:55 AM
A few final finishing touches.  I grabbed one trailer wheel and shook it to check for bearing play.  The wheel moved a lot.  One of the U bolts holding the axle to the leaf spring corroded and broke.  Salt termites at work.  It was late and only the hardware store was open.  I bought some rod and made a new u-bolt.  I am very glad that I found this problem in the driveway and not on the way to B-Ville.  Rosie gave me a navy hair cut and beard trim.  Plenty short.  This makes it more comfortable out on the salt.  A couple of braces make the Triumph front fender a lot stronger.  They were added after reading about JimL's experiences at Speedweek.  All done and time for bed.  As Bob Dylan says, "The Titanic sails at dawn."



   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: JimL on August 28, 2010, 01:07:48 AM
Useful learning from KentR today....my handling issue appears to be several things combined.  He gave me some good ideas, and the gist of it is:
1.  Fender needs to be kept off the tire.
2.  Taking out the front engine, and NOT adding ballast up front, lightens up the front end a lot.  This means my rake doesn't really work (making the bike very susceptible to the fender effect).
3.  That front-rear balance issue matters more with the large side area of the fairing (center of pressure is well ahead of the center of mass).  This also makes the bike less stable.

I should have seen this coming, but mistakes are my stock in trade.  Doing the big "hurry up" to get to the salt left me with a compromised ride.  I'll be moving the engine forward, and another battery and water tank as well.  I'm making more heat, per run, than expected.  I'm also taking one battery down pretty hard (those dual SPAL fans can pop a 20A fuse at switch on!)

Have a great ride and keep us posted when you can!
JimL
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 06, 2010, 01:57:57 PM
Last night we got home.  The lawn sprinkler is under the truck.  The BUB staff and volunteers ran a great meet.  My youngest daughter, Gretchen, and me had an enjoyable time.  Definitely, we will be back in 2011.

The fancy lambda meter quit working and I do not know how to read the plugs when I use the racing gas.  Matt Capri was there and I asked him if the #135 main jets that he installed were right for the conditions.  He said that the big NA motors run #140 and #145 jets and the #135's should work fine in my little engine, and if they were off, they would be a little bit rich.  He said "Don't worry.  Just ride it."  He was right.  The jetting was perfect.

My usual method is to run down the middle of the track.  I did this on Tuesday morning on the down and it worked OK up till about 120mph.  Then the bike snaked around.  The front wheel was hunting when it jumped in and out of ruts and the back tire was spinning bad.  There was very little traction.  I kept the throttle on the stop until I thought I was going to crash and then I backed off a bit.  Then I pinned it again.  I went through this procedure a few times.  It was one of the best moments in my life when I got through the traps.  The down was 126+.

It was time to do my annual thinking.  Another run in that goop might be my last.  There was a side wind that morning and almost everybody avoided the downwind track edge.  The good salt would be there, I hoped.  The wind had died down.  It was my lucky day.  I ran the back on the track edge just inside of the markers.  The salt was nice and Bonnie ran straight and hard.  It was a good run.  The back was 129+.

This is the first year for the new motor and it is slightly faster than the old one was after years of fiddling and tuning.  The 130 mph barrier was not crossed.  Maybe next year.

     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 07, 2010, 11:35:51 AM
Land speed racing is in many ways the ultimate test of a builder's ability.  The adverse atmospheric and ground conditions, the remoteness of the speedways, the long distances to be traveled at full throttle- all make it very difficult.  Lars and his Indian Scout had an especially challenging time.  This is his first year on the salt and conditions are completely opposite those of his native Denmark.

Lars had his share of challenges, such as head gasket durability.  He overcame all of this and he made a successful run through the mile.  The bike is fast, it ran in the mid 80's as I recall.  This is much quicker than a standard Scout.  He has done a very good job.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 09, 2010, 01:08:33 AM
Meeting new people is a great thing about land speed racing.  These two fellows are Dave on the left and Louie on the right.  They came down from BC in a ratty old van.  Their bike was this 400 cc Yamaha twin with the Burt Munro handlebars.  Their pit was next to ours.  Their objective was to learn everything they could about LSR.  They got six runs on the little Yamaha before it gave up and broke.  Dave did the riding and Louie was the wrench.  Louie said he will definitely be back next year with his own bike.  Nice people.

A couple of young guys thrashing an innocent little Jap twin.  Sorta like most of us a long time ago.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 09, 2010, 08:19:13 PM
This cute older couple owns a Vincent.  The Vincent owners are unique to motorcycling - it is their commitment to their bikes.  The motorcycles seem to return this affection with good service.  One fellow I talked to a few years ago had his Vincent in his minivan.  He put 400,000 miles on the bike over the years.  Another bloke was my age and he had his Vincent since his teens.  He modified the bike as he went through the phases of his life.  The psychedelic paint job in the 70's, etc.  Some of the bikes have names and are part of the families.  Many are not sold.  Instead, they are passed on through the generations.  These folks are very interesting to talk to if one gets the chance.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on September 10, 2010, 11:30:27 PM
That sounds like Terry Prince with the sidecar
Had his Vincent since his teens
Still has the same leathers! that still fit!
Really clever guy and a really nice guy to talk to as well

I've still got the CB1100 I bought when I was in my twenties, not quite the same thing
And my younger brother recently gave me back the jacket my gave me when I turned 17
I can't even get my arms in it
G

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 11, 2010, 02:08:36 AM
My old leathers are too small, too.  It is strange how cowhide shrinks.  The guy I talked to that had the bike forever was not Terry and he had a solo.  I wish I could remember his name.  A red Rapide will go on auction soon in Las vegas.  The auctioneer's estimates are US$80,000 to US$100,000, as I remember.  The Rapide is the basic model Vincent.  That is serious money for an old bike.

It was my first day of my rookie year.  Everything was going wrong.  Speed wobbles, etc.  I was a scared little puppy.  Golf was looking good.  That night while I sat near the campfire a racer asked me how I was doing.  I told him what was happening.  He carefully explained to me what to do so things would work.  The next day he watched me and gave me more help.  That fellow is Curtis in the photo with his Buell Blast.

Most of us like to race.  Curtis lives to ride at Bonneville.  He has some health issues and his love of the salt keeps him alive.  Every year he shows up to ride in the Run-Watcha-Brung class with his NOS powered Blast.  He goes faster every year in his quest for 100 mph.  Now he is up to 94 mph.  That is as fast as it will go this year, according to Curtis.  He hopes to make it quicker during the off-season.  Almost everyone goes faster than Curtis, but few have more fun. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 12, 2010, 11:28:17 PM
Motorcycle racers generally fall into three categories.  One bunch has lots of talent and luck.  They can do something for the first time and everything goes great.  Another group has lots of time or money and fewer skills.  They can get good results from trial and error.  The remainder do not have the funds or hours for trial and error and they are not rocket scientists.  They need professional help.

I am one of those who cannot do it alone.  When I started land speed racing it was many years since I built bikes and engines.  The internet was new and wonderful.  Computers were not around earlier.  I could order all sorts of things with a few mouse clicks.  I did this and a lot of the things I ordered worked OK.  Some very expensive things did not.  This bothered me.  This LSR is serious business and inferior parts and assembly could cost me a record, injure me, or worse.  It was time to use the old fashion method.  I needed to find a speed shop that did LSR.

The gentleman in the photo is Matt Capri, the owner of South Bay Triumph in Lomita, California.  He developed most of the engine parts that I use.  He helps me a lot, and of course, I pay him for the parts and work.  This is his business.  The motorcycle to the right is the Turbo  Bike.  It is a Bonneville just like mine that runs a blower.  Matt and the bike hold several records and the engine has about 100 hours on it of racing and dyno testing.  There are all sorts of Turbo Bike developed parts on my cycle, especially in the lower end.  As I figure, if the Matt cannot break them on the Turbo Bike, I cannot break them, either.

The folks around us in these meets are all special in their own ways and they make our experiences richer and fuller.  These people have done this for me. 



Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 13, 2010, 11:53:52 PM
The Bonneville is back on the road in street trim.  It is time to enjoy these last few dry days before the rains.  A nice ride in the hill country after work.  Life is good.

Modern finances allow a person to go beyond broke and this will be a Burt Munro year.  Maximum speed with minimal financial is the theme.  The streamlining will be streamlined, the intake and exhaust systems will be tuned to the cams, and the black box will be reprogrammed to give more spark advance. A new helmet, too, to meet the 2010 certifications.  That is all.  Most of this I can do myself.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bak189 on September 14, 2010, 01:25:32 AM
Matt Capri, used my welding equipment 2 times to weld his header pipe..........both times I did NOT get even a
"thank you for the use of your welder".........................................................................................

Not a problem.......just remember Matt to bring your own welding equipment.......because mine will not be available to you... 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 15, 2010, 12:32:15 AM
The bike would barely run with baffles in the Arrow pipes and the original equipment Keihin CV carbs.  The lambda meter would read very rich and raw gasoline would drip from the air filters.  I figured that pressure waves were bouncing off of the baffles and they were going backwards through the exhaust system and they were blowing the fuel air mixture back out through the carbs.  This would be reversion.

I took off the stock manifolds when I installed the Keihin flat slides.  South Bay makes billet manifolds for the big carbs.  I looked at the intake valves and they were shiny silvery bare metal.  There were no carbon stains from reversion.

The bike in the photo is running great on the street with the flatslides and baffles in the Arrow pipes.  The idle is a bit rich.  I need to have it this way so it will start.  There is no choke or enrichener.  No signs of reversion.  The baffles do not adversely affect these carbs.  The reasons for this are a mystery to me.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 16, 2010, 02:10:42 AM
Photographs can tell us how we can improve.  I need to tuck down lower as seen in this photo by Ray the Rat.  I like to look through the windshield with an occasional peek over the top to make sure I am on course.  The first project for the off season will be to lower the windshield.  This will allow me to tuck down lower.  Both drag coefficient and frontal area will be reduced.  This will help the aerodynamics.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 24, 2010, 12:11:46 AM
Hammer and torch work on sheet metal is occupying me now.  Nothing interesting enough to post.  Some thoughts about what I have done.

Decades ago I was a line mechanic in a bike shop.  The guys in this place did some dirt track racing and they occasionally would build a frame, swingarm, etc.  People did this in those days.  They had a frame with plates to mount the engine.  They could put different engines in the bike and they could move the engine forwards or backwards.  Plates were welded on the frame for the swingarm pivot.  They could position the pivot in different locations.  The upper and lower shock mounts were done the same way.  Lots of holes.  They could move the shocks around to find the best settings.

These fellows had this ugly bike and a nice race bike.  They tested things on the ugly bike in the local races and they figured out the best settings for the race bike.  The nice bike was raced in more significant events.  I never went to the races with them.  They were building the rapid transit system behind the shop and there was a long stretch of vacant land.  There were hard packed "grooves" and soft "cushions" on the dirt trails across this property.  I learned a lot by listening to them and riding around there.  I should have spent more time with them.

One big lesson I learned was the ability to move the engine in the frame is a good thing.  A forward mounted engine works best when the surface is hard and traction is good.  The added weight keeps the front wheel down and it gives more control during acceleration.  In dirt track a person wants to spin the tire a bit and the forward engine position lightens up the rear.  This is a help when traction is good.  The opposite occurs when things are softer and slippery.  A lighter front end tends to track better and to not knife into the surface and the added weight on the back gives more traction.  The engine moved to the rear helps in these conditions.  Moving the footpegs can make a difference, too.

The Triumph can be a handful on soft salt like we had in the middle of the track this year and in 2007.  The streamlining adds weight to the front and there is that skinny 19-inch diameter front tire.  It tends to knife into the soft stuff and follow ruts.  Also, there was some rear tire spinning this year.  I have a hard time believing this.  The bike has only 75 horsepower, but it did spin the tire on the down run this year.

There are things I have been doing, and changes I will be making, to cure the problem.  I need to get the weight distribution rearward.  Unfortunately, I cannot move the engine.  The engine is an integral part of the frame like a Vincent, and it will always be where it has always been.  Someday, if I build a frame for this engine, I will make sure to have some adjustability in how I locate the motor.  I will set it forward when I run naked and back when I run with the armor.  This will keep the center of gravity where it should be.     

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 26, 2010, 03:00:40 PM
The last post talked about the ability to adjust things.  This is useful when a person does not get everything positioned right the first time, the track conditions demand a different setup, or the vehicle will be run in different configurations, i.e. partially streamlined or naked.

These Triumphs are heavy bikes with short wheelbase and little steering trail.  This gives them the quick handling on the street that modern riders desire.  This is not good for LSR.  The streamlining adds some forward weight and handling at speed is snakey and touchy.  A fellow is either just short of a speed wobble or in one.  I had two choices based on my 2007 experiences.  Either bring several changes of underwear or fix the handling.

A fellow who knows from experience tells me the swing arm needs to be lengthened 3 inches to calm things down and to prevent a weave at speeds of 150 mph or more.  He runs a naked bike and he has less weight on the front wheel than me.  A longer swing arm will put more weight on the front wheel and I do not want to fix one problem and make another worse.  I decide to lengthen the swing arm 1.5 inches.  This will be a compromise that will help stability and not add a lot of weight to the front wheel.

The Triumph swing arm has forgings on the ends with the shock mounts and chain adjusters.  I do not know how to extend the adjustment slots on the forgings.  I buy a used swing arm and take it to the machine shop and they add sections to the middle of the chain gaurd and swing arm.  I buy a longer chain and brake line and custom made longer shocks.  IKON in Australia made the shocks.

Now I am ready to go.  I have a long wheel base setup and that is the way I build it before I leave.  It will give me better handling at high speeds.  The disadvantage is less weight on the back wheel.  This should not be a problem.  High speeds are obtained on hard salt and traction is no problem for a low power guy like me.  I also have the shorter standard shocks, swing arm, chain, etc. in the truck.  I can change back to these if the salt is soft and slippery and I need more weight on the back wheel.  The short stuff is carefully packed in a box and put in my truck.

A brilliant plan, except for one thing.  There is the big thrash before leaving, the packing, all of the driving, etc.  I get to the salt and I get the pre-run logistics done.  There are children with me and they require attention.  I am slightly tired and fried.  The last thing I want to do is work on the bike.  Racing and socializing with folks I have been away from for a year, meeting people, and watching everything that happens, this is what I want to do.  No short arm installation even though it will help me go faster.  I run whats I bring.

In hindsight, it would be best if I had a custom swing arm built with long adjusting slots.  I could easily play around with different wheelbase settings while I was on the salt.  Simply moving the wheel and changing the chain.  No big deal.  Easy adjustments are the ones that are done in the field.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Queeziryder on September 26, 2010, 03:21:54 PM
Hi WW,
A friend of mine running a street based drag bike had adjusters which when flipped, meant he could go from 1.5" under to 8" over stock.
It was fabricated by a Co on the UK called NWS, now back under the Harris Bro's wings (they make chassis for MotoGP WSB etc)

If I can find a decent pic or two I'll send them over to you...

Neil
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 01, 2010, 01:29:46 AM
Thanks for the adjuster info.  Some pix would be help me.     

Steering trail gives a bike stability and my bike did not have enough.  The front suspension would compress during the shutdown and the rake angle would steepen.  This reduced the trail and it was speed wobble time.  There were several things I did to reduce this tendency.  One was to lighten the fairing and the front end of the bike and to install heavier fork springs.  This reduced the dive and the fork angle change.  A radial front tire, more sag in the rear suspension, and a gentle shutdown helped, too.  All of these made things better but I needed to do more.  The fork triple clamps were real flexy.  Stronger triple clamps seemed like a good idea.

I ordered a set of triple clamps off of the internet.  They were Harley flattracker clamps adapted to fit a Triumph.  They looked good in the internet picture and in my imagination, until I opened up the box.  They were weak.  Far too weak for LSR.  I was putting them back in the box before sending them back and I hesitated.  These clamps had inserts that I could replace to adjust the steering trail.  The clamps could teach me something.  I could use them to find the correct trail to wheelbase ratio for stability.  Sure, it would cost me a lot of money.  The bike was scaring me badly and spending a grand or more to figure out a solution was money I had to spend.  My racing program could not move ahead unless the bike was stable.

It was a lot of work, those clamps.  I had to remake the steering stem so it was strong enough.  Then I had to make stops so the fork tubes would not dent the tank.  What a pain in the donkey.  I ordered inserts to set the fork tube offset at three 7 mm increments.  The bike was so twitchy it was almost impossible to ride over 45 mph with the tubes at maximum offset.  The bike handled quick like a road racer with the offset in the middle setting.  Things were stable with minimum offset.  An eight percent trail to wheelbase ratio was perfect.  I gave the clamps to a friend with a sidecar.  They would help him.  I calculated the offset I would need to get eight percent with the longer swingarm and I made a set of nice solid aluminum clamps.  Problem solved.

The message in all of this?  Sometimes it is necessary to go through an intermediate step between where a person is and where they want to be.  Often parts are bought and made that will not be on the final product.  None of us like to do this and it seems like effort and money wasted.  It is the cost of business when a person develops and builds their own stuff. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 02, 2010, 02:06:11 AM
The Triumph ran 126.284 down and 129.504 back this year.  This is with the new motor build, soft salt, and I was not riding at my best.  Last year the bike ran 127.143 down and 123.490 back with the old motor build, hard salt, and me riding as good as I ever do.  The new engine is slightly better and I need to work on it so it will go as fast as it can.

The first step is to determine where I am with mixture, torque, and power.  This information will help me make informed decisions and a trip to the dyno is in order.  The bike is prepared.  Parts are swapped and adjusted so the chain, sprockets, tire and tire pressure are the same as those used in the previous dyno run.  The tank is filled with fresh unleaded non-ethanol premium.  This is my reference gas.  I always use the same type , brand, and gasoline station for the dyno work fuel.  All of this "sameness" helps me to evaluate the items that are different between the new and old setups.  The changes are the carbs and filters.  The old setup was the new engine build with original eqiupment Keihin 36 mm CV carbs and short velocity stacks.  The new setup is the same except the carbs are Keihin 39 mm flatslides with foam uni-filters.

Mixture is looked at first.  The bike is hooked up to the dyno and the first pull is made.  This is the blue mixture curve on the attached.  The mixture curve starts at the lower right corner at about 10.2 to 1.  This is very rich and the mixture is fat so the bike will start with a cold engine.  There is no choke or enricher circuit on these racing carbs.  There is funkiness in the curve between idle and 5,000 rpm.  I see this and I ask for two more pulls.  The 2nd pull is the red line and the third is the green line.  The scatter among the curves below 5,000 rpm tells me that the accelerator pump is confusing matters.  Above 5,000 rpm the pump has less influence and the curves are very consistent and close to each other.

These three curves give me the info I need to start jetting the carbs.  The typical quick dyno pulls do not work all that well for telling me the mixture below 5,000 rpm.  I will ride the bike with the lambda meter in operation and I will use the mixture gauge to set the jetting below 5,000 rpm.  The mixture will be set for street use.  This will not hurt me when I am on the salt.  I do not ride at lower rpm and smaller throttle settings at B'ville.  The mixture above 5,000 rpm will be set using the dyno.  The bike is really moving at full throttle above 5,000 rpm and I should not look down on a silly little gauge.  I need to watch where I am going.  The mixture above 5,000 rpm will be set for Bonneville.  This will be no problem on the street.  I do not use full throttle and high rpm on the road.

The next post will address setting the mixture for Bonneville.



 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on October 02, 2010, 02:56:41 AM
If I were to pick a fuel for running a baseline, the last thing I would use would be a pump gasoline. While the fuel in the pump may meet the octane rating on the label anything else may be varied depending on the season, what components were available at the time to make the blend, and what components were available to allow the greatest profit margin for the producer. This does not lead to an accurate baseline.

On the other hand racing blends are made consistently from the same components so that you have a truly accurate base line to work from. Racing gas does not have to be made to allow for seasonal variations and the price is high enough that they can use the same components consistently from batch to batch.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 05, 2010, 01:30:29 AM
You are right, Peter.  I get by with pump gas because I have a mildly tuned engine and it is amazingly tolerant of fuel quality.  A true high performance engine is less tolerant and race gas is the correct thing to use.  This post is modified to recommend race gas instead of pump.  This is how I use reference gasoline and a dyno to tune the mixture for Bonneville.

Step 1)  The bike is filled with reference gas and put on a dyno.  A good fresh racing gas is best.  Always us the same type.  In my case the dyno is at elevation 150 feet, more or less.  Bonneville is at a much higher elevation and a lean mixture near sea level will be a richer mixture on the salt.  I make a good guess based on the altitude difference and assuming the racing gas has a higher oxygen content than the pump gas I am using.  The mixture is set at 13.5 to 1.  See 2007 curve on attached.

Step 2)  The bike is run on the salt.  I check some mixture indicators.  There are many and my preferences are the exhaust header pipe color, piston crown color, and how the engine sounds and feels under acceleration and at full throttle.  In this case the pipes are blue four to six inches beyond the header clamps, the pistons are a nice nipple brown, there is no misfiring, and the bike runs clean.

Step 3)  The mixture is adjusted as needed on the salt to get it right.  I did not need to do this.

Step 4)  The bike is filled with reference gas and put on the dyno.  The mixture is recorded.  The mixture trace from Step 1, if the initial guess is right, or the mixture trace from Step 4, if the mixture was adjusted on the salt, is the basis for the target mixture.

Step 5)  The engine parts are examined during tear down to make sure these mixture assumptions are correct.

The head was ported in 2008 and larger intake valves were installed.  Before we left for the salt, the bike was filled with reference gas, put on a dyno, and the mixture set as close as possible to 13.5 to 1.  About 14 to 1 was the best we could do.  See the 2008 curve on the attached.  The bike ran great and the indicators showed a good mixture.  Based on this, I reset the target mixture at 14 to 1.

This year I set the mixture at 14 to 1 on the dyno with the new build and the old CV carbs.  Then I switched to flat slide carbs, guessed at the jetting, and ran the bike on the salt.  It ran OK, but the pipes showed more color than I like and the engine did not pull hard.  The bike was filled with reference gas when we got home and it was put on a dyno.  The mixture trace shows that the mixture was lean.  See the 2010 curve.  In hindsight, before I left for the salt I should have filled the tank with reference gas, put the bike on a dyno, and set the mixture to my 14 to 1 target.  It is likely I would have had a richer mixture and few more horsepower if I would have done this.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 09, 2010, 06:00:23 PM
Qualitative test results give us a picture of trends and cause and effect.  "Changes in quality" are the keywords.  In other words, if "A" is changed this happens to "B."  Quantitative tests show us changes in quality just like qualitative tests.  They also give us accurate measurements, too.  "Changes in quality and quantity" are keywords.  Quantitative tests are more rigorous than qualitative tests, as a general rule.  They are also more expensive.

This dyno session is a low budget quicky and all I want to do is get some rough quantitative results and qualitative trends.  This will help me determine what happened during my last visit to the salt and the best things to do this winter.

The mixture trace is shown in the previous post. It is a lean mix for the street with pump gas and it likely was also a lean mix at Bonneville with the MULB unleaded.  It cost me some mph and it did not hurt the engine.  I look at the pistons crowns and everything seems to be OK.  One size bigger main jets will be installed to richen up the mixture.

The bike is set up with the same rear tire, tire pressure, chain, and sprockets as during the previous 15 July dyno test.  The gasoline is from the same pump at the same station.  This gasoline might not be exactly the same as the gas I used previously.  In the future I will use racing gas for the dyno tests.  It is more consistent in quality and the results of the different dyno sessions can be better compared with each other.

Two torque curves are shown on the attached.  One is for the original constant velocity carbs with open velocity stacks and a fuel mixture that varied from 14:1 to 15:1.  This is my old setup.  The other curve is for the new flatslides with lightly oiled foam pod filters and a mixture that varied from 14.5:1 to 16:1.  The mixture got leaner as the rpm's rose.  This is my new setup.  Note that there are two significant variables here that can affect torque - carb setup and mixture.  This can be no better than a qualitative comparison because of this.

A quanitative comparison can be attempted.  The flatslides will need to be rejetted to have a fuel air ratio similar to the CVK's.  This will reduce the comparison to one significant variable.  This more accurate test will tell me how much better the flatslides are.

The qualitative results are all I need and my budget can afford.  They tell me the flatslides are not costing me power. They also show me that I need to move the torque peak higher on the rpm scale.  The torque characteristics are great for the street.  They are not optimal for LSR and I need to do more work.. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 11, 2010, 01:00:14 AM
The last task in the dyno session is to take off the pod filters and to put on short velocity stacks.  The stacks bias the torque curve to higher rpm as seen in the attached.  This happened with the old 790cc build, too.  The bike produces 74 horsepower during this pull.  This is the most it has ever made.  Some richer jetting will give it a few more ponies.

The pulls with the pod filters and the stacks are done one after another.  The only change is unbolting one component and bolting on another.  There is only one variable.  This give me a quantitative comparison.

This is one of the leanest years we have had in a long time, budget wise.  Cheapest modifications come first.  A little plenum chamber will be made to house the open stacks with the air filters attached to the plenum.  Some reverse cone meggas will be made to bias the power curve further toward the higher engine speeds.  Cost is negligible.  There is all sorts of sheet metal around here.

There is a chance the horsepower cannot be significantly increased by stacks and pipes.  Some bigger valves are needed if this occurs.

   

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 14, 2010, 11:35:17 PM
Is there a difference in the amount of volatiles in typical winter and summer blend gasolines?  The volatiles that I am talking about help the engine to start from cold without fouling the plug.  Is there anything to add to gasoline to aid in winter starting?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 1212FBGS on October 15, 2010, 01:21:33 AM
yes there is...... and the fuel can change from week to week.....  you should really stop tuning on inconsistent pump fuels.... it has fuel injection cleaners and all kinds of useless crap.... start using ERC.... call Rick and get him to send ya some..... Oh, target yer AF around 13.2, slow revving 4strokes like it around there
Kent
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 16, 2010, 12:02:31 AM
Thanks, Kent.  You are absolutely correct if this was a race bike.  This is my transportation and I am trying to keep the flatslides on it through the winter so I can build a plenum chamber and megaphones.  Race gas was used for racing, only, in the past.  Now I will use it for the dyno tuning and racing.  Pump gas is what I use on the street.  Cost and convenience make it a good choice. 

Last week I got a bad batch of gas.  This would be no problem with the standard carbs but the bike is hard to start with the flatslides.  Occasionally I foul the plugs before the engine starts.  I am wondering if this bad gas is an isolated incident or if it is typical of a winter blend.  In Oregon we do have winter blends.  Some law makes this a reality.  Also, I am looking for a way to increase the volatiles if I get a really bad tank of gas.

Lack of flammability is the issue.  Octane, or lack of, is no problem.  This bike will not "ping" on the lousiest gasoline I can find, even with the high compression pistons.  Any help is appreciated.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Queeziryder on October 16, 2010, 02:07:05 PM
Hi WW,
Sorry for taking so long to get back to you :-(
Firstly I can't find any decent pic's of the swing arm conversion on my friends bike, but I will try to do you a sketch, and if you PM me, I'll send it by email...
Secondly if you can get it in the US, you can possibly add Tetra Ethyl Lead (TEL) to your unleaded to bring it back to a high octane leaded fuel, this is what we do occaisonally to one of my dads bike which is a hot Norton single running 12:1 on the road.

HTH
Neil
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: charlie101 on October 16, 2010, 10:36:28 PM
Well, I have antisocial behaviour issues in spades and am a little bit challenged on the IQ scale :?, so I haven't got that much to spare for handling the highly toxic TEL concentrates myself as it seems a source for diminishing IQ. (read the TOXIC chapter here) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetraethyllead
And I don't even care about children! On the other hand, I wouldn't know where to aquire a jar of that as it isn't for sale or the amount that is needed for bumping a specific octane a certain level, blast, I'm not certain if TEL is the only additive that is needed for that task.
The additives that is commonly available, in my neighburhoods anyway, and that I put in my gas is either sodium or natrium salts. And from what I belive, those doesn't do squat for bumping any octanes but down perhaps. Well, maybe the salts absorb some heat (slowly). Anyhow, I need my additive to prevent micro welding of valve and valve seats and ping I have to manage with comb.area shape and timing cam and spark. Turbo or blower engines regulary run high effective compression on lead free.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 17, 2010, 12:58:56 AM
My problem is the exact opposite.  I do not need more octane.  The gasoline ethanol blends we have here are sometimes hard to ignite in cold weather unless the mixture ratio is just right.  The Keihin flatslides do not have an enricher circuit.  I flood the carbs with a twist of the throttle, using the accelerator pump, then I start the engine.  Nine out of ten time this works.  The time when it does not is a pain.  I am trying to find an additive that will increase the light ends in the gasahol and make it easier to ignite in cold weather.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: charlie101 on October 17, 2010, 01:58:24 AM
From what I read, the companys use aceton to get the alcohol more volatile, maybe they need to accumulate some more profit before they can put enough of that in, or the gas is from last years winter season and have evaporated the good kick starting stuff? There's always a good whiff of ether, that can get almost any cranky jalopy as yours going. :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 18, 2010, 12:01:22 AM
Thanks, Charlie.  I have a gallon of acetone laying around after a recent painting project.  Now I have a use for it.  A couple of ounces of acetone per tankful is not much of a quantity and the gallon should last me all winter.

There are some stations here that pump premium grade unleaded non-ethanol gas into street vehicles.  I just learned about this.  Now I need to find one of these stations for my winter fuel.  The premium gas costs a bit more but I also get better mileage.  The added cost is not that great because of this.

It looks like I have a couple of solutions to my problem.  Life is good.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on October 18, 2010, 03:38:36 AM
Secondly if you can get it in the US, you can possibly add Tetra Ethyl Lead (TEL) to your unleaded to bring it back to a high octane leaded fuel, this is what we do occaisonally to one of my dads bike which is a hot Norton single running 12:1 on the road.
HTH
Neil

I've got a tin, yes tin, of TEL here somewhere. It's as heavy as ....
I'm not sure how I would go trying to post it
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 19, 2010, 12:25:18 AM
Thanks for the offer, Grumm.  Things around this household are goofy enough now.  Mild lead fume induced brain damage is the last thing we need.

     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 26, 2010, 01:22:15 AM
The climate data from www.airdensityonline.com is intriguing.  I am using it to calculate at Bonneville vs standard condition SAE dyno horsepower with free on-line calculators.  I am a lazy and cheap bastid.  Typical input is ambient or absolute pressure, temperature, relative humidity, and altitude.  I always enter the ambient (uncorrected) pressure in the calculators that ask for altitude.  I enter the absolute (corrected) values in the calculators that do not ask for altitude.

Unfortunately, the answers these calculators give are conflicting and sometimes goofy.  Does anyone have an on-line calculator they trust?  Better yet, does anyone have the crazy old style paper charts.  Can I get copies? 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on October 26, 2010, 10:00:38 PM
Wobbly,
The “crazy old-style paper chart” is more often called a “psychrometric chart” and you will find a plethora of information on the web if you Google it.  An actual paper one is often featured in the back of thermodynamics text books, so you may want to drop by a local college used book store and take a look.  Finding one will, however, be easier than using it!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 27, 2010, 01:31:19 AM
Thanks, I will find one.  I hope I can remember how to use it.  My goal is to do some quick checks to verify the on-line calculator I use is reasonable.

Years ago the AMA put minimum weight limits on motocross bikes.  One day I was at a race and there were factory Yamaha racers there.  I asked a fellow "Why are you continuing to use all of these expensive special parts to make the bikes lighter?  They are already well below the minimum weight limit."  His reply "We add ballast to bring the weight up to the minimum.  We locate the ballast where the weight is least detrimental to handling."  Careful observation showed me the ideal place to locate the ballast was near the motocross bike center of mass.  The pros, especially the BSA team, tried to locate all heavy things as close to the center of the bike as possible, too.  Years later the Japanese would act like they invented this concept.  They called it mass centralization.

The Triumph was a handful to ride on soft and rutted salt.  The front wheel hunted from rut to rut and the bike wobbled a lot.  Mass centralization and general lightening is an ongoing process and it is making a big difference for the better.  The wobbles of old are wiggles now.  Weight can be a good thing for a LSR bike, and I will add ballast as needed where it will help traction and not hurt handling.

The lower part of the fairing was redone last year and now it is time for the upper half.  The bike had a frame for a headlight.  I do not use the fairing on the street anymore and the frame is removed.  In the past I used 0.025 sheet aluminum for the pieces where stiffness was needed and 0.020 sheet for the thinner parts.  This was a good idea for the knockabout life of a street bike fairing.  Now I use 0.020 for the stiffer pieces and 0.015 for the majority.  All of these changes remove weight that was high and up front.  This greatly helps the handling.

The thinner 0.015 thick aluminum is hard to find in sheets.  I use roll flashing from a roofer supply.  The temper is a bit soft.  It hardens up when it is hammered.  Sometimes I need to make a part with a lot of curvature.  In this case I cut metal from the roll, hammer it, anneal it with a torch, hammer it some more, and the process is repeated as needed.  The torch annealing must be done with care.  It is easy to melt the thin sheet.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 28, 2010, 12:07:03 AM
These are the specifics about the problems I am having with on-line density calcs.  I logged onto www.airdensityonline.com  Bonneville data is:

temp = 37.0 degrees fahrenheit
corrected baro = 30.38 in Hg
52% relative humidity
uncorrected baro = 26.06 in Hg
elev = 4212.6 feet

A "tit stiffener" is what we call this weather.

Input into the on-line calculator at http://wahiduddin.net/calc/calc_hp_abs.htm or http://www.anycalculator.com/enginehorsepower.htm (they are the same)

air temp = 37.0 degrees Fahrenheit
absolute pressure = 30.38 in Hg (corrected baro used)
relative humidity = 52 percent

Output is:

SAE relative horsepower = 109.1 percent
dyno correction factor is 0.917
air density = 1.297 kilos per cubic meter
density altitude = -1965 feet
ICAO relative density = 105.9 percent
virtual temperature = 37.7 degrees fahrenheit
vapor pressure = 0.115 in Hg

Input into the on-line calculator at www.csgnetwork.com/relhumhpcalc.html is:

current air temp = 37.0 degrees Fahrenheit
ambient barometric pressure = 26.06 in Hg (uncorrected pressure used)
ambient relative humidity = 52 percent
physical or pressure altitude = 4212.6 feet

Output is:

calculated relative horsepower to rated = 75.8 percent
calculated dynomometer correction factor = 1.320
calculated air pressure = 22.24 in Hg
calculated vapor pressure = 0.114 in Hg

Big differences in answers.  Any ideas?



   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on October 28, 2010, 09:08:37 AM
The csgnetwork write-up calls for using corrected pressure.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 28, 2010, 11:15:33 PM
Tonight, the pressure readings are reversed.  The uncorrected 26.06 in Hg is used as the "Absolute Pressure" in the www.anycalculator... calculator.  The corrected 30.38 in Hg is used as the "Ambient Barometric Pressure" in the www.csgnetwork... calculator.  Both calculators give me the same result, a 1.100 dyno correction factor

The word "Ambient" on the www.csgnetwork... calculator input button is misleading.  It should be "Corrected to sea level."

This will be my rule of thumb.  "The calculator needs altitude, temperature, and relative humidity if it is asking for corrected to sea level atmospheric pressure.  The calculator needs temperature and relative humidity, only, if it asks for station or absolute pressure."

Thanks, Interested Bystander, for the advice.



   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 01, 2010, 12:18:58 AM
The engine and carb combination I ran this year was new and unknown.  It went on the dyno just after I got back and the results are posted earlier.  I do not know the engine rpm through the runs.  I got a peek at it during the first run and it was somewhere between 7,000 and 8,000 rpm.  I also remember how the bike felt.  There was all sorts of wiggling and wheelspin during the first run.  The wheelspin was managed.  I would back off of the throttle, the bike would hook up, and I would open it up again.  The bike was steady with no excess spin during the second run.

The speeds and other data are entered into the rpm vs speed chart.  Slip factors are assumed based on what I felt and it makes sense based on my peek at the tach.  These calculated rpm will be used with the dyno chart to figure out what happened during each run.

A comment about this procedure.  These slip factors are based on the few times during the years when I read the tach through runs.  I was able to backcalculate some slip factors using the speed and rpm data.  I remember what I felt at those times.  The slip factors vs feels on the bottom of the chart were figured out.  This is a Mickey Mouse method.  It is much better to use a data logger to record the actual rpm.   

 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stan Back on November 01, 2010, 04:14:59 PM
"Thanks, Interested Bystander, for the advice."

You mean Interested Observer -- Bystander might not be real helpful in that.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 02, 2010, 02:04:13 AM
Thanks for pointing this out, Stan.  And the help is appreciated, Mr Observer.

The dyno curves for torque and horsepower are plotted along with vertical lines that represent the down and back runs.  The engine speeds are estimates from the RPM vs Speed Chart.  This is a reconstruction of this year's runs and it gives me the info I need to go faster next year.

Many posts ago, at the beginning of the engine tuning, I mentioned 7,500 as my target rpm.  This is the engine speed I want to have at full throttle through the measured miles.  It is a compromise that gives me reasonable performance and affordable engine life.  I was running right at my target rpm.  Any more speed will cause the rpm to increase above the target and it will shorten engine life or worse.  Task 1 will be to have 40 and 41 tooth rear sprockets cut.  This will allow me to go faster at reasonable rpm.

The run curves also show that my torque is dropping off rapidly when I reach maximum speed.  Also, I am past my horsepower peak.  I need to move my torque peak closer to 7,500 rpm.  Not much, about 500 to 700 rpm closer would be great.  I need to be careful here.  I need a broad spread of torque, with midrange torque to get me to top speed and high end torque to make good power when I get there.  Some intake and exhaust tuning will do the trick.  These are Tasks 2 and 3.

These run curves also show me the limits I have.  Maybe, with hard work, some help, and luck, I can get the horsepower into the mid to high 70's.  That is not much.  Very little, really.  I need to work hard on aero.  That is Task 4.  Lots to do.  Fortunately none of this is really expensive. 

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on November 03, 2010, 08:43:42 AM
In support of near-namesake Interested Bystander, he, as an admitted “reader”, could have done just as well since it was just a matter of reading through the documentation.  Wobbly was looking for bark beetles and had forgotten which forest he was in.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 04, 2010, 02:09:34 AM
This year was the biggest race of my life and it was time to be prepared.  So I brought all sorts of wrong size sprockets, left most of my tools and spares on the workbench at home, and I did not have dyno curves for this year's engine.  It was a triple crown of dumbness.  Usually I am prepared and this is what I do.

First, I estimate the engine and wheel sprockets that will work best.  Then I make a run through the measured mile.  Now I have a time slip with a speed.

Second, I do my best to estimate the engine rpm.  A record from a data logger is best.  Visual tachometer readings are second best.  Calculating the rpm based on estimates of slip and the "RPM vs Speed Chart" is a last resort.  I always have the chart, just in case that I will need it.  Now I plot up that first run's rpm on the dyno curves for the engine, as shown on the "2010 Run Curves."  This tells me the engine's torque output during the run.

Third, I calculate the driving force at the rear wheel contact patch using the speed on the time slip and and the corresponding engine torque.  See attached "Driving Force" paper.

Fourth, I calculate the driving force at the speed on the time slip with the gearing change.  This could be a sprocket or tire change.  The proposed change is justified if it significantly increases the driving force.  An example will be posted tomorrow.

Most of my formulae have multipliers and these are for my bike, only.  They make it easier for me to calculations on the salt with a pencil and paper.  The RPM formula on the "RPM vs Speed Chart" has a multiplier of 1976.  The "Long RPM vs Speed" attachment to an April 2010 post shows the full formula without the multiplier.  The "Driving Force" formula has a 44.9 multiplier and the full formula is shown on the sheet, too.  A person wanting to use these methods needs to calculate their own multipliers.  Also, I do not correct the torque to Bonneville weather and climate conditions when I am making simple comparisons.  The correction factor, when I use it, is 86 percent.  In other words, torque and horsepower at Bonneville is 86 percent of what we measure on the dyno in Beaverton.   



 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on November 04, 2010, 02:46:02 PM
WW,
86% seems to be a good number.
I have been using it for jetting [I'm at sea level] ever since Leroy Newmeyer told me to adjust 14%.
For me if it was not right on it was darn close.

Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on November 04, 2010, 10:43:22 PM
Wobbly, a couple of musings on your power curve---

In “observing” your power curve in reply 287 the “flat-topped” horsepower curve just didn’t seem consistent with the torque curve.  After cranking a few numbers, it appears that the horsepower data points at 7400 and 7800 rpm are plotted one unit too high.  While this is not a big deal, correcting the locations more vividly shows that you were running well beyond the approximately 6800 rpm current power peak.

Also, as you embark on more inlet and exhaust tuning, it may be useful to recall that what may be good at 60 degrees in Oregon may not be quite optimum at 95 degree Bonneville.  This would amount to about a 3.5% increase in acoustic celerity--again, not a big deal, but an indication of which way to round off dimensions, or a reason to include some “shimming” capability in the inlet tract. 

Getting the inlet, exhaust, and valve timing all coordinated will probably keep you well occupied over the winter.



Re: Your “driving force” performance evaluation process (reply 289):

First, there is a much easier way to calculate the tractive effort, or “driving force.”  Force times velocity equals power.  More particularly,  Force (lb) x Velocity (mph) / 375 = Horsepower (hp)  and conversely, Force (lb) = 375*Hp/mph.  (This is just a linear version of a relationship you are already familiar with--Hp = torque (rotational force) x rpm (rotational velocity)).

Example:  70 horsepower expended at 125 mph produces 375*70/125 = 210 lbs of “driving force”.
One could also include an efficiency factor to account for driveline losses.

Second, why do you care what the torque or driving force is,  except to get an idea of the aerodynamic drag?
All the torque in the world won’t pull the skin off a grape.  To do work (go 130 mph at Bonneville) one must apply POWER.  Likewise, to accelerate you need to apply power.  Don’t worry about how broad the torque curve is or is not, worry about the power curve.  Manipulate the power curve itself by tuning changes, and its application by gearing arrangements.

Of course, none of this is meant to criticize you or your methods, it just illustrates a different and perhaps simpler perspective that may be useful.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 05, 2010, 12:46:00 AM
Thanks for finding the error in the horsepower curve.  Some of this is late night work and mistakes are easy.  The torque method seems to be easier for people to understand when discussing the effects of sprocket and tire size changes.  It gives similar results to the power method.  I used the power method to verify the results of this torque method before I posted it.  I can post the power method results, too, if requested.

Let's pretend I came to the flats with extra 41 and 40 tooth rear sprockets.  As seen by looking at the power and torque curves, the overall gear ratio is high and I am running well beyond peak torque and a little bit past peak power.  Do I put on a smaller rear sprocket and make another run?  Will it help?  This is a big concern.  The engine is torn down every ten runs for inspection and this is expensive.  I do not want to waste a run while using an idea that might not work.  It is time for some quick figgering.

First, I use calculate the driving force that gets me to the speed I am running.  In this case it is 192 pounds force.

Second, the rpm is calculated that will occur at the speed I am currently running with the proposed gearing combination.  The engine torque is figured out for this rpm using the dyno curves.

Third, the driving force is calculated for the proposed gearing.  It will make me go faster if it creates more driving force.

I initially ran a 42 tooth rear.  Calcs are done for a 41 tooth rear and it would give 194 pounds force.  A 40 tooth rear will give 195 pounds force.  These are small increases and not worth the time, effort, and wear and tear on the motor. 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 07, 2010, 12:57:30 AM
Sprocket change calcs using the power method are attached.  This procedure is explained in the book by John Bradley "The Racing Motorcycle: a technical guide to constructors"  ISBN 0 9512929 2 7

The torque and power methods give me slightly different results and the power method's are usually higher.  The torque method I can verify to be correct by vector diagrams and the principles of simple machines.  I use the torque method because of this.

Either way, the methods show that a sprocket change would not be worth it.  I was hoping it was what I needed.  It appears that I need more horsepower. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WhizzbangK.C. on November 07, 2010, 01:23:39 AM
Sprocket change calcs using the power method are attached.  This procedure is explained in the book by John Bradley "The Racing Motorcycle: a technical guide to constructors"  ISBN 0 9512929 2 7

The torque and power methods give me slightly different results and the power method's are usually higher.  The torque method I can verify to be correct by vector diagrams and the principles of simple machines.  I use the torque method because of this.

Either way, the methods show that a sprocket change would not be worth it.  I was hoping it was what I needed.  It appears that I need more horsepower. 

Using the HP method, you show to have 11 more pounds of force with the smaller sprocket. In my mind that's enough difference to go for the sprocket change and give it a try just to see how much more speed that might actually give you. Have you calculated even smaller sprockets, say down to 35 teeth or even smaller? You may find that there's a sweet spot somewhere in there that would justify hunting one down or even having one made if not available, even if you had to run it out in a lower gear. Seems like a lot of folks don't pull top gear and are setting records, reference Ack Attack.

You've mentioned in the past working on your aero package more, and I think your calculations point out the importance of that also. Better aero will decrease the driving force required to achieve a given speed. Since you've established how much driving force you have available with your current engine package, perhaps you can now calculate how much drag you need to lose to get to your target speed, and work your aero mods based on that?

On our 250 bikes, we seem to get the best results running smaller sprockets in 3rd gear (4 speed gearboxes). We've experimented with larger sprockets and trying to pull 4th, but haven't had much success due to the large jump between 3rd and 4th, just a characteristic of the design that we have to deal with and may not apply to yours at all, but I thought I'd mention it as something you may want to crunch some numbers on.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on November 07, 2010, 04:57:06 PM
The disparity in tractive effort calculated between the power method and torque method is due to the necessity of using the tire circumference in the torque method.  All the rest of the analysis is completely consistent.  It is not clear how Wobbly determined the 79.25” dimension for this circumference--whether it is the unloaded circumference or a loaded rollout measurement.  Since reducing the loaded rolling radius from that of the 79.25 circumference by .63” (a likely amount of tire deflection) brings the tractive efforts into agreement, it would seem that the 79.25 figure is unloaded, or otherwise slightly erroneous.

Also, rather than making various stabs at different gearing, if, in this case 70 hp produces 129.5 mph and most of the drag is aero (which goes as power cubed) and the maximum power available is 72 hp, then P2/P1 = (V2/V1)^3 and V2 would equal V1 times the cube root of the power ratio, or 129.5*1.0094 = 130.7 mph.  If the bike were re-geared to operate at the maximum power, it should be able to produce the 130.7 mph.  Then the question is whether a 1.2 mph increase is worth it.  This seems more informative than just determining the change in TE.  (On the same basis, 80 hp would produce 135.3 mph--is that worth it?)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 08, 2010, 10:31:14 PM
Thanks, Mr Observer.  I was using the unladen tire circumference measured with a tape.  That explains the difference.  You are smarter than me.  I spent an evening trying to figure out why both methods gave different results and I could not figure out an answer.

K.C., valve size is a problem in these little Triumphs.  The intakes are 2mm larger than standard.  This change, with a port job, really helped the 790 cc engine.  This bigger engine can benefit from 4 mm larger intakes and exhaust valves.  South Bay Triumph makes these.  I am not sure if I will put them in.  Lately I have been riding around town on frosty mornings, in the rain, at night, and there are leaves all over the road from the street trees.  This engine is very well mannered and I can tractor around in these conditions without wheel spin.  This is the best street engine I have built, by far.  It is hard to make it better and easy to screw it up.  Like you say, it is time for me to work on aero.

Talk among land speed racers can be sorta casual about blowing apart motors.  Experience has shown me that an engine failure leads to a series of events that I do not control.  One of these is the classic "high side" when a person is flipped off the bike and into the air.  Engine reliability is especially critical on a bike like the Triumph.  The spinning transmission shafts and gears are inches away from the rods and pistons.  Parts from a fracture can easily fall into the tranny and lock it up along with the rear wheel.  Life would suddenly be very interesting.  This is what I do to lower the chances of a blowup.

First, the bike has a rev limiter and it is set to an engine speed about 500 to 1000 rpm less than "explosion."  It is hard to look at a tach and use the throttle to limit engine rpm on the salt.  Too much is happening too quickly.  A rev limiter is essential.

Second, the engine is built to be strong using the best parts available.  The motto is "built it stout now and worry about performance later."

Last, there are periodic tear downs and inspections.  These attempt to find potential problems before they become disasters.

The reason I mention this.  The tire broke loose twice during the down run this year.  The engine hit the rev limiter both times before I rolled back on the throttle.  Last winter I did a periodic tear down, problems were identified and fixed, the bike has a rev limiter, and it is set to a safe rpm.  There is a good possibility, had I not done all of this, that engine would have blown.  As they say, be careful, be safe, and go fast.         

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on November 09, 2010, 12:51:59 PM
Off the basic subject, but it's a question that has always evaded an answer from me:

"I was using the unladen tire circumference measured with a tape.  That explains the difference.  You are smarter than me.  I spent an evening trying to figure out why both methods gave different results and I could not figure out an answer."

I can understand pretty well how the diameter of a tire will change between loaded/not loaded -- but I don't see how the circumference can change.  Whether squished down harder on the surface or not, there's no change in the amount of rubber -- it doesn't fold in or anything, so 100% of it still has to travel on the surface.  It flexes from round to flat and back, sure -- but it doesn't grow or get shorter.

Please teach me how the circumference changes -- or tell me that I really do have it correct.  Thanks.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RidgeRunner on November 09, 2010, 02:10:32 PM
Tire under load squishes down resulting less height from top of tire to ground - smaller dia.

Smaller dia divided by 2 for new radius multiplied by pi [a constant 3.14xxx] results in a new smaller "real or effective" circumference.

Less circumference means less "roll out" or forward distance gained per revolution.

Help any?

Nearly 40 years ago as I was changing eng sprockets [countershaft sprocket wasn't handy to change behind the clutch basket and rear was one piece with the brake drum] looking for optimum gearing a fellow watching made the comment that the final ratio may be the same but it makes a difference where the changes are made, ie between the eng sprocket and clutch basket or between the countershaft sprocket and real wheel sprocket.  In other words, where the torque is multiplied in the chain of events can make a difference even though the numbers "should" give equal results.  Just now starting to understand that concept myself.

                      Ed
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on November 09, 2010, 03:17:35 PM
SSS,
The essential dimension for use in Wobbly’s torque formula is the effective rolling radius--the distance from the center of the axle to the ground plane.  This is approximated in his formula by calculating from the tire circumference, presumably because that is (arguably) easier to measure. 

So, you are mostly right that the circumference itself probably doesn’t change substantially.  However, being of rubber composite construction, the circumference probably does change to a small degree when it is deflected by the ground, although the shorter (straight) distance along the contact patch is mostly made up for by slight outward bulging of the tire ahead of and behind the patch.


Ridgerunner,
Don’t give much creedance to your onlooker’s comment.  The only difference would be in friction losses, possibly due to the type or number of components in the drivetrain.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on November 09, 2010, 03:54:35 PM
IO, I'lkl take your response as about what I had figgered on my own - and thank you for corroborating my own story.  I can see how the effective radius - axle to ground - is made smaller by the tire's deflection, and therefore how that'd affect the torque.  And this way I'm allowed to keep my circumference about the same (I still think it doesn't change at all) because the amount of rubber doesn't change -- save maybe for some small amount due to the outward "squish" of the tire.  Thanks to both of you.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on November 09, 2010, 10:56:55 PM
I would have thought that at, say 120 mph, the centrifugal force exerted on the tyre would have caused it to grow even when it had some load on it. I know that with some of the custom stuff i used to work on, and in particular older scooters, if you put a slightly larger rear tyre on, it would spin on the stand with the wheel in the air but as soon as you got some speed up on the road it would run into the engine case.
Having said that, it would generally be "J" and "P" rated tyres that were not really high performance equipment
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on November 10, 2010, 10:06:57 AM
Yes -- no question (from me, at least) about tire growth at higher speeds.  I was talking about (and so were the others, I think) the reduction in overall height due to the load.  I expect that there's a point/speed where the two cancel out one another, meaning the torque bonus given when the tire is spinning slowly and squished down - goes away as the squish goes away when the spinning makes it grow.

But tire circumference wasn't WW's topic - the Partial Streamliner is -=- so I'll return control of the thread to him.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 10, 2010, 10:15:18 PM
The Triumph runs relatively narrow v-rated steel belted Metzeler radials.  Not much growth expected with these and a slow bike.  On a big fast bike like the 1400 cc Kawasaki with wider tires it might be a different story.  All of my old data is based on tire circumference.  One of my winter projects will be to calculate a conversion factor between tractive force calculated using tire circumference and the torque method to tractive force figured out by the horsepower and speed method.

Does anyone have a good tire rolling resistance equations or coefficients of rolling friction for radial motorcycle tires?  My equations from Hoerner and Cooper are based on the older bias ply tires.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 11, 2010, 01:16:06 PM
The Triumph will be raced until Spring 2015.  That year I will race in Australia with the big valve head.  Probably that will be my lifetime fastest speed.  Bonnie and I will both retire in August 2015.

A guy like me needs a retirement project to keep busy and out of trouble.  My sister inherited my father's Toyota truck.  It is a four cylinder with the last version of a carbureted engine.  As much as possible of that truck will be my power train for project "Model B Roadster."  Right now I am trying to talk her into selling me the truck and I will stash the engine, trans, diff, etc. away until 2015 when I start the build.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: JimL on November 11, 2010, 09:51:11 PM
PM me with an address....I've got a useful little book that may help with your 22R project.....I'll mail one to you.

Regards, JimL
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 11, 2010, 10:37:43 PM
Thanks, Jim.  I will PM you with my address.  Today I was going to talk to my wife about this project.  I did not.  Some inner voice tells me I need to think this one through before I commit.  Cars are far more complicated than bikes and there are so many more parts.  I will build a roadster.  I need to figure out what I want vs what I can afford, etc. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 12, 2010, 02:48:03 PM
Project "Model B Roadster" is moving along.  There is a 1990 Toyota Tacoma sitting out in the driveway.  It has a 22RE engine and I take good care of it.  It is my wife's truck.  Lately we are discussing a new vehicle for her.  This old truck will be part of the roadster.  The decision was easy.  The government is a little out of control here.  This project is five to seven years down the road.  Who knows how hard it will be to register and license a special construction vehicle?  It will be easier if I have the vehicle and I am simply modifying it.

The big job was talking to Rose.  This donor vehicle is her truck and it will be another project.  We have been married 32 years and she knows my weakness for collecting and hoarding rusty junk I never use.  I showed her the roadsters in The Rodders Journal, the hot rod kits, and the pictures of the new body parts being made in Ohio.  I told her I would use new stuff as much as possible.  She gave the OK.  Now I will spend five years collecting all the info I can about mating a Toyota Truck with a Ford Model B.

The magazine The Rodders Journal deserves a lot of credit.  It is a classy publication that presents hot rodding in a format I can show and discuss with my wife and daughters.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 13, 2010, 12:49:00 PM
These next posts are about aero.  "The Racing Motorcycle" by John Bradley will be the primary reference.  He has a lot of information on partial streamlining in Volume 1.  A reference to "Bradley" will be to this book.  These posts will illustrate, without a doubt, that I am not a rocket scientist.  Hey, we all cannot be Miss America.  Someone has to be at the lower end of the bell curve.

The 2007 configuration is shown in the photo.  Aero changes are the fairing, the low seat, and the little tail section behind the seat.  The speed I obtained with the horsepower available is plotted on the graph by the circle with the dot in the middle.  This is part of Bradley's graph on page 67.  Properly designed racing bikes are near the lower line and road bikes with lousy aero are near the upper line.

My bike had horrible aero in 2007.  I would have gone faster naked.  The cross-sectional area at the fairing trailing edge is the base area.  It is very large.  I could fit almost entirely within this base area with only my hands and helmet top projecting.  To quote Bradley "Shapes like this, which many people think of as low drag, are not.  They suffer from high base drag because the pressure is still very low when the flow separates at the large base area."  In other words, where the air passes the trailing fairing edge there is a large low pressure zone at the edge of, and behind, the fairing.  Air is sucked into a large turbulent wake behind the fairing.  This creates base drag.

There were some naked Triumphs similar to mine at the 2007 meet.  We discussed the horsepower and speeds of our bikes.  It was obvious to me that something was very wrong.  I had a lot of work to do.  The next post will discuss the 2008 changes and show that year's dot.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: debgeo on November 13, 2010, 05:09:37 PM
WOW that book is pricey!!! Looks like good info .Will watch with interest. I have been using info provided to me by Bob Bakker. Like you some of the info challenges my IQ.   ps From listening to some of the beauty pageant contestant's talk I think they may be at bottom of bell curve.

Disclaimer I not saying they all fit this description as my daughters best friend went to college on a full scholarship. She almost won in her state.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Dr Goggles on November 13, 2010, 06:00:14 PM
   ps From listening to some of the beauty pageant contestant's talk I think they may be at bottom of bell curve.

What?...that's outrageous!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj3iNxZ8Dww
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on November 13, 2010, 06:20:49 PM
Dr. G:  That should be in the Blonde joke thread!   :mrgreen:

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 55chevr on November 13, 2010, 07:07:35 PM
Dunno why it was posted here but that is funny ... you can't make this subaru up.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: debgeo on November 13, 2010, 11:12:30 PM
Dunno why it was posted here but that is funny ... you can't make this subaru up.
  Read post 308 & 309 and you will understand. Just having a little fun with WW
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 14, 2010, 01:21:45 PM
Deb, Bradley's main expertise is with smaller displacement road race bikes.  He emphasizes proper setup, the shape of the engine power curve, gearing, aero, etc.  Racing success with those little buggers depends on mastering these things.  Right now I am limited to what I can achieve with a 70 to 80 horsepower engine in a big heavy bike.  Like Bradley, horsepower is limited and I need to work with setup, engine power curve, gearing, aero etc. to get speed.  Fortunately, the LSR partial streamliner is similar to a road race bike from an aero viewpoint and Bradley's advice applies.  My guess is, if you are in a similar situation, the book's cost is worth it.

It is 2008.  This is my first experience with salt termites.  What awful creatures they are!  My bike is being eaten alive.  The fairing lower is changed so it covers the engine crankcases and a belly pan is installed.  This will keep the salt out of the undercarriage and it will help aero.  It is visible in the picture.  A 6-inch shorter rear fender is installed to reduce drag at the back end.  This is hidden in the photo.

The front fender is a harder decision.  There were, and are, many record holding Triumphs with naked front wheels.  The disadvantage of a naked wheel is the rotating atmosphere that surrounds it.  The rotating air around the top of the wheel is traveling in the opposite direction of the prevailing airflow.  This creates turbulence and drag.  Also, the naked wheel sprays salt all over everything.  I made a front fender and shaped it to help aero.  The flared sides direct the air around the boxy lower fairing.  Other changes are a non-o-ring chain and removing the front brake.  This will slightly reduce rolling friction drag.

The horsepower vs speed graph is shown with the 2008 runs.  They are the two dots in the 115 to 120 mph range.  My other two 2007 runs are plotted, too.  They are in the 90 to 100 mph area.  Speed is greater and this is mainly due to some engine work.  Note how the resistance to motion is dropping.  The aero and other little changes are helping.  I have a long way to go, but I am going in the right direction.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 15, 2010, 10:42:12 PM
The 2007 bike photo is courtesy of Michael Cole.  He was a volunteer working in the timing tower at BUB.  He has set records on a Suzuki rotary.  This 2009 bike photo is taken by Corey Levenson.  This was one of his first attempts at professional photography.

Now it is 2009.  The engine is the same build as in 2008 and it is getting tired.  A set of Nology coils and wires perks it up.  Now it performs the same as it did a year earlier.  A radial front tire is installed and this lowers rolling resistance.  This is the first year I run lower 36# front and 38# rear tire pressures.  Before I used the maximum that was printed on the sidewall.  This probably cancels out and advantages of the radial.  Any differences between 2009 and 2008 will be from aero.

The fairing corners below the headlight, and the corners at the bottom of the lower section, are boxy.  They are smoothed out using larger radius corners.  A tail section is fabricated.  It meets AMA modified partial streamliner standards.  These are the aero changes.

The 2009 dots are shown on the graph.  Note how I am going faster with the same horsepower.  This is due to better aero.  Also, I am getting closer to the lower line.  The resistance to motion is getting closer to a race bike's.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 16, 2010, 10:47:13 PM
2010, it is.  The engine year.  Aero work is taking the flare out of the lower fairing trailing edges.  This is done to keep the flow attached as far along the motorcycle sides as possible.  The photo by Ray the Rat shows this.  Also, the crash bars are removed.  I figure out how to tie the motorcycle down on the trailer without using them.  These are small aero changes.

The graph shows that these small changes do not help much.  The 2010 dots are not any closer to the lower line than the 2009 dots.  The 2010 dots are farther to the right and higher than those in 2009.  This shows that more horsepower, rather than aerodynamics, is making me go faster.

Rear sprockets need to be cut for this bike.  I cannot buy ready-made sprockets in the size that I need.  The next posts will show how I use this graph to determine the sprocket size.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fredvance on November 17, 2010, 10:33:58 AM
I would be looking at trying to get as much air around/past your arms and shoulders. IMHO

  Fred
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 17, 2010, 11:23:09 PM
Thanks for the advice.  The body work is being redone.  The back half this year and the front half the next year.

The speed vs power chart is one of my best tuning tools.  It will be used to figure out the rear sprocket size I will need next year.  It is also used to figure all sorts of other useful stuff, like how much power I will need to reach a certain speed.

This winter's aero work will add 5 mph, as my best guess.  This speed increase will not require any more power.  It is drawn as a horizontal dashed line on the chart.  Hopefully the intake tuning and jetting this winter will produce 75 horsepower on the dyno in Beaverton.  This will be 65.4 horsepower on the salt.  A horizontal line is drawn across the graph at this horsepower.  Another dashed line is drawn, parallel to Bradley's lower curve, upward from the right end of the dashed line.  This represents the speed increase due to more power.  This dashed line intersects the horsepower line.  This intersection point is estimated to be as fast as I will go, 136 mph.  The sprocket size will be calculated in the next post.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 19, 2010, 10:11:38 PM
More figuring...

The sprocket I will have made must be large enough to assure that the chain does not rub on the hub.  About 3/16 of an inch clearance between the bottom of the sprocket teeth and the hub is enough.  This will provide room for the chain.

The first step is to lay a sprocket on a piece of paper and to trace its shape, including the teeth and the mounting holes.  Also, I draw in the parts of the hub that are closest to the sprocket teeth.  The "C" shaped lines on the drawing show the sprocket mounting flanges.  The number of teeth on the traced sprocket is not an issue, although the sprocket must fit on the hub.  This is a 42-tooth Sunstar sprocket from Triumph.  Next, I fugure out the exact center of the sprocket.

Next, I measure the traced sprocket radius to the bottom of the teeth.  Also, I figure out the sprocket radius with 3/16 inch clearance between the teeth bottoms and the hub.  This is the smallest radius the new sprocket can have.  Some simple multiplication and division tells me the minimum number of teeth on a rear wheel sprocket.  It is usually a fractional number.  I round it to the highest whole number.  The smallest sprocket I can use on this hub has 36 teeth.

A roadster question.  I can get an older 22R Toyota engine with a carb or a newer 22R four cylinder engine in a lot better condition with fuel injection.  The injectors are screwed into the intake manifold just upstream from where the manifold bolts onto the head.  It will be difficult to fit this massive, ugly as Medusa, system under a Model B hood.  Is there a simple way to toss the system and to mount a carb setup?

In this part of Oregon we do not have the periodic smog system checks like they do in California.  We mail in our registration fee every two years and no one in the govt knows what we do to the car.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 21, 2010, 01:36:43 AM
All of these graphs and formulae are used to make everyday decisions.  The first one I do is to calculate the sprocket size I need to go 136 mph.  A 40 tooth one will be OK.  I order one.  Then, I think about ordering a 36 tooth one, too.  Over 90 horsepower will be needed for me to go the 150 mph that sprocket will allow.  There are no plans to build the engine to make that power.  I will order a 38 tooth sprocket.  That will work good with the big valve head and I should get into the lower 140's.

This is the last post on this subject.  These are the most complex calculations I do.  I am not a mental kinda guy.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 23, 2010, 09:15:53 PM
The streamlining will be redone during the next two years.  The rear section will be redone this year.  The front fender will be remade, too, if I have time.   This is a tall bike with a short wheelbase and I am a big guy that does not fold into a tight tuck very well.  Miracles will not happen.  I will be happy to drop down to Bradley's lower line on the horsepower vs speed graph.

It is important to plan the streamlining.  The front and rear sections must compliment each other, fit the bike, and cover the rider.  The first step is to draw up the bike dimensions.  The pegs and handlebar grips are shown.  This tells me where my hands and feet will be.  Two lines mark my shoulder width and two more mark the width of my bum.  A line perpendicular to the bike center line shows the back of the seat.  All is drawn to scale.

About the roadster.  The Model B Ford is a rare car, I thought.  I was wrong.  They are popular for making hot rods and there are all sorts of parts and a lot of Model A items will fit.  This is great.  It seems that the car will need to be inspected at the department of motor vehicles.  I will keep the fuel injection on the 22R engine until I get the thing registered.  A forum member sent me a nice book and a lot of hints on how to make the injection system work in a Model B.  Thanks, JimL.  This summer I will start to build the roadster shed.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 24, 2010, 10:53:12 PM
Usually I write up these graphs and charts during my work lunch time.  The figuring for this streamlining shape got me so engrossed that I worked on it for most of the afternoon.

The sketch shows the plan view of the widest part of the streamlined shape.  The 25-inch width gives coverage for my hands, legs, chest, and arms.  My shoulders are marked with lines behind the hand grips.  The shape appears to be wider than my shoulders.  It is not.  My shoulders are higher than the widest part of the shape and they are at the edge of the shape at that height.

The width is figured, now it is time to calculate the length.  The rules say "Any aerodynamic aid on any section behind the rider and his seat shall only exceed the rear edge of the tyre up to a distance equal to half of the rear wheel rim diameter."   An easy to understand rule!  This is 17 / 2 = 8.5 inches.  I will use 7.5 inches to be safe.  The front of the streamlining will be above the front axle.  This gives me an 83 inch total length.

Ideally, the widest part of the shape is at 25 percent of the untruncated shape length.  This is too far back on this bike.  I want the widest part to be in front of my widest part, my hands and shoulders.  The widest part at 25 percent of the truncated length fits better.  The widest part is 62.25 inches in front of the back end.

It is important that the air flow near the streamlined skin stay attached to the shape.  I do not want the rear section included angle to be more than 10 degrees in order to keep the flow attached.  Trial and error is used to figure out the best rear shape.  The one shown has a 10 degree included angle and no more.

The back end is truncated to a 9 inch wide flat section with this shape.  This is not ideal.  This increases drag 15 to 20 percent according to Bradley's data.  It is the best I can do with this short wheelbase bike.  There are some things I will do to address this problem.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WhizzbangK.C. on November 25, 2010, 03:15:29 AM
The rules say "Any aerodynamic aid on any section behind the rider and his seat shall only exceed the rear edge of the tyre up to a distance equal to half of the rear wheel rim diameter."

Are you not running Bub's next year? That doesn't look like anything in their rule book. Just asking is all.

Have you considered extending the swing arm to allow you a longer rear fairing to minimize the truncated area?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 25, 2010, 09:52:20 PM
This is a 2010 FIM rule.  Yes, I will be at BUB.

The wheelbase is extended now, but not by much.  Somewhere between 1.5 to 3 inches, as I recall.  The bike seems to be well balanced now.  It has a good drift in the corners.  A bit more drift in the rear than the front and the handling is slow and steady but tolerable.  I am afraid that with a longer wheel base there will be too much weight on the front tire and it will drift more than the rear.  That would be really spooky.  I do not want to permanently extend the swing arm for this reason.

I thought more about your idea.  A fellow on this forum knows about some swing arm extensions made by Harris in England.  That concept might be the answer.  I could extend the arm for racing on the salt and shorten it back for the street.  Then I could get rid of the truncated end.

This Christmas I am buying a welding set for Werner.  Maybe some bolt on extensions can be a future project.  The young guy needs something useful to do. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 26, 2010, 12:24:22 PM
The BUB bike #240, a Triumph, is one of the best partially streamlined bikes based on my miniscule knowledge of aero.  This is Tom Mellor's bike.  It is a very good example of how a longer wheelbase can be used to give more length.  Tom's approach to streamlining is best.  Mine is compromised.  My bike is like a street rod and it must be a daily driver, too.

The Triumph is measured up in side view as shown on the sketch.  Gretchen took some measurements with me on it.  It is very important to include the rider in the overall design.  Look at Scooter Grubb's website, 2010 BUB meet, Day 3, Page 2.  A big fellow or lass is on Tom's #240.  Note the fit.  Another picture is in the 2009 BUB meet photos, Day 2, Page 1.  Tom is on Tom's #240.  See the perfect fit.  This makes a big difference in aero.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WhizzbangK.C. on November 26, 2010, 03:34:42 PM
You're going through a lot of the same process that we've used to determine the aero shapes on our bikes. What we've found to work well is to make full size templates of side profiles and frontal areas with the rider in riding position on the bike. We used large cardboard boxes, like a water heater or refrigerator carton, flattened out and propped up beside the bike. Have an accomplice (it's always good to have accomplices, or even minions, that way you have someone else to pass the blame onto if it doesn't work out exactly right), trace your outline on the bike in full riding apparel and position, and the bike outline onto it in plan view.Top, side, and frontal views. That way you can draw out the shapes that you think may work on the cardboard to really visualize them fully. I don't know about you but my mind works best in full scale and 3 dimensions.

 That's the process that we used to develop the shape on the 7419 bike. It seemed to work well for us anyway. Here's a picture of it right before we loaded up to leave this year.

(http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m68/Whizzbang02/Bonneville%202010/100_4518.jpg)

(http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m68/Whizzbang02/Bonneville%202010/100_4520.jpg)

Of course, as everyone knows this body is wood. We were running out of time and I wanted to at least prove the concept for the bike, this year with the chassis and engine mostly done I'll be starting early in the spring to make a real body for it, more in line with the original concept of some sexy fiberglass, like so.

(http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m68/Whizzbang02/Bonneville%202010/100_4433.jpg)

I kind of went to extremes to minimize frontal area and maximize the tail length, and was concerned that the large slab sides would make it uncontrollable in cross-winds, but it turned out to be a complete non issue and rode very well through some side gusts over 10mph, so I feel comfortable putting the effort into a more complex streamlining setup.

And yes, Tom Mellor's bike is a very nice piece of kit. I told him personally that his body work was a great inspiration to me in the design of the rear end of mine. I don't know if he took that as a compliment though, LOL.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 28, 2010, 09:31:05 PM
Ed, did the streamlinined rear section work as intended?  It sure looks like it would.  I am using your idea of drawing things.  It helps.

The English road racer, Peter Williams, has written about his career.  He helped to develop the John Player Norton road race bikes in the 1970's.  They did a lot of wind tunnel testing and they experimented with lowering the windshield.  One time they lowered it enough to greatly improve aero.  Peter says he could feel the air rushing across his back when the screen height was correct.

The windshield on the Triumph was lowered 3 inches this fall.  This will let me tuck down lower toward the tank.  Hopefully the air will flow over me rather than around me.  Also, my lower stance will reduce the large gap between the back of the windshield and the front of me.  My upright position and the air gap are seen on photos of the bike, on Scooter's 2010 BUB website, 2010 BUB Photos, Day 3, Pages 8 and 9.

It took two tries.  It is important to have a rounded front.  The first time I did it I did not get the shape right.  The second time it came out OK. 

     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WhizzbangK.C. on November 28, 2010, 10:35:49 PM
"Ed, did the streamlined rear section work as intended?  It sure looks like it would." 

I believe that it did help. If you look at the frame I ran the last 2 years and the bike this year, my overall height is about the same, width is slightly narrower now because I don't have to hang my legs outside the frame and mechanical parts. I made no changes to the engine that would have an affect on power. I've never been able to get acceleration in 4th gear with the old configuration, in fact it would always slow down. This year it was gaining speed in 4th gear for a bit, with a sprocket combo that I tried last year without success. I was feeling really good on that run until the engine locked up again, right in the middle of the trap, LOL. I now have a collection of toasted pistons all pointing to the fact that I need more clearance between the cylinder wall and the piston. That will be remedied next year for sure.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 29, 2010, 01:18:54 AM
My first and last attempt at web journalism.  http:www.motorcycleclassics.com/restoration-technical/sidewalk-motorcycle-tire-repair.aspx
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: debgeo on November 29, 2010, 09:24:18 AM
 :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 30, 2010, 10:14:08 PM
Thanks, Deb.  That article was fun to make.  It was done in 2008.  Heidi Rose was in a photography class and this was a good way to show her the practical uses of photography.  She was interested in professional picture taking.  The whole experience taught her to concentrate her efforts on finding another way to make a living.  Photography is a nice hobby or a way to supplement your income from a steady day job.

The side view shows me tucked down behind the windshield that was lowered three inches this winter.  This is the higher position and I stick up into the air.  I am too high.  The lower position shows me tucked down behind a windshield that is lowered another 3 inches.  This tuck will be just about right.  I will lower the windshield when I rebuild the front fairing.

The old tail section is shown by dashed lines and the new by solid.  The new wide truncated end creates excess drag and this is reduced, somewhat, by reducing the truncated end height.  This excercise shows the value of using photographs as a design tool.     

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 06, 2010, 12:41:33 AM
The rear section frame is partially built and I put it on the bike today.  The spine for the old rear is clamped to it.  This shows how much bigger the new rear is.  The seat pan is one I have been using for several years.  Every time I change the rear section I reuse it.  It is 3/16 inch thick aluminum.  The rest of the frame is 12 gauge with the exception of the thin angle shapes that the sheet metal is riveted to.  They are 1/16 inch thick.

My usual procedure is to cut the part out of the sheet and to temporarily rivet it onto the main assembly.  Then, I ask myself, is there metal I can remove to make this part lighter without compromising its strength?  Then I use the sawzall or hole saws to remove the metal.  Sometimes I will lighten the part and cover the holes with a riveted on piece of 0.012 inch thick roof flashing.  I have done this to cover the lightening holes on the seat back.

It is much easier to draw lines on paper than it is to make the parts out of metal.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: charlie101 on December 06, 2010, 08:13:24 PM
You didn't want to put more weight on the front wheel, thus not lenghtenen the swingarm more than a couple of inches, what about putting the tank back there and then you can lenghten the swingarm a bit more and still have the same weight on the front wheel and tuck even lower on the frame?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 07, 2010, 01:11:06 AM
That is an idea I will consider.  Thanks.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 08, 2010, 01:06:20 AM
Oil filters are a current forum topic.  The Mobil 1 M1-108 synthetic fiber blend filter fits this 790cc 2003 Triumph T-100 Bonneville.   The oil appears to be cleaner based on visual inspection, as compared to the paper filters.  There have been no filter related problems during street or racing use.  The oil is changed twice a year and the filter is renewed at every oil change.  The filter is filled with fresh oil before it is installed.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on December 08, 2010, 08:37:18 AM
My first and last attempt at web journalism.  http:www.motorcycleclassics.com/restoration-technical/sidewalk-motorcycle-tire-repair.aspx
   

WW
  Well you made that look easy
as Motorcycho said "Never seems that easy when I do it!"

And I've got a tyre machine
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 12, 2010, 02:16:23 AM
Grumm, in my earlier life I moved around a lot.  Many times I was the low seniority mechanic and the bottom guy on the totem pole.  Changing tires and cleaning bathrooms.  I did a lot of that.

Recently, my oldest girl graduated from college, bought a car, and got married.  She is on her honeymoon.  Soon she will be gone and starting a new life.  She was one of three children I have brought to Bonneville.  It was a big event for both of us and something she fondly talks about.  It is expensive to take a young person to the salt and they need attention.  This distracts one from the tasks at hand.  In hindsight, I never regret bringing a well mannered child with me.  Giving them this experience is worth any inconvenience.

A few years ago I was going to install new bright lights in the cave like Team Go Dog Go! workshop.  This would be a lot of money.  Lights, wiring, etc., and the electricity to power them.  I needed to buy performance parts and beer and the new brightness would destroy the cellar's romantic ambiance.  Instead, I bought this little headlight.  It uses LED bulbs and rechargeable batteries and a charge lasts a long time.  The light pivots.  I wear bifocals and I need to tilt my head to see things up close.  The pivot allows the light to be directed to where I am looking.  There is an intense spotlight setting and a wider floodlight setting.  All are useful.  The light is an Everready 6-bulb LED headlight.

The light makes it much easier to see when cutting sheet metal, drilling holes, and doing all sorts of machining tasks.  Also, it is good for under the truck jobs like changing u-joints.  My workmanship has noticeably improved.  All said, the light is a good investment. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on December 12, 2010, 02:38:12 AM
WW
Electricity isn't a problem here, as I have a 2kw of solar on the roof, and it doesn't really get to freezing here so it seems I'm always in credit. I only recently started wearing reading glasses as I found my arms were too short for me to read.
Beer and scotch, brew my own.
Taking children to the salt, the Rev and Dr Googles generally go in the same car, not mine and pay for themselves.
Since being an apprentice I've generally been the head mechanic, and usually the only mechanic. Most of the stuff I worked on until I joined the motorcycle trade, didn't have tyres, it had tracks. Changing tyres. I'm used to using a machine. Got one at work and one at home. but tube type tyres (Aus spelling) Arrrrrggggggghhhhh

G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: gearheadeh on December 12, 2010, 09:13:29 AM
Hey W.W.
I don't know about everybody else but I do make a point of reading your thread. For the reason that you are not too shy to bring up anything and everything that might be interesting.  :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RidgeRunner on December 12, 2010, 12:03:07 PM
Hey W.W.
I don't know about everybody else but I do make a point of reading your thread. For the reason that you are not too shy to bring up anything and everything that might be interesting.  :cheers:

+1

   Ed
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 15, 2010, 01:05:28 AM
This afternoon I looked out of the window where I work and saw a big dark thunderstorm a few miles away.  It looked like a nasty one.  Inside, where I could not see, there was a tornado.  It trashed a neighboring town and crossed over a highway.  Our district maintenance crew took these photos when they cleaned a barn off of the roadway.

Curves drawn on paper are cut out of metal when I make the tail section.  First, I draw the curve on a piece of graph paper.  In this example I use graph paper with a 10 square per inch grid and I draw the tail section on it using a 1 to 10 scale.  In other words, 1 inch on the graph paper equals 10 inches on the metal.

The metal and the drawing will be measured during subsequent steps.  A good ruler is essential.  I keep a nice clean one on the drafting table and the other one is in the shop.  The one shown is a Starrett No. C316R with 32nds and 64th of an inch graduations on the back and 50th and 100th of an inch graduations on the front.  The graduation marks are a style that is popular in the aircraft industry.  They are very easy to read and this is my favorite.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 17, 2010, 12:18:52 AM
The part is drawn to scale on paper in the last post.  The metal is selected and a square or rectangle is made with tape around the area to be cut.  The tape is marked with graduations.  In this example I mark every inch on the the tape.  A grid is drawn across the part with a pencil.  The grid on the metal is a full size version of the grid on the paper.  It is ten times bigger.  One tenth inch on the paper equals one inch on the metal.

Now I look at the part on the paper and note where the part edge crosses the grid lines.  I mark those crossing points on the grid on the metal with dots of white-out.  The little dots do not make a perfect line.  They seldom do.  They give me a good enough idea of the part shape.  A flexible wood strip is placed over the dots and it is bent to resemble a smooth curve.  A line is drawn along the stick.  This represents the part edge.  Blue masking tape is placed on one side of the line and tan on the other.  This makes the line easy to see.  The part is sawed out of the sheet.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 20, 2010, 01:03:07 AM
A drill press used as a milling machine is shown on previous posts.  The very low price of this Chinese made Shop Fox vise was too tempting.  I bought it and I use it for milling.  It makes the job much easier.

This project is to make a nice polished billet aluminum tail piece for the new rear streamlining.  The cut outline is marked with punches.  It will be easy to see during the milling.  Two wires are placed at the top of the jaw faces to tilt them inwards.  This keeps the piece from moving upward during the machining process.  The vise is securely bolted to the table.  Plunge cuts are used to mill out the cavity in this part.  The feed screws turn during the machining process unless they are held in place.  I use bungee cords for this.

This third world method is great if a person is in no hurry.  The entire setup is not designed for milling and it is not very rigid.  Shallow cuts with a slow feed rate in aluminum are OK.  Deep cuts, high feed rates, and ferrous metals are best cut on a milling machine.  Accurate work is possible with patience and practice.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 26, 2010, 01:59:00 AM
It was time for them to go.  Old cabinetmaker and machinist tools covered by that dark thin hard rust of use and time.  Rulers with the numbers wore off and knobs with the knurling gone.  Tools I used for more than half of my life, and my father and his father, too.  My son, Josef, called me to say they are hanging on his shop wall and I could hear his son, Maximus, in the background.  A box of rusty old tools.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 04, 2011, 04:06:47 PM
The new tail section build is progressing.  This is tedious work with a lot of hours spent before any significant progress is made.  The next few posts will describe some of the revisions.

General rules for partial streamlining are given by Bradley in Chapter 4 of his book.  One says "The area behind the rider's legs should be filled out but this is limited by access and regulations."  The first picture is a fuzzy enlargement showing me sitting on the bike.  The picture was taken by Ray the Rat.  Note the space behind my leg.  I need some room around my legs to paddle around and to put my leg down to hold up the bike, but I do not need this much.  The second photo shows the finished bottom half of the new tail section.  The loose plate on the side is from the old tail.  This illustrates how the area behind the legs can be filled.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Dr Goggles on January 04, 2011, 05:18:11 PM
just wondering if you ever saw this post Wobster.

http://www.landracing.com/forum/index.php/topic,3553.0.html
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 05, 2011, 10:15:53 PM
Those are nice bikes.  The pointy one, in particular.  It gives me some ideas.  The last two photos look like Frank Kletchkus shots.

In "The Racing Motorcycle", Bradley says "Do not attempt to pull the seat section in too sharply.  If the air has managed to stay attached this far then it will surely separate at a steep contraction.  The seat should only approach a point if the riser's backside is small enough to allow the seat section to reduce slowly in the available length."

My ass is too big.  A contraction from my bum to a sharp point in the available length would be to sudden and flow separation would occur.  The seat sides taper to the rear at no more than 10 degrees and the back end is truncated at a flat plate.  The 10 degrees is the maximum taper I figure that is allowed without separation.  This is not an ideal situation.  I make the best of it by minimizing the truncated end height.

There is a lot of power robbing turbulence caused by air passing around and under the lower part of the motorcycle.  The skirts are an attempt contain this turbulence and to release it in a sort of organized manner.  They are an attempt to reduce base drag.

One picture shows the tail right side up and it is upside down in the other.  Right now I am putting the skin on the top part of the tail.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 07, 2011, 01:06:33 AM
LSR motorcycle crashes are shown on u-tube video and in still pictures.  These are painful to look at and there are lessons they teach us.  One is that we do not want to be dragged along with the bike.

The tail could be built as a shell with an open gap between it and the bike.  The gap is blocked with sheet on this build.  There are no places on the tail to catch my boots if the bike flips me off.

Genuine crashing experience has shown me that the projection of the sewed on sole on a welted boot can catch on the bike and trap my foot.  My preference is a weltless boot like the Triumph one shown.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 07, 2011, 11:14:02 PM
The old tail was taken apart to build the new one.  The old one was redone once, already, before this.  Salt is sprayed up onto the tail bottom every year and lately I am not washing the bike until I get back to Oregon.  The salt is on the bike for several days.  A perfect corrosion test.  Body work aluminum is the only thing I looked at.

The outside is waxed with airplane wax a few weeks before I leave.  I like the aluminum body work to be nice and shiny.  The wax does not work well to prevent corrosion.  Lots of pitting and white powder on waxed areas.

The unwaxed areas, such as the inside, were coated with ACF-50 after I put the tail section together.  There was dark grey oxidized aluminum in between the plates in some areas but no pitting or fuzzies.  The ACF-50 is working well to prevent corrosion.

Keep in mind that I use a cold water soak and cold running water from a garden hose on these parts.  They never see hot water, a spray, or soap.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 09, 2011, 09:26:36 PM
This thing is done, finally.  Today it was weighed with the number plates and seat pad.  It weighs 20 pounds, for the curious.  I do not know how that poundage compares with a similar tail made from another material.  The pictures give a rough idea of the size.

This year I planned to do a lot more to the bike and not much more will be done.  The build will be on hold for awhile.  There is a small window in a teen's life where they are mature enough to grasp complex skills and ideas, yet they have not reached the rebellious and independent stage.  My youngest daughter is there now and she wants a motorcycle.  We are going to get my old desert race bike running and during the process she will help me rebuild the engine, suspension, etc.  During all of this I will show her how to operate all of the shop tools and machinery.

She plans to paint the bike pink.  Egad.  I guess it will be hers when we are done.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 14, 2011, 01:30:35 AM
A goal in the partial streamlining is to get the teardrop shape.  The widest part of the rear streamlining is at the seat pan just under my bum.  The widest part of the front streamlining is the fairing in front of the handlebar ends.  The handlebar ends are about ten inches higher than the seat pan.

Ideally, the widest front part of the front streamlining should be at the same height as the widest part of the rear.  This clubman bar will place the handlebar ends 3 or four inches lower than they are now.  I will rebuild the fairing so the widest section is lower, too.  This will make the front and rear wide sections closer to the same height, give the bike a more teardrop like shape, and help aero.  This bar is made by Biltwell, an American company.  It is very strong and well made.

This year's racing expenses are two rear sprockets, this handlebar, a new helmet, entry fees, and travel to the race and back.  All other costs are raw materials.  I did not plan this, but the concept of a partially streamlined special construction bike is working out well.  Before the recession/depression, when I had money, I bought the riding gear and did the expensive stuff, like alloy rims, the racing engine parts, carbs, etc.  Now, when I am low on dollars, I can do the big jobs that take a lot of time and do not cost much, like rebuilding the tin work, building an exhaust, fabricating an intake plenum, etc.  I figure I can stretch these low budget tasks out and it will be at least two and maybe three years before I buy anything that is costly.
 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: gearheadeh on January 14, 2011, 09:48:07 AM

This year I planned to do a lot more to the bike and not much more will be done.  The build will be on hold for awhile. Sad to hear this!  There is a small window in a teen's life where they are mature enough to grasp complex skills and ideas, yet they have not reached the rebellious and independent stage.  My youngest daughter is there now and she wants a motorcycle.  We are going to get my old desert race bike running and during the process she will help me rebuild the engine, suspension, etc.  During all of this I will show her how to operate all of the shop tools and machinery.

She plans to paint the bike pink.   Egad.  I guess it will be hers when we are done.

Why not post a build thread here for her? Call it something pink! :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Geo on January 14, 2011, 11:34:25 AM
You are the Man, in my book!  Taking the time to work with your children and delaying what you would really like to do.    :cheers:

I have learned a lot from your postings.  Keep them up!

The build diary on the pink bike is a great idea.

Geo  - the car guy  :-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: octane on January 14, 2011, 01:09:06 PM
Bo ! ..as always; it's a pleasure reading you posts.


You might want to show your daughter this:

(http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x214/octane98/knit.jpg)




...or, maybe not

.-)


.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on January 14, 2011, 01:41:25 PM
Unh, mmm, Lars - is this a sign that you're going off on a tangent?  Maybe a sign of your life style changing.  Let us know so we don't get the wrong idea.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: octane on January 14, 2011, 03:46:51 PM
Unh, mmm, Lars - is this a sign that you're going off on a tangent?  Maybe a sign of your life style changing.  Let us know so we don't get the wrong idea.
No, you haven't got the wrong idea.
I would never underestimate me female side.
As part of my life style change, I'm trying to get in contact with my inner knitter.

It's amazing how one can knit a motorcycle when on magic mushrooms.......yeah man.....er.....woman
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 14, 2011, 09:16:18 PM
We will make some posts.  The old bike is "Thrasher."  It was raced and ridden a lot for fourteen years.  It is well used.  Fixing it up real nice and reliable is to take off the gas cap, roll the bike away, and roll a new one under it, and screw the cap back on.  Its main purpose now is a learning tool.  She will put some flower stickers on it and learn to ride it when we are done.  I am saving a little bit of money and I will get her a better bike if she helps me to the end and is still interested.  Then I will ride Thrasher when we go out into the woods together.  My testosterone level is dropping with age.  I might, or might not, take off the flower stickers.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on January 14, 2011, 09:34:23 PM
Maybe it's just a little of the ol' hippie influence coming through. :-D :-D :-D

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on January 15, 2011, 01:03:33 AM
Peter, do u think there is any chance that the Old Hippy is trying to reform?

Do you think that next he will be using a CAD program and aluminum torch welding?

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 16, 2011, 01:13:04 PM
Freud, you discovered my secret!  Yes, a long time ago I was a hippy.  That was in pteredactyl times.  I have a yard full of rocks, sticks, and old bones for tools.  No need to spend money on anything fancy.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 17, 2011, 11:54:05 PM
Today it was cool and cloudy with breeze instead of wind.  A perfect day for putting on the clubman bar.  Club racers in England used their bikes for transportation and raced them on weekends.  It was easier for them to change from their street setup to racing configuration and back with this type of bar, rather than with clip ons.  Hence the name "clubman" for this bar.  The advantage of this bar is mainly psychological.  It is more natural to tuck down low when a person's hands are also low.  Installation was easy.  I cut 2.5 inches off each end to give the 24-inch overall width that I prefer.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 22, 2011, 12:50:57 PM
The other Team Go Dog, Go! modified partial streamliner is up and running.  It last ran at BUB in 2009.  Werner put a 175cc kit in it with a cam and I ported the head.  The picture shows it last night at arenacross practice in Salem.  The engine runs good but it smokes.  The oil level is OK and the crankcase breather is not plugged.  The bike sat for about 9 months after it was put together and it was never run since 2009.  Today I am going to spray some fuel injector and choke cleaner down the bore and let it sit for awhile.  Then he can start it and I will spray some cleaner in the carb while it is running.  Hopefully a stuck oil ring is causing the problem and this will free it.  Any suggestions are welcome.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 24, 2011, 01:04:40 AM
Two Model B roadster questions.  Sometimes I cannot figure out everything on my own.

My books discuss the original Ford drop axle with kingpin setups and they also show a lot about independent front suspension options.  Did Ford go directly from the kingpin arrangements to independent front suspension?  Were there some intermediate steps?  My books do not discuss these.

My plans are to run radials and I am a caveman kind of guy.  The info I have says it can be tricky and mental to get radials to work on front suspension setups other than the independent ones.  The exact reasons are sorta unclear.  Is independent front suspension the best for a beginning level guy who uses radials?

Any help is appreciated.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Dr Goggles on January 24, 2011, 03:06:13 AM
.....surely they went Independent with king-pins then to ball joint spindles?......
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RidgeRunner on January 24, 2011, 08:54:37 AM
.....surely they went Independent with king-pins then to ball joint spindles?......

Ford passenger cars yes, '49 kingpin/independent, '54 ball joint/independent.

                       Ed
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 24, 2011, 10:50:23 PM
Thanks, Dr and Ed.  An 50's vintage Ford independent suspension with ball joints would not be inappropriate on an old style hot rod.  I will look into this.  Thanks for the help.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 26, 2011, 12:50:44 AM
Keihin CR flatslide racing carbs will work on a street bike.  The carbs do not have chokes or enrichener circuits for cold starting.  It took quite a bit of fiddling for me to get them to work.

First, the spark.  The ignition system should be in tip-top shape for maximum performance.  A strong spark at the correct time will successfully ignite a mixture with wider range of air fuel ratios and gasoline quality.  This is critical with CR flatslides and the sometimes funky Oregon gasahol.  The battery terminals and the battery, engine, and coil grounds are undone, cleaned, lubed with dialectric grease, and retightened every year just before leaving for Bonneville.  New NGK iridium racing spark plugs are installed.  Nology coils and wires are used.  All of this keeps the spark strong.

The lights on bikes sold in the US are lit when the ignition is turned on.  This is an idiot concept.  Little bike batteries do not have the power to light the lights, run the starter motor, and create a good spark.  This is a worse problem with high compression engines.  An English light switch is installed so I can turn off the lights when I start the bike.  This is a big help.  I ordered the switch from London at www.jacklilley.com.

The battery was replaced every two years before I put on the flatslides and I was not picky about its quality.  Now I put in a new high quality battery every year and I trickle charge it weekly during the winter.  The flatslides need to be a bit rich on the starting mixture so the bike will fire up when cold.  This fat mixture can foul the plugs when the engine is warm and it takes considerable battery effort to start the bike.  The fresh battery is essential.

The next post will be about jetting.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on January 26, 2011, 03:35:29 AM
Keihin CR flatslide racing carbs will work on a street bike.  The carbs do not have chokes or enrichener circuits for cold starting.  It took quite a bit of fiddling for me to get them to work.


So are they CR's or FCR's
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 26, 2011, 11:30:22 PM
Graham, they are FCR's  - Bo
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bak189 on January 27, 2011, 10:00:47 AM
Regarding replacing the Batt. on a yearly basis......take a look at the new Lithium-Iron batteries like the
Shorai LFX we are using......Hold a charge for at least one year without maintenance....can be mounted in any position.....Ultra light.....longer service life....Safe-no explosive gasses...no lead...no acid...............
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: dadsolds on January 27, 2011, 12:05:03 PM
Bo,
about your gas-ahol- there should be a couple of stations that sell ethanol-free gas to street vehicles in your area. Check this link
http://pure-gas.org/
BGB
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 27, 2011, 11:47:31 PM
Thanks for the tip.  At first, the ethanol was a problem.  Now the bike works OK.  When I get the time I will write the second post I will tell what I did.  Flood damage repair is using most of my time lately. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 30, 2011, 01:42:48 AM
The first post on this subject described electrical system upgrades.  The new battery and light on-off switch are essential, based on my experience.

The main jet is sized for running at Bonneville.  The needle and cutaway are chosen using dyno runs to provide the best street running mixture at the elevation where I live (150 feet above sea level.)

The low speed mixture is set by trial and error.  First, the idle mixture screws are turned to a reasonable setting.  I never wrote the setting down.  1-1/2 turns out is what I almost always use as a starting point.  Overly large #55 pilot jets are installed.  Cold starting is great.  Hot starting is not.  Sometimes the plugs foul.  The exhaust gas has the nauseating smell of unburnt hydrocarbons.  The exhaust baffle is sooty.  I run these jets for a week or so to get a thorough idea about how they work.

The idle mixture screws are not touched.  One size smaller #52 pilot jets are installed.  Cold starting is OK and warm starting is better.  Less foul exhaust smell and soot on exhaust baffles.

Again, the mixture screws are left alone, and one size smaller pilots #50 pilots are put in.  Cold starting sometimes requires a blip of the throttle to make the accelerator pump squirt in some extra gas.  Hot starting is great.  No soot on baffles.

Mixture screws remain at 1.5 turns out and smaller pilots are installed.  Cold starting is a pain.  Lots of throttle blipping needed once it gets running.

The ideal pilot jets are the best compromise between cold and hot starting.  In my case, #50 in the warmer months and #52 in the colder.

The starting procedure is to turn off the light switch, not touch the throttle, and use the starter motor for 1/2 second only.  The bike will fire right up if it will start.  Cranking on the starter does nothing useful.  If it does not start, I try half second bursts again for a couple of times.  Fouled plugs are the probable culprit if it does not start.  I wait for a few minutes and try again.  Eventually I have always been able to get it running.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 30, 2011, 01:01:19 PM
This last carb related post compares the standard Keihin 36mm CVK constant velocity flatslides against the Keihin 39mm FCR flatslides.

The 36mm mixers are large enough for all but the most heavily modified engines in street use.  Dyno data for this Triumph shows the size of the larger carbs helps only at full throttle at the very high rpm.  These engine speeds and throttle openings only happen at Bonneville for a guy like me.  The vacuum operated throttle slides on the little carbs compensate, to a large degree, for varying altitude.  This is a very important feature in the western US where tall mountain passes are almost always between us and where we want to go.  There are plenty of jets available for the CVK's.  The CVK's are paid for when the bike is purchased.  These are their advantages.

The Triumph is not a powerful bike.  The way to go fast on the road is to stay on the throttle going into and out of corners and only shutting off completely, if at all, at the apexes.  The CVK's do not give the throttle control to safely do this.  The vacuum slides do not work in precise coordination with the throttle.  The acoustics of some cam and exhaust combinations will confuse the CVK's.  It is impossible to jet the carbs for the correct mixture when this happens.  The CVK's wear in use like Amals.  The needle jets and slides are especially vulnerable.  The float bowls need to be removed to change the main jets.  These are the disadvantages of the CVK's.

The FCR's are large enough to give flow capacity for heavily modified motors on the street and lightly modified engines like mine on the salt.  They give excellent throttle control for fast riding when leaned over in corners.  They are less susceptible to adverse acoustics.  There are plenty of jets available and they are easy to jet.  Screw on caps cover the main jets.  These are FCR good points.

The FCR's are more susceptible to altitude changes.  They lack an enrichener or choke and there is the starting problem mentioned in previous posts.  They are something a person has to buy and they are not inexpensive.  These are FCR disadvantages.

Both setups give similar fuel mileage when properly set up and the rubber parts work OK with racing gas or 10% corn likker/ 90% gasoline pump gas.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 31, 2011, 12:32:31 AM
It was a nice day and we dropped the engine.  Timing is so critical with children.  Usually it is the middle school years when they will work with a parent on these types of things.  This is important for the child.  This might be the only time in their life when they will be exposed to mechanical things.

Years ago I saw a show about chopper building.  A father and son were building a bike.  The old man was constantly yelling at the kid.  This is not the right thing to do.  A positive attitude is best.  Gretchen occasionally strips threads and rounds off bolt heads.  She feels bad about this and it is no problem.  We simply fix as needed and resume work.  Actually it is a good thing.  She learns how to get the job done when things do not go as planned.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 02, 2011, 01:43:00 AM
Children are individuals like the rest of us.  They learn how to do things in different ways.  A good method to teach them is to create a learning environment they enjoy.  One way is to have a project that the adult and child work on at the same time doing the same things.  My two girls like to do this.  Another situation is for the child to have an independent project of their own.  This was preferred by the boys.

Time is perceived differently by youth and adults.  An hour spent cleaning parts is no problem for me.  It can seem like eternity for a youth.  Usually I spend no more than half an hour to an hour working on the bikes with a young child.  We vary the tasks to keep them fresh and interesting.  The photo shows Gretchen welding up a stripped thread on a plastic part.

Young teenagers are going through stages when their brain circuitry is changing from child to adult configurations.  It is important to recognize this.  There are times when they do the craziest things and they are unable to grasp simple concepts.  It is best to ignore this and be positive.  They will outgrow the goofy stage, eventually.

My two older boys worked out at gyms a lot.  There were a lot of characters in those places and everyone got along well.  One of my boys said the people "check in their baggage at the front door."  In other words, the gym is a neutral place.  Teens can have a lot of problems like drugs, not doing their schoolwork, being knuckleheads, etc.  As much as possible, I try to temporarily forget about these issues and keep the shop a neutral place like a gym.

These are four thoughts about introducing kids to our world.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 03, 2011, 11:10:18 PM
Welding rods made from scraps and a flat tipped soldering gun were my plastic fixing essentials for many years.  This hokey method works to some degree.  Awhile ago I bought various materials and a Model 5600HT Mini-Weld Model 6 Airless Plastic Welder from Urethane Supply Company www.urethanesupply.com  A book was purchased from a local store, too.  It is published by Whitehorse Press and it is "How to Repair Plastic Bodywork" by Kurt Lammon ISBN 1-884313-37-X.  Proper tools and materials make for an easier and better quality job.  They are worth the cost.

The first task is to identify the plastic.  Some, like polyethylene, and easy to recognize.  This airbox plastic is not.  It could be one of many types.  It is time for the melt and sniff test.  Dents are melted in an unobtrusive area of the airbox.  The melting plastic has a distinctive smell.  Various welding rods are melted, too.  The odors are compared.  Melting airbox and TPO rod have a similar stink.  The plastic is identified.  It is a good idea to have a full selection of welding rods for identification purposes.

A weld contaminated by the wrong plastic can be weak or discolored.  The welder tip is cleaned by brush and drill and Gretchen is showing how.  The welder is cold so she will not be burned.  In practice it is hot when cleaned. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 05, 2011, 12:31:50 AM
The airbox has stripped female threads for a screw.  The screw hole is chamfered into a cone shape using an X-acto knife.  The base of the cone is on the outside in the direction away from the screw head.  A small piece of aluminum tape is placed between the airbox body and lid to prevent welding the lid to the body.  It is hidden in the photo.

TPO rod is pushed into the hole in the welder.  It is white and some is barely visible in the photo.  The rod melts and oozes through the hole and down into the melted plastic in the weld.  The welder is pushed around to mix the rod with the airbox plastic.  Sometimes I use a rod that is a different color than the base material.  This makes it easier to see when everything is mixed.

The last photo shows the complete weld.  The center shows the white color of the unmixed rod.  This is not a problem.  It will be drilled out.  Some trimming and finishing will be used to remove the extra plastic and the repair will be undetectable.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 07, 2011, 01:14:22 AM
A crack is welded in this post.  This repair procedure would be used to weld something new together.  The plastic is polyethylene.

Cracks in plastic are champfered just like cracks in metal.  A full depth "V" if all welding will be done from one side and two half depth "V" grooves if welding will be done from both sides.  Welding is hot and the welded area can sag.  Also, melted material will occasionally drip from the seam.  The stiff aluminum tape prevents this.  The red air scoop will be welded first from the back side.  The tape is put on the front side as shown in the photo.  Urethane Supply sells the tape.

The back side is welded in two passes.  Rod is melted into the weld during the first pass, any rod residue is cleaned from the welder, and a second pass is made to melt everything together.  The photo shows the second pass.  Note the spots of darker plastic.  This is overheated polyethylene and I try to minimize this as much as possible.

Polyethylene does not sand or polish well.  I cut the weld beads flush with the plastic surface with an X-Acto knife as shown.  The entire procedure will be repeated on the front side of the air scoop.

Awhile ago a fellow cleaned a weld area with brake cleaner and he welded the cleaned area.  Poisonous phosgene gas was produced and it almost killed him.  The lesson I learned is to use the proper cleaner.  The can in the photo is plastic cleaner.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 09, 2011, 01:40:17 AM
A piece of stainless steel screen is included with the welding kit as shown in the photo.  A small piece will be used when this broken polyethylene chain guard is welded together.  It is melted into the weld and it reinforces and strengthens the repair.

Large repairs are ugly when I initially do them.  The excess material is cut away with a knife.  Some rough spots and pits remain as shown in the photo.  A second welding session is done to fill the pits and to smooth out the rough spots.

This summarizes everything I know about welding plastic.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bones on February 12, 2011, 08:26:07 PM
Wobbly
       Been building 2 bikes with my son, one for me (500 Weslake) and one for him (yz 80 yamaha) He is now the offical team welder.
The learning curve is pretty steep at the moment.He gets a bit frustrated when I tell him to make a weld joint a neater fit.
I am having a great time teaching him and taking him to visit some of my racing mates. He seems to be enjoying it
I hope you and your daughter are having as good a time as Alex and I.
If all goes to plan I will bring the weslake to BUB.
Some shots of Alex and his bike
    (http://)(http://i246.photobucket.com/albums/gg102/bonesracing/IMGP3899.jpg)
(http://)(http://i246.photobucket.com/albums/gg102/bonesracing/IMGP3904-1.jpg)
(http://)(http://i246.photobucket.com/albums/gg102/bonesracing/IMGP3768.jpg)
on the weslake.  chassis are similar
cheers   Bones
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 15, 2011, 10:38:54 PM
That young fellow tucks in real nice and tight to that weslake.  He looks like he is ready to ride.  That is nice of you to work with him.  My wife calls these "precious moments."

We took the bike apart and the frame, swingarm, etc. went to the painter today.  It will be walnut shell blasted, epoxy primered, and painted with urethane or enamel.  I do not know which is best.  Any advice is appreciated.  The bike will be a trail bike and see occasional use on the salt.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Geo on February 15, 2011, 11:21:11 PM
Wobbly,

I like what you are doing with the bike.  All of them. Some ideas I can take and apply top my car work.  Thanks for posting all your thoughts. 

Love what you are doing with the children. That really makes me feel good and I apply the same principals to my child.  We do not work on the car much but spend time on science and math.

I have found the two part paint body shops use for accident repairs strong and any color can be mixed to match.

All the best,

Geo
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 16, 2011, 10:30:45 PM
Science and math will help that girl.  A few years ago my oldest girl was in a college class and I had an hour or so to wait until she was done.  I wandered over to the engineering building.  The sight of it made me yawn and get a bit sleepy.  Inside, there were more ladies in the classes than guys.  They sat up front and looked interested.  Taking notes, too.  A big change.  When I was in engineering skool there were hardly any girls, nobody sat in the front row except for the occasional suckup, and in my case, I was not smart enough to listen to the lecture and write anything down at the same time.

The paint shop wanted paint codes.  I looked on the internet and found codes for Fire Red and Silver.  I gave these to the painter and I wandered around the shop looking at the cars-in-progress and the pictures on the wall.  Obviously these guys know what they are doing and more about paint than I do.  I said "Put on a good epoxy primer and the top coat that you think will work best.  This is not a show bike and it will be used on the trail and the salt at Bonneville.  The paint cost is a small part of the job.  Use the best.  Tell me when it is done and I will come down and get it."       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on February 18, 2011, 11:33:53 AM
+1 on the paint directions....they are the professionals!  I am building a Triumph Cub and think I have the rules figured that I will be competing in Modified Chasis - Pushrod Gas so I think my number plates should read 250cc M-PG.  Thanks for all of your advice and special tips. I am a novice when it comes to motor building. I've restored a few bikes but thought a slow-speed attempt might be worthy of my effort.

Its great to work with your children! I learned a long time ago that I must have been brought up wrong!  I had been conditioned to STAND AND TAKE IT when voices are raised in anger or frustration.  My wife abruptly leaves those situations........so I have had to learn to teach our daughters to have patience and understanding.  Somehow they have turned out OK and seem to have the know-how of when to apply the appropriate response to a given situation. My youngest rides with me and is hoping to buy her own bike.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 19, 2011, 01:49:24 AM
That number plate lettering seems OK.  There is a younger fellow from Iowa or Nebraska on this forum that is building a Tiger Cub or Terrier.  There have been some fast Tiger Cubs on the salt in the past.  This is an interesting project and I hope to meet you at BUB.

The British did lunar exploration just like the US.  This is a little known fact.  It was Wallace and Gromit.  Wallace is a cheese lover and he wanted to find out what the moon tasted like.  Their rocket technology has been a well kept secret until now.  Haynes, the technical manual publisher, has a new book that details all of the inner workings of the rocket including cutaway drawings and "meticulously researched detailed technical descriptions."  The February 2011 British magazine "The Classic Motor Cycle" has a little article about the book.  Wallace and Gromit, like many famous people and dogs, ride a Triumph.  There is an article in the same Classic Bike showing a recreation of their famous combination.

Team Go Dog Go has ordered a book.  Most things the team does are shown on the build diary, but not this.  Incorporating bits and pieces of space age technology into our build is best kept secret.  Listen for the big boom when the Triumph breaks the sound barrier.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: charlie101 on February 19, 2011, 02:54:37 AM
I got to warn you Wobbly, dont put a penny in any gas stove and dont ever let the evil penguin get hold of your Techno Trousers! :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 21, 2011, 12:45:55 AM
I will remember that.

Is there a preservative to keep cast iron or steel brake drums and disks from rusting and not cause brake problems when they are used?  This will be used on a race bike that is stored in a humid climate during the winter. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on February 22, 2011, 10:17:00 PM
Paint the parts.........then soda blast and acetone for use.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 26, 2011, 12:48:38 AM
It is a small fuzzy photo buried deep in an obscure publication.  For some strange reason, having this little picture in the B'ville News means as much to me as anything else I have done.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Beairsto Racing on February 26, 2011, 03:08:48 AM
Congrats Bo!!  :cheers:

I enjoy following your build diary, thanks for sharing your experience and skills. The info is always positive and I really like that you make it a family effort.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on February 26, 2011, 11:22:41 AM
Whaddaya mean, "obscure publication"?  I was going through that very paper, saw that very photo, just about ten minutes ago.  Does that mean I'm "obscure", too?  Nancy, what do you think?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 28, 2011, 02:03:29 AM
Thanks for the compliment Mr Bearisto.

The frame is back from the painter.  They used an epoxy primer.  I asked for that.  Usually I use zinc chromate primer and I want to experiment.  The top coat choice was theirs.  They used urethane enamel for the color coat and clear over that.  The paint matches the original Yamaha Fire Red.

Years ago I had two Matchless 500 cc single cylinder bikes.  A 1948 and a 1953.  One was made at a time when chrome and nickel were scarce.  The rims, spokes, and almost everything was painted.  This worked OK.  The zinc plating is gone from a lot of the parts on this bike and they will be painted silver.  Its a budget thing.  The parts need to be stripped of rust before painting.

The wire wheel on the bench grinder works good for the big parts.  It is dangerous to clean the little ones on the wheel.  These grit impregnated bristle brushes on the drill press work good for the small ones.  I use them with a slow speed of 280 rpm or a moderate 560 rpm.  They are much, much, safer than a wire wheel.  The grey one is coarse, the orange one is intermediate, and the blue one is fine.  All are needed to do good work.  Usually I use the coarse one to remove the rust and the finer ones to polish out the scratches.  The drill press table is set at a height where I can rest my wrists on the table when I am holding the part against the brush.  This gives better control. Grease and dirt can load up these brushes so they do not cut.  It is best to clean the part before the brush work.  These are Nyalox brushes made by Dico products in Utica, New York.  I got them at the local Ace Hardware. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bak189 on February 28, 2011, 10:55:55 AM
Question Wobbly!!......seeing that you make your own fairings and you race at the BUB meet....why not build a Dustbin fairing for your bike?????....................................................................................
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 01, 2011, 02:13:25 AM
These Hinckley Bonnevilles have a tendency to speed wobble on deceleration.  Not just mine, my friends also have this problem.  The fairing weight makes it worse.  Some changes to the steering geometry, radial tires, proper suspension setup, and how I ride can manage the problem, but not completely cure it.  The weight of a dustbin might make the bike unrideable. This is what I worry about.  I get up to speed and I cannot shut the bike down without the death wobble. 

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bak189 on March 01, 2011, 10:07:20 AM
OK. I understand......see you at the BUB.....
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 01, 2011, 11:53:23 PM
Bak, I have a problem and a plan.

My friends deal with the Triumph wobble when they street race.  One bought a pair of upper tubes from "Forking by Frank."  I am not sure if Frank's stocked these or if he had them made.  He installed them with "gold valves."  I am not sure what they are.  The tubes have thicker walls, they flex less, and they help him a lot.

The standard Triumph fork springs are too soft and they sag excessively.  I bought a set of progressive springs.  All "off the shelf" racing springs for these bikes are progressive.  I much prefer a stiffer than standard straight rate spring.  IKON in Australia built the rear shoks and they did a good job.  They make custom springs.  A set of heavier straight weight fork springs should be no problem for them.

There is a frame modification used by the folks that road race these bikes in the Thruxton Series.

These four front suspension mods, reshaping the lower part of the fairing to modern practice, and fabricating an airbox to fit the flat slides will keep me busy and out of trouble for this year and next.  This 865 cc engine has 70 horsepower and it can have 80 with some fiddling and bigger valves.  I want to spend a few years on chassis strength and aero before I monkey with the motor.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: stay`tee on March 02, 2011, 06:28:00 AM
These Hinckley Bonnevilles have a tendency to speed wobble on deceleration.  Not just mine, my friends also have this problem.  The fairing weight makes it worse.  Some changes to the steering geometry, radial tires, proper suspension setup, and how I ride can manage the problem, but not completely cure it.  The weight of a dustbin might make the bike unrideable. This is what I worry about.  I get up to speed and I cannot shut the bike down without the death wobble. 

   

Wobbly, i can see that you are attempting to cure the handling problem, and that  is the correct move,,, however, in the short term, have you tried pulling the bike down from speed by applying the back brake (back brake only) while still holding power to the motor, then slowly backing out of the throttle, only shutting the throttle completly off once the bike is below the "wobble" zone ?,,,
This method has always worked for me, both on the street and dragstrip, whenever a machine has got the "death shakes" or had a flat rear tire, :-),,,
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bak189 on March 02, 2011, 10:31:47 AM
Back in the 1970's I rode a Vincent with Brampton forks on the salt.....when I shut the bike down after
a fast ride (125mph?) it would go into a "wobble"....using the rear brake to drag the bike down and leaving some power on worked (as has been noted) needless to say I rode the bike only a couple of times.....
we changed the front forks to Vincent's later model....and had no more problems........we even got it up to
140mph
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 02, 2011, 10:55:22 PM
I will remember the back brake trick.

Today I looked at the Vincent Girdraulic fork in my old books.  I know that they work well, but I cannot figure out why.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 04, 2011, 12:39:54 AM
Today I called Forking by Frank in Evanston, Illinois.  They made the stronger fork tubes that my friend uses.  Frank's told me the original equipment Triumph inner tube wall thickness, and theirs, too.  Some quick figuring is needed to show if the benefits are worth the effort and expense.

The calculations assume the ability of the tube to resist flexing is directly proportional to its moment of inertia around an axis through the tube center.  This simple assumption will work for this application.  The old and new forks will differ in the inner tube inside diameter, only.  Their lengths, etc will not be changed.  It would be possible, using much more complicated math, to compare the flexural properties of a change in fork length and wall thickness.

The new tubes will resist flexural bending 19 percent better than the old ones.  This is a substantial increase in strength in an area of troublesome weakness.  I will order a pair.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on March 05, 2011, 02:52:01 PM
Good advice on the tubes...........since you are ordering a pair.........have you considered the length?  Maybe you would want to change the front wheel size (taller and more narrow rim) and adjust for frame height with shorter tubes. You may only want to run the rear brake. In '09 BUB I helped (block of wood) remove the complete brake system from the front of the electric bike. Next day they ran 10mph faster with no wobble.  Just a thought........you seem to ride it well!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 05, 2011, 09:49:48 PM
This morning our Triumph club had its monthly breakfast and I talked to people with experience.  The Triumph fork tubes are unusually thin for a bike of that weight and speed. The thicker tubes will be similar to what most bikes are using.  This year the stronger tubes are what I will do.  Cost is a big issue.  The fix can be done for between $300 and $400.  This I can afford.

The sun came out today and it quit raining for a couple of hours.  I almost forgot what the bright shiny fellow looks like.  Summer is on its way.  I hope it arrives soon. 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 06, 2011, 12:48:18 AM
The Old Scrambler has an excellent idea. A fork length change to accommodate a different size wheel.  In this case I would go to a smaller, rather than larger, front rim.  There is a 19-inch spoked rim on the bike with tube type tire, now.  A 17-inch rim has these advantages.  There are many more choices in high speed rubber.  There is less gyroscopic effect with a smaller wheel.  There are "mag" wheels in the smaller size, and this allows tubeless tires.  This would eliminate the tube weight and it would be safer.  Tubeless tires tend to deflate at a slower rate when punctured.

Simply fitting a 17-inch wheel on the front would drop the headstock an inch, it would steepen the steering angle, and trail would be decreased.  All of this would hurt stability.  Fitting the 17-inch wheel with an inch longer fork will preserve the current steering geometry.  Stability will not be compromised.  The fork tubes will be raised an inch in the triple clamps until I am able to get the money for the smaller wheel.  I will lower them when I fit the new hoop.

One problem I will have is the spring preload adjuster on the top of each fork tube.  There is no room for them when the tubes are raised an inch.  The handlebar gets in the way.  I must remove them.  This is a problem.  I run maximum spring preload when the fairing is on the bike.  This keeps the proper ride height with the added weight.  I use the minimum preload setting when the fairing is off.  This makes the ride a lot smoother.     

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on March 06, 2011, 03:00:57 PM
We all know that the basic law of physics requires reaction to change. If you are suffering fork sag......a simple solution is a 2-step process........heavier fluid and a slight overfill.  Spring preload will shorten the overall potential travel but they should never fully compress. Preload alone tends to lead to a bound spring situation which typically results in a wobble because no two springs are absolutely equal.  Your fairing is not only adding weight but it adds substantial down-force at speed. The effect has been measured by just adding a small fly-screen.

Regarding wheel and tire size...........I like tubeless for safety, weight, and availability.  I like tubes on skinny TALL rims for soft track conditions because they roll easier and ADD gyroscopic effect to counter any shift in weight.  Smaller wheels steer quicker but this is straight-line riding. Their is a wide selection of modern 21-inch tires with speed ratings of 130 and up.  Maybe I am wrong, or don't competely understand the physics, but dirt-bike riding and observing my fellow riders tells me that wire spokes and aluminum rims are lighter than cast.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 06, 2011, 10:30:07 PM
We got the seniority list at work last week.  Basically, they give this to us before the layoffs.  For once in my life being old is a good thing.  I am not at the top of the list, but close to it.  This always bothers me.  The first to go are the young guys and gals.  They are our future.  Heck, I would retire early, except I have children at home and an expensive hobby.  That 19-inch "paid for" front wheel is looking really good right now.  It will be on that bike for a looong time.

Frank's wanted me to send in a fork tube so they could match it.  No problem, I pulled one off.  The front wheel and fender need to be removed to install the fairing.  This is a perfect time to fit the new tail and reshaped front.  I did this, put on the monkey suit, and climbed on.  The front view is shown.

Several things are apparent.  First, I need to increase the front coverage.  This will be done next year.  Second, I need to tuck in my toes.  Third, look at my eyes.  They can barely see out from under my lid.  I cannot get down and lower and still see where I am going.  The helmet blocks the view.  Is there a good helmet that gives forward vision for a guy tucked down low?  See the side view.  I need to get lower.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: MC 1314 on March 06, 2011, 10:37:48 PM
I have the same 'helmet' problem, between my ever expanding belly and vision out of the helmet I have to keep my head up too far to see where I'm going. Is there a helmet that allows more vision? I tilt mine back just before takeoff which helps for a bit but vibration brings it down too quickly.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on March 07, 2011, 10:19:40 AM
I hear ya on the budget and work issues.............I started with a badly worn and abused Tiger Cub motor and a frame for $300.  Have added $700 in parts to the motor. The rest is salvaged from a swamp full of old bikes, a friend's metal bending skills, and then the tires and helmet.

Every inch you shave from your butt will lower the helmet at the same angle.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: octane on March 07, 2011, 03:09:35 PM
... Third, look at my eyes.  They can barely see out from under my lid.  I cannot get down and lower and still see where I am going.  The helmet blocks the view...
Naaaaaaaa, Bo my man:

Here's a comparative study between your riding position/helmet position as shown on your picture
and my riding position/helmet position:
I've made a line going from 'temple' to 'rear processed food exit'
and a line showing the angle of helmet position, in relation to above said line:

(http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/bb220/octane98extra/bo.jpg)

(http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/bb220/octane98extra/sideview-1.jpg)

as clearly shown it IS possible to "..get lower.." and
I'm quite sure it IT possible with your present helmet, to "..still see where [you] are going..",
couse I am in fact riding with your very helmet on that picture,
( You were kind enough to lend it to me. Thanks )
Note the angle between the lines on the two pictures.
You need to get down lower and raise your head a bit.


.-)

Some sort of "pillow"/support on the tank, as I have, will help you get down
and still be confortable in that position
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WhizzbangK.C. on March 07, 2011, 03:31:15 PM
Some of us have "issues" that prevent tilting our heads back very far (mine is a previous neck surgery limiting range of motion). This is one of the factors that prompted my sit down design. In researching this problem I did stumble upon a reference that said Simpson makes a motorcycle helmet with a raised eye port. Said it's not listed in their catalog but you need to call them direct to get info. I also found a new helmet on the market late last year called Shark Vision-R that claims to have the highest vertical eye port on the market, but couldn't find any info on certifications that would tell if it's legal to race with. You might Google it and give them a call to find out.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 07, 2011, 11:06:23 PM
Today I remembered that I could get down real low during, um, "testing and development."  After work I put on my street helmet and I can see just fine down low, as shown in the photo.  Then I looked for differences between the two helmets.  The Bell racing job has thicker padding and some sort of wind dam in the back.  This tilts the helmet down over my eyes when I get low.  The picture shows this.  I will look for thinner padding and no air dam on the back when I get a new lid.

The chiton-like back armor I use is shown.  The armor works OK with the street helmet.  The back edge of the Bell racing helmet is lower than the same part on the street helmet.  The back edge rubs on the armor when I tilt my head back and it pushes the helmet down over my eyes.  I adjusted the body armor lower on my back.  This helps.  After this I could see sorta OK with the racing helmet.  The picture shows this.

Ol Scrambler, my bony old butt is almost on the frame rails.  I cannot get any lower, tushwise, unless I do some cutting and welding.  This is a typical problem when using a production chassis.  K.C., I will look at those helmets.  Lars, I will limber up and try to get lower.  My problem is no neck.  I am built like a squirrel.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on March 08, 2011, 02:29:19 AM
but couldn't find any info on certifications that would tell if it's legal to race with. You might Google it and give them a call to find out.

Try the source
G

http://www.smf.org/cert
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on March 08, 2011, 05:55:31 AM
Sorry! I was the one who said to look at Snell, but that's for helmets. You shoud be looking at SFI ( sfifoundation.com ) under "Manufacturers". Right now only Safety Solutions and HANS are listed. They update the site pretty promptly so others may be added at any time.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 08, 2011, 09:34:51 PM
The next few posts will be about the fork rebuild.  This is covered in brief in the Triumph manual and in more detail in the Haynes book.  Things not in either will be mentioned here.

The forks have slider bushings as shown in the photo.  The wider diameter one is the upper bushing and it is mounted in the outer tube.  The narrower width one is mounted on the tube end.  They are teflon coated and they are durable.  I like to replace them periodically so as to minimize wear on the sliders and tubes.  Both parts last longer if the teflon coating is not worn off the bushings.  New bushings at 25,000 to 30,000 miles seem about right with oil changes at every 12,000 miles.  New bushings are recommended when new inner tubes are installed, like I am doing.

The upper bushing, seal, and dust cover in the picture are available from Triumph.  The lower bushing is not.  A person needs to buy a new inner tube to get a new lower bushing from Triumph.  The lower bushing, as well as the upper bushing, seal and cover are available from Race Tech at www.racetech.com.  They are the only source of the lower bushings that I know about.

Triumph had forks made by Kayaba or Showa.  It is easy to get things mixed up.  Frank's asked me to send in an upper tube so they could make a perfect match.  This is not absolutely necessary.  Franks has plans for most fork tubes.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 11, 2011, 12:41:11 AM
The stronger inner tubes and new seals and bushings are on order.  New fork springs? that is the question now.

Several years ago I bought a set of progressive springs and I installed them with a lot of preload.  This keeps the front end up and it works OK for LSR.  The downside of this is the progressive nature of the springs.  The springs have a very high rate when the forks are compressed and the ride is harsh on the street with the fairing removed.

Last night I ordered a set of straight rate springs that are 15 to 20 percent heavier rate than standard.  It is estimated they will be strong enough to keep the front end high with the fairing on.  Also, they are not progressive so the forks will compress farther and the ride will be smoother on bumpy streets.  The downside is the possibility the front end drop too much during shutdown on the salt and result in a speed wobble.

The springs are being wound in Australia by IKON.  They made the custom rear shocks and they did a good job.

This is an experiment.  The old springing is OK but I want to try a different concept and see how things work.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bak189 on March 11, 2011, 11:10:29 AM
Buy a good used Ceriani fork for around $300.00 to $400.00 and your problems will be solved.......It worked for my Tri. Triple...(1995..Bird)...............New parts..spring,seals, are still made by Paioli....
OR better yet try to find a set of Rickman Forks.....like we are using on our LSR sidecar.....hard to find
but great forks........
Find Ceriani forks on E-Bay for fair prices.................................................................................
Just a thought!!!!!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 12, 2011, 01:13:12 PM
The little Yamaha build is chugging along.  The plan is to restore the chassis first then to take apart the motor.  There is less loose stuff laying around the shop this way.  This 1986 model is an older bike.  The parts guys at the local dealer always seem to be in a hurry and they are not effective at getting the parts.  Plus, they give me that "look" that is normally used when dealing with the slow and retarded.  A older guy restoring a trail bike is not their ideal customer, I guess.  Now I buy the Yamaha goodies on the internet.  These are a few things I have learned.  A lot of us have older equipment and this might be useful.

Yamaha makes an incredible number of parts for the dinosaur.  Their stuff fits and is high quality so it is my preference.  There are several internet outfits that sell original equipment parts.  Chapparal, Cheap Cycle Parts, Bike Bandit, and others.  I do not know if any are better than the others.  Bike Bandit is able to find almost everything and ship it to me.  Usually a big box of parts arrives quickly followed by mailers with individual hard-to-find parts arriving later.  The Bandit cannot find everything.  There are parts shown on the Bandit parts drawings that are not on the bandit parts list.

The folks at Chapparal have a parts list with Yamaha parts numbers.  They show the parts that have been superseded and the new Yamaha parts numbers.  A click on the parts description on the Chapparal list brings up another screen.  This one shows all of the other Yamaha models that use the part.  Often Chapparal can find the hard to get piece.  If they can't, I type the Yamaha part number into my internet search engine.  Links appear and some are for folks who have the part.  Often these are people have a hoard of obsolete new or used parts. 

The internet is what I use for the old stuff.  The parts and accessories for the newer bike come from the local bike shop.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 16, 2011, 01:20:56 AM
The new fork inner tubes have a smaller internal diameters than the standard tubes.  Standard Triumph springs will not fit inside the 1.380 ID tubes.  It is obvious new fork springs will be needed in a smaller diameter.  Not so apparent is that smaller diameter rebound springs will be needed too.  These are the little guys that fit around the damper rod.  They also must fit inside the new fork tube.

The fork springs I have been using have a 35/50 pound-inch progressive rate.  The 35 pound-inch rate is too light and the front end dives too deep on deceleration.  The 50 pound-inch maximum rate seems OK.  The forks do not bottom.  The springs I ordered are 50 pound-inch straight rate.  This will keep the nose higher during shutdown.

The little rebound springs should have higher spring rates to match the beefier fork springs.  IKON is aware of this and they are making stronger new rebound springs.

Bak - Cerianis are good forks.  These Triumph ones will be good, too, when I am done.  There is an old hot rod tradition in America of the "sleeper."  I am not sure if people run sleepers in Europe or elsewhere.  This bike follows that theme when it is in street trim.  All sorts of extra work has been done to keep the bike looking like a production Triumph.  It does look like one.  Lots of the racing mods are hard to see unless one has a trained eye.  The forks are following that theme, too.  They will look like production items except for the Thruxton spring preload adjusters.  Thanks for the suggestion about the lithium battery.  I will get one sometime this spring. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 18, 2011, 01:22:49 AM
A news video about the Japan nuclear disaster said some workers are going in to fix the reactors with the knowledge they will die.  This tears me up inside.  It is hard to concentrate on LSR or anything else with this happening.

Sometimes we want to shorten our fork.  The method shown here is easy to do and it is reversible.  In other words, it is easy to make them longer again.  That cannot be done if the tubes are shortened to reduce the fork length.

Most modern forks are like these Showas.  There are long compression springs and short rebound springs.  The compression springs sit atop the damper rod pistons and the rebound springs surround the damper rods.  Often there are spacers on top of the compression springs.  This fork does not have spacers.   Instead, it has additional shorter compression springs.  Reducing the fork length is simply swapping the longer stiffer secondary compression springs for the shorter lighter rebound springs.  This will shorten the fork about an inch.

A fussy person would install a stiffer compression springs when this is done.  The shorter forks have less travel and stiffer springs are needed to keep them from bottoming.  I am not going to do this.  Approximately right is good enough for me.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 21, 2011, 12:00:55 AM
A lot of good photographers enjoy land speed racing.  Each has their own style.  We are fortunate.   

The new Norton push rod twin ran at BUB last year.  This was a big event for the factory and they had an official photographer, Phil Hawkins.  Phil was kind enough to take a picture of the Triumph.  It is a nice photo.  The composition, focus, and lighting are all first class.  We used it for this year's team photo.

There is an article about the Norton at BUB in the March 2011 English magazine "Motorcycle Sports and Leisure."  There is a shot of the Norton's back end on the cover and many in the article.  All are Phil's.  This magazine is on stateside news stands now.   

There are two professional photographers named Phil Hawkins.  The motorcycle Phil has the website www.ishootfromthehip.com   There are more Norton pictures there.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 23, 2011, 12:30:18 AM
The front and rear tin work is put on with the low bars to see how the aerodynamics look.  I can not turn the handlebar.  The fairing is in the way.  This is a minor detail I am going to ignore, but I am bored and need something to do.  Some cutting and other mayhem will ensue.

Lots of grooves are needed in the aluminum frame.  Somewhere around the shop are my air tool bits.  The only one I can find is this worthless looking thing with the little dimples.  I never used it before and I have no choice but to use it now.  It works wonderful and much better than the other bits.  The secret is to use kerosene as a lubricant to keep it from loading up with aluminum.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 23, 2011, 10:05:47 PM
The fork lowering shown a few posts previous is for the little Yamaha.  The Triumph will not be lowered.

Often I will try new things.  There are four things I look at.  First, the basic principles must make sense, second, I need to be able afford it, and third, there has to be an exit strategy.  Fourth, and most important, the change must not cause a bunch of problems in other areas.  The concept of inertia or speed sensitive damping makes sense from a theoretical viewpoint and it costs only a few hundred dollars.  What the heck, I will try it.

There are several companies that make fancy damping valves.  RICOR is in Henderson, Nevada, and they promptly answered my questions in an intelligent manner.  This is a custom application and I had a few.   Also, their modification does not require drilling the damper rod.  Going back to standard simply means draining the fork oil, removing the springs and the valves, and putting the springs back in.  The "exit strategy" is simple.  I chose RICOR Intimidators.  They are custom made for the narrower fork tube internal diameters.

The Intimidators are shown.  I also ordered extra shims and an adjusting tool.  They fit below the fork springs and on the top of the damper rod as shown in the photo.

The fork springs I am using are made for holding up the fairing.  They are stiff for use with out it.  Hopefully the speed sensitive damping will smooth things out when street riding and they will help make things a bit smoother.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 30, 2011, 01:11:34 AM
Engines are the most expensive part of racing.  Mine are expected to give me five years between builds.  My method is to stash away some money each year in the motor fund between the builds.  I have been stashing away a lot.  All of the easy stuff is done and the next build will cost major $$$.  The hoarding will give me the money I need when I need it.  A brilliant plan.  There is one minor flaw.

The oldest girl works hard as a waitress and she needed a car.  Bus service is cut back because of the depression and she could no get to school.  No problem, I dug into the motor fund for a down payment.  It was tough.  Then there was the new washing machine...  Many months later the motor fund was finally back up to some useful level.  Visions of big valves, titanium, mongo size pistons in billet jugs, all were in my daydreams at work.  Life was good.

Last week the youngest girl and I went up to Portland to retrieve the oldest girl at the airport.  We scheduled an extra few hours in case there was heavy traffic.  There was none and we got there early.  Enough time to nip into a bike shop and get some cartridge fork oil for the Triumf.  The youngest and I have been looking at some small bikes on the second floor for many months.  She is growing fast and wanted to see if she could straddle a bigger scoot.  She sat on various bikes and she picked one she really liked.  A brand new 2009 model.   It was time to go.  Then the salesman showed up.  He said "You want it?  $600 off of the 2009 price and 0% interest for 6 months."  She looked up at me with those big brown eyes and said "I'll take care of it papa."  "I really want to ride."  This girl does all of her chores and gets straight A's in school.  What else could I do?  The motor fund takes a big nuclear bomb hit.

Vaguely on the way home I remembered doing the same thing with my father.  He was a tough old cookie and I paid half of the $869 cost of my new Yamaha DT1.  He took care of the rest.  We bring the new baby home on Saturday and I will post some pix. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: MC 1314 on March 30, 2011, 07:12:02 AM
 Wobbly.. That will pay dividends forever! You certainly did the right thing. The only thing I haven't decided on is the color of my 5 year olds first Corvette..lol
Bob
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: dadsolds on March 30, 2011, 11:53:03 PM
What a dad!
Wait 'till she comes up the driveway on a liter bike.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on March 31, 2011, 06:19:32 PM
Wobbly,
I always enjoy reading your build threads.  A lot of people don't post simple fixes because they must figure everyone else already knows how to do it.  Not So!  

I have two comments.  One about your problem with being able to see out of your helmet.  When I ran my BSA B50 in '09 &'10, I had the same problem.  But by duct taping a firm chunk of foam rubber to the top of the frame (on top of the oil fill on the B50) I was able to rest the front of my helmet on that rubber, which forced my helmet up which allowed me to lower my head.  I picked up 2 mph with that change alone.

In regards to shortening the length of your forks (those pictured on the previous page - Yamaha?), which look a lot like the CB360 ones that I am using on my new build.  Funny how thoughts happen, but I was going to cut a piece out of the damper tube (irreversible), but now realize that all I have to do is add a spacer between the rebound spring and the top of the damper rod, which will limit the travel. Easy and reversible.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 31, 2011, 11:59:54 PM
Thanks for the compliment.  That foam trick is great.  It works.  So simple yet not obvious.

The tubes arrived from Franks.  The standard tubes weigh 3 lbs 1 oz each.  The thicker tubes are 3 lbs 14 oz.  Showa has bottoming blow-off valves that are pressed in to the tube ends.  I was worried about the Franks tubes.  Would they have the valves?  They do.  Franks installs their own as part of the standard price.  They are held in by circlips.  These tubes from Franks are a good deal when considering the amount of work and material it takes to make them.  Their service was very good. 

The tubes have 1.380-inch inner diameters and these are smaller than standard as mentioned in prior posts.  The Triumph upper springs will not fit.  Progressive Suspension makes some that will and Franks knows the part numbers.  The little topping springs fit around the damping rods and they are often forgotten about.  They must be smaller diameter, too.  Both the longer and shorter springs are being wound in AUS by Ikon.

The damper rods fit in the narrower tubes.  The damper rod rings do not and the end gaps need to be filed larger.  This is just like filing the gaps on piston rings.  The damper rods would need to be drilled to install some types of aftermarket valves.  This is not needed with the Ricor.  It must be specified on ordering that the valves are for a late model Triumph Bonneville with 1.380-inch inner dia tubes.  Otherwise, the valves will not fit.

Ricor specifies AMSOIL 5W fork oil and they developed the valve settings using this oil.  Fork oils in 5 weight, or any other weight, are not all the same viscosity.  There is a lot of variation between brands.  I could not find the AMSOIL locally.  Instead, I am using a high quality cartridge fork oil I can for a good price and I am adjusting the valving as needed for that oil.  It is important that I continue to use the same oil after the adjustment.  Use of another brand might mean a readjustment will be needed.   

     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 03, 2011, 01:49:58 AM
The little bike came home today.  Gretchen is 13 and it will be a few years before she can ride on the street.  She has time to get dirt and salt experience first, like her older brother, Werner.  Tomorrow we take off the street equipment.  Also, we take off and store the nice new plastic.  Some less expensive aftermarket stuff will be put on for use in the dirt.  She is a happy girl and ready to go.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on April 04, 2011, 05:06:04 PM
++++ for Wobbly and Gretchen!!!!  Good idea about saving the original plastic.  The next owner will think it was ridden by a 'little old lady'.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 09, 2011, 12:28:35 AM
Now I have three bikes needing work.  The LSR bike, my dirt bike, and Gretchen's Yamaha.  It is crazy and I am trying to avoid doing things I do not need to do.

The fairing interfered with the low bars and I could not turn.  A fellow at BUB rides from the pits down to the start, makes a run, and circles back to the pits.  Left hand turns all the way, so I trimmed one side.  I could make left turns no problem.  I was done.  Then, in an Einstein-like flash of clear thinking, I realized I might need to make a return run.  The loop would be ridden in reverse and right turns would be the rule.  Drat.  Nothing is simple these days.  I trimmed the other side, too.  Now I can turn in either direction.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: saltwheels262 on April 09, 2011, 01:25:02 PM
ww,

you would need to turn to the right on a down run also;
if there were health issues w/ you or the bike.

franey
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 11, 2011, 01:11:20 AM
The 2011 build is done for all practical purposes.  The only things left are to finish the front forks, turn it back to a street bike for the summer, and then convert it to a lake bike for BUB.  Any speed gains this year will be due to better aero.  The pictures show last year and this.  A brand new custom cut 40 tooth will go on the back.  I need to remember "toes in, head down, and back straight" when I ride.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on April 11, 2011, 03:33:25 AM
Good luck Wobbly. It definitely has a smoother more streamlined look. Hopefully it will result in more speed. It might be worth doing a little tuft testing if you get a chance and have someone who can do the photography. :cheers: :cheers:

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on April 11, 2011, 10:30:44 AM
Wobbly the Walrus (or should that be Lobby the Lobster?)

Great looking body work.  But what class will you be running in?  The tail section now protrudes beyond the rear wheel, so MPS is out.  Maybe APS, or is it FIM?  Or you could add a longer swingarm to get the wheel back to back of tail section, but that would be quite a stretch.

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 12, 2011, 02:00:12 AM
Pete, thanks for the idea.  It got my devious mind to thinking and I will do it.  This year I plan to make my runs for time and then, the next day, tuft the bike and run it again.  Scooter Grubb's photos are very good and his normal race photography shows the rivets.  I expect the tufts will be easy to see.  The sheet metal rework is half done.  Next year I am going to move the windshield back to close the gap between the back edge and my helmet, tilt the shield so the trailing edge is flatter, and redo the lower front so it encloses the wheel in a more modern shape.  Then it will be time for some more tuft testing in 2012.

Tom, the old streamlining was legal for AMA MPS.  The new is for FIM partial streamlining and the tail can extend up to 1/2 the rear wheel rim diameter beyond the rear tire and at least 135 degrees of the lower half of the rear wheel must be visible.  The shrouds on the sides could extend farther back and lower if I wanted them to.  The swing arm is as long as it can be and give reasonable handling on twisty roads.  It is extended 3 inches.

These bikes are never finished.  There is always something to do.



 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: saltwheels262 on April 12, 2011, 10:09:51 AM


These bikes are never finished.  There is always something to do.



 

 

how right you are.

like when diane will ask- "are you done in the garage , yet? "
and i answer- " i'll never be done "
after 6 years together , she's starting to get it.

franey
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 05, 2011, 10:03:03 PM
Type "stress concentration" into Google or another search engine and all sorts of interesting material pops up.  It is good to be familiar with these concepts when it is time to inspect parts.  The primary purpose of examining parts is to spot problems before they become disasters and most distress occurs first where stress is concentrated.

This little piston has been through a lot of races.  First, I look at the skirt for cracks originating at the edges with emphasis on sharp corners or other discontinuities that concentrate stress.  These are often called stress risers.  This skirt is well designed and there no significant stress risers or cracks.

Next I look for cracks around the gudgeon pin bosses.  None there.  Then I carefully look at the skirt.  There is a very small hairline crack 2 to 3 mm long about a mm in front of the penciled arrow.  A glance at the back of the skirt shows why this area is susceptible to cracking.  These is an abrupt section change between the thin skirt and the thick reinforcing rib.  Stresses are concentrated here.  Mechanical loads may be the cause, or thermally induced stresses from repeated heating and cooling, or a combination of both.  It is time for a new piston. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 07, 2011, 10:59:59 PM
Years ago there were no systems for monitoring or collecting engine data.  Racers used their senses such as hearing, sniffing, and feel; they looked at their results; and they examined their engine parts during tear downs.  One of my big regrets is not learning from them the finer points of seeing these indicators or remembering everything the old racers told me about them.  One indicator I remember to look at is the bottom of the piston crown, as follows.

uncolored - everything is cool, calm, and controlled in the combustion chamber
slight yellow orange and shiny - hotter than uncolored, not unusual
brown and shiny - hotter than yellow orange, not unusual for an air cooled race engine
black and shiny - hot in the combustion chamber, not unusual for a race motor but too hot for a street engine
black and dull - highly oxidized oil.  A very hot mama.  Trouble waiting to happen.

The little Yamaha piston is shown with its pin.  The crown is uncolored.  It is a cool runner.  The gudgeon pin also led a happy life.  Shiny and worn with no discoloration.  An amber color would indicate that it got hot and a blue color would say it got even hotter.  This helps me make tuning decisions.  The Yamaha can tolerate some performance enhancement without running too hot.

 

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 09, 2011, 01:13:17 AM
One rocker arm adjustment screw end was pitted.  This indicates that the valve clearance was excessive and the valve was being slammed open and shut.  This stressed the valve train and I looked at all parts carefully.  This keeper has a what appears to be a horizontal crack in the conical hole about 2 mm below the top.  I have never seen a keeper crack in this location.  Needless to say, both keepers, both valves, and all four collets will be replaced, and I will pay more attention to keeping the valve clearances correct.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 10, 2011, 12:22:31 AM
The Triumph forks come apart in the typical fashion of Showa units.  The bolts on the bottom of the forks that hold the damping rods in place are removed along with the wire circlips that retain the fork seals.  The inner and outer tubes are repeatedly pulled apart like a slide hammer.  This loosens and pulls out the seals and outer fork bushings.  One of the seals was corroded in place.  It appeared that salt somehow got in there.  Imagine that.

It took a lot of violent slide hammering to separate the tubes.  The fork bushings got bunged up in the process.  The teflon coating was wearing off of them, too.  This is not good.  The bushings are steel with copper plating and a teflon coating.  The teflon keeps the steel bushings from wearing out the aluminum outer tubes and the polished steel inner tube.  New bushings are needed.

Truimph makes the outer bushings that are housed in the outer fork tube.  They do not supply the inner bushings.  The only supplier I could find for the inner bushings in GB or USA was Race Tech.  I ordered a set of dust seals, oil seals, outer fork bushings, and inner bushings from them.  Nothing they sent would fit the forks.  All was returned to them except the inner bushings.  I ordered Triumph parts and I will Mc Gyver the Race Tech lower bushings to fit.  These are split sleeve bushings as shown in the photo.  The original bushings will be used as a guide.

The part is blackened and some sharp divider calipers are set at a distance 0.5 mm wider than the original bushings.  The dividers are used to scribe a line around the longer bushing.  This method is useful when a line must be scribed that is parallel to a face.  See the picture.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 11, 2011, 12:39:06 AM
These bushings must fit tightly against the groove in the inner fork tube.  It is important to not trash the teflon coating or bend them during the next steps.  It is almost impossible to get them bent back to the correct shape.  The bushings are laid on a dowel and sawed to a length about 0.5 mm longer than the finished dimension.

The sawed bushings are sanded to the final length.  Coarse sandpaper is used first followed by finer grits.  I measure them periodically with my cheap dial calipers as I work them closer to the finished size.  It is possible to get them close to perfect with some patience.


 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 12, 2011, 12:57:42 AM
The bushing is sanded to size and the rough sanded edge is smoothed with an oil stone.  The bushing is put on the new fork tube and the end gap is measured and compared to the gap in the old bushing on the old fork tube.  A line is scribed on the new bushing, it is removed, and a file is used to get the correct gap on the new bushing.

One trick I use is to file down close to the final surface using my eyes with no magnification.  Then I do the final filing under the magnification and light of the lamp I use for parts inspection.  This results in much more accurate work.

It is tempting to ignore this step and to leave the gap small.  Some fork oil is trapped between the inner and outer tubes.  This oil flows in and out of the gap when the fork is compressed or extended.  I always make the gap the same width as it was on the original tube and bushing.  This assures the oil flow will be correct.  About 2 or 3 mm needed to be trimmed from the new bushing to get the right gap. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 13, 2011, 12:39:56 AM
The last step in the bushing project is the final fitting.  The bushing is put on the fork tube and the fork tube is clamped upside down in a vice.  Leather protects the tube from the jaws.  The outer tube is pushed on.  It is an interference fit.  The bushing is removed and the inside of the bushing is sanded.  The fit is checked again.  This procedure is repeated several times until the outer tube fits on the inner with a clearance fit.  The fit is checked on the other three bushings, too.  All bushings are tuned so they are barely large or small enough to provide a clearance fit.  Now it is time to put the fork together.

The fork will have thicker tubes and they fit in homemade triple clamps with 7 mm less offset than standard.  This has been a big project undertaken over several years and it has been a lot of work.  It is done to give the bike the stability and strength to carry a lot of sheet metal streamlining.  There is another way to do this.  Unfortunately for me, I learned about it last week.

The German company LSL makes triple clamps with 52 mm offset.  This is 3 mm less than the 55 mm Bonneville offset and 8 mm less than the 60 mm Thruxton offset.  This will give stability.  The LSL clamps are 200 mm wide.  This is 10 mm wider than the 190 mm standard clamps.  The LSL clamps can be made to accept the standard 41 mm fork tubes or stronger 43 mm tubes.  There is a picture of a brown tanked Triumph on their website www.clubman.de  It has the clamps.  The webpage is in German.  I contacted them in English by e-mail.  They promptly replied in English with answers to my questions.  Although I have not tried the LSL products, using their clamps with some bigger and stronger tubes makes a lot of sense.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 14, 2011, 03:56:49 PM
Any recommendations for a good quality satin black spray can motorcycle engine, head, and cylinder paint?  The brands I can find around here are Rustoleum, PJ-1, and VHT.  I could probably find more with minor effort.  I am looking for durability.  Cost is no big problem.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 22, 2011, 02:02:10 PM
The engine paint I tried is satin black VHT "High Temperature Motorsport Case Paint."  It applied well and seems to be tough.  Long term durability is not known.

Any recommendations on a motorcycle engine machinist?  It is an air cooled two valve single cylinder engine.  Pretty basic.  The jobs are a simple cylinder rebore, reaming valve guides and a five angle valve job.  As is typical, I procrastinated on porting the head until time is running short and I need the work done in about three to four weeks.  A person with a good reputation for quick turn around is best.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: dadsolds on May 23, 2011, 02:04:58 PM
I'd give Brent Faulkner at Hatch Engine in Aumsville a call at 503-769-7188. They've been around a long time, do aircraft, automotive, balancing, flowbench work and so on.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 27, 2011, 12:24:24 AM
The head was heated to about 350 degrees in the oven and I pounded the old guides out.  It was a hard push.  Then I did the port work.  It is a lot easier working on those little ports if the guides are out.  More room for fingers and sandpaper, etc.  Then I put the new guides in the icebox and heated the head to 350 degrees again.  I pounded them in with a brass drift.  It was a hard drive and I cracked both guides at the tops where the seals fit on.  I ordered a new pair.  How hot can a head be heated?  The oven goes up to 500 degrees.  I have gone up to 400 degrees a few times years ago but not more.  Any advice on how to install the guides? 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on May 27, 2011, 12:34:47 AM
When we were changing the bearings in the old Hewland gearboxes we usually used about 450 degrees. At that temperature the bearings would pretty much fall in or out.

I would probably build a stepped driver similar to a bushing driver to do the job.

Hope these suggestions help. They're based on my own experiences, others will certainly vary.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 27, 2011, 12:48:56 AM
Thanks, Peter.  You are right.  A snug fitting and properly sized guide driver would evenly distribute the load across the valve guide top.  My drift sometimes did not hit square and it concentrated the impact on one part of the top edge.  More heat will help.

This seems like a good job for the machinist who will be boring the jug and cutting the valve seats.  He can quickly make up a proper driver if he does not have one.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 04, 2011, 01:13:19 AM
A few posts about the humble retaining ring.  There was a broken one laying at the bottom of the engine when I took it apart.  It was used to retain a spinning or sliding component on a shaft.  An external retaining ring fits in a groove around a shaft and it was one of those that let go.

Right now I am looking at the broken ring.  Where it came from is immaterial at this time.  The goal is to look at the ring and read its story.  Its condition will tell me a lot.

First, I look for wear.  A worn ring that has lost a lot of metal is weak and easy to dislodge or break.  The ring to the right in the first picture has lost a lot of metal.  It was replaced during a periodic inspection before it failed.  My broken ring has very little wear.  This is not the failure cause.

Second, I look for discoloration or signs of heat.  Is the ring annealed by heat and easy to bend?  An overheated ring that has lost its temper is weak and easily dislodged.  My broken ring does not show signs of overheating.

Third, I look for distortion such as necking near the break or bending.  This would indicate a sudden load stretched the ring through elastic and plastic deformation until it finally was pulled apart.  The parts of my ring are not bent or stretched.  There is no necking near the break.  Nothing indicates it was pulled apart.

Fourth, was the ring put on the shaft backwards?  These rings are stamped from steel plate.  There is a face with a rounded edge and the other face has a sharp and square edge.  The loads on the ring should push the sharp edge toward the side of the groove on the shaft.  The wear marks tell the story.  The wear mark on the sharp face should be at the inside edge of the ring.  This is the reaction wear mark.  The ring to the left in the first picture shows a wear mark on the inside of the sharp face, like it should.  The second picture shows the rounded sides of two rings.  The wear marks are on the high points in the middle of the rings.  These are from the spinning gears and they are the load wear marks.  The loads are being applied to the correct faces on these two examples.  My broken ring was installed correctly.

Fifth, the process of elimination indicates that my ring was not worn out, broken from some sort of massive load, overheated, or installed backwards.  Metal fatigue from a cyclic load was the failure cause.  The engine shafts and other parts will be examined in the next post. 

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 05, 2011, 01:22:48 AM
The broken ring is shown in the first picture.  The engine is broken down and cleaned and the broken ring fit on the kick starter shaft.  The groove is worn and the edge carrying the load is rounded.  This part must be tossed.  The new retaining ring will not have adequate support.  A new shaft and the original equipment Yamaha retaining ring is ordered.  They arrive and the shaft is measured.  The outside diameter is 16.89 mm, the groove inside diameter is 15.95 mm, and the groove is 1.22 mm wide.

"external retaining ring" is typed into a computer search engine.  There are many charts on the manufacturer's websites with application charts.  It is easy to determine this is a 17 mm nominal diameter shaft and the groove is cut for a standard duty shaft ring.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 05, 2011, 02:00:57 PM
Now I am on the internet looking for a retaining clip with an increased 2nd moment of inertia.  This is often called the area moment of inertia.  All us backwoods guys do this.

There are two types of heavy duty retaining clips in my style.  One type conforms to Deutsche Industries Norm (DIN) standards.  Dimension T is much greater but dimensions S are not much different.  See attached chart for descriptions of T and S.  The formula shows that a thicker T helps and greater dimensions S help a lot more.

The other type meets American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standards.  It has a thicker T and also greater minimum and maximum S dimensions.  This is what I will use and I order a couple in the strong carbon steel.  Always, I use OEM or reputable manufacturer retaining rings.  A ring of unknown pedigree is like a blind date.  You might get lucky.  Chances are you won't.

The clips arrive and the T dimensions are too big to fit in the groove.  This is anticipated.  I rub one of the rings across some sandpaper to take off a few hundredths of a mm so it will fit.  This little rascal is quite a bit stronger than the original as shown by the math on the attached.

There you have it, my circlip trick, Part 1.  There are many uses for it.  Gear clusters and shift linkages are some.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 07, 2011, 01:19:40 AM
Part 1 was to install a stronger retaining ring.  That cures the symptom and not the problem.  More than 40 years ago I read some books about a fellow that left his body and witnessed life from the perspective of a fly on the wall.  He made some observations and went back into his body.  Powerful drugs aided this transformation.  Carlos Casteneda was the author, I think.  My memory is bad for some reason.  Anyway, I make myself small and look at life from the retaining clip's view.  I use my imagination and a bottle of Russian beer.

Fatigue is the problem here.  It can be reduced by lessening the load, reducing the number of load cycles, or keeping the retaining ring in constant tension.  In other words, a ring that is a loose fit is subject to tension and relaxation during a load cycle.  This contributes to fatigue.  A ring that tightly grips the shaft throughout the load cycle does not relax and it is less susceptible to fatigue.

An aluminum part slides along the shaft when the kick start is used.  It is a loose sliding fit on the shaft and it is worn where it contacts the circlip.  The hollowed aluminum part face tries to bend the circlip out of the groove.  This explains the rounded back edge of the groove.  I hunt around in a can of washers and find a high quality steel one that is a tight sliding fit on the shaft.  Then, I cut it to the same outside diameter as the aluminum part and I put some grooves in it to match the part.  Finally, I remove metal from the aluminum piece so the length of the washer and the aluminum part is the same as the original piece.

One thing to remember.  The face of the retaining ring with sharp edges should be forced by the load against the groove face.  The same with the washer.  The face with the sharp edges should be forced by the load against the retaining ring.  I put aluminum part on the shaft with the new washer on top of it.  The washer is positioned so the sharp edged face is pushing on the retaining ring.  Now a nice and flat piece of steel pushes evenly on the beefy retaining ring.  The forces trying to bend the ring out of the groove are greatly reduced.  There is less chance of fatigue.  This fixes the problem so it will not happen again.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 26, 2011, 01:59:29 AM
This little red and white bike has been keeping me busy with new paint and a rebuild from end to end and top to bottom.  It is done.  Now I can start back to work on the salt bike.

In SoCal I rode 500's in the desert and I took one big Yamaha with me when I moved to Oregon.  The club in Oregon I belonged to built and maintained trails in the woods.  Lots of times I had to lift the bike over logs, pull it out of bogs, push it up muddy hills, etc.  The 500 weighed too much.  I sold it and bought this little bike new in 1986.  Lots of riding and one big race every year was the routine with a mix of enduros, ISDE qualifiers, and desert races.  I won several bronze and silver medals, but no gold ones.

Several years ago I entered the China Hat 100 desert race.  There is a cinder cone on the course that looks like a Chinese coolie hat, hence the name.  Desert racing is not for a person with sense or the ability to think or reason.  Often times the ground is frozen and slick or icy.  There are barbed wire fences all around and abandoned mine shafts.  There is a lot of riding flat out in top gear in the dust.  Sometimes a fellow cannot see where he is going.  I was zipping along and an aggressive pine tree jumped right out in front of me.  I tossed the bike to the left and it went around one side of the tree.  I went around the other.  Totally smooth and painless - until I hit the ground.  Then it really hurt.  I found my glasses and the bike, restarted, and finished the race.  Neither the bike or myself have been completely the same after that.  I was 50 years old at the time and I decided to find a safer hobby, like LSR.  The bike sat and I rode it two or three times.  It ran bad, had a serious oil leak, and handled like the frame was broken.  I could not sell it for some reason.  Now my youngest girl wants to ride.  Tomorrow will be the first time we both ride together. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: octane on June 26, 2011, 08:39:54 AM
I read some books about a fellow that left his body and witnessed life from the perspective of a fly on the wall.  He made some observations and went back into his body.  Powerful drugs aided this transformation.  Carlos Casteneda was the author, I think.  My memory is bad for some reason.  Anyway, I make myself small and look at life from the retaining clip's view. ...

The above just reminded why I love reading your posts



...and again:

I was zipping along and an aggressive pine tree jumped right out in front of me.  I tossed the bike to the left and it went around one side of the tree.  I went around the other.  Totally smooth and painless - until I hit the ground. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 27, 2011, 01:19:56 AM
Thanks for the compliments, Lars.  This forum is a comfortable place for me.  Often I write the goofy thoughts I think without worrying about it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on June 27, 2011, 09:33:32 AM
WW, you've got it -- the essence of writing for others.  They'll get bits and chunks of good information as well as discovering that it's fun to read and learn said stuff.  Well done -- on the writing, too, as well as on the red and white bike for your daughter.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 28, 2011, 01:52:29 AM
Actually, Slim, the red and white old bike is mine.  The new one is hers.  We rode about 15 miles with short trails and longer road sections.  Speeds up to 30 mph on the roads.  We got back to the truck and were packing.  She said "I tried to keep up with you and my bike was going as fast as it would go."  It took about ten minutes for this to sink in.  I asked "What gear were you in, second, third?"  She said, "First gear papa.  I am afraid I will crash if I shift into second.  The bike just will not go as fast as you."  Some inner voice tells me the new engine is broken in.  She changed the oil this evening.

The forks are ready to be put together.  One picture shows the damper rods.  The inner springs are from IKON and they are custom made to fit in the narrower inside diameters of the stronger tubes.  The damper rods are unmodified OEM.  There are black plastic rings on the damper tube ends.  They are OEM with the end gaps enlarged so they will fit inside the new tubes.

The other picture shows the stronger tubes from Forking by Frank.  The dust seals, oil seals, circlips, and upper bushings are all new OEM.  The lower bushings are fabricated from some Race Tech parts.  The silver washers are OEM.

The inner tubes insides are coated with brown funk as seen on the paper towel.  This is cleaned out before assembly.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 30, 2011, 01:35:44 AM
These goodies fit inside the inner fork tubes.  The front end dives during shutdown and this causes stability problems.  The old springs were progressive wound and the softer upper spring coils were compressing and allowing the front to drop.  These custom wound springs by IKON are stiffer springs and straight wound.  There are no softer coils.

The old T-100 fork caps had no spring preload adjustment.  These caps from a Thruxton have about 20 mm of preload adjustment and they are interchangeable.  Plans are to run minimal preload on the street and greater preload on the salt.  The preload adjustment screws stick into the tops of the springs and do not work correctly unless disks are installed between them.  The disks here are valve adjustment shims from a Honda.

The motorcycle chassis with rider has lots of mass and it moves slowly in response to external forces.  The bike wheels are small and light and they move quickly.  The mushroom looking things are Ricor Intimidator fork valves and they take advantage of the different movement rates.  Slow chassis movements are damped and quick wheel movements are not.  This allows the suspension to absorb road shocks, and at the same time, keep the bike from wallowing around.  They were custom made for this application.  This is intended to help reduce front end dive.  The tool and shims between the spring are for adjusting the Intimidators.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 04, 2011, 01:28:57 AM
A lot of testing has been done these last few days to tune in the fork oil weight, oil height, spring rate, and spring preload.

First, the oil.  The standard Triumph fork oil is 10 weight and the compressed fork tubes are filled up to 120 mm of the tube tops.  The Intimidators will not work with 10 weight and a lighter oil is needed.  Ricor used Amsoil 5 weight "Shock Therapy" when they calibrated the Intimidators.  They recommend this oil, preferably, or another brand of 5 weight.  Money is tight around here and I had a full can of Yamaha S1 suspension fluid on the shelf.  It is either 0 or 5 weight oil for cartridge suspensions.  In it went.  The tubes were filled within 140 mm of the tops.  This was a height recommendation given to me by Progressive Suspension years ago.  The Intimidators work great with the Yamaha oil and this oil level.

Second, the racing springs.  The custom IKON spring is 0.9 kg/mm rate and it is 20.5 inches long.  This is about 51 pounds per inch, roughly.  I tried them with the Thruxton adjustable caps set at minimum preload.  The fork topped out when crossing over bumps.  I used the standard Triumph T-100 fork caps next.  This reduces the spring preload 0.578 inches and the topping occurred much less often.  The suspension is stiff but tolerable.  Just like an old time cafe racer.  These springs will work well with the fairing at Bonneville.  I will use them there.

Third, the street springs.  Advice I had about the Intimidators was to try them with softer springs than I would normally use.  A set of progressive Suspension #11-1126 springs fit in the tubes.  These are 35 pound / 50 pound progressive springs.  They were a bit soft for me based on past experience.  I install these progressive springs the opposite of most people.  The open coil is toward the wheel.  This is what goes on top of each spring after some experimenting:  a plain washer, a 1.577 inch long spacer, another plain washer, the Honda valve shim, and the Thruxton adjustable cap. 

Fourth, suspension settings.  The back end has a set of IKON shocks with progressive springs and adjustable damping and preload.  Salt flat settings are maximum damping and minimum preload on the shocks.  The front is not adjustable.  Street settings are to set the fork spring preload to match the shock spring preload.  Full preload on the shocks means the preload adjusters on the forks are screwed in all the way, as an example.  I also try to set the shock damping to match the fork damping.

Does it work?  Most of the freeways around here are concrete and the on and off ramps are asphalt.  The seams between the two can get ratty and a person has to cross the seams at an angle to get on and off of the freeway.  This could be a scary moment with the old forks.  Sometimes they flexed and the front wheel did not go exactly where it was supposed to.  No problem now.  The new forks are noticeably stronger.  This will be a very big help on the salt.  There are rough places on the streets around here that I steer around.  Now I do not need to.  The Ricor valves allow the forks to respond to these bumps and the ride is much smoother.  The bike holds a line much better when cornering on rough pavement.  These modifications are worth the cost and trouble.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on July 04, 2011, 07:01:49 AM
You should title this "Fork Rebuild 101" and submit it to the Rico people.  Great explanation.  I have some Gold Valve Emulators in my CB350 race bike that I've never set up properly.  Now I'm inspired -- if only I had more time.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: dadsolds on July 04, 2011, 01:49:35 PM
Wob,
I really enjoy your posts about selecting modification options.
About your fork oil, here is an interesting article about damping with a really helpful table at the bottom.
http://www.peterverdonedesigns.com/lowspeed.htm
It seems not all fork oils are created equal, or even comparable by viscosity weight rating.
Hope to see you and your team at Bub!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 06, 2011, 02:12:43 AM
Tom, these Ricor valves are adjusted by adding or subtracting shims with different thicknesses and changing the fork oil weight works, too.  I am not sure how the gold valves work, but sometimes changing to a different weight oil will make a difference.

DadSolds, thanks for the article.  I buy stuff on clearance and sale and these handy charts will help me select oils similar to what the is in the fork now.

The article attached to DadSolds post has a link to a discussion about springs.  The author does not prefer progressive rate springs for many reasons.  My experience is similar and this is something I did not mention in the suspension post.  The bike uses progressive springs front and rear for the street setup.  These springs work well with varying loads, such as me alone or with my wife, camping gear, crab pot, crab pot and camping gear, etc.  Properly tuned straight rate springs always have given me the best results for race or dirt bikes when the load is the rider and it does not change.  The bike would be setup with straight rate boingers if racing was all that I do.

Dyno work is scheduled for the morning of the 14th.  This should be an interesting year.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on July 09, 2011, 06:51:04 PM
Great Stuff Wobbly...............See ya at BUB........
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 15, 2011, 01:39:58 AM
Months ago I reserved a few hours at the dyno.  The carburetion was a little lean last year and I want to make sure it is correctly adjusted.  Also, I need to know the horsepower for setup purposes such as picking the right sprockets.  Another goal is to do "A-B-A" testing to figure out the best header pipes for an exhaust system I will build this winter.  The procedure is to test system A, then setup B, then A again.  System A is the larger diameter headers with no cross-over pipe on the Arrow system and B is the Triumph smaller diameter headers with a cross-over.  The Arrow mufflers would be used on both for the comparison

The bike was hard to start.  The battery seemed to be low.  It started and off I went to Portland.  Halfway there I took a break and the bike was even harder to start.  Odd.  Finally I got to the shop and prepared the bike for the dyno.  It would not start.  The charging system was not working and the regulator/rectifier was the culprit.  It is the finned thing under the headlight and when it failed some wires in the harness overheated and their insulation burnt.  The harness costs three times as much as the regulator and it is on backorder from England.  The mechanic says this failure is very uncommon on Bonnevilles, and when it happens, there is often expensive damage to other parts.  Lesson 1, pay attention to this part.

Every year I do a charging test during the annual service.  I mentioned that during last years test the charging voltage dropped when the rpm increased.  This did not bother me because the drop was not enough to result in a discharge.  The mechanic said the voltage should not drop.  He said it is typical for these components to gradually fail and periodic charging tests can spot trouble before it becomes expensive.  Lesson 2, plot graphs of voltage and amperage at various rpm when the system is working OK.  Check, with a comparison against the graphs to make sure the thing is working annually and before long trips.

These components convert excess alternator output into heat.  Normal operating conditions are a bike at moderate rpm with the lights on.  There is not a lot of excess current and heat in this application.  In this example there is a nut riding the bike for miles at a time at extremely high rpm with no lights.  There is a lot of extra current and resultant heat.  Lesson 3, land speed racing puts a lot of stress on this part   Keep an extra one at hand.  This winter I will carefully repair the old harness and keep it, too.

More schooling from the college of experience, this is.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: gearheadeh on July 15, 2011, 09:47:14 AM
Wobbly, I really appreciate it when you have the guts and honesty to make posts like these. :-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 17, 2011, 02:26:22 AM
Well, it is a diary and we have good days and other kinds of days.

The BUB pre-entry list is posted.  It seems I need the rocket backpack in a serious way.  Lowering the windshield, a new tail section, and a tight tuck will not be enough for this year.

The mechanic gave me the choice of voltage regulator replacements.  One is the Triumph original equipment shunt regulator.  These types get hot during operation.  The other is a mosfet regulator.  See www.ricksmotorsportelectrics.com  They run a lot cooler.

Looking at the situation from a thermodynamics viewpoint, the heat dissipated from a hot regulator is wasted energy that could be used for other purposes, like going faster.  Viewing the situation from a common sense standpoint, the OEM regulator did not give stellar performance.  It was an easy choice, the mosfet will be the one.  Mosfet is metal-oxide-semiconductor-field-effect transistor.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: MC 1314 on July 17, 2011, 09:18:36 AM
Wobbly.. I could not find the Bub pre-entry, do you have a link?
Thanks
Bob
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on July 17, 2011, 07:17:36 PM
The mechanic gave me the choice of voltage regulator replacements.  One is the Triumph original equipment shunt regulator.  These types get hot during operation.  The other is a mosfet regulator.  See www.ricksmotorsportelectrics.com  They run a lot cooler.

Looking at the situation from a thermodynamics viewpoint, the heat dissipated from a hot regulator is wasted energy that could be used for other purposes, like going faster.  Viewing the situation from a common sense standpoint, the OEM regulator did not give stellar performance.  It was an easy choice, the mosfet will be the one.  Mosfet is metal-oxide-semiconductor-field-effect transistor.   

Good choice WW
The mosfet ones tend to work a lot better and last longer
I see a lot of regulators where the smoke got out and burnt out AC wires from the stator to the regulator
Usually around any sort of connector or plug.
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 18, 2011, 01:46:07 AM
Bob, it is on the 2011 BUB Speed Trials website in the "News" section.  It starts with RWB, then AMA, and finally FIM.

Grumm, it did that.  The harness was toasted with most damage near the connectors, like you say.  The mechanic told me to always check and clean the connectors.  The harness is not cheap, somewhere over US $600.  My mind went numb and I do not remember the exact price.  This winter I will carefully take apart and rebuild the old one and keep it as a spare.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: MC 1314 on July 18, 2011, 10:15:34 AM
Thanks Wobbly
I found it, poor sight disadvantaged senior citizen that I am. Gonna be fun, I finally have competition! I volunteer so will not run till things slow down, likely the last day so I will know what to shoot for.
Bob
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on July 18, 2011, 05:07:13 PM
I usually just build a new sub harness
There is only usually five or six wires

So I just run the three yellow wires straight from the stator to the regulator and leave the old ones in the loom
because they don't go anywhere else. It's pretty rare to have to replace the earth and B+ wire
The only other thing is corrosion. If you see it , cut it out. And don't re use corroded plugs, no matter how clean they look
That is usually where the heat starts in the yellow wires.
My boss likes to either run the stator wires all the way to the reg with no joins or hard solder them together so there are no plugs
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 20, 2011, 01:51:24 AM
Grumm, thanks for the tip.  Corrosion was a problem and the subharness would be my fix if I would have known about it.  The bike is in the shop and they ordered the parts so I am committed to getting it fixed there.

One of my friends is a bus mechanic and he recommends "Weatherhead" connectors.  They use them under buses where they are sprayed with road salt laden water.  The connectors seal out the water and prevent corrosion.  This winter I will make a subharness for the wires between the regulator and alternator.  All joints will be soldered and there will be one weatherhead connector between them.

There is some gravel road between our house and Bonneville.  Rocks are picked up by the tires, they hit the bikes, and they chip the paint.  This weekend I made some rock guards.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on July 20, 2011, 04:33:08 AM
Grumm, thanks for the tip.  Corrosion was a problem and the subharness would be my fix if I would have known about it.  The bike is in the shop and they ordered the parts so I am committed to getting it fixed there.

One of my friends is a bus mechanic and he recommends "Weatherhead" connectors.  They use them under buses where they are sprayed with road salt laden water.  The connectors seal out the water and prevent corrosion.  This winter I will make a subharness for the wires between the regulator and alternator.  All joints will be soldered and there will be one weatherhead connector between them.


The weather proof connectors are good, however, they don't really handle the sort of wattage that is generated by the alternator
I would love to be able to offer some alternative, but I haven't found one yet
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 27, 2011, 09:09:51 PM
It is vacation time and Gretchen and I are on the road.  Everyone else is in summer school or too busy.  Two people and two running bikes with lots of time and a big country.

     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 29, 2011, 12:05:55 AM
Most of us drive by various mountain ranges to get to Bonneville, Elmo, the Black Rock desert, etc.  The mountains do not look impressive from the desert floor and we get the impression that they are one more part of a vast and arid wasteland.  Many ranges such as the Rubies and Humboldt are tall enough to harbor temperate forests and alpine meadows.  Every year after the BUB meet we stay for a day or two in the Humboldts to wind down and relax.

This picture shows an ice field on the top of Bidwell Mountain in the Warner range to the west of the Black Rock Desert.  This was a wet winter and the lakes are full and ice and snow will remain on the mountain tops through the summer.  The elevation is around 8,000 feet.  A visit to any range of these tall mountains is worth adding a few days to a trip.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 29, 2011, 11:04:16 AM
The sharp pointy knob on the ridge in the photo is the summit of Yellow Mountain in the Warners.  It is just under 8,000 feet elevation and there is a trail up the back side.  The Top-O-the-World trail.  Gretchen's modern bike runs perfectly up there.  No misfires due to altitude induced richness and great fuel economy.

The story with my 1986 bike is different.  It is a big project to lean out the carburation with a needle clip move.  The tank, seat, side covers come off and there are all sorts of little circlips on the linkage I can lose.  Hardly ever do I change it.  My solution is to keep the engine at the rpm where the reversion makes it run lean.  At very high altitudes I slowly turn the fuel cock to restrict the fuel flow and this leans out the mixture.

It is quite a ride up to the top of the world.  Up I go with one hand turning the throttle and steering.  My other hand is between my legs slowly twisting my cock.  It is an exciting ascent.  Now I have seen the vision.  Electronic fuel injection is in my future.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on July 29, 2011, 12:02:31 PM
"My other hand is between my legs slowly twisting my cock.  It is an exciting ascent."

Bo, PLEASE tell me that this is a mis-print!!!!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 29, 2011, 01:19:14 PM
It should have said "fuel cock," Slim.  An accidental omission on my part.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fredvance on July 29, 2011, 02:29:29 PM
Uh huh, sure. Thats what all the dirty old men say. :wink: I know, I are one. :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on July 29, 2011, 02:35:01 PM
I expected "petcock" -- but will accept your explanation without further questions. :roll: :roll:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Glen on July 29, 2011, 03:08:49 PM
I thought he had a chicken on board and he was wringing it's neck.
Chicken choker. LOL
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 30, 2011, 08:54:37 PM
We are staying for a few days with my family in Cool, California.  It is about 45 minutes drive to the BUB factory and we made a visit.  Linnea was very nice and she gave us a factory tour.  A look at all of those pipes being made gave me an idea.

The BUB pipes for a Bonneville are a 2 into 2 carbon steel system with baffled megaphones.  Plans are for me to order a bare (unchromed) system with the megaphones without the baffles.  It will be easy for me to cut and modify the BUB system to get the correct length.  I know how to weld mild steel.  When I do this I will have several questions about the best way to tune the pipes.

Gretchen wants to learn how to ride a motorcycle.  She only rode two times before this trip and she was not experienced.  We rode a few hours in the high desert east of Bend, Oregon, one evening and one full day in the Warner Mountains in california and Oregon, and an afternoon in the Sierra Nevada mountains in California.  She is fourteen, and at this age, is easy to teach.  In addition she does not have bad habits to be unlearned.  She slowly works at learning the basics.  The photo shows her hauling donkey down a Sierra trail in the classic attack position - elbows wide, head down, knees gripping the tank, and butt off of the seat. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: MC 1314 on July 30, 2011, 10:46:33 PM
Wobbly.. my old stompin grounds are the Roseville, Auburn, Grass Valley, Nevada City area, did some mining in Downieville for 35 years or so to. My wife is from Georgetown..darned small world huh. Bub has a great place in GV. Cool is a great place, do not know how it got it's name but in July it usually isn't!!
Look me up at Bub, I work Pre stage, just look for the potbellied guy.
Bob
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on July 30, 2011, 11:53:27 PM
You may get an award as one of the all time great dads WW. :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: agro on August 08, 2011, 04:26:30 AM
The valve head to piston clearances are checked.  Many methods have been used over the years and this one works best for me.  First, I clean all oil off the piston crowns and I put on dabs of soft modeling clay.  Then, I rub some oil on the valve heads.  I do not want the clay to stick to the valves.  Some method is needed to turn the crank.  I do not use the starter motor.  An allen wrench is used to turn the crank.  This hand method is what I want.  I will stop turning if I feel any resistance from a valve hitting a piston.

The Triumph valves are necked so the stems near the heads are narrower than the stems in the valve guides.  This improves airflow and it makes them lighter but they are easily bent.  Most of my experience with bending valves is when they nip up against the side of the valve pockets in the piston crowns.  I am very careful now.  I shim the head above the cylinders with three washers each on six of the eight studs and I do not bolt the head down.   I hook up the cams to the cam chain and drive gears.  Now I hold the head down on the cylinders with my hand and I slowly rotate the crank.  The only resistance that I should feel is the clay being squished.  Any harder resistance is a danger sign and I need to stop turning the crank.

Now I remove the drive gears and I pull the head off.  I cut the clay across the marks where the valves touched the clay.  Examining the cut clay shows me my clearances.  The clearances seem to be OK.  The process is repeated with only one washer on each stud and clearances look good.  Then is is repeated a final time with only the head gasket on and 5 lbs-ft torque on the head bolts.

The cam data card gives the minimum valve head to piston crown clearance.  All are OK.  I note that I will also have sufficient clearances with the larger valves that I am considering for the future. 

An additional step would be done if the clearances were near or at the minimum.  I would retard both cams one tooth and recheck the clearances.  This would resemble the engine if the cam chain was very worn.  I would change the chain before it was this badly worn, however. 

Regarding the checks for valve to piston clearances, how much clearance did you have...?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: agro on August 08, 2011, 05:03:19 AM
The next step is to verify that the new higher lift cam does not cause coil bind.  Also, the spring compressed lengths will be calculated to see if any springs need to be shimmed.

Coil bind occurs when the spring is compressed to the extent that all of the the coils are touching each other.  The spring is solid.  Coil bind can damage the engine.  The cam manufacturer recommends 0.015 inches gap between each coil at a  minimum.  A spring is compressed in a vise until coil bind and its length is measured.  0.015 inches is added to the compressed spring length for each coil gap.  The minimum spring compressed length is 1.082 inches as shown on the top ot the calculation page.

The distance A between the retainer spring seat and the valve tip is measured.  This is different than the "A" used in the retainer to seal gap clearance calcs in the previous post.  Distance B is measured, too.  It is the distance between the lower spring seat and the talve tip when the valve is closed.  Distance C is from the cam data card.  Some simple math tells me the compressed length for each spring.  All are less than the 1.082 inch minimum.  Not good.

Now I compress a spring to 1.037 inches in a vice.  This is the most highly compressed spring.  The gaps between the middle coils are 0.025 inches and the coils near the ends are at coil bind.  Not ideal, but the spring is not at coil bind.  The springs will work OK.

Now I look at the compressed spring lengths again.  Are any springs not compressed enough?  If so, I will put a shim under them to compress them to the same length as the others.  The shims look like machined steel washers.  No springs are long enough to require a shim.

These little calculations tell me a third thing.  The #813 cam has the most lift that the standard valve train can tolerate.  Any more lift will cause coil bind in the standard Triumph valve springs.

Hi, love your analysis on this build, your D measurements for the a valves are 1.037" to 1.043" and safe limit is 1.082", I think your at coil bind sir. How can this be rectified to have safety margin with your valve train?

Cheers....Agro
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 09, 2011, 01:50:38 AM
Pete, the girl is an honor roll student, she treats everyone including her mother with respect, and she has gone with me to B-ville twice as a helper.  She looked at me with those big brown eyes and said "I want to learn how to ride.  I will take care of my bike."  The salesman offering me the discount price on the bike and the six month no interest loan clinched the deal.  I was no hero and more like a dinosaur in the La Brea tar pit.  What else could I do?  Nine out of ten of us would have done exactly what I did.  No regrets.  Everything worked out OK.

Agro, more than 1 mm clearance between the valves and the pistons, as I recall.  I did not record the measurements.

No springs are at coil bind and a few are very close to coil bind.  The safety factor is near zero.  I knew it was a problem and I was very, very, careful during the installation.  It was a risky deal and it worked.  That motor ran great and it did what it needed to do.

I am worried about valve spring life with the springs near coil bind.  South Bay Triumph sells a fancy kit with under the bucket shims and racing valve springs.  I strongly recommend this for racing cams.  Installing the kit is on my to-do list.  Hopefully I will get it done before I drop a valve or have some other problem.     
   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: agro on August 09, 2011, 03:55:58 AM
Wob, PM sent..........

Cheers............agro

Pete, the girl is an honor roll student, she treats everyone including her mother with respect, and she has gone with me to B-ville twice as a helper.  She looked at me with those big brown eyes and said "I want to learn how to ride.  I will take care of my bike."  The salesman offering me the discount price on the bike and the six month no interest loan clinched the deal.  I was no hero and more like a dinosaur in the La Brea tar pit.  What else could I do?  Nine out of ten of us would have done exactly what I did.  No regrets.  Everything worked out OK.

Agro, more than 1 mm clearance between the valves and the pistons, as I recall.  I did not record the measurements.

No springs are at coil bind and a few are very close to coil bind.  The safety factor is near zero.  I knew it was a problem and I was very, very, careful during the installation.  It was a risky deal and it worked.  That motor ran great and it did what it needed to do.

I am worried about valve spring life with the springs near coil bind.  South Bay Triumph sells a fancy kit with under the bucket shims and racing valve springs.  I strongly recommend this for racing cams.  Installing the kit is on my to-do list.  Hopefully I will get it done before I drop a valve or have some other problem.     
   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 10, 2011, 01:42:46 AM
A few things I forgot to say about cams in the Triumph.

The 865 cc 10.5 to 1 ratio Arias pistons and the 813 grind cams in my engine are a performance package from South Bay Triumph.  They also modify the advance curves in the ignition module to match this kit.  All of this makes a good street roadster motor with lots of midrange power.  It is not the best setup for an LSR engine.  Too mild.

Larger valves are a common and very effective modification for this engine.  My intake valves are 2mm larger than standard and the exhaust valves are standard.  These are good sizes for a street engine.  Valves are available in larger sizes and the valve pockets in the Arias pistons accommodate valves up to 5mm larger diameter than standard.  I checked the clearance between the pocket sides and the valve edges.  There was plenty.

Cams with over 0.390 inches lift will bind the standard springs.  The 813 cams have slightly less lift and they are, for practical purposes, the hottest cams that can be used with the standard springs and the standard retainers with shims on top of the buckets.  The valve pockets in the Arias pistons will accommodate much higher lift cams than the 813 grind.  There is lots of clearance between the valve heads and the piston crowns.

My springs were close to coil bind with the 813 cam.  There are things I do to minimize any problems due to this.  The rev limiter is set so the engine cannot turn fast enough to float the valves and bind the springs if they are in good condition.  This is essential.  In addition, I check the spring tensions before assembly to make sure all are in good shape.  I do not have the tools to test the spring tension at zero and max lift.  This would be a good thing to do.  Also, the engine goes on the dyno annually and I look at the torque curves near red line.  The curves will tell me if I have a floating valve.

The South Bay Triumph racing lifter kit will accommodate the higher lift cams that produce lots of top end power.  The valve adjustment shims are under the buckets so they cannot be spit out.  This is a big plus for safety.  I do not know the maximum cam lift that can be used with the Arias pistons and the SBT racing lifter kit.   

There might be good parts made by other people than South Bay Triumph.  I would not know.  The SBT stuff costs more, I know that.  Their parts are developed and refined by actual use at Bonneville and they do not give me any problems.  This means a lot to me and it is the main reason why I use their components.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 12, 2011, 01:49:29 AM
It is the early 1970's and I am a younger guy.  One of my friends road races a production bike and he invites me to go with him to the races.  I have never been to a road race and it sounds like fun.  Thursday evening I pack my sleeping bag, cooking gear, tent, etc on my trusty Honda 350.  Always the optimist, I slip a fresh rubber into my wallet.

Friday at work I imagine an evening of light partying, some restful sleep, and an early morning trip to the track.  Dreams and reality are different.  Friday evening I arrive at my friend's double car garage.  It is packed with guys and gals and bikes in all sorts of disassembled states.  A dog or two also.  I set to work changing tires, etc.  Bottles of red wine are passed around and joints, too.  It gets dark outside and I am feeling pretty good.  Someone hands me a box of Suzooki transmission gear clusters and a greasy shop manual and says "These are our blown clusters.  See if you can find enough unbroken parts to make one good set."  The night goes on.  One by one the bikes are finished and put in the vans.  The racers lay their sleeping bags alongside the bikes in the vans and try to get a few hours sleep.  The rest of us work.  It is just getting light and we are off to the races.  I ride my Honda.  I did not have a car license in those years.

We get to the track and wait in line to get in.  It is Sears Point.  I look at the soft brown grass on those gentle California hills and imagine myself sound asleep on top of my down filled paratrooper bag.  Dreams.  Reality is different.  There is not enough money for the entrance fees and several of us are "volunteered" to be corner marshals for the races.  The corner worker has several flags.  A yellow one, I vaguely remember, is waved if someone crashes in the corner.  The other racers see this and slow down.  There is another color flag to wave if there is oil on the track.  A fellow has to pay attention while doing this job.  This was a challenge.  No sleep for about 30 hours.  A cheap wine hangover.  Serious cotton mouth.  Lots of hot sun and castor oil fumes.  Somehow, everything went OK and no one died due to my funky flagging.

This was a classic thrash and there were many more through the years.  I thought I had finally learned how to avoid them.  Dreams and reality are not the same.  The parts arrived from England late and the bike will be ready to pick up at the shop tomorrow evening.  One weekend, maybe two, to turn the bike from street to racing trim.  Another thrash... 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 13, 2011, 01:58:15 AM
The Triumph is back from the shop.  The new mosfet regulator from Ricks is a direct replacement.  It bolts on in place of the standard unit and it has the correct connector on it.  There is none of the typical motorcycle accessory adapt-a-fit hassle.  The mechanic told me to periodically check the regulator to wiring harness connection and to make sure it is tight and non-corroded.  He said I will prevent future problems if I do this.

The mechanic talked to several of the local tuners and he learned a lot about flatslides.  He was told that these carbs are very good for producing maximum top end horsepower and they are not as precise as other carbs at smaller throttle openings.  An expert tuner told him to not choose jet and needle settings by looking at the fuel-air ratio curves.  He said to jet the carbs to produce maximum power.

The blue curves on the attached show mixture and power with #138 main jets.  The red curves show the same with richer #140 mains.  Richer #142 mains were tried and the power fell significantly.  These are the two best jets for producing power.  The initial jets for Bonneville will be the #140's and I will change as needed to suit local conditions.

The 70 horsepower this engine produces is not very much and it is barely better than the old 790 cc motor.  Next year I will install the bucket, spring, and shim kit for higher lift cams and I will try some street cams that are ground to produce more top end power.





Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 14, 2011, 01:51:11 AM
A lot of work to do in a short time.  A thrash.  The next few posts will show some things I have learned over the years.

The first step is to find and lay out the parts I will need.  Everything, including nuts and bolts, goes onto the garage floor.  This part of Oregon is a backwater and almost everything I need beyond the basics must be ordered and shipped to me.  The object of this is to find out if I need to order anything so I will get it on time.  The riveted chain master links I have are the wrong size.  I order some more.

Next I find all of my spares, such as an extra igniter, coils, inner tubes, throttle cable, etc., and I put them in a hand grenade box.  I will think of more spares to take during the coming week and I will put them in the box, too.

Finally, I collect all of the special tools and put them in an ammo can.

This method helps me to remember to bring everything.  During the week I will use all sorts of tools and I will say to myself  "should I take this with me to the salt?"  If yes, into the can it goes.   

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 14, 2011, 01:23:40 PM
Now it is time to figure out which tasks to do first.  Some things must be done before others.  I ask myself a lot of "what if" questions.  Some serious thinking reveals that I need to adjust the valves before I put on the fairing.  I ask myself "what if I do not have the right valve shim, cannot find it locally, and I must order one from Triumph in Beaverton?"  This could derail the entire thrash if I wait to adjust the valves.  The valve adjustment is the first task.

The Bonneville valve shims were also used for many late 1970 and early 1980 bikes, such as the 750 cc DOHC Hondas, the big Kawasaki fours, the Yamaha XS-750 triples and the XS-1100 fours, and some others.  I need several shims and I am lucky, the local Honda shop has them.

Most of us rotate the cam to a point where the lobe faces directly away from the valve shim and we do a single clearance measurement.  Cam base circles are not always concentric with the cam centerlines, sometimes there are slight bumps and flat spots on the base circles, and often there is some clearance between the cams and their bearings.  I rock the cams forwards and backwards a few times a make several measurements of the clearance between the base circle and the shim at different locations.  The shim adjustment is based on these multiple measurements rather than a single one.  This method gives me better results.

In the past there has been some scuffing and pitting on race cams I have installed.  These cams had none of this and they looked perfect.  The engine was broken in with 10-40 mineral oil with an oil additive for the break-in period.  This oil was replaced with 20-40 synthetic motorcycle oil made for bikes with integral clutches and trannys.  Throughout all of this I made sure the oils had adequate zinc and phosphorous to prevent cam and lifter damage.  This is something I learned how to do from this forum and it works.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 16, 2011, 02:41:30 AM
The thrash is moving along as expected.  I was pulling the trailer on the interstate to retrieve the bike from Portland and suddenly I realized that I forgot to tighten the lug nuts on the right wheel after I installed a new tire.  Then I stood up while lifting an air wrench from the bottom drawer of my roll-around and I cut my head on the top drawer I forgot to close.  Clear thinking under pressure is not my strong point.

The Triumph does not have a normal motorcycle frame.  It has a top frame that bolts to the engine like a Vincent and a swing arm that connects to the rear of the engine.  There are all sorts of plates and brackets and the cradle under the engine bolts to the top frame and some brackets near the swing arm.  All of this works well enough when the bolts are tight.  An important pre-race chore is to retorque the bolts.

The first step is to look up the torque in the shop manual.  The published torque value is for a bolt if there is no nut, or it is for the nut if there is one on the bolt.  The torque values are for clean and dry threads unless noted otherwise.  The published torque for the example nut on the engine mounting bolt is 80 Newton-meters.  The first photo shows the loosened nut after I took it off and cleaned the threads.  I cannot get a socket on the nut to tighten it with a torque wrench.  The oil line is in the way.

The bolt head is on the other side of the bike as shown in Photo 2.  I can get a socket on it.  The oil line is not blocking it.  I use the torque wrench to measure the torque it takes to overcome friction to make the bolt turn as shown in Photo 3.  The nut on the other side is loose when I do this.  It takes 5 Newton-meters torque to make the bolt turn.

Now I add the two torques together as shown in Photo 4.  This give me the torque value when I tighten the bolt with the socket and torque wrench on the bolt head end and I hold the nut steady with a combination wrench.  The 85 Newton-meter torque I use provides 80 Newton-meters to tighten the bolt and another 5 Newton-meters torque to overcome friction between the bolt and the bolt hole.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 16, 2011, 04:26:18 PM
It is a thrill to see the vehicles in this build diary on the salt at Speedweek.  We have watched them turn from dreams to completed vehicles and now they become veteran race machines.  The only one I have seen in the photos so far is Fabio's the Gus Gus liner.  There is a lot of European race car technology in that car and it will be interesting to see how all of it works.  I wish them well.  Freud's post about the emotions he feels at Speedweek is touching.  Most of us fell this way and Freud has the courage and gift to write it down.  Ray and Slim, youse guys are doing a good job.

The Triumph has a countershaft sprocket held on by a nut and the countershaft is enclosed within a big bushing and all rotate within the oil seal.  All are uncoated carbon steel and salt can get in there and rust everything up solid.  These are doused with anti corrosion oil during setup and all are taken apart and cleaned when I get home.

Our union contract says we take a couple of weeks off a year with no pay.  These are furlough days.  I forgot about them and my boss reminded me.  I will take today and Friday off to finish the bike.  This will be a big help.  The back end is done and now it is time to turn the scoot around and do the front.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 19, 2011, 01:39:10 AM
Some massive communication breakdown a few years ago resulted in me ordering the street/torque #813 grind cams.  The cams I need are the street/horsepower #540 grind.  Well, the lack of top end power is finally figured out.  The cams will be pulled at the start of the rainy season and they will be sent in for a regrind.

Several methods to protect the bike from corrosion have been tried over the years.  This method is to fill a cup with anti-corrosion oil and brush it on the frame, engine cases, and all other metal parts on the lower 1/3 of the bike.  A disposable paint brush works good for this.  The preservative oil sits on the bike for a few days and it penetrates all of the cracks, crevices, nooks, and crannies.  Last, I wipe off the excess with a paper towel.  The towel is not very efficient at cleaning off the oil and a thin film remains.

This method works very well for me. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 20, 2011, 01:18:08 AM
The fairing is on.  The two beers on the seat are my incentive.  I cannot drink them until the fairing is completely mounted.  I need to get this bike done and I cannot seem to do anything right.  One hour of normal work is taking me two to complete.  I measure wrong, break taps, etc.  Someone put a voodoo curse on Team Go Dog, Go!  I am sure of it.  Yes.  This is the problem.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 22, 2011, 01:28:51 AM
The picture is taken this afternoon at Portland International Raceway.  It was European Day and the bike was on display at the Cascade Moto Classics tent.  People asked me questions about land speed racing most of the day.  I sat on the grenade box and taped up the front wheel, did some little things, and finished the bike.  Bonnie is ready to go.  I am too.

This is one thrash I could not handle by myself and there are a lot of people to thank.  My wife, Rose, put up with me during all of this.  Cascade Moto Classics helped a lot.  Floyd, a fellow in the Triumph club, saves his spare change in a box all year and he gives it to me for gas money.  The guys in the Triumph club helped me figure out the fork fix.  The people in my crew at work cover for me when I am taking days off and they schedule my work so I can get to B'ville.  My boss gets special thanks for not firing me.

My big goal this year is to not crash and to go over 130 mph.   It looks like I can do it if the salt is in good shape.  This will be a good meet.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Geo on August 22, 2011, 09:01:06 AM
Wobbly,

Best of luck to you!  Thanks for bring me along with you for the years work between meets.

 Geo
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on August 22, 2011, 12:26:06 PM
Wobbly........the Salt is good enough that you can not use it as an excuse.

Go For It.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 23, 2011, 01:14:47 AM
It is a pleasure, Geo.  It has been a lot of years and I am glad that you enjoy the build.  Freud, it is good news that the salt is is nice.  A lousy rider like me needs all the help that mother nature can provide.

The windshield is lower this year and I tuck down until my chest bone hits the top of the gas tank.  I cannot get any lower.  The roll of paper towels supports my helmet so the upper edge does not drop down and block my vision.  This is a big help and it is a suggestion from a fellow racer on this forum.  The towel roll is mickey mouse so I went down to one of the local chopper shops and ordered a small p-pad.  It seemed a good idea to buy a new one for obvious reasons.

It is hard for an old guy to make himself small.  I set the kitchen timer for ten minutes, hop on the bike and tuck down, and stay in place until the bell dings.  It is working.  Slowly I am loosening up and it hurts less each time.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 25, 2011, 01:22:17 AM
Another goofy shop trick.

Lots of bolts on the Triumph are shrouded by the sheet metal and it is difficult to tighten them with a torque wrench.  Their awkward locations make them hard to accurately tighten by hand, too.  This is what I do.  First, I break out the fish scale, an allen wrench that fits the bolt, and an open end/box end wrench that fits the allen wrench.  These wrenches must be strong and of good quality.

Next, I figure out the torque needed on the bolt.  This bolt is Grade 5, 5/16 inch diameter by 18 threads per inch, lubricated.  The torque is 13 pounds-foot according to the chart.  I also measure the wrench length between the center of the box end to the center of the open end.  This distance is 3.5 inches.

Now, I put the allen wrench through the box end, stick the allen wrench in the bolt head, connect the chain to the open end, and attach the fish scale to the chain.

Last, I pull the fish scale to tighten the bolt.  The chain is always at right angles to the open end/box end wrench.

The formula I use is this:  desired torque in pounds-foot x 12 / wrench length in inches = pulling tension on fish scale, or 13 x 12 / 3.5 = 45  I pull the fish scale until it shows 45 pounds tension.

The long and bumpy ride to Bonneville loosens some bolts on the Triumph.  I will use this method in the pits to make sure all are tight before I run.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on August 25, 2011, 03:13:00 PM

It is hard for an old guy to make himself small.  I set the kitchen timer for ten minutes, hop on the bike and tuck down, and stay in place until the bell dings.  It is working.  Slowly I am loosening up and it hurts less each time.   

Gee, Wobbly, you are only 58!  Just wait til you're 59 - - that's when the prostate sometimes decides that 9 minutes is all you can stay in that position!  But look at the bright side; water of any kind does have a cooling effect. Oh well, you still have another year!

See you on the salt.

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 26, 2011, 12:53:18 AM
Next year I will need to get down the course quick to the porta potty at the 5-mile for a pee!  This is the incentive I need to buythe cam and lifter kit this winter.  Thanks for the advice.  Now I will not feel guilty when I spend the big $$.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on August 26, 2011, 09:34:30 AM
On a more serious note, your bike looks great and I look forward to meeting you.  I'm just glad I only have to stay in my riding position for 4 miles. I am leaving for Bonneville in about a 1/2 hour.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on August 26, 2011, 11:15:00 AM
W Walrus, we station a porta-potty at about the 6 1/2 (for the course watchers), not the five.  You'll have to go farther to get your urinary relief.  There was an outhouse about the 4 1/2 this year - at the long course timing slip stand -- but it was for the folks in the timing slip stand only - not for spectators or racers (although you might have been allowed to use it with their expressed permission.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 26, 2011, 12:31:09 PM
Slim's Bonneville weather forecast on the home page shows dry weather at the beginning.  This is good.  We will leave tomorrow and be there on Monday afternoon.  Tom, you and Lars need to be control yourselves.  Do not shred the salt with those big singles before we get a few runs in.  Good luck with your bike.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 28, 2011, 01:15:32 AM
Tonight we are at the Malheur Field Station.  It is an active research facility for folks interested in the high desert.  We rent a trailer for the nights when we are traveling through on our way to B'ville.  Everything is old and ratty.  Broken down.  This does not bother the scientific types.  Their interests are in other more esoteric areas.

This evening we watched the sunset and a thunderstorm over Steens Mountain.  The fellow standing next to me was an etomologist (expert in bugs).  A mosquito landed on his arm.  All of us immediately recognized this insect.  It was the small curex? variety.  A vector for West Nile virus.  The expert watched her crawl around on his skin until she found a spot she liked.  The bug scientist's hand was poised over the insect and it was and ready to squash.  The mosquito became still as she prepared to insert her sucking tube into the underlying flesh.  Suddenly the hand descended.  The insect was doomed.  There was no escape.

I asked the fellow how he knew when to slap the little bugger.  This is what he said.  Mosquitos have a sheath over their needle.  They pull the sheath back before the big plunge.  They are focused on their objective and they are not easily distracted.  This is the perfect time to flatten them.  Biting flies are the same way, according to the expert.  The trick is to wait until they spread their jaws.  At that instant, wham!

This is a good thing about racing.  It gets a person out and about in the world and it promotes a good general education in practical matters.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on August 28, 2011, 03:34:52 AM
Boy, if it ain't on here it ain't worth learnin'!!! :roll: :evil: :-D :cheers:

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 30, 2011, 08:31:39 PM
Fourteen year old girl + pick up truck + wide open spaces = driving lessons.  We all started somewhere.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on August 30, 2011, 08:43:16 PM
Good Job, Wobbles.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 31, 2011, 10:13:28 AM
It is Wednesday AM in the KOA, on a picnic table, during the magic moment at dawn when it is not too cold, hot, or windy.  We are done.  The engine this year was down two horsepower due to wear and tear since last year.  Last year's runs were fairly decent and the streamlining I had then was not all that bad.  I was not expecting much as far as speed goes.  The main goal this year was to see if the fork mods fixed the handling problems.  It made no sense to continue to race the bike unless it would go in a straight line.  More speed would make things worse.

The course we rode was the short international.  It was choppy and there was a 10 mph side wind from the NNW during the down run.  It was too jiggly to see good when I was down tight on the tank.  I kept as low as I could.  The run was a good one at 131 +.  The bike handled perfect.  No bar twitching and the front wheel did not twist and turn to follow ruts.  This was the first LSR run I enjoyed and was not scared.  The side winds did not cause any problems.

The back run was the first LSR run I did not dread.  I actually wanted to do it.  The wind was 6 mph from the SW and the speed was 130 +.  No handling problems.  I held the bars tight and gave them a little twitch.  This would start a harmonic wobble in the past.  The bike twitched once and righted itself.  Total stability.  I am a happy fellow.  Two runs in the 130's and no big crash.  Life is good.

A trick that Old Scrambler told me yesterday.  He said we tend to tense up and stop breathing when we are going fast.  This is a problem for me.  I linger a bit longer in the mile than most.  Scrambler said he talks to the bike and this makes him breathe correctly.  I did this, yelling "come on Bonnie, you can do it" and other things.  This trick works.

Lars, Team Speed Doo, team Australia, Koncrete Kid, Don Pearsoll, and lots of other folks on this forum are tearing up the salt with record runs or tearing their bikes apart to figure out why they do not work.  Ray the Rat is here.  All will have stories to tell.  We are taking the day off and will explore the mountains nearby. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: gearheadeh on August 31, 2011, 11:01:19 AM
Wobbly,
Good job on meeting your goals, plus the novice driver thing brought back memories for my first time driving.  Only my instructor was asleep so I found out that a fairly new 1971 American Motors Javelin could go over 120MPH on an Oregon highway.  8-) Iam sure your 14 year old will be more law abiding, enjoy the desert.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 02, 2011, 10:40:39 AM
Thanks for the compliments Freud and Gearheadeh.  This is a record I should not have.  The slower return run was straight into a headwind.  My job was to keep centered on the course and ride a straight line, hold the throttle open, shift at reasonable times, and tuck down.  That was not enough.  Somehow that little Triumph found some horsepower I did not know it had and we pushed through the wind.  The gods of speed give and take away.  They were generous to me on that Tuesday.  That is the only way I can explain it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 05, 2011, 01:20:53 AM
It is Tuesday afternoon at BUB.  Our runs are done and it is time to visit Lars.  He is been working on the bike for several days.  Every part of the bike has been taken apart and checked at least one time.  It makes all of the right noises and runs well for a short time.  Then it stops.  I try to assist.  This is an Indian, blown, running on alcohol.  Not something I see every day.  I am no help, and I say to Lars "When you give up on this thing, we can take you with us tomorrow.  We are going to go exploring."  Lars says, "No, I will not give up.  'Flummoxed' is an English word with no Danish equivalent.  It does not happen to Danes."  He was correct.  He got the bike running on Wednesday and set an AMA record.  Amazing. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: saltwheels262 on September 05, 2011, 06:26:18 AM
  He got the bike running on Wednesday and set an AMA record. 


that's when lars was pretty chuffed .

franey
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: octane on September 05, 2011, 11:58:04 AM
Thanks Bo !

It was a pleasure meeting you and Gretchen.

Ha, ha....that picture you took there;
that's me trying reeeealy hard to do the 'Top Gun posture'.





that's when lars was pretty chuffed .

Yep

.-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 05, 2011, 04:19:31 PM
It is Wednesday at BUB.  We drive to the Bend in the Road and take a left onto dirt instead of turning right on the blacktop.  This is the road up to Leppy Pass.  There are some strange mounds up there that appear to be made by a giant 20-foot tall groundhog.  We climbed up on top of one and there was no big groundhog hole.  Strange.  Mounds of mysterious origin.  Next we drove along the east side of Pilot Mountain.  The photo is from near Patterson Springs with Lemay Island on the left and Crater Island on the right.  There was water on the flats near the shore.  It was trapped there.  See the big expanse of bright white salt offshore.

Is this the second salt flats that old timers talk about?       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 07, 2011, 01:15:49 AM
This is the beginning of the work to run next year.  It is figuring out what to do.  First, I calculate the engine RPM for each run.  The speeds on the timing slips, the tire circumference, the sprocket sizes, and the slip factor are all input into the little formula on the bottom of the page.  My runs were on the International Course.  It was hard, dry, and very choppy.  My best guess for the slip factor is 95%.

The listed speeds show that I am making slow progress at going faster.  Too slow.  This is frustrating.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stan Back on September 07, 2011, 11:08:43 AM
Well, you can't fix the salt -- but it looks like you've fixed the bike.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on September 07, 2011, 11:09:41 AM
It looks like 7,500 rpm is the goal so a 41-tooth sprocket would gain another 1+mph.  You may be at the point where the overall weight and drag of the bike is a high factor vs available horsepower.  Lighter; lower; narrower; then add motor power/rpms...........You have done a lot with a converted street bike.........it may be time to dedicate the build to the salt and get a second bike for the street. Whatever you do, keep us informed..........you offer a lot of good info!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: dadsolds on September 07, 2011, 03:40:46 PM
Wobbly, don't forget the new power band range with the new cams. that could change your gearing requirements. best to check that on the dyno
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 08, 2011, 01:43:33 AM
Stan, it is nice to just open the throttle and enjoy it, just like everyone else.  The chassis and suspension part of this street toadster build is done.

Ol Scrambler, this bike is like the Cub.  It is teaching me a lot at safe speeds.  There is more go in it.  Plans are to change the cam this year, install the shim under bucket kit, and rebuild the front fairing.  In 2013 the intake, exhaust, and spark advance curve will be tuned.  In 2014 I will leave the bike alone, run naked at Elmo, and save money to race in Australia.  I will go there in 2015.  That will finish the build.  After that, who knows?

DadSolds, you are right.  I will need to do a dyno run.  Last year I had a 38-tooth rear sprocket cut.  That will be the one I use, hopefully.

This year's rpm's are plotted on the 2011 horsepower and mixture curve.  The sea-level horsepower is 68.5.  My standard correction factor is 0.86 for Bonneville.  68.5 x 0.86 = 59 hp.  My runs are done with 59 hp, as an estimate.

The curves show that the engine was spinning well beyond the torque peak and just over the horsepower peak.  Normally this would indicate the gear ratio was too high, numerically.  This was my lucky day and I was running into headwinds on both runs.  The down was in a 10 mph wind from the NNW.  This was predominately a side wind with some headwind.  The back was directly into a 7 mph headwind.  The slightly high gear ratio I had might have been to my advantage in these conditions.

       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: joea on September 08, 2011, 09:28:24 AM
wobbly...I want you to know I can learn ALOT from others...

from you I admire your "humility" and "demeanor"......

THANK YOU

Joe :)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on September 08, 2011, 10:15:48 AM
Bo,
Horsepower is what gets the job done at Bonneville, for a given bike configuration (i.e. height, fairing, etc.)  I got my bike dyno'd in Longmont, CO. then geared it according to the maximum horsepower RPM.  We bracketed this by changing the rear sprocket one tooth at a time until we could no longer pull the RPM for maximum horsepower.  It worked; we went the fastest when the RPM's matched the maximum horsepower point.

If you install a new cam, keep in mind that the cam that will produce the maximum horsepower is the one you want for Bonneville, but may make your bike harder to live with on the street.

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 09, 2011, 02:51:59 AM
Hi Joe.  It is age.  I do not have the energy or testosterone level to be a cocky smart donkey anymore.  It was fun when I could do it.

Tom, the grind #813 cams in the bike now polished up nice during use.  There is no pitting or galling on the lobes or lifters.  They run quiet.  In other words, the cams do not seem to be slamming the valves open and shut.  These cams appear to be well designed.  I like this, so the next cams will be the same brand.  There is another grind I can try and it is the #540 grind.  These cams produces more horsepower and are suitable for the street according the folks that sell them.  I cannot use the standard springs, though.  Racing items will be needed.

Does anyone reading this run a #540 grind WebCam in a Hinckley Bonneville?  Please PM me.

The third and last step in evaluating how I did is the power vs speed chart adapted from Bradley's book.  The new entries are triangles with dots in their middles.  Note that all of my dots for the last four years make a horizontal line.  This shows that my speed increases are due to aerodynamic improvements, learning how to set up and ride the bike, and decreasing the chassis rolling resistance.  I am going faster by increasing efficiency rather than horsepower.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 12, 2011, 12:54:38 AM
The last thing I want to do is work on the build.  It would be great to do something else for a few months.  One of my big jobs this year is a front fairing rebuild. The fairing must be on the bike when I do this and it gets cold and wet here in the winter with short days and long nights.  In must do it now before the weather gets bad.

The first step is to rebuild the fairing in front of the handlebars.  It is not as wide as the handlebars and my hands are in the wind.  This is not good and the new front will be slightly wider than the handlebars.  The existing front has an "opening section" in both top and side view.  This splits the wind and shoves it away from the motorcycle.  It also creates a lot of rearward turbulence and a large low pressure area behind it.

The nose section will be rebuilt into a semi-circular shape.  This will split the air, and hopefully, not shove it away from the bike sides.  I want as much airflow as possible to stay attached to the bike.  Also, with this shape there is a reduced area of low pressure behind it.

The goal for next year is to get into the 140's and the aero must work well. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: dadsolds on September 12, 2011, 12:23:47 PM
Wobbly,
The way I understand Bradley, its not so much the size of the radius of the front section, but rather what the fairing sides do after you pass the center (radius center mark in drawing) or widest section of the fairing. What seems to be important is that the sides of the fairing begin to close back in towards the center of the bike, both in top view and in side view. The angle of closure should be less than 10 deg to the center line. This angle of closure applies to your body and also the tail section. The greatest drag (neg. pressure) producer is the area at the tail end of what ever is punching a hole in the air. The gradual tapering of the object, bike fairing and rider, helps minimize this area. Take a look at Mellor.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: mtkawboy on September 12, 2011, 12:34:03 PM
Honda made a Blackbird motorcycle
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 13, 2011, 01:22:54 AM
Dadsolds, the overall shape is shown on this drawing I made a year ago.  The back is done and I am working on the front.  Unfortunately I forgot to consider that I would need to turn the bars.  The front is moved ahead a bit and widened slightly to give a teardrop shape, overall.  Now I will be able to turn.  The part I am working on now is the nose right in front of the cutout where my arms and hands are.  The nose is in red on the drawing.  The rules say that all of me should be visible from the side.

On another subject.  Most of the builders I admire use low frames with rigid rear ends.  They lay down on the bikes.  I was going to build a lowboy Triumph.  The choppy track at the last meet showed me the value of properly setup rear suspension.  Now I consider it essential.  Karena Markham, a local rider, and Leslie Porterfield are going fast with tall and short wheelbase production frames on 600cc and 1000cc Hondas.  Now I changed my mind.  The Triumph will be run as a highboy with the production frame and the 3" extended swing arm it has now.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on September 13, 2011, 09:43:31 AM
Bo,
I am going thru some of the same questions that you are, except that I don't have a starting point as my BSA build does not seem to conform to anything now on the market. My view plane thru the headstock will require a large Plexiglass or Lexan bubble in front of this area.  So I will have to start from scratch.  What I see in your top view, is handlebars and footpegs outside of the bodywork.  I think the bodywork needs to envelop these important items which may mean the widest part must be wider and moves rearward, especially on my build.  I also see that you are ending your rear enclosure 7-1/2" rearward of the tire.  This must be FIM, as I have heard the number 11" for BUB (AMA) next year.

I have a question about the plastic bubble.  I see in SCTA that Lexan (polycarbonate) is required for cars for windows, etc.  I have a friend who builds road race fairings, and he claims that Lexan would be dangerous to a bike rider, as it is so strong it could "cut your head off" if you try to go thru it.  He uses only Plexiglas, as it will shatter on impact. I also see that I can buy a better grade shatter resistant acrylic at Lowe's, so that may be my choice.  I can find nothing in the rules for bikes on this subject.  Any thoughts on this?
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WhizzbangK.C. on September 13, 2011, 10:01:51 AM
I'll jump in and agree with Tom that you need to have the fairing extend outward past your hands. This year Brian ran with two different fairings on the front of his bike. The first was a cafe type fairing that was recycled from years past on Tucker's and my bikes. With this fairing he ran consistent 99.xxx mph passes. He swapped to the larger fairing that we made to fit the bike and him and with no other changes made several 102.xxx passes. This experiment proved to us that a full coverage fairing is a worthwhile project.

Tom, on the subject of polycarbonate vs. Plexiglass, I don't believe that Plexiglass is in any way safer than polycarbonate. Yes, it will shatter on impact rather than resist your motion. However, the resulting shards will be razor sharp, and quite probably slice right through anything they encounter, your neck included. Polycarbonate can be formed to with a little heat and patience, and the edges can be sanded round and polished smooth so as not to cut anything. Buy a piece of each and break them, or try to in the case of the poly (wear long sleeves, gloves, and safety glasses when you break the Plexiglass, as it tends to explode when it breaks). If you're worried about hitting it in an accident, mount it so that it will come off if struck from behind, but be secure against wind forces from the front. A bit of thought should provide the answers to how to do this, as I don't have those right now, LOL.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on September 13, 2011, 08:03:28 PM
Tom, I'll second Whizzbang's advice. The shards from plexi are really nasty and may either cut or penetrate. If you're concerned I'd be more inclined to sand smooth all the edges on the polycarbonate (Lexan) windshield and then design a simple breakaway mount.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 13, 2011, 11:34:41 PM
I am glad you answered that Pete.  Windshield plastic is something I do not know about.

Fortunately the fairing is being built on the bike.  I have the tail on, too.  I can sit on it and make sure there is enough coverage.  Thanks for the advice. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on September 14, 2011, 10:29:09 PM
Consider the potential to get your hands as narrow as possible..........I believe the rules allow a minimum of 10-inches between your thumbs.........that says about 15 to 16-inches of fairing width should do.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 15, 2011, 12:51:47 AM
Scrambler, right now I am using the standard switch gear and it is bulky.  I moved the controls and grips in as far as they would go and trimmed the bar ends.  The total width is 25 inches.  A bit on the wide side.

An aluminum bar was bent in a semicircular shape to a 25 inch inside diameter.  This will give the fairing nose immediately in front of the handlebar a 26 inch outside diameter.  The Frankenstien apparatus in the photo is the jig I made to position the bar in the right place.  The new fairing will be built around the old.  Then the old one will be removed.

I sure hope Lars finds his bike.  What a mistake.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on September 15, 2011, 02:19:12 AM

 If you're worried about hitting it in an accident, mount it so that it will come off if struck from behind, but be secure against wind forces from the front. A bit of thought should provide the answers to how to do this, as I don't have those right now, LOL.


Indeed
Have a look at how they mount the screens on modern bikes
Plastic screws, or plastic nuts. Or rubber mounted "wel nut"
http://oemfasteningsystems.thomasnet.com/viewitems/pop-well-nuts/pop-well-nut-threaded-inserts
The idea is, in the event of an accident, you hit the screen and it breaks free of the fairing, saving the rider from serious injury
More than once, a bike has turned up at my workshop on a tow truck with the screen off the bike, but intact.
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 17, 2011, 12:32:27 AM
The p-pad I ordered for a chin rest did not arrive in time for BUB.  I engineered one out of the unused part of a roll of toilet paper, some cord, and duct tape.  Note the loops.  They wrap around the belt.  This way, if the pad squirts out from under the belt it will not fall down onto the salt.  It is always good to design things so there is no chance they will fall off.  The pad is from Drag Specialties.  It is leather and good quality.  These are great for cars and bikes where a small amount of padding is needed.  They come in several colors.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 18, 2011, 01:45:33 AM
This fairing rebuild is a lot of slow and tedious work.  Walrusthink is kept to a minimum.  I do not want to mess this up with my creative ideas and I am trying to follow the concepts in Bradley's "The Racing Motorcycle."  I hope he knows what he is writing about.  The old fairing I am taking off seems to be more streamlined that the new one I am building.  This photo from a ladder shows the shape of the new nose as compared to the old.  The top of the old fairing is removed.  The new nose is larger and it has a semicircular shape.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RidgeRunner on September 18, 2011, 10:26:56 AM
Bo,

     If you haven't already, you might want to google up info on the Wixom Bros fairings for roadracing HD's back in the day.  Should ease any doubts you might have about the direction you are taking, looks to me like you are on the right track.  The timeslips will tell.

                     Ed
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: thefrenchowl on September 18, 2011, 01:33:28 PM
Yes, wider is better as far as streamlining goes... Wixon Brothers replica stuff here:

http://www.airtech-streamlining.com/Harley/XR750TT1970-74.htm (http://www.airtech-streamlining.com/Harley/XR750TT1970-74.htm)

Main page, they sell a lot of replica stuff:

http://www.airtech-streamlining.com/ (http://www.airtech-streamlining.com/)

Patrick
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 19, 2011, 12:10:51 AM
Patrick, that Airtech and replica stuff looks good.  Ordering the streamlining and adapting it to fit would be the smart way to do it.  Anyway, these three posts tonight show the other way to approach the problem.

The gap between the back of the windshield and the rider's helmet should be kept to a minimum according to Bradley.  I put on the monkey suit and my helmet and laid down on the bike with my helmet on the chin rest.  My cute blond laboratory assistant took a side shot.  Next she took a level and put it against my helmet, held it vertical, and made a mark on the bike directly under the top of my helmet.  She also made marks on the chin pad where my helmet contacted it. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 19, 2011, 12:30:56 AM
This is the second of the three posts.  Now I use the photo she took and the marks on the bike to position my helmet exactly as if I was in it and I clamp five guide bars to the bike.  One bar on each side represents the sides of the streamlined shape.  One bar loops up over the bike to show the streamlined shape in end view, and another bar extends from the nose to the bar that loops over the top.

The side view picture shows the bar that goes from the nose to the loop.  This gentle curve would be the ideal shape.  I clamp the back of my windshield to the bar in a location a few inches in front of my helmet.  The windshield is mounted to my old dashboard and the tachometer is attached to it.  My notes from previous runs say the windshield is at the ideal height when the bottom of the tachometer is at the same height as the top of the headlight.  I move the loop up and down until the windshield is at this height.

The front view picture shows the bar that loops over the bike.  The "Bell" sticker on my helmet is a couple of inches above my eyes.  The photo shows that I am looking through the dashboard.  I go to the back of the bike and look through my helmet to the front.  I adjust the windshield height a little bit until I am looking through it correctly.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 19, 2011, 12:38:17 AM
This is the last of tonight's three posts.  This is a top view from the ladder.  It shows the back section that was built to a tapered shape last year.  The guide bars alongside the bike are visible and they show the taper.  The camera angle exaggerates the taper.  It is slightly less than the ten degree maximum described by Bradley.

These guide bars will not be part of the fairing or tail.  They are there to give me reference points for the design fine-tuning and fabrication.  It is beer-thirty on a warm Sunday afternoon.  Enough fabrication for one day.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 21, 2011, 12:47:59 AM
The fairing layout did not look right.  It seemed to be too big.  Yesterday Rosie took some pictures from the front and sides with me on the bike.  I unloaded the photos on the computer and looked at them.  The opening was too small.  Then I adjusted the guide bars, Rosie took photos, and I looked at them.  After the third try everything looked OK.  The bigger opening will keep my shoulders, hands, and arms out of the wind.  This taught me a lesson.  The streamlining must consider the rider.  I fill in the hole behind this fairing and together we make a nice aerodynamic shape.  Also, I learned that the camera is a valuable design tool.  Today I started to do more metal bashing. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 22, 2011, 11:46:12 PM
The Cook Shootout performance of Poteet, Main, Dutweiler and crew means a lot to this backwoods boy.  It would not mean as much if it was a three engine six wheel drive car or some other technological complication.  Instead they are breaking the big records with a single engine two wheel drive car.  A car that is much more similar to our typical rides.  This is way cool and it is traditional hot rodding at its best.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bones on September 23, 2011, 06:42:14 PM
Hey Wobbly
   You're at it already.
   I enjoyed meeting you and your
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bones on September 23, 2011, 07:20:21 PM
Wobbly I'll try again
 I think you are on the right track with the fairing.
 I bought a magazine (Bike from the UK) the other day with a test of 3 Yamaha Diversons
  n/a ,modified -56hp --  115mph
  NOS injected- 57hp --  116mph
  standard with modified fairing-47hp-  123mph
  The fairing used is a "Peel Mountain Mile" from a Manx or G50
  They calculated 69hp is needed for a standard bike to match the faired one.
  Hope to see you next year.
   cheers    Bones
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on September 23, 2011, 08:06:59 PM
Bo,
I'm thoroughly enjoying your fairing build, as it is what I have to do for next year.  Big difference is I have to start from scratch.  How do you plan to make your windshield?

Also, I can see a couple of problems with your build.  Your footwear is not appropriate, and that big ass chain attached to your carport column is going to slow you down.....

When I get started, which probably won't be until I get back to N.S., I'll keep everyone posted.

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 26, 2011, 02:01:47 AM
Bones, those numbers from the UK seem reasonable.  The tail is as important, or more, than the shape of the front.  Did they put on a tail piece?  We will be there next year, too.  It was nice to meet you.

Tom, look on Scooter Grubbs website.  The 2011 BUB pictures are posted and the bikes are in numerical order.  There is a familiar looking yellow BSA in a few pictures.  The windshield is something I will have made for me by a professional.  There are some complex curves in it.  A bit much for me to figure out.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 28, 2011, 01:04:44 AM
Our team records are 2007 AMA 1000cc Modified Partial Streamliner, Production Engine, 2008 1000cc AMA Modified Partial Streamliner, Production Engine, 2009 AMA 175cc Modified Partial Streamliner, Production Engine, 2010 FIM Category 1, Group 1, Partially Streamlined, Naturally Aspirated, 1000cc Twin Cylinder flying kilo and mile.  Every bike has gone to impound every year it ran.  Twice we lost records later in the meets.  The Triumph held four at year's end and the Honda one.  I do not mention these in my posts.  This brings bad luck and no more records.  Now I am racing for fun and not records and I will list them just this one time.

None of our bikes have been competitive and we simply were the first to figure out unique combinations.  We show what people can do with a dream, little resources, sketchy talent, and lots of crafty thinking.

The AMA and FIM records are within reach.  The little Triumph could be modified to the extent where I could get them back.  The bike would be fit for only one purpose, LSR, and it would be useless for everything else.  The bike has treated me well and it does not deserve this.  Also, I do not have the money.  The plan is to stick with the street roadster concept, try to get a 150 mph coin at BUB, and race in Australia in 2015.  Simple dreams.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bones on September 28, 2011, 03:04:00 AM
Bo
   the seat was really basic- a rolled up sheet of something about the size of a orange marker cone.
  If you make it to Aus I'm sure we can look after you.
Remember the place is BIG, you need as much time as you can afford
  cheers   Bones
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 29, 2011, 01:02:17 AM
Hi Bones.  We are figuring on six weeks total vacation with five weeks in AUS.  One of my friends showed me pictures of his trip there last year.  He said food was expensive.  My, oh my.  I just made a trip to the kitchen and had a big bowl of ice cream on top of oatmeal cookies.  The plan is to fatten up for the trip.  I have until 2015 so I am getting an early start.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 03, 2011, 12:45:16 AM
Financial planning for the year was the big topic this weekend.  The kid's college savings and my racing money all comes out of the a same paycheck.  The girl that comes with me to the races is fourteen.  I asked her about her plans after high school.  I was hoping she would say "I want to join the Marines" like her two oldest brothers.  Or, "I'm off to join the Navy" like her mother.  Or she could say, like I did, "Pops, I am sick of skool.  I want to be a machinist."  She said "I want to go to college."  "What major?" I asked.  "Biochemistry" she chirped, like she already had given it serious thought.  I do not know what this is and they do not teach it at the local community college...

These Triumphs like I have are originally 790 cc or 865 cc depending on the production year.  Mine was a 790 cc model that is upgraded to 865 cc with 10.5 to 1 pistons instead of the standard 9.5 to 1.  The #813 grind cams I have are great street cams that produces lots of mid range power.  They are not the best for Bonneville.  I am looking for cams that give more top end power.

People that race these things typically install big bore kits and sometimes stroker kits to raise the displacement from 904 cc to over 1,000 cc.  This is something I might do in the future.  I cannot afford it right now.  The hot cams are all made for these larger motors.  I asked the expert that helps me if installing the mildest of the racing cams in my 865 would work.  He a said "I do not know and I need to think about this.  That little engine might have enough size and compression to scavenge with the big cams."

My question is, what is scavenging?     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: octane on October 03, 2011, 01:01:46 AM
 He said food was expensive.  My, oh my.  I just made a trip to the kitchen and had a big bowl of ice cream on top of oatmeal cookies.  The plan is to fatten up for the trip.  I have until 2015 so I am getting an early start.    
Bo, my man:
you SERIOUSLY crack me up !
Love your posts here !

The girl that comes with me to the races is fourteen.  I asked her about her plans after high school. ... "What major?" I asked.  "Biochemistry" she chirped, like she already had given it serious thought.
That girl, Gretchen, is one h*ll of an allmightingly ( that's probably not a word in the English language ) smart girl !!!
Obey her, with all you can possibly give !!!!!!!


Wonder where she got it from......mmmmm.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: dadsolds on October 03, 2011, 12:13:03 PM
Isn't scavenging what you do when you need a part and know you have one somewhere but can't remember in which old coffee can you pitched it?
Or is it the interaction between the returning exhaust pressure waves with the incoming intake charge in the combustion chamber during the in/ex overlap period. It usually has little to do with the displacement of the cylinder but rather the design of the ex system, the shape of the comb. chamber and the design of the intake tract. What you did with the small engine to optimise the intake length, cam timing and exhaust length. All that interaction worked to maximise the scavenging effect to boost torque at a certain rpm.
Or is it when they give you a list of weird stuff and tell you to go and find it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on October 03, 2011, 09:28:03 PM
Bo,
Panic has a spread sheet program to determine the optimum length for your primary pipes, taking into consideration the valve timing, intake length within the head, and the RPM you want to tune for.  It seemed to work for me, and I ended up with a 22" pipe.  If your pipe is too long, the reversion wave will not arrive back at the exhaust valve at the right time, and with a race cam with lots of overlap, incoming charge can exit straight out the exhaust pipe.  Similarly, with the proper length, a negative wave can arrive just when the exhaust valve opens, which will help to "scavenge" the exhaust gases. (I'm basically just repeating what I believe is the correct analysis.)
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 03, 2011, 11:51:51 PM
Lars, I am not sure about the "obey" part.  We are a typical American family.  The kids are on the bottom rung of the command chain, the husband thinks he is in charge, the wife actually is, and everyone would be better off if they listened to the cat.

This might be another type of scavenging but I am not sure.  Scavenging in this case might be the engine's ability to reach peak horsepower before it hits red line.  I have seen this in the past and the solution was to either increase compression or displacement.

There is new English magazine about racing old bikes.  See www.classicracing.com  The adverts are the most useful part for the old British bike enthusiast.  The Barnes and Noble bookstore carries it here in Oregon.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 04, 2011, 01:28:58 AM
A lot of aluminum is used around here.  The 0.020 sheets for the skin are common and found in hardware stores.  No problems there.  Thicker sheet aluminum, up to 1/4 inch thick, is hard to find in small sizes.  I go to a metal fabricator and look in their supply and scrap bin.  They sell it to me by the pound.  I use enough to be on an "industrial user" account and I get a discount.  The 1/2 inch by 1/2 inch bar stock seen in the photo is not very expensive and I use a lot of it.  I buy standard 12-foot long lengths from the metal fabricator.  They are a metal supplier, too.

It is not economical to buy standard lengths of the larger aluminum bars that I used for the triple clamps, tailpiece end, and the front fairing brackets I will make next week.  I order the larger bar from Fastenal.  They sell it by the foot.  This makes much more sense than buying a full bar when I only need a small piece.

It is very important to use good metal.  Chinese metal can be of awful quality and it should be avoided.  The better suppliers stock metal from reputable sources.  I always ask to make sure.

Alloy is important, too.  The 2" by 2" aluminum bar stock I ordered today is a good example.  It is available in 2024 or 6061 alloys.  Volume 2 of the book "The Racing Motorcycle" by John Bradley has a chapter on aluminum and its alloys.  The major alloying element in the 2000 series is copper and in the 6000 series it is magnesium and silicon.  These additives give the aluminum different properties.

Bradley has a lot of information about these alloys, in summary, the 2024 is heat treatable, has high strength, poor corrosion resistance, does not anodize well, and neither TIG welding, gas welding, or brazing are recommended.   The 6061 is heat treatable, has good corrosion resistance, color anodizes well, has moderate strength, and TIG or brazing are recommended.  Gas welding is "fair."  Strength, weldability, and anodizing are not concerns in this application.  Corrosion resistance is.  These brackets might get salty and 6061 is the choice.  In fact, almost all structural aluminum on this bike is of the 6000 series.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 05, 2011, 12:32:17 AM
The performance shop I work with told me the cams I have are the best ones for an 865 cc engine.  The next hotter cams will make me go slower, they say.  Several years ago I did a bunch of posts about engine math.  In those posts I did the math on a 994 cc big bore kit.  I knew this day would come.  The kit is on the www.triumphperformanceusa.com website and it is listed in the performance parts section for the Bonneville.  High compression pistons are available for this kit beyond the 11.5 ones that come standard.

Plans are to finish the front fairing this year, install a 2 tooth smaller rear sprocket, plug in a Stage 3 ignition module instead of the Stage 2 I have now, and race at BUB in 2012.  This winter I will buy the big bore kit and start collecting all of the seals, gaskets, etc. I need for a rebuild.  The winter of 2012/13 will be devoted to installing the big bore kit.  Cams, etc to match the big bore kit will be done in winter 2013/14.

This is a long time.  My racing budget is $500 a month.  I am not complaining.  How far would that money take me in NASCAR or NHRA?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Unkl Ian on October 05, 2011, 11:53:59 PM
  My racing budget is $500 a month.  I am not complaining. 
How far would that money take me in NASCAR or NHRA?


You could buy tickets for a couple events.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 06, 2011, 01:14:24 AM
There was on the landracing.com webpage a link to Dr Mafy's aero stuff.  It had tables and lists of all sorts of drag coefficients, frontal areas, etc for different vehicles.  I could not find it this evening.  Is that info posted anywhere?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on October 06, 2011, 09:46:35 AM
Good question.  I remember that we've moved things around -- I'lldig and see where it went.  If nothing else I'll ask Mayf (who doesn't visit this site but does watch the land-speed.team.net list) where he's got it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 07, 2011, 01:00:39 AM
Thanks, Slim.  I am sure you are tired after the World Final fiasco.  Get some rest.  I am in no hurry.

The streamlining rules I race under say that the entire rider must be visible from the side.  This includes my hands so there is a slot in fairing side.  The slot has a round front and I need to bend some bar into the right shape.  A steel ring from an old Yahama crankcase assembling tool will give me the perfect radius.  It will be the mandrel and I will bend the bar around it.

The bar is 6061 aluminum alloy and it has been described in a recent post.  It has a T-6511 temper.  The alloy and temper are printed on the bar.  Bradley has this to say about the T-6000 series tempers.  "Very common.  Product is solution treated and artificially aged (precipitation).  Gives maximum strength but ductility is reduced.  Fatigue life may also be reduced compared to T4 condition.  Often referred to as 'fully heat treated.'"  My triple clamps were made from tempered aluminum billet like this.  I did not do anything in the fabrication process to alter their temper such as welding or heating.  This would reduce the metal's strength and strong triple clamps are best.

I need to heat these bent sections during the forming process.  The aluminum after heating and cooling will have "O" designation temper.  Bradley says about O "Very common.  Fully annealed material.  This is the softest, weakest, most formable condition for the alloy concerned."  This weaker material will not be a problem in this application.

First, I roughly shape the loop with a rebar bender.  Next, I clamp the piece in a big vise.  The chain clamp holds the mandrel against the aluminum bar and the two other bars and c-clamp keep everything in alignment.  The vise is tightened and the bar is bent into a loop.

The tempered bar would spring back quite a bit when the vise is loosened and it would not have the correct shape.  It is annealed to temper designation O with a propane torch to make it relax onto the mandrel.  The torch is moved SLOWLY over the bar on both sides at a rate of 2 to 3 millimeters per second.  I count one alligator, two alligator, etc as I move the torch 2 or 3 mm per alligator.  Finally I let the bar cool.  It expands a tiny amount when I relax the vise, but not much.  This is typical.  Job done. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 13, 2011, 12:40:57 AM
The next two posts shows "putting an engine to bed."  That is what I was taught.  I do not know if there is a proper name for this.  This is best done while the motor is warm after the last run.  I am doing most of it in the Smith's parking lot.  I forgot my top end oil and they had some spray oil in the hardware section.

First, I unscrew both spark plugs and check them for aluminum deposits.  This will tell me how busy I will be over the winter.  Next, I spray some oil down the plug holes to lube the cylinders.  They make oil for this purpose.  I use Marvel Mystery Oil.  My father used it and I need to keep the tradition.  Then, I drain the carbs.  Now, I turn the engine over with the starter and spray oil down the bellmouths.  This lubes the valves.  Last, I grease the plug threads and reinstall the plug using lubricated thread torque.  (About 2/3 to 3/4 of dry torque).

Road dust can travel up the pipes and down the bellmouths.  It sticks to the oily engine parts.  I stuff oily paper towels into the pipes.  The Triumph has air cleaners.  I would stuff the bellmouths if it did not.

Now I remove the chain and soak it in water to dissolve any salt.  Then I dry it in a sunny spot, oil it, and put it in a plastic ag for the winter.  The oil I use is FP-10 Lubricant Elite by Ventco, Inc www.shooters-choice.com  This is good stuff.  The chain looks like new and has no rust after four meets on the salt.  In all cases, it was on the bike, on the salt, for several days without lubing.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 13, 2011, 12:43:12 AM
The other 3 pix.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on October 13, 2011, 09:36:44 AM
Bo, where did you come up with your estimate of how much torque to use on the threads of a lubed spark plug?  I'd like to know if there's an official (so to speak) source of this information.  I ask 'cause when my dad sold for Premier Industrial (makers of fasteners including up to "Supertanium", supposedly at or above grade 8 nuts and bolts) that the lube reduced the needed torque to something less than 25% of what's needed for a dry threaded fastener.

25% or 65% of "normal".  Got some hard and factual information to back it up?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Vinsky on October 13, 2011, 01:22:52 PM
Champions torque specs say that after 'finger tight', which should be the same with or without lube. Then you go 3/8, 1/2, 5/8 more turn. depending
on type of seat, new or old crush washer and so on.
I'll read it again, but o don't think you would want to put a new plug in an aluminum head dry.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on October 13, 2011, 02:56:34 PM
Ah - they don't give a numerical torque value but rather just X turns after Y, another value without numerical definition.  I guess I'll go looking. . . :-)  Thanks anyway.  The only other method of tightening to some specific was given to me by a Chem. Eng. student when I was at Tech.  He was a backyard mechanic and offered, for when using a ratchet-type wrench, that one should do the following procedure"

(sound) widgegiggy, widgegiggy, widdgigiigggy, unh! (The "unh" being the grunt one would make when doing the final tightening stroke).
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 14, 2011, 01:30:57 AM
Three things happen when a bolt is tightened.  Some torque is used to overcome the friction between the bottom of the bolt head and the piece underneath.  More torque is used to overcome the friction between the male and female threads.  The remaining torque is used to stretch the bolt.  it is important to stretch the bolt enough to get the desired clamping force.  Too much stretch will deform the bolt.

Torque figures are for bolts with clean dry threads unless noted otherwise.  The listed values consider the relatively higher friction between dry parts.  Lube on the threads, and especially lube on the threads and head, reduces friction.  As a result, less torque is used to overcome the friction and more is used to stretch the bolt.  Torque figures are reduced to account for lubed threads.  See the chart.  This is where I got the percentages I posted.  I did some division using these values and arrived at the posted averages.  Note that too much tensile force on the bolt is a problem and a worse problem is too much pulling force on the soft female threads in the aluminum head.

I use a 75% reduction for lubed threads if I am too lazy to look in the chart.  It is close enough.  Nothing I work on is the space shuttle.

There are two reasons I lube the plug.  The plug is in a deep well and it collects salty water.  One year a plug was corroded into the head.  The lube prevents this.  The second reason is that plugs are screwed and unscrewed a lot in a race engine and lube reduces wear on the threads.

There is a reason I use a torque wrench.  The "count the turns" method works great instead of the torque method when a new crush washer is used.  Some of the turns are used to squash the washer and others are used to tighten the plug.  The plug is overtightened with the turns procedure if the washer is  crushed from previous use.  I am reinstalling used plugs with squashed washers in the post so I use the torque wrench.

A long post.  Now I know what a spawned out salmon feels like.  It is time for a pre-bedtime beer.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bak189 on October 14, 2011, 10:30:21 AM
Everybody is a expert.......just screw it down, and fire it up....it is not rocket science.............................................................................
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 16, 2011, 11:34:43 PM
These metal fairings are not as rigid as they appear and internal braces are a must.  First, I have a lot of metal laying about so I can select a piece of just enough thickness.  There is no need to use overly thick stock because it is all I have.  Second, the braces are carefully thought out so they are in the right location to give strength and not be in the way when I need to do maintenance in the area.  Third, any excess material is milled or drilled off.  These corner brackets for the dashboard are an example.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on October 17, 2011, 07:15:31 PM
Bo,
What is the size of the stock (aluminum?) that you are using?  Is it predrilled or are you drilling it for lightness?  Also, if it is aluminum, what grade, and are you having to anneal it to bend it?  I don't remember having quite that great a  selection in my erector set.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 17, 2011, 11:49:31 PM
The bars are 1/2 inch by 1/2 inch.  The gussets are 1/8-inch plate.  The braces are 0.100 inch plate.  The sheet is 0.020 inch sheet.  I will try 0.015 on the new fairing.

Almost all of the bars, billet, and angles I can get here are T6061.  Magnesium and silicon are the major alloying ingredients.  These are good alloys for general purpose use and they resist corrosion.  Most of these have T6511 temper as supplied.  This is a strong temper and I only anneal them when I am bending around a sharp radius.

Aluminum metallurgy is complex and fascinating.  Try to find Bradley's book "The Racing Motorcycle" Volume 2 used or new on the internet.  He says a lot about alloys, tempers, welding it, etc. in easy to understand language.  For example, from his chart, the 6061 alloy in T6 temper has a 310 newton per square millimeter tensile strength and it drops to 124 N/mm2 when I anneal it to O temper.  This is why I do not anneal the metal unless absolutely necessary.

I drill everything.  Nothing is predrilled

My knowledge about aluminum makes me use friendly, easy to understand, and predictible steel for the steering stem, axles, footpegs, handlebar, swingarm pivot bolt, engine connecting rods, and the frame.  Nuts and bolts, too.



 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 23, 2011, 01:03:07 AM
My middle son is in afganistan.  They captured a couple of people today.  This is unusual.  The taliban usally fight to the death.  Neither of the two spoke afgani and they both had pakistan money.  My son thinks this war is entering a new phase.

On a lighter note.  Here is our 2012 team photo. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 25, 2011, 12:31:09 AM
"The front fairing must start as far forward as possible and should shroud the wheel as mch as possible within the regulations.  Look at the Honda NSR500 and NSR 250 in Fig 4.36" says Bradley in his discussion about streamlining.

The dustbin style fairing used in the 1950's is the most aerodynamically efficient and it encloses and shrouds the front wheel.  The regulations I race under say "A front fender is compulsory..."  This means I must use a more conventional setup.  Sorta like the fronts of the road race bikes in Bradley's two examples.  The front edges of the fairing is shown in the two photos and it will partially enclose the whee.  The drilled bars are where the edges will be.  The opening is big to allow room for the forks and wheel to turn.

The new fairing will allow a lot more air to pass over the engine.  This is good.  The new motor will have a lot more displacement and compression and I need to keep it cool.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on October 25, 2011, 02:52:56 AM
Do the rules specifically rule out a dustbin fairing. You could always run a conventional front fender within the dustbin. When I'm trying to enforce the rules I hate guys like me! :evil: :evil: :evil:

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Unkl Ian on October 25, 2011, 03:33:56 PM
For example, from his chart, the 6061 alloy in T6 temper has a 310 newton per square millimeter tensile strength and it drops to 124 N/mm2 when I anneal it to O temper.  This is why I do not anneal the metal unless absolutely necessary.





Welding will do the same thing in the heat affected zone.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bak189 on October 25, 2011, 04:47:30 PM
At the BUB Trials one can run a Dustbin fairing, as long as it is mounted even or above the front axcle...(solo bikes only)
Sidecars the Dustbin can be below the front axcle..............................

Even when using a Dustbin I would mount a front fender to keep the salt spray out of your helmet and face.....................................................





















Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 26, 2011, 12:47:05 AM
Thanks for the advice about dustbins.  Two questions.  How does air get into the engine bay?  Those things were banned from world road racing due to handling problems.  Did anyone figure out a cure?

I am committed to the current design.  I want to get the frame done so I can take it off and move it indoors before the weather turns real bad.  The skin will be hammered out and riveted on in the warm cellar with some nice music playing.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bak189 on October 26, 2011, 10:44:13 AM
Dustbin fairings were banned from International Roadracing on solo bikes
for two reasons.......one being cross winds.....but the main reason was
that during a long roadrace exhaust would build up inside the fairing affecting the rider.
If I were to run a dustbin fairing on a solo bike......I would certainly not make a run at any of the LSR events if there was  wind......certainly any cross winds.  We have for many years used a dustbin on our LSR
sidecar outfit......but in the last couple of years on the salt the winds have increased to the point that we feel it is too dangerous to run that type of fairing.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 27, 2011, 01:12:49 AM
Thanks for telling me this bit about history.  I never thought exhaust would be a problem.  Now I see how it could be one.

A comment on the subject of annealing aluminum during welding.  Years ago I was witness to some aluminum chassis fabrication.  The frame and swing arm were sent out to be "pickled."  As best as I know, the chassis was retempered by immersing it in a hot liquid.  Bradley in his book "The Racing Motorcycle" Volume 2 gives a lot of advice about welding and retempering aluminum alloys.

Up here in the woods it is hard to get good advice about anything related to racing.  I read books and magazines to learn.  This was easy when Borders Books was in business.  This was a big book store with an in-house coffee shop.  I could sit down and browse through books and read the tidbits I needed.  They went belly up.  I had to find a new method to get books and I can afford to buy only a portion of the ones I need.  This is what I do now.  An example.

New radial tires are developed with rubber compounds having less internal friction when flexed.  Does this reduce rolling resistance?  This is what I want to know.  First, I look up "Motorcycle Tire" in Wikipedia.  These sentences are in the lengthy article.  "Rolling resistance is the resistance when a tyre rolls on a flat surface.  The rolling resistance coefficients of motorcycle tyres are about 0.02[1]."

The [1] is a link to a reference note.  I click on it and this comes up.  "Cossalter, Vittore (2006), Motorcycle Dynamics (Second Edition ed.) Lulu.com pp 37-72, ISBN 978-1-430300861-4"  THis is the reference note.  It describes the book.  I copy it.

Now I open http://openlibrary.org/  This is an internet library.  I type the ISBN number into the search box.  I separate the numbers with dashes just like on the previous paragraph.

Up pops a few choices.  One is a link to a scanned copy.  There is not one for this book.  I could read it on-line if there was.  That sometimes happens.

Another choice is a list of people who sell the book.  I click on Powells Books.  They are in Portland and if they have a copy on the shelf I can peek inside.  They do not.  The books are in a "remote warehouse." 

A further choice is a list of libraries that have a copy.  There is one in Eugene.  That is not far from my house.  I will go down to the local library, give the librarian the mooneyes, and sweet talk her into getting me a copy on inter-library loan.  She does this sometimes when she feels like it.

A fellow can race when almost broke.  It just takes some creative thinking.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on October 27, 2011, 01:31:14 AM
Sometimes E-Bay works too. It's variable.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Unkl Ian on October 27, 2011, 03:58:09 PM
New radial tires are developed with rubber compounds having less internal friction when flexed.  Does this reduce rolling resistance?  This is what I want to know. 


I think the benefit is in the carcass construction, not the rubber compound.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 31, 2011, 10:33:37 PM
Ian, I think it is silica or something similar in the rubber in addition to the radial carcass.

This is something I learned from Rick Murray.  Rick and his wife, Nida, race a grand prix sidecar at BUB.  These countersunk pop rivets are developed for aircraft and they do not project out into the wind and cause drag.  Today is the first time I have used them.  The picture shows the head shape.

Another picture shows a bar with holes in it.  Every third hole is for a pop rivet.  The larger holes are for weight reduction.  I put a 60 degree wood screw countersink bit in the cordless drill and I bevel each hole.  The bevel works best if I tilt the drill a bit to the side and swing the drill around in a full circle when I am using it.  This gives the bevel a shallower angle than if I go straight in.

The rivets are installed in a picture.  Note how the heads pull the sheet metal down into the bevels.  The rivets do not stick out.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 06, 2011, 01:30:37 AM
It took me forty years to learn this.  A racing fund fat with money is like a lone liberty ship crossing the Atlantic ocean at 5 mph.  There are U-boats everywhere and soon it will be no more.  All sorts of things, cars, stoves, etc. have been financed by my racing money.  Now I am smart.  I get what I need as soon as I get the money together.  The 994 cc billet big bore kit was ordered Friday along with an extra gasket set and gudgeon pin clips.  It was ordered with the special coating that extends its life.  I do not know if these coatings do anything and it was strictly an emotional decision.  I have a lot of money invested in these parts and I want them to last as long as possible.

Fuel makes a lot more sense than blowers or turbos for my budget.  I only race once a year so expensive fuel is no big deal.  This was one of the key factors in the decision to purchase the new jugs.  The new cylinder block is big and strong and there are two piston options, 11.5 to 1 and 14 to 1.  The lower compression ones were ordered.  This is my street bike and I need to be able to run it on pump gas.  The other ones would be suitable for an alcohol motor.

The fairing chin gave me a lot of trouble.  Usually the fairing sides converge to an open "V" at the chin.  This engine is wide down low and I could not make a V.  Also, I like to enclose the bottom of the engine compartment to keep the salt out.  A flat plate across the fairing bottom is not very aerodynamic.  The fairing nose will have a blunt rounded end and a teardrop shape.  I tried to copy that theme for the chin.  The photo shows what I built. 

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 06, 2011, 07:12:20 AM
Bo,
Great looking metal work.  As I said in my post, I am considering using sheet aluminum for fabricating part of my fairing.  I have a friend, semi-retired, who has worked in sheet metal all his life, but mainly industrial, and some car parts. He has recently purchased an English wheel, so I may be spending some time in his shop.  The problem I see with using fiberglass, is that it first requires a mold of some kind to create it's shape.  Compound curves are of course the hardest to make. I consider myself a Jack of many trades, but bodywork is not one -- at least not yet!

Your view on the "budget" situation is interesting and shows that you have a very understanding partner there (and you do not abuse the privileges).  My situation is a little different.  It's more like that lone liberty ship crossing the Atlantic ocean, with a slow leak!  I sold my business 4 years ago, and retired 2-1/2 years ago.  Now I live off the income from my investments.  Got to keep that leak in check! 
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 07, 2011, 12:29:17 AM
Tom, eventually a mold is needed for metal, too.

There are three types of aero drag that I know about.  Shape drag is influenced by the object's shape.  Interference drag is the subject of a future post.  Surface drag is caused by the surface texture.

Long term followers of this build will have seen three aluminum tail sections, two partial fairing rebuilds, and now a complete fairing makeover.  All are attempts to minimize shape and interference drag.  Eventually I will have the shape where I think it is good.  The mickey mouse aluminum plate method is great for this experimenting.  It is easy to build and modify the shapes.  I can make a fairing and tail with minimal shape and interference drag using this procedure.

Freehand shaping like I use for the plates has its limits.  It is hard to make complex forms with multiple curvatures.  To do this correctly, a hardwood buck is made and the metal is annealed and hammered to shape on the buck.  Then, the individual pieces are trimmed and welded together.  The bucks are a lot of work to make.  It makes sense to do this after the optimum shape is figured out.  The welded fairing will have less surface drag than the riveted one I am making now.

A common problem with a lot of fairings, mine included, is a lack of elbow room.  My arms are inside the original fairing to illustrate the issue.  In practice I had my arms outside of the fairing when I raced, like in the second photo.  This caused turbulence and drag.  The bar under my elbow with the half a pizza shaped aluminum piece on it will be the new fairing edge.  It will be much lower and all of me will fit behind the fairing.  No more arms sticking out.

The rules say the rider must be fully visible from the side while in racing position.  Let's say I do not pay attention to this and I set a record.  A person could file a protest after the race is done.  They probably would have a picture of me riding while partially hidden behind the fairing.  I would not have the time to correct the problem and make another record attempt.  I could lose the record.  I am very careful about following the rules so this does not happen.  These side view photos help me to do this.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 07, 2011, 07:54:19 AM
Bo,
You are, of course, running under the FIM rules which are slightly different from the AMA rules.  FIM has no "pushrod" class as such, so a single cylinder 500cc can be overhead cam, 4 valve, etcetera, maybe even 2-stroke.  I did a quick read of the rules and that was my interpretation.  Running an old pushrod motor under these rules seems a little tough, although I can't find all the current records.  Interestingly, the version you gave me said that Tad Meadows has the 500cc non-streamlined record at 108 mph on an old Gold Star (I think).  I am, however, building my bike by the SCTA current rules, which allows more streamlining at the back than the AMA rules, but rumor has it that that will change for 2012.  The current AMA rules allow the following: "With the rider in the racing position, the rider must be able to be seen (hands and arms excluded) entirely from either side."  I interpret this to mean my hands and forearms can be fully faired.

Thanks for the info.

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 07, 2011, 09:25:48 PM
That is the critical thing, knowing the rules.

The pros and cons of running a front fender are always a subject of debate.  There are very fast bikes out there with no front fenders.  Occasionally, like at 2007 BUB, the salt can be wet enough to stick to tires.  This can cause a visibility problem when it flies up and attaches to the face shield.  A front fender is a good idea based on safety, alone.  Front fenders are required on FIM partial streamliners.

Another advantage of a front fender is, with a well designed fairing behind it, it keeps the salt out of the cooling fins on the engine or radiator and it minimizes flying loose salt around the air intake and electrics.  The half moon shape with side panels is especially good at containing the salt and the white stuff is the enemy of reliability.  The critical design point is the bottom of the air hole in the front of the fairing should be above the salt spray zone behind the front wheel.     

The very fast bikes like Warner's Suzuki runway racer use the front fender to an aerodynamic advantage.  It has a wedge shape and it splits the air before it hits the fairing.

The half moon fender will stay on after the front fairing is done.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 10, 2011, 01:20:57 AM
Recently Joe Frazier, the boxer, died.  One of his bouts was broadcast on the telly.  There was a short piece before one of his fights where the boxers were shown in their everyday lives.  Joe had a nice full dress Harley and a camera was mounted on the front.  The producers showed him riding around the countryside.  The view was taken from the bike and one could see the countryside pass by.

That short film made an impression on young me.  The Triumph is not a race bike all of the year.  It has saddlebags and a windshield and I ride it like Joe did.  Just putting around the countryside and nothing fancy, like I have done since I was young.  I have Joe Frazier to thank for showing me how to enjoy a leisurely ride.       
 

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 14, 2011, 12:10:37 AM
The bottom left side on the fairing was the weekend's project.  This is a good photo of construction using guide bars.  The vertical bar alongside the skin is the guide bar for shape in the vertical plane.  The thinner horizontal guide bars help me to line up the rows.  I tried to make one big piece instead of the little plates.  It took me all Friday morning to get nowhere.  There are a lot of curves on this fairing and I could not get all of them correct.  I was getting frustrated and I almost drove myself sane.  This fairing will use plates like the old one.

There was a BMW at Cooks Shootout.  It was raced with and without a passenger and the speeds were almost identical.  My guess is the wedge shaped front end made an enormous turbulence pocket around the motorcycle and the passenger was inside this turbulence envelope.  A bike with decent aerodynamics would have attached flow with much less or no turbulence around it.  The passenger would disrupt the the attached flow this would slow it down quite a bit.

The picture also shows how the wider part of the fairing is in front and it tapers toward the rear.  The goal is to have the air attached and flowing parallel to the direction of travel when it passes over the trailing edge of the fairing.  Hopefully it will reattach itself to the tail section.  This is a completely different concept than the BMW's wedge shaped front end.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: gearheadeh on November 14, 2011, 09:15:17 AM
Wobbly,
Keep up the good work, This new fairing ....is it gonna allow for the must see the lower portion of the front tire rule?Do you have an Air power rivet gun? or forearms like Popeye? I like the "Drive yourself sane" Bit! :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 15, 2011, 12:49:52 AM
Thanks for mentioning this.  There are so many rules.  It is hard to remember them all and I forgot about that one.  Yes, I am lucky, half of the tire is visible.  I do not need to redo anything.  Right now I am using a hand riveter.  I will buy a power one after the family forgets about the $2,324 I spent for the big bore kit.  I am keeping a low profile now and not buying anything other than food or beer.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 22, 2011, 01:04:25 AM
This year it looks like the handling problem is fixed and no more weaves or wobbles.  This gives me the green light to start buying the parts for the big motor.  It made no sense to do this until the chassis was sorted.  The big bore cylinders and pistons are on order and I am saving money for the cams, lifters, machine work, gaskets, seals, airfare to Australia, etc.  Target date is 2014 BUB for the big engine debut.

Meanwhile, I am getting the chassis ready for the motor.  The old fairing had a simple rectangular hole cut in the front of it for cooling.  Enough air went through the hole to cool the mildly tuned engines I am running.  The big motor will put out a lot more power, hopefully, and a lot more heat.  This has me worried.  The cylinder head is ported and I do not have a lot of metal between the valves to dissipate heat.  The head might crack between the valve seats if it gets too hot.

There is jumbo size shark that cruises through the water with its huge mouth open and everything in front of it goes in.  This gave me the idea.  The front of the fairing around the cylinder head is shaped to catch air and direct it onto the oil radiator and cylinder head.  The fairing is not done yet, but this first panel shows the idea.  There will be more panels on the front just like it.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 22, 2011, 06:20:42 AM
Bo,
Don't forget about rule # 6548 section Z, "The maximum number of pop rivets allowed is 500."

By the way, your favorite author, John Bradley, on page 226 of volume one states "...I made up a simple duct to ensure that the air reached the fins.  As a result the bike would barely run because it would not stay hot enough." 

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on November 22, 2011, 09:48:11 AM
Just remember that any air you direct inside creates drag, offsetting all the work you've done building the fairing. That's why race cars in all classes of road and oval racing have some way of controlling air flow through the cooling system whether it be tape or panel inserts. Make an easy to resize opening and test like you always do.

Forget the shark! KISS!

Looks to me like the trees got in the way of the forest.

Pete

P.S. - Sorry if it sounds harsh, but I'd hate to see you head off in a tangent that created a lot of work that could be invested more constructively elsewhere.

P
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 23, 2011, 12:26:53 AM
I clicked on the sox on cox attachment from Australia and picked up a virus.  It trashed the computer hard drive.  The only thing that works now is Firefox.  This virus got through a Webroot virus protection system.  Youall wont be reading anything I type for awhile.  I need to get my hard drive replaced.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Dr Goggles on November 23, 2011, 04:08:14 PM
I clicked on the sox on cox attachment from Australia and picked up a virus.  It trashed the computer hard drive.  The only thing that works now is Firefox.  This virus got through a Webroot virus protection system.  Youall wont be reading anything I type for awhile.  I need to get my hard drive replaced.

Not sure how to apologise adequately for posting that link Bo. I just googled "Chillipeppers socks" and got that, I opened it at work...on a Citrix system.Our system usually shuts down access on risk pages or throws up a virus warning but there was no alert there. Once again I'm very very sorry if that was the cause.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on November 23, 2011, 06:26:19 PM
I think some of those viruses work on a random basis and while it may have come from there it also may have come from somewhere else and just triggered at that time. I opened it with no unintended consequences.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 24, 2011, 01:59:25 AM
The virus posts a lot of error messages that say your hard drive is failing, etc.  Then, you are blocked from getting into your files and most of your icons disappear.  A popup screen has a little Microsoft flag in the corner and it says it is a "System Fix."  It is impossible to delete the popup.  The screen directs you to do some security scans.  Then it says it cannot fix the system.  It says you need to buy an enhanced version of the program.  The victim orders the program by entering in their credit card number and secret code.  Nothing happens.  The victim has sent in their personal ID to the hacker.  This program caught my wife and she sent in the credit card info.  The virus eventually trashed her hard drive.  We replaced the hard drive and notified the credit people.

I did not know about Rosie's problem when I encountered the virus.  I noticed the little Microsoft flag icon was not correct when I saw the popup.  This told me there was something hokey happening.  I did not send any info and this evening I did a lot of scans, quarantines, and removal with Webroot.  I think I have cleared it from the system.  The computer works, sort of, and there has been a lot of damage.

This is a common virus.  Folks at my job have encountered it, too.  I have no idea where I am getting these viruses and there is no one at fault on Landracing.com, I am sure.  Hopefully this info will help you recognize the virus if your computer gets infected.  Modern life.  Isn't it fun?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: saltwheels262 on November 24, 2011, 11:47:41 AM
if I don't recognize an email , or who it's from , it gets deleted.
-- before opening.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 29, 2011, 01:50:03 AM
That is my method now, too.  I do not open anything unless I know the person who sends it.

Right now I am having a hard time with the fairing.  Lots of hours are used up with little progress.  The problem is the hole in the front where the wheel sticks down through the fairing.  The hole is very big when I size it to accommodate the wheel swinging through the full steering arc and with full compression on the forks.  The clearance between the top of fender and the fairing edges is the issue.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 29, 2011, 06:58:16 AM
Bo,
Can you put some temporary stops on the steering?  10* is all that's allowed for "A" class bikes, and I've not had a problem with that at Bonneville or Loring.  That should make the hole smaller.  On my bike, I am making the fairing without the fender, and I plan to cut away the back part of the fender, as required, to clear the fairing.  I plan a very small hole for air, or NACA ducts on the edges, if necessary.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on November 29, 2011, 07:28:08 AM
Tom
SCTA is  15°   Rule 7.B.19
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 29, 2011, 05:31:05 PM
Yes,
I stand corrected, 15 degrees for SCTA.  I can't even find the correct number for AMA!  It is, however, the maximum amount allowed for classes other than Production.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: saltwheels262 on November 29, 2011, 06:15:32 PM
not sure that a m a even has maximum swing specs for mc front ends.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 55chevr on November 29, 2011, 09:32:19 PM
I dont remmember AMA with a number ... just cant use damper to stop travel
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: joea on November 30, 2011, 12:11:12 AM
wobbly im sure you have already investigated this but wanted to mention
for whatever its worth...:  figure in  some compression of the forks and its
resulting change in fender edge to the hole, and or load the forks now, it can
be quite surprising how much that effects the clearance, much easier to make
accomodations now then later...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 30, 2011, 01:41:24 AM
The intent is to run FIM, AMA, or DLRA.  The DLRA allowed steering swing I do not know.  Some internet research will be done this weekend.

The inside calipers were set at the advertised 120 mm maximum fork travel.  They would not fit between the fender and the fairing in some places.  This showed me that there was a problem.  This evening I put the bike up on the lift, pulled out the fork springs, and put a wagon jack under the front wheel.  The wheel was lifted up to full compression and I swung it around from side to side.

What I saw was baffling.  There were some interference problems and they were in completely different locations than where I anticipated.  A front fender that is closer to the tire will solve a lot of these issues.  It is time to toss the armadillo style oldie and make a new one.  The family objects to this.  They say the goofy front fender is an essential part of the Triumph's identity and I must not get rid of it.  Tomorrow I will set the fork stops at 15 degrees each side and see how things look.

Thanks for the advice, all of you.  I am using it. 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on December 03, 2011, 12:45:15 AM
Bo
DLRA is  15°   Rule 7.B.19
Yep, same rulebook but for a few headings and Helmet specs

G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 06, 2011, 02:02:56 AM
Thanks, Grumm.  This weekend I will check and make sure it will turn 15 degrees each way.

My laptop was trashed by a phishing virus.  It took awhile to get it working.  I am not a nerdy guy.  A few things I learned.

1)  The garden variety virus protectors do not always protect against phishing.  Mine could not stop the attack.  It did work for scanning and cleaning the system.  I scanned repeatedly until three consecutive scans did not find anything.  Eventually I bought a top grade virus protector that is designed to prevent phishing damage.

2)  The virus protectors capture and quarantine the virus.  It is smart to write down the names of the captured viruses before they are deleted.  This will be handy later.  I used the names to figure out that a phishing attack was the cause of my trouble.

3)  Always check the hard drive condition before assuming it is trashed.  Windows has several tools for checking system health.  All said my hard drive was OK.  It was reprogrammed by the phishing virus and files were deleted.  I reinstalled the operating system and everything works OK.

4)  Internet Explorer has an option that prevents phishing attack.  It is not turned on by default.  A person needs to turn it on.

5)  Avoid all websites with the subject of "animals." 

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on December 06, 2011, 06:28:48 AM


5)  Avoid all websites with the subject of "animals." 


Especially those with names like "wobbly walrus!"
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Kiwi Paul on December 07, 2011, 12:10:07 AM
 :-D :-D Another mouthful of Tea gone right out my nose....... :-D :-D :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on December 07, 2011, 05:33:08 AM
I'm just using the free version of AVG and it picked up the virus and spat it out into quarantine.
However, I don't use internet explorer as it does stuff without asking. I'm using Firefox.
I also have the automatic updates turned off because they ***t me

As for running DLRA, if you have a SCTA rule book, you will be fine
We realize that we are not the only organization  that runs on a salt lake and so unlike another organization who will remain nameless
we allow people who have an SCTA license to run without having to re license.
Oh and if you want to run a 3 engine motorcycle streamliner over here, http://www.dlra.org.au/forum/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=1314  that's OK too
G


Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 08, 2011, 12:53:15 AM
Thanks, Grumm.  I will get an SCTA rule book.  Hopefully the bike rules are more simple than the car ones.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on December 08, 2011, 03:58:01 AM
Or you could just
http://www.dlra.org.au/rulebook.htm
Never mind
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 09, 2011, 12:35:32 AM
Thanks, Grumm.  I will download it when I figure how to get my computer working OK.  I was planning on running at speed week before AUS.  It would be interesting to pull out a DLRA rule book in the SCTA tech inspection to discuss if something was legal.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on December 09, 2011, 04:53:17 AM
Yep
Funnier still is when you get to tech inspection and get the same inspector you got in Aus :-D
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 12, 2011, 01:35:19 AM
The same inspector would be nice at both events.  Speed week will be 2013 or 2014 and AUS in 2015.

An airplane wing slices through the air.  The air pressure over the curved upper surface is less than the corresponding pressure under the flatter lower surface.  The high pressure air under the wing swirls upward into the low pressure air at the wing tip.  There are swirling eddy currents in the air where the wing tip has passed.

It takes energy to move air.  The household fan is an example.  No air moves unless that rascal is plugged in and turned on.  The swirling eddy currents are air movement, it takes energy to cause them, and this energy loss is interference drag.

The goal of streamlining is to save energy by moving as little air as possible the shortest distance, and energy is saved by minimizing interference drag.  To do this, the surfaces are designed to have similar air pressure on them.  The curvature, texture, length parallel to the flow, and angle to the air flow is as uniform as practical.  It took me a long time and several tries to get concept from theory to bent and mangled sheet metal.  One side of the fairing is made, as shown in the photo.

The steering stops were shimmed to give me 15 degrees of movement on each side.  I sat on the bike and turned the bars.  A little bird on my shoulder said "You have been here before.  You told yourself you would never do it again."  In my distant memory there was a bike with limited steering swing.  It was terrifying to manoeuver around at lower speeds.  I went really slow and paddled a lot to keep it from tipping over.  The steering lock is 25 degrees each way normally and I will keep it that way.  The hole in the fairing is sized to give enough clearance.  The steering is at full lock and the fork is completely compressed in the photo.  There just enough room to accommodate the fender.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on December 12, 2011, 07:14:22 AM
Excellent work, Bo,
I have a couple of thoughts.  A Large hole in the front can cause a lot of drag from what I've read (Bradley, for example).  The famous Can Am 125 didn't have any hole in the front - - it certainly worked for them (of course the motor seized on the return run).  Can you close part of the hole to reduce this drag?  Possibly with some screw-in panels; start without them and watch the temperature gauge.  Then close them up and try again.  NASCAR cars do it with duct tape and it speeds them up.  I don't think it matters what their shape is (curved or flat).
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 12, 2011, 10:12:03 PM
A fellow a few years ago was running a naked Triumph with an engine build similar to the one I am doing.  He forgot to shift into 5th gear and made the run in fourth at high rpm.  The head cracked.  Knowing this, my plan is to run the hole open until I learn how to do data recording and I get some baseline information about engine temps.  Then, after looking at the data, I will close up the hole a bit at a time if I can.

Another thread on this forum discusses crankshaft configuration.  I posted some info about work I did to the Triumph crank to prepare it for high rpm use.  A reply mentioned road racing Triumphs and 10,000 rpm engine use.  It would be unfair to hijack the other fellow's thread.  Info on this subject follows.

Currently my target rpm is 7,500 and the rev limiter is set to 8,400.  This is higher than the standard Triumph factory red line.  It works OK.  These engines are very strong.  Reciprocating engine parts are subject to stresses when they are accelerated and decelerated.  Forces create these stresses and they can be roughly approximated by the equation F = MA where F = force, M = the part's mass, and A = acceleration.   Acceleration can be approximated by A = V**2 / 2g where A = acceleration, V**2  = velocity squared, 2 is what it is, and g = the gravitational constant.  Basic algebra shows that the internal stresses in an engine increase in proportion to the rpm squared.  In other words, doubling the rpm increases the engine stresses fourfold.  This is a rough and simplistic statement.

In these calculations from a few years ago, I see that increasing the engine operating speed 1000 rpm increases stresses 25 percent and increasing the rpm ceiling another 1000 rpm will increase stresses over 50 percent.

Horsepower can be calculated by the equation HP = t x 2 x pi x rpm / 33000 where HP = horsepower, t = torque, 2 = two, pi is pi, and 33000 is a constant.  Assuming that the torque is the same for all engines, some bonehead algebra shows us that horsepower is directly proportional to rpm.  In other words, double the rpm will double the torque.  Again, this is a simplistic statement.

This is some of the most useful info I can calculate.  In Case 2 the engine operating speed is increased 1000 rpm, engine stresses go up 25 percent, and I get 13 percent more power, 77 horses.  In Case 3 the operating rpm is raises another 1,00 rpm, engine stresses go up a whopping 54 percent and I get a measly 86 horsepower. 

Big increases in engine stresses = periodic teardowns and inspection + regular replacement of some very rare and expensive parts.  The roadrace folks do this.  They have no choice.  Some LSR people with big money take this route.  My budget says a higher 8,000 rpm target rpm with a 9,100 rpm redline is OK.  It increases stress about 12 percent and it will give me a few horses.

These simple equations explain why blowers, turbos, fuel, and combinations of all three are so popular.  They can provide much more power than spinning the engine faster.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 15, 2011, 01:32:37 AM
The RPM vs stress calculations showed me that high engine speeds cause greater inertial stresses.  These are the stresses caused by parts moving back and forth.

Therer is another type of stress in an engine and it is caused by the pressure of the combustion in the cylinder.  It compresses the piston crown, the rod, the crank bearings, etc.  These stresses can be reduced by increasing the rpm.  The work of moving the bike is spread over more engine revolutions.

Right now I am planning for a new motor.  The tradeoff of greater inertial loads and reduced combustion pressure loads at increased rpm is keeping me busy. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on December 15, 2011, 08:00:00 AM
"double the rpm will double the torque."  I'm sure you meant "double the rpm will double the horsepower."  Of course this assumes that torque remains the same as the rpm increases.  In real life, torque begins to drop at some point due to reduced efficiency.  Therefore, horsepower doesn't always increase proportionately.  So you have a double wammy -- increased stress without the proportional increased horsepower.  Cubic dollars spent on porting, bigger valves, bigger carbs, different cam timing, more efficient exhaust and so forth sometimes add up to a small gain.  That's life!

Does the Department know you're using their notepads?

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 15, 2011, 08:55:14 PM
The mistake is mine.  I meant to say double the rpm doubles the HP assuming the torque is the same.  Usually I do my calcs on toilet paper in the john.  These notepads are a big step up to classy behavior.

A call from the vendor selling me the big bore cylinders started all of this figuring.  The pistons are custom made and he wanted to know the CR I wanted, 11.5 to 1 or 14 to 1.  The 14 to 1 is the best for a racing engine to be used at B'ville.  It will work well with racing gasoline and the thin air on the flats.  The choice was easy.  11.5 to 1 will work for a street motor near sea level and this is what I chose.  The second question was about ring thickness, 1 mm or 1.5 mm.  I would chooe the thinner rings for a high rpm drag motor or B'ville only engine.  The thin rings resist flutter at high rpm.  I chose the thicker 1.5 mm ones.  They wear better and I will not have a high rpm engine.  The vendor asked what I would be doing with the motor.  I said "street use with annual runs on the salt."  I should have been more specific and told him about the horsepower I wanted and the red line.  Rick Vogelin's "The Step-by-Step Guide to Engine Blueprinting" has a chapter on pistons and rings.  It tells a person about the various setup choices and what they do.

Inspired by all of this, I got out some old calcs and started to do some serious figuring.  I made a lot progress in learning about engines.  I made greater progress in confusing myself.  In a moment of clarity I called Triumph Performance and said "the power and torque curve on your website for the 104 horsepower engine is what I want."  The curve is shown and it is in the "Bonneville" portion of the "Performance" section.  It is for an engine with a big block and a stroker kit.  Mine will have the big block, only.  About 90 hp is all I expect.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 22, 2011, 02:04:00 PM
Happy Holidays from the mouse patrol and Team Go Dog, Go!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: JimL on December 23, 2011, 06:31:45 PM
I can certainly attest to the difficulty of getting the horsepower gain out of the 5 digit RPMs.  My project is down to jumping compression, shorter tuned lengths, and reducing internal losses.  It is becoming difficult to tell where remaining horsepower may be hidden, because small tuning problems seem to be amplified up there above 10,000 - 11,000 RPM.  Next year will require some changes in the ERC gasoline choice and engine temps.  I dread that experiment (has to happen because I've shortened the stroke.)  It is very hard to find that edge without stepping in cracks a few times, and they don't make parts for my old engines, anymore.

Always fun keeping up with your build!
Regards, JimL
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 24, 2011, 12:58:31 AM
Jim, you are in a more difficult position than I am.  You are exploring the outer limits of those little Honda twins.  The 90 horsepower big bore motor I will be building is a mild engine.  Sometimes I think chopping up one of those new Kawasaki 1,000's into a 500 cc twin might be an answer.  The more I look at that concept, the better it seems.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 26, 2011, 12:27:05 AM
A new windshield was going to be made for the rebuilt fairing.  That was the original plan.  No money for that now and I will try to use the old one.  It is a Triumph windshield that says "PC" near the recycling triangle.  This means polycarbonate, I think.  The new fairing is wider than the old and I need to flatten out the windshield a little bit.

First, I perched it over the wood stove and put a couple of logs in.  The windshield was heated up by the stove and it was warm to the touch.  I spread it apart and it sprung back.

Next, I placed it over an Alladin oil light.  These put out a lot of heat.  I could not get the windshield hot enough to bend and stay bent.

Has anyone bent one of these?  How hot should I get it and how is it usually done?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on December 26, 2011, 01:03:16 AM
Be careful because polycarbonate is Lexan or actually viseversa. It contains water and will bubble before it reaches bending temperature. Scratch one windshield. It requires a slow prebake in an oven to expel the moisture. I've found the required temperatures and times on the internet before. Get Mr. Google busy and follow the instructions or next thing you know you're going to learn how to build a new windshield...................not good.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: thefrenchowl on December 26, 2011, 05:34:55 AM
Hi, wobblywalrus,

You need a lot of heat to de-bend and re-form this screen... ie lots of hair dryers or better, one of those oxy-propane torches they use to braze old tube-in-casting frames. Will work better if you got a hard wood form made to the right pattern and use a flat sheet of lexan that you wrap hot over the form. That's how they make those big double curvature screens for helicopters.

Patrick
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 27, 2011, 01:23:09 AM
We had a barbecue today and I heated up the windshield over the hot coals and tried to bend it.  A small section is crazed.  Either it is water bubbles or the surface melted a little bit.  This is no big loss.  I destroyed the old fairing that used that shield.

My plan now is to find some money and give the job to a professional.  Does anyone know of a racing windshield builder in the Pacific Northwest?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 29, 2011, 09:21:27 PM
The bottom part is done.  About a year and a half ago I posted drawings of egg shaped streamlining in top and side views.  The back part was built last year and this is the front.  The object is to have the widest part of the streamlining in front and to provide coverage for me.

The top view shows the old fairing.  Right now the new one is attached to the old and it is bolted to the bike.  I need to make some brackets and braces.  Then, I can take the old fairing out.  The side view shows the hole in the front.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on December 29, 2011, 09:45:17 PM
We had a barbecue today and I heated up the windshield over the hot coals and tried to bend it.  A small section is crazed.  Either it is water bubbles or the surface melted a little bit.  This is no big loss.  I destroyed the old fairing that used that shield.

My plan now is to find some money and give the job to a professional.  Does anyone know of a racing windshield builder in the Pacific Northwest?

This guy does Lexan windshields and rear hatch glass (using original glass as a form) for race cars.  http://kentplasticsinc.com/ (http://kentplasticsinc.com/).  He can do the rear hatch on my Merkur for ~$250 plus cost of Lexan.  Talked with him yesterday, nice guy.  Maybe he can help you.

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 01, 2012, 12:49:28 AM
Thanks, Mike.  I will contact him when I get the fairing done enough to remove from the bike and I show it to him.

It is time to make some fairing brackets.  There are two choices for the aluminum, 2024, an alloy with copper as a main ingredient, and 6061, an alloy with magnesium and silicon as primary alloying ingredients.  The 2024 is very strong with poor corrosion resistance and fair machinability.  The 6061 is strong enough and it has good corrosion resistance and very good machinability.  I order a 13-inch long stick of 6061 from Fastenal.  My machine tools are a Sawzall, an air grinder, some files, and an old drill press.  Hole saws are used for the fancy work.  Here are some tricks to make this hole saw magic happen.

First, select a hole saw with a set to the teeth.  The groove it makes is wider than the saw barrel and it will not bind as easily.  Ace Hardware hole saws are made in the US and the teeth have a lot of set.

Second, use the pilot drill to get the saw started, then take it out.  The drill creates a lot of drag and makes cutting harder.

Third, use a slow speed and lubricant.  This will keep the saw from packing up with aluminum and binding.  Kerosene is a good lube but it smells bad.  I use the odorless kerosene made for kerosene lamps.

The bar will make two brackets.  I do not detach them until the very last step.  It is a lot easier to clamp the part down if it is longer.

Happy New Year.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 01, 2012, 11:24:57 PM
Ham fisted guys in a hurry cause themselves problems.  I broke a tap.  A #10-28.  Here is what I did.

First, I drill down each top flute with a small drill, a 1/32.  This is delicate work and it cannot be rushed.

Second, the holes are enlarged with a the 3/64 drill.  The objective is to remove some of the metal around the tap.

Third, I try to turn the tap into the holes with a center punch.  The tap does not move.  The top breaks off.  This is OK.

Last, I set the anvil on the thickest part of the concrete floor and I put the part on the anvil.  I need hard support that will reflect, not absorb, a shock.  Now I put a 1/8 drift punch over the remaining tap and give it a sharp whack.  It crumbles and falls out of the hole.  Tap steel is brittle and I shattered it.  This part of the job is done.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 01, 2012, 11:39:31 PM
Now I scrounge through the insert box.  A #10 insert has threads 3/8 wide.  This is too big and it will weaken the part.  A heli-coil will work.  It is New Years Day and the stores are closed.  I will need a tap and insert tool, too, and this will cost money.  It is time for Plan C.

The outside diameter of #10 threads is 0.1900.  The inside diameter of 5/16 x 24 threads is 0.2720.  The difference between the two divided by two is 0.041 inches.  This will be the minimum thickness of a homemade insert.  It is enough.  The outside diameter of the insert is 5/16 inches.  This is small enough to not weaken the part.

I look for a 5/16 x 24 bolt.  There is a nice new 8mm x 1.25 mm one in the can.  It is close enough to correct.  I will use it.  Now I need to mark the center of the end.  A divider is set at about 1/2 the bolt diameter and I scribe a bunch of arcs across the bole end.  Where these arcs cross each other is the middle.  I penile device punch there. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 01, 2012, 11:47:53 PM
Now I put a nut on the bolt and tighten it in the drill press chuck with the threaded end down.  I put a 1/64 pilot drill in the machinist vice pointing straight up.  Now I turn on the press and pull the spinning bolt down onto the stationary drill.  I repeat with the #21 pilot drill for the #10-28 threads.  The spinning bolt self centers the drill so it goes straight down the middle.  I drill all of the way through the bolt.  This makes it easier to keep clean when it is tapped.  I blow the chips out through the open end with compressed air.  Now I tap the inside of the bolt with a #10 x 28 tap.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 01, 2012, 11:54:41 PM
Now I tap the part with a 8 mm x 1.25 mm tap.  I do not tap full depth threads throughout.  The last thread is partial depth.  It will clamp onto the insert and hold it in place.  Now I screw in the bolt with some red loctite on it.  It is turned until the threaded end is flush with the bottom of the threaded hole.  Next, I cut the hex head end off with a sawzall and file everything flush and flat.  Job done and time for a cool and foamy beer...or two.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 03, 2012, 11:00:20 PM
One of the brackets is done.  Stainless steel fasteners are great.  They do not get rusty.  A problem with using them in aluminum is corrosion.  Salty water will get in the threads between the aluminum and the stainless, the aluminum will corrode, and the fastener will seize solid.  Blue loctite or anti seize has helped to prevent this corrosion in the past.

Now, when I can, I use stainless steel studs with stainless nuts.  No corrosion issues.  I use loctite where the stud is screwed into the aluminum to control corrosion there.

Extra holes are included on the bracket.  I might want to add or change something later and these will be handy.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on January 04, 2012, 12:38:54 AM
Always use anti-seize or Loctite on stainless to stainless fasteners. The nuts love to gall on the bolts.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 06, 2012, 11:37:26 PM
Thanks, Peter.  I will use the weaker blue locktite on the nut-to-stud connection and the strong red stuff on the stud-to-part threads.

Do any of you remember your first long road trip?  My oldest girl an one of her friends left for Fort Drum in New York on the 2nd.  Her husband is in the 10th Mountain Division and she will meet him when he comes back from the big litter box.  Two girls, one little Toyota, five days and and $600 is what it took.  Her smile says it all.  There is nothing like that that first one.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 09, 2012, 12:19:00 AM
The brackets are done.  Now it is time to make the braces between the brackets and the supported parts.  Mos of us most of the time will measure the distances between the parts with a ruler or tape, write them down, and use the ruler or tape to lay them out on the metal to be cut.  There are multiple opportunities to screw things up with this method.

Chances for error are reduced if trammels or a divider are used to transfer the dimensions directly from the vehicle to the metal.  Here is how it works.  First, I spread the trammel or dividers so they span the distance between the holes on the future brace.  Next, I move the tools from the vehicle to the brace using care to not unadjust them.  Last, I mark the distance between the holes on the metal to be drilled and cut.  The first photo shows a distance being recorded with trammels.  The second shows the trammels being used to lay out the distance on the metal, and the third shows machinist dividers.

Trammels are used by cabinet makers and finish carpenters.  Look for them at a woodworkers supply.  The set shown here works very well.  They are Precision Trammels, Model 520, by General Tools Manufacturing Company, Inc. in New York City, New York.  I bought these before computers and there is no internet address on the box.  General Tool is still in business.

This method can be used for a bent brace, too.  Bend the brace first, then transfer the distances to it as shown in the photo. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 09, 2012, 08:27:06 PM
How do you insert a link?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on January 09, 2012, 08:53:27 PM
Cut and paste (or type) the link into the edit box.  Highlight it, then click the third from the left icon in the bottom row (it will say "Insert Hyperlink" when you mouse-over) directly above the edit box.

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 10, 2012, 01:44:05 AM
Thanks Mike.  I will try it tomorrow.

The only way to figure out the best spark advance curve for a bike engine is experience and lots of trial and error on a dyno.  I have neither.  Triumph Performance has developed an advance curve for 865 cc engines with the #813 cams like I have.  It is the Stage III curve.  The igniter box on these bikes controls the spark advance.  I boxed one of mine up and sent it to TP for reprogramming.  This should give me a horsepower or two.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 10, 2012, 11:07:12 PM
The intake valve opens on the Triumph.  This creates a low pressure area at the intake valve and it sends a vacuum wave out toward the inlet end of the intake tract.  The wave goes through the carb venturi and it reaches the end of the velocity stack.  The stack opens into an empty area and the wave is reflected back to the valve as a pressure wave.  An open pipe end reverses the wave direction and polarity.  The pressure wave arrives just before the valve closes and it pushes additional fresh fuel air mixture into the combustion chamber before the intake valve slams shut.

This simplistic explanation describes a phenomenon that would happen if I had a very long intake tract.  In reality, I do not.  I have a short tract and the wave must bounce back and forth several times before it hits the intake valve at the right moment.  The pressure wave hits the closed intake valve a few times.  This is a closed pipe end and it reverses the wave direction but not its polarity.  A pressure wave is reflected as a pressure wave.

The waves travel at the speed of sound and the engine rpm varies.  This means that these waves will help me in a narrow rpm range.  I need to tune the inlet tract so everything is in harmony at the desired rpm range.  I do this by adjusting the inlet tract length.  This controls the length of the bounce and the instant it hits the intake valve.  A short tract causes more frequent bounces and a long tract makes fewer.

There are some good theoretical equations for determining the length.  I need to know the speed of sound in the inlet tract, the inlet tract length, the desired rpm, the intake cam timing, and the inlet tract diameter.  This input data is problematic.  It is hard to determine the reflective length of a curved inlet tract with complex shape around multiple inlet valves.  Any errors of estimate are compounded because the waves go back and forth several times.  The speed of sound is dependent on gas temperature and this is hard to estimate.

No equations, no matter how good, can give accurate predictions if the input is garbage.  I have never got the equations to work well.  My inlet tract tuning method is trial and error on a dyno.  The next few posts will explain how I do it. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 11, 2012, 11:52:57 PM
The inlet calculations I did in 2010 are redone so they are legible.  Tuning for the third bounce can be done within the space constraints of the Triumph.  The first try uses 1100 feet per second for the speed of sound.  Many reputable tuners use this value.  It is the speed of sound in 45 degree air.  Some tuner use 1300 feet per second.  This is the speed of sound in 245 degree air.  Note how the sound speed makes a big difference on the inlet tuned length calculations.

Both pages will be posted separately so they will be large enough to read.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 11, 2012, 11:54:06 PM
This is the second page.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on January 12, 2012, 09:25:21 AM
Bo,
I note that you are using 7000 rpm in your calculations. If your maximum horsepower is indicated at 8000 rpm, and you are gearing for this, then I think you should use 8000 instead of 7000.  You have a couple of miles or more to get up to speed and you need that last little bit of HP to get maximum speed.  Otherwise, as you pass the 7000 rpm figure, the wave will become less effective.  I applied the same logic to the length of the primary exhaust pipe.
For your intake, you can vary the length in the intake manifold, or by changing the length of the air horn on the carburetor - - it theoretically does the same thing, only sometimes more easily.  As for using the 3rd harmonic, it is sometimes still too long to be practical.  I think I calculated mine using the 5th harmonic, and came out with something like 8 inches, depending on whose online intake length calculator I used.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on January 12, 2012, 02:47:29 PM
For some reason I am not given the option of correcting my last post.  I have read back over your diary and now realize the big Triumph twin with your cam seems to actually develop maximum HP at less than 7000 rpm.  Therefore, your calcs are close.  My point was to try to tune everything for the rpm at which your motor makes maximum horsepower, and then gear to be at full speed at this RPM.  There is no point in overrevving past your maximum hp-rpm number unless you happen to get a nice tail wind and then you take advantage of it.  If your motor is making 90 hp at 6800 rpm, but only 88 hp at 7000, try dropping a tooth at the rear and run again.  My 2c worth.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on January 12, 2012, 02:55:14 PM
Tom - the reason you can't edit a post is because there's a setting in the software that limits the time during which you can make changes - to 4 hours after the post is first made.  That's there, I believe, to prevent people from making comments that might be made in the heat of an argument or inflammatory - - and then removed a day or two later when they decide that they've spread enough ill will.  while the time is variable -- I haven't felt a swell of need to change it nor to delete it.  I have occasionally been asked to make an edit or even to delete a post -- which help I've always given.

There - that's the story.  If you've got further to discuss - either start a topic on the website general suggestions topic - or get back to me off this thread.  Use email or PM, please.  Regards from Skandia, Michigan, where we're in the middle of a two-day "winter storm warning" with up to a foot of snow forecast. :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on January 13, 2012, 09:07:29 AM
Jon,
Not a big deal.  I try not to put my foot in my mouth too often, but sometimes I start typing before I put my brain in gear!

Sorry to hear about your storm warnings there in Michigan. I'm sitting on my sun porch here in Deerfield, Nova Scotia (near Yarmouth), looking out across a 90% ice free lake, with only a smattering of wet snow on the ground. I haven't had the snow blade out yet this winter, and the average temperature in December was 31* F.  Unusual winter, for sure.  Some of us actually look forward to this global warming.

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 13, 2012, 11:43:20 PM
Tom, I am doing exactly what you say.  I gear to run 7,500 rpm through the mile and I am trying to move the peak horsepower up to that rpm.  It is a 500 rpm shift and I can do it with intake and exhaust tuning and a different spark advance curve.  I hope.

All of this intake theory study is paying off.  I am hesitant to rely on calculations alone to tell me the correct runner length.  This is what the theory and math are telling me.

1)  Tuned length is not significantly affected by cylinder size.  I do not need to change the runner length when I go from 865 cc to 996 cc.  This is a good thing.

2)  Cam timing does change runner length.  I will need to adjust the length when I go from the 813 cam to the more radical one.  The length change is expected to be reliably calculated by the equations.  No need for an additional session of tuned length dyno testing when I fit the bumpier cam.

3)  Intake air temp significantly changes the optimal tuned length.  I need to get my cold air intakes done before the dyno work.  Also, I need to develop some length correction factors for running on exceptionally hot and cold days.  Also, I need to figure a way to adjust easily adjust the runner length on the salt.

I thought the bike would be as fast as it would go and built in five years.  It is seven years and I am just getting started on figuring out a bonehead simple NA motor.  A crazy hobby.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on January 14, 2012, 09:18:18 AM
Bo,
You and I are on the same wavelength.  I agree with your procedure, except for the part about not requiring new Dyno testing.  The great white dyno in Utah will give the best results, but it's expensive for the few runs you'll get, and it maybe difficult to assess small changes.  The real dynomometer may seem expensive, but if you have easy access to one, you should probably book some time to arrive at a starting point for jetting, timing, and to assess the new intake length with the new cam.  I hope to be able to do so but the nearest one here in NS is at least 200 miles from me.  I hope to do my final dyno work at Dan Dunn's shop in Longmont, Colorado.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 55chevr on January 14, 2012, 04:46:48 PM
Tom - Dan runs our bikes through the dyno before Bonneville.  Since he is Longmont Co. it is 5000' which works really well for Bonneville and he knows how to tune. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 15, 2012, 01:23:39 AM
Yesterday was Friday the 13th.  It was 10 minutes until I was going to turn the lights out and go to bed.  The lousy minutes.  I decided to take a picture of something I am machining.  I picked up the camera off of the work bench and heard something hit the floor.  It landed with a dull thwack.  My dial caliper.  There are some nights a fellow is better off if he goes to bed early.  On Friday the 13th maybe I should stay in bed.

The intake length formulae give me all sorts of intake lengths.  They are consistent with each other on one thing.  I need to shorten the inlet tract to move the torque peak higher.  Also, an inch shorter is the usual answer.  It is time for some ABBA dyno testing.  This is when setup A is tested first with one pull, setup B is tested with two pulls, and setup A is tested one more time.

Setup A is what I am running now.  The air cleaners fit under the side covers and the tuned length matches the cam.  It produces good power for street use.  The air cleaner and velocity stack are shown.  The stack is 40 mm long.  The tuned length is measured from the valve seat to the where there is a significant change in cross-section at the upstream end of the tract.  In this case it is where the foam begins in the air cleaner.  The tuned length of the stack with the filter is 56 mm.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 15, 2012, 12:07:48 PM
The B setup is the orange plastic stack.  It is 35 mm long and the tuned length is about an inch shorter than the A setup.  Everything for A are B are in the carb kit from Triumph Performance.  The ABBA dyno curves are shown.  These are averages of two pulls each so they are drawn by hand.

Years ago I asked Matt Capri about intakes for my bike.  He said the shorter the better and shape is important.  Matt's NA bike had odd looking stacks shaped like little trumpet bells.  The stacks I was using then were short enough.  They are sharp edged, unlike Matt's.  They are shown in the photo and they were hammered out of copper water pipe.

The sharp edge hurts performance.  There can be a ring of turbulent are inside the stack at the inlet edge during high air flow.  This ring of swirling air blocks flow into the stack at the edge and the flow is concentrated in the center.  This prevents proper fuel atomization with the very short stacks I use.  The proper intake edge shape is the rounded one on the orange stack.  The orange stack gives me what I want.  It is more torque at high rpm.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 16, 2012, 11:45:47 AM
The B setup gives me a little bit more torque at higher rpm and a few horsepower. The inlet changes I will do give a small advantage for this mildly tuned 865cc motor.  The big 996 motor will use the same carbs and filters.  These small changes are expected to be more of a benefit for the big bore engine.

The 39 mm FCR flatslides have the same 36mm choke diameter as the standard CVK carbs.  They are not any larger.  They do not have the restrictive throttle plates in the bores, there are all sorts of jets and other parts available, and there are special parts for alcohol fuel.  These are the 39mm flatslide advantages.  The first photo is from a page on the SUDCO on-line catalog.  It shows bellmouths for the FCR.  Shorter bellmouths with good flow characteristics are what I want.  I order the ones shown.

It would be easy to order bigger foam filters and simply clamp them onto the bells.  One big goal is to have the waves in the inlet tracts inverted and reflected by the bell openings and not by the foam-rubber interfaces in the filters.  A large and abrupt expansion in cross-sectional areas at the bellmouths will assure this happens.  Annular rings are made and attached to the bells with JB Weld.  The ring and bell separately and together are shown in the second photo.   

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on January 17, 2012, 01:22:19 PM
Wobbly, some things to think about if you haven’t already--

Using your 6ms inlet flow duration and about 500cc’s per cylinder, the average flow rate (assuming 100% volumetric efficiency) during induction would be about 83 liters/second, 3 cu. ft/s, or about 180 cfm.  What is the pressure drop across the the air filter at those or, more likely, higher flow rates?  Might want to consider a plenum of some sort, the bigger the better, and then the filter(s), the bigger the better.

Inlet tract wave interactions (reflections and transmissions) will occur to some degree at any change of area, including tapers.  What are the diameters of the port, runner, venturi, inlet bell?  Are they consistent or all different?  Energy is lost at each interaction as well as along the way.  Different areas everywhere will likely just make hash out of the effort to tune the inlet.  Also, the primary reflection is the strongest with each successive round trip less effective.  Can you stretch it out to use the second?  Straight is nice, but not necessarily required.

If you are not already aware of Gordon Blair’s book, Design and Simulation of Four-Stroke Engines, ISBN 0-7680-0440-3, you would probably find a lot to muse over about engines, particularly the gas dynamics of inlet and exhaust systems.  While much of the underpinings of the book utilize somewhat advanced mathematics, there are also considerable qualitative descriptions and examples, and a section on using simplified empirical methods, such as what you have alluded to using so far.  And Blair seems to have had a particular affinity for British twins.   It may also provide points to be aware of when considering peculiar or unexpected dyno results.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 17, 2012, 10:34:07 PM
Thanks for the advice.  An oiled foam air filter will support 3.5 horsepower per square inch filter area, according to David Vizard in "How to Build Horsepower."  The small filters I have will support 250 hp and the big ones will handle 322 hp.  That is plenty of capacity.  I am OK there.

There were some aftermarket carb inlets on the bike.  They did not match the ported inlet tracts.  Too small diameter.  Years ago I enlarged and polished the stock ones so they match the ports perfectly.  I found them in the bone pile and put them back on.  I am good in that area.

The A setup gave me 69.7 hp and the mixture was jetted for maximum power.  It was 16.4 to 1 at 6,000 rpm and it richened to 13.8 to 1 at 8,000 rpm.  The B setup gives 74.3 hp and the mixture is 15.9 to 1 at 6K and it dropped to 15.0 to 1 at 8K.  The feeling at the time was the B setup would give me even more hp if I was jetted to the best power mix ratio.  It was late and we were tired.  We did not do this.  I am confident that I am tuning to the third bounce, and maybe the fourth.  The big motor will be my retirement project.  I will experiment with the second bounce tuning then, when I have more time and lots less money.

Let me know if you see an extra copy of that book floating around.  I will buy it.

Thanks for the advice.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on January 18, 2012, 04:20:10 AM
Wobbly, try E-bay for the book. I've had amazing success that way.

It might be worth doing back to back tests on the dyno with and without your air filters. I found late model racing that the results aren't always as predicted and that the oiling of the filters is really critical. Only a little too much kills efficiency.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on January 18, 2012, 09:11:29 PM
Wobbly,
I found a cache of articles written by Prof. Blair on the website below which can be downloaded in pdf form.  I would have attached a couple of them here but they are a little too big to suit Jon’s attaching criteria.  They would give you a sense of the kinds of materials that are in the book.  I would suggest the September 2006 “Best Bell” and Dec/Jan 2008 “Back to Basics” to start with--or whichever of the others you might find interesting.  You have to pay attention when you are reading them.

http://www.profblairandassociates.com/RET_Articles.html
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 19, 2012, 01:08:42 AM
Thanks, Peter, and Observer.  I will do som dyno comparison.  In the old days when that blue Bel-Ray foam filter oil came onto the market we had problems with over oiling.  That oil is real gooey.  This is what we did then.  Wash the filter and oil it according to instructions.  Wash it again and let it dry.  There will be enough residual oil in the filter for a race.  Do not do the second wash for road bikes or dirt bikes.  It worked last year.  There was some salt on the outside of the filter and none went through, as best as I can tell.  I will do some dyno testing and I will order the book.  The "pay attention" aspect will be difficult.

I order just enough stock to make the rings as shown in the blurry photo.  The ring outlines are scratched onto the metal and it is drilled, tapped, and attached to a plate scrap with countersunk screws.  The screws are located out of the path of the cutter.  The plate will be bolted down to the press table.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 20, 2012, 01:09:52 AM
The drill press table is checked to make sure it is not tilted and the tilt clamp is tight.  The swing clamp is loosened, the chuck teeth are retracted, and a bearing ball is placed in the hole in the table center.  The chuck is pulled down tight over the ball and the motor is turned on for a fraction of a second.  Now the table and chuck rotation centers are aligned.

A pair of 1/16 pilot holes are drilled into the stock at the ring centers.  This is followed by a 1/4 drill.  The bigger holes are not through the part.  About halfway is OK.

The drill is removed and an old cutter with a 1/4 shank is turned upside down and chucked tight.  The chuck is lowered onto the part and the shank is in the 1/4 hole at the ring center.  Now the table, chuck, and ring rotation centers are aligned.   

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 22, 2012, 01:10:34 AM
The drill stop is shown in the first photo.  This is what I use to lock the drill press spindle at various heights.

An outside caliper is tightened down on to the plate.  One side of the caliper is on top of the plate and the other is on the bottom of the plate in the groove on the table.  The caliper is used to mark where the groove is on the plate.

Holes are drilled in the plate and it is bolted down.  The back end of a cutter in the chuck and the hole in the center of the ring are used to check if the plate is centered.  Previous photo Intake Mods 13 showed how I do this.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 23, 2012, 12:35:08 AM
Now it is time to machine the rings.  There are three clamps I looses and tighten.  ONLY ONE is loose at any one time.  The clamps are the depth stop that controls the cutter height, the table swing clamp, and the table rotation clamp.

A dial indicator is set up on the table.  This will tell me the distance the table is swung.

The table is swung to the side and the swing clamp is clamped.  The drill press is turned on, the cutter is lowered, and the spindle housing is clamped at the desired depth.  The table rotation clamp is loosened and the table is rotated to make a curcular cut.

Small cuts are made and the cutter speed is set to minimize chattering.  Sometimes I rest both hands on the table to minimize chatter.  It is a cold day when the picture was taken and I am wearing gloves. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on January 23, 2012, 01:18:01 AM
Be very, very careful wearing gloves around rotating machinery. They start to get wrapped up really quickly at the most inconvenient times and they aren't as easy to get out of under those circumstances as you might think. The results are often not very pretty.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 24, 2012, 01:21:43 AM
You are right, Peter.  It was real cold and that was the first time I wore them.  It will be a bad habit I will not start.  No more gloves.

Drama is fun to watch when others are the subjects.  It is no fun for a fellow doing machine work.  In the past there have been some thrilling moments when the final cut is made and the part and stock seperate.  Suddenly there is a loose object in the vicinity of a rotating cutter, like what happens in a mill, or a loose rotating part near a stationary bit, as with a lathe.

This habit I developed over the years.  The final cut does not seperate the parts.  I take the whole piece off of the machine tool and I do the final seperation by hand.  Its safer that way.

The intake mods are done.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 26, 2012, 12:41:45 AM
One cylinder was running richer than the other last year at Bonneville.  The carbs are off and I checked a few things.  One main jet was too big.  This has been a problem for me before.  Non OEM main jets can have their own numbering system and some are not the size that is stamped on the side.  Using OEM jets prevents this and it is what I do.  Sometimes a person will bore out a main jet and forget it is larger than it says and it gets mixed up with the rest.  I bring my own virgin main jets to the dyno sessions to prevent this.  The bad jet was a new OEM one.  I will check them too in the future.

I get a few jets from my supply that are stamped the same size, a couple that are one size bigger, and two that are one size smaller.  Then, I stick a carpet needle in each one and compare how far it goes in.  The needle goes farther into a larger jet.  This shows me which jet is too big or too small.

It is time to order some bigger jets for this year's dyno work and it will be a good time to order float valves for the big 996 cc engine.  There is a chart on page 13 of http://factorypro.com/tech/carbkei.html  It shows the float valves sizes that are needed for various horsepowers.  The Triumph will produce near 100 hp or 50 hp per cylinder.  This takes a 3.2 mm float valve based on the chart.  The float valves in the carb are stamped with the size and they are 3.4 mm so I do not need new ones.  A company in Oregon near where I live gives me good mail order service for carb parts.  They are pjmotorsports.com  The Keihin FCR flatslides are good racing carbs.  There are all sorts of parts for them and they are readily available.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: thefrenchowl on January 26, 2012, 08:44:58 AM
Hi wobblywalrus

Am I wrong in thinking that 2 jets of the same actual physical diameter will not pass the same amount of fuel due to machining tolerances, degree of finish, varrying efficiency of the 2 venturis, etc..., hence 2 jets with the same number on the side, usually related to their same flow rate on the same flow bench, will indeed not necesseraly have the same diameter?

Patrick
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 28, 2012, 01:53:10 AM
Hi Patrick.  The needle test seems to work for these Keihin jets.  The hole size and flow rate are closely related as best as I can tell.  The AMAL main jets are flow bench tested and, like you say, they can sometimes have different hole sizes with the same flow rates.  Almost all of my good experience is with AMALs or Keihins and I do not know much about other carbs.

The picture of the road race bike on fire in the fuel line thread made me concerned.  Maj has a good idea with the double protection.  After work I went to performance Racing Equipment in Salem and asked Steve for advice.  He specializes in Aeroquip.  These are some of the things I bought.  One is a fuel line with braided stainless steel wire.  The other is a hillbilly style bolted connector.  It looks like a bolt on the outside and there are no threads.  Inside, almost hidden from view, is a hose clamp.  Steve made this little U tube.  It takes the place of a big looping section of hose.  Tomorrow I will fit everything up.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: oz on January 28, 2012, 03:00:48 AM
Nice work dude
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 29, 2012, 01:05:39 AM
Oz, being sorta low on cash, I can spend a lot of time perfecting the little details.  A lot of us are in this pot of stew.

One hose was too long and Steve told me how to cut it.  First, I wrapped about 2 to 3 feet of electrical tape over the cut line real tight.  Then, I cut the hose through the middle of the taped section with a ceramic cutoff wheel.  I used a wheel on my angle grinder.  It stank like the starting line at a drag strip from the burning tape rubber.  This method made a clean cut.  Steve also told me to make sure to clean out the inside of the hose before I use it.  I did this.  Burnt rubber crumbs and wire fragments were inside.

The picture shows the completed hoses.  The blue caps are covering hose clamps.  The main line is a longer version of the short line and it has a fire sleeve.  The side view shows the fuel line going up and under the tank.  I will figure out a better way to route it some day.

This was easy to do and it is OK for a gravity fed fuel system.  I would use threaded and welded fittings if it was pressurized.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 03, 2012, 12:03:42 AM
The next few posts are Triumphcentric.  They summarize what I have learned about this particular bike.  Folks with new Bonnevilles may benefit.  Most of the rest of you can hit the ignore button.

The inlet tract has a hole at each end.  One is a nice round opening and it is always open.  The other end is closed most of the time and when it is open it is cluttered up with all sorts of obstructions like valves, valve stems, and valve guide bosses.  It is obvious which end is the most restrictive - it is the end with the valves.  Experience has taught me this is the first location to consider for tuning.

There are various options for the Triumph.  Larger inlet valves are available from Black Diamond, Triumph performance, and others.  Inlet valves in 1 mm and 2 mm larger diameters were available years ago when I had the head work done.  Now larger sizes are available.  The 2 mm oversize worked great with the standard Triumph pistons.  There were no clearance problems.

The inlet valve seats need to be reworked to fit the larger intake valves.  When this was done I had all of the seats redone with a five angle valve job.  Flow around the inlet valve is enhanced by this.  Most performance shops can do this.  The head was ported when the valve work was done.  Triumph Performance did it and others offer similar services.

These bikes are sluggish in standard form.  This porting and valve work makes them come to life.  An excellent street engine was all standard Triumph 790 cc parts except for this head work, a black box equivalent to the Triumph Performance Stage II, Triumph off road mufflers, and the standard air box with the baffle plate and snorkel removed.  The engine with louder Norman Hyde mufflers and velocity stacks ran in the 120's at Bonneville.

     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 05, 2012, 01:04:21 AM
The air filter is at the other end of the inlet tract.  Years ago I showed a picture of one of the original pistons fitted by Triumph when the bike was made.  It had made ten runs down the salt and about 20,000 street miles.  There was a small horizontal hairline crack on a piston skirt midway up from the bottom.  There was a reinforcing rib on the inside of the skirt at that spot.  There was also bore and skirt wear caused by airborne contamination.

Salt was the cause of the bore and skirt wear, and excess rpm created the crack, I said.  I was wrong on both.  Some knowledgeable people looked at the parts.  It was too much wear for salt to be the cause.  Dirt was getting into the engine.  The worn piston was rocking in the bore and the crack was due to stress and fatigue from the piston rattling around.

These bikes have nakasil bores and good quality, but restrictive, paper filters.  Normal piston life is well over 50,000 miles.  I was using oiled gauze filters, both in the standard airbox and as pod filters. 

Someone on this forum occasionally says "What are you going to do different?  The oiled gauze filters were not working.  Oiled foam filters give me great filtering on my dirt bike.  Nothing gets past them.  Now I run oiled foam filters all of the time on the street or on the salt.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 05, 2012, 10:47:52 PM
More Triumph specific stuff.

The theme of this build is "street roadster."  The carb setups that I run on the street are used on the salt with no changes.  The main jets are set for Bonneville and the rest of the jetting is set for the street.  This works well.  This is a powerful bike and I can do everything I need to do on the road without using the main jets.

The production engine class rules require OEM carb bodies.  This bike has 36 mm Keihin CVK constant velocity carbs.  They are sorta altitude compensating and they are good for the street in the western US.  There are lots of mountains everywhere and a fellow will cross many high passes in a days riding.  The drawback to the CVK's is the lack of tuning parts such as bigger float bowl needle valves, attachable air horns and filter adapters, etc.  They are also very expensive to replace.  I have not bored these carbs bigger for these reasons.  The only modification is to bore the little holes in the vacuum slides to bigger little holes.  Instructions are in the tuning guide on the "Jenks Bolts" website.

Lots of filter setups have been tried over the years.  Pod filters of any sort do not help these carbs.  They work well with open clamp-on velocity stacks or the standard air box.  A modified air box is what I use.  Inside is a filter.  I remove the internal restrictor plate and the snorkel on the inlet.  In place of the snorkel is a Norman Hyde bellmouth.  There is enough metal on the Hyde bellmouth to withstand some enlarging.  I do this and maintain its curved shaped lip.

The inability to hop-up the CVK's has dictated how I build the production class engine.  These carbs work OK with the 865cc kit and 813 grind cam I am running now.  The carbs seem to be close to their limits.  Another production engine option would be to put in a 911 cc bore kit with a nice hot cam.  I did not do this.  All indications are the carbs could not handle the bored motor without some mods and I could not find the parts to do them.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 06, 2012, 11:51:33 PM
I was looking up some info on the internet for this post.  I typed "Triumph Twin Power" into the search engine and browsed through the company website.  They offer the service of boring the standard carbs to 39 mm, flow testing them, etc.  This is just perfect for my production motor.  Yes.  Life is good.  Very very good.

There are other than standard carbs for the Bonneville.  Keihin makes 35 mm racing smooth bore round slide carbs and 39 mm (actually 36 mm) racing flat slides.  I was told the smooth bores are better for road racing and the flat slides are best for wide open use such as land speed or drag racing.  The flat slides are plenty big.  The dyno curve for the 100 horsepower Triumph Performance engine I posted a month ago uses them.

The flatslides I use were sold by Triumph Performance.  They have an OEM throttle position sensor on them.  This tells the ignition module what I am doing with my right hand.  The default if the module gets no signal is to retard the ignition.  Not good.  These are three things that can be done when installing racing carbs.  One is to buy carbs with the sensor on them, like I did.  Another approach is to wire in a resistor in place of the throttle position sensor.  This fools the ignition box into thinking the sensor is there.  Resistor readings are in the "Triumph Twins Adjusting the Throttle Position Sensor" topic on the "Triumph Twin Power" website.  The third method is to program the ignition module to ignore the sensor.  I have not done these last two methods.  Folks have told me about them.

The bike was hard to start with the flatslides.  I blamed the carbs because they did not have an richening circuit and I also blamed ethanol gas.  I was full of carp.  The bike got real easy to start when I fixed the voltage regulator so the battery was always charged.  Also, I puled off the float bowls to change the pilot jets during some road tuning.  Evidently, I lost the little linkage rod that actuates the accelerator pump.  It never worked.  This pump can be used to richen the mixture for cold weather starting.  All in all, the flatslides are a good set of mixers.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 12, 2012, 11:07:47 PM
The RICOR Intimidator fork valves are intended to allow the front suspension to travel and absorb road and track irregularities, and at the same time, they do not allow slow chassis movements such as pitching and diving.  The track was choppy last year and they helped a lot.  The oil I put in them was some Yamaha suspension fluid I had laying around.  I did not really know if it was the right weight.  The valves were calibrated by RICOR to use Amsoil 5 wt Shock Therapy.  I looked real hard to find this stuff.  Our local Honda shop carries it.  Photo 1 shows it.

The first step is to drain the oil as shown in Photo 2.  Unfortunately, not much comes out.  The trick is to tap the open fork tube end on a wooden block.  The RICOR valve comes out and a lot of oil with it.  See Photo 3.  Next, fill the fork with enough oil so the RICOR valve is submerged when it is installed.  This is about 420 cc on the Triumph.  See Photo 4.  Slowly stroke the work to remove bubbles.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 12, 2012, 11:23:56 PM
Now, push the RICOR valve down into the oil using the fork spring, as shown in Photo 5.  Make sure it is seated.  Remove the spring.  The valve should be submerged.

Most of us refill the fork tubes with the oil quantity listed in the shop manual.  Not so with the RICORs.  The oil level must be set with a sucker tool.  The one I made is shown in Photo 6.  It is a section of small diameter copper tube open on both ends.  Hobby shops sell the small diameter tubing.  A little hole is drilled in it like in the pix and a clear tube is installed on one end.  The little O-ring is set to the oil height.  I use 140 mm with the RICOR in the fork, tube fully compressed, and no spring.  The distance between the O-ring and the hole is 140 mm.  This is different than the level in the Triumph manual.

The sucker tube is lowered into the fork tube until the o-ring is flush with the tube top.  Excess oil is sucked out.  It is impossible to remove too much.  See Photo 6.  The last step is to install the spring and spacer and the fork tube cap.  It is easy to cross-thread the cap.  I clamp a socket in the vise, put the cap in it, and screw the fork tube onto the stationary cap by hand.  See pix 7.  This works well to prevent cross-threading.  All done. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 14, 2012, 11:53:05 PM
The SCTA rules say bias ply tires, only, with tubes.  I am not arguing with the rule, I just want to know some history about the when and why it exists.

It is for future planning.  The setup I run now has radial tires with tubes on spoked wheels.  I have two choices.  One is to switch to bias ply tires.  I really do not want to do this.  They are inferior in so many ways.  The other is to spend major money I do not have to buy a set of mag wheels for tubeless tires.  Hopefully the concern about tubes in radials can be addressed without either of these changes.  That is why I am asking.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 16, 2012, 12:28:03 AM
Standard operating procedure is to clean up and repaint parts as needed when they are being worked on.  My usual method is to spray red primer first, then grey primer, then a first finish coat, steel wool it, and then to apply a second finish coat.   Pretty basic - and it has worked for years.

These forks are aluminum with factory applied black powdercoat.  I sanded the original finish until it was smooth and sprayed on grey Rustoleum engine primer.  No problem.  Then I let the paint cure until the next evening and sprayed on a coat of black Rustoleum engine enamel.  No problem.  I let this cure for two days and steel wooled the finish until it was dull.  Then I sprayed on another coat of black.  Immediately it crazed the first coat.

This has been a problem for me since paints went to xylene based solvents.  Is there an intermediate coat I can apply to stop this crazing?  Is there a spray can paint without xylene solvent?   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on February 16, 2012, 07:34:24 AM
The one thing I noticed about engine enamel a few years ago, was that if you spilled gasoline on it, it would wash off!  I assumed that engine enamel, like high temperature manifold paint, needed to be heat cured.  I have found that regular Rustoleum gloss black rattle can paint gives me the highest gloss, but I  re-paint within 30 minutes to an hour without sanding between coats. Doesn't craze if you re-paint within the hour.

For aluminum, I usually bead blast and then use Duplicolor aluminum wheel paint, with or without primer, but it is still not very resistant to chipping. Is there a primer that really works with aluminum?

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on February 16, 2012, 01:23:52 PM
Advice from my painter friend...................Warm the sanded aluminum and use acetone to clean............then paint and re-coat before dry.........cure in warm area (3-feet below the tube heater in the shop) for a day or more..........if you want modern paint to hold up to fuel.........mix additional hardener.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 16, 2012, 10:36:51 PM
It is cold in my shop.  That might be the problem.  Two days was not long enough for it to cure between coats.  I have had the same problem of gasoline dissolving modern engine black.  Hopefully someone on this forum knows a source for decent rattle can paint.

Two pictures from the Salem Roadster Show.  This was the only lake racer there.  The plaque said it was a lakes modified roadster.

The only four cylinder engine in the entire show was in a Volkswagen.  No inline fours of any kind.  I should have asked for a refund on my admission.  All in all, they were beautiful cars and bikes.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stan Back on February 17, 2012, 12:17:29 PM
Wobbly, that roadster runs in the fantasy Lakes Roadster class.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 19, 2012, 09:30:07 PM
This is a car in the Salem Roadster Show.  My father was a pre-war hot rodder.  War service calmed him down and he did not discuss it much.  Besides, I was a wild child and we did not have the most intimate relationship.  I am glad he did not kill me.  That is what I deserved.  This is what I recall from conversations with him, my mother's father, and some others who lived then.

Henry Ford was smart in many ways.  He, with a lot of help, figured out how to mass produce a lot of simple cars that folks could buy and maintain.  The cars themselves were sorta mediocre and had a lot of horse and buggy technology.  People bought them at a time when that was all they could afford and they had no status when times got better.  A lot of owners dumped them as soon as they could afford to buy something else.  This was perfect for my father and his buddies.  A whole lotta cars selling for cheap.  Ford's reluctance to change and update things helped too.  There was a lot of parts interchangeability.

There is a picture somewhere in the family showing my father in his Ford Model B.  It was by modern standards a ratmobile.  The top was sawed off and he was sitting in it with a big grin.  His family was conservative German and if this car was perceived to have any value he would not be allowed to do this.  My mother's father recalled this.  He was the terror of the neighborhood.  This photo is of a Model B standard.  A beautifully restored car.  Nothing like the one my father had but as close as I have seen.

My father was a Ford man until he died.  His daily driver was a Toyota for decades.  His weekend truck was always a Ford.  He admired their simplicity.  His saying was "Ford knows how to do something with one part that GM needs two to do."   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on February 19, 2012, 10:13:43 PM
It was a pleasure meeting you and your family, Bo.  I would have liked your father, I think.

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: ol38y on February 19, 2012, 10:26:33 PM
The SCTA rules say bias ply tires, only, with tubes.  I am not arguing with the rule, I just want to know some history about the when and why it exists.

It is for future planning.  The setup I run now has radial tires with tubes on spoked wheels.  I have two choices.  One is to switch to bias ply tires.  I really do not want to do this.  They are inferior in so many ways.  The other is to spend major money I do not have to buy a set of mag wheels for tubeless tires.  Hopefully the concern about tubes in radials can be addressed without either of these changes.  That is why I am asking.

Wobbly, I think you need to re-read the rule. There is no "only" in the rule. Also, it says "may be run with tubes". It does not say "radial tires may not run tubes"..
 IIRC, in the past they downgraded the speed rating 1 grade for tubes. I do not believe that is the case now if you use radial tubes in radial tires. Check with Tom Evans for your final answer...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on February 20, 2012, 09:54:24 AM
The Model B was also in my Dad's life until a 1940 sedan appeared................then the B-wire wheels and hubs became part of a farm wagon.........many years later that wagon sold for surprisingly good $$.........much more than the slightly newer wagon with the Chevy hubs and plain rims.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 20, 2012, 01:02:53 PM
The NW reunion was a lot of fun.  This is the only time of the year that many of us running under the different sanctioning groups can meet and socialize.  It was nice to talk with all of you and learn about the fastest roadster.

Thanks for the info about the tubes and radials.  Plans are to run Speedweek in 2013 so Gretchen and I can see the cars.  That will be a first time for both of us.  I will run the tube and tire setup I have now.  It works wel.

The paint expert at the store where I bought the Rustoleum gave me some advice.  He said to do the finish coats quickly like Tom says.  He said if a finish coat dries it must cure before the next coat is applied.  Seventy two hours in a warm environment were his recommendations.  This place is heated in the morning and in the evenings, only.  We do not have anywhere that is continuously warm until summer.  It was time for plan B.

In the dinosaur times the headlight shell, fenders, tank, and sidecovers were spray painted by a guy in the neighborhood who had a gun and compressor.  Everything else was brush painted.  I could use any paint I wanted on our family paint shelf to do this.  Rattle can paint was a decadent luxury and my parents would not buy it.  Most of us were good brush painters.  This is what I did.

First, I sanded out the crazed places and reprimered them.  Then I hunted around and found a split can of black stove enamel.  One was left over from a fence painting job.  I buy a big can of paint and ask the store to split it into little cans.  This way, I have fresh paint from a little can.  I rarely use a big can up in one job.  The paint in the big can will go stale if it is opened and stored for a long time.  Next, I buy some enamel brushes.  I used sign painter brushes when I was a kid.  Now the artist store is the only place I can find them.  Note the tapered shape.  Good quality brushes do not shed hair.  This is important so I spend a little extra $ to get some good ones.

The paint should be just thin enough to lay down after it is applied and no brush marks remain.  I always work so the edge of the previously applied paint, that I am lapping over with the new coat, is as wet as possible.  It takes some practice and a good brush job can be as good as a spray application for a lot of smaller stuff, like frames, brackets, the fork tube lowers, etc.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 27, 2012, 12:55:19 AM
This Saturday it was windy, raining sideways, and snow mixed in.  During all of this I was putting the Triumph back together for the street.  It was wet cold and miserable.  There are times I question the smartness of having this hobby and this was one of them.  That evening I read some of the articles in the March 2012 issue of "The Horse - Backstreet Choppers."  One was about a fellow who has been working on his iron head Sportster for years.  It is a gasoline powered naturally aspirated chopper.  He gets good gas mileage and runs as fast as 11.75 seconds on the drag strip.  It is reliable and he tours across the country on it.  Another one was about the worlds fasted knucklehead (that is a type of Harley, not the rider).  The bike, raced by Pete Hill, won five national championships.  Pete made the cylinders out of a railroad car axle.  This was the strongest steel he could find.  All of this gave me some inspiration.  Those guys done good and the bikes they started with had tractor technology.  It was time for me to quit feeling sorry for myself and get to work.  Today I got the bike running.  It rained all day and the sun came out when it was time to fire it up.  The birds chirped, the Triumph started, and everything was OK.  Dyno day is at 10:00 on March 22nd.  Now I need to make a plan and get ready.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on February 27, 2012, 02:44:59 AM
I understand exactly how you feel
It seems I'm always working on other peoples bikes
When I get home, i don't feel much like working on or even riding my own bikes
On Wednesday at work, I had to take my riding gear in as there were a whole lot of finished jobs that needed riding
So it's Guzzi Le Mans IV, followed by a Le Mans III. Then a bunch of Indian Enfields. A Ural with a sidecar.
Next a Vincent Comet. And I'm still not feeling the love.
The final bike was Ducati 900GTS that has been following me from shop to shop
It was then that I remembered why I like the Bevel drive Ducati
So it's Sunday and It's absolutely tropical in Melbourne. I'm sitting on the couch, Air conditioner going, lacing up a wheel for my 750GT
on the coffee table.
It's all good
There is about three weeks to go until I'm standing on a salt lake
The bellytank will not be there, but I will.
G
(http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc28/grumm441/Lounging.jpg)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 27, 2012, 10:42:18 PM
Truing wheels and drinking pints of beer at the same time?  Interesting.  Those Ducati GT's are nice bikes.  Rumors here are that half of the world's Ducati spare parts are hoarded on some farm in the AUS outback.

My draft dyno plan is shown.  One task is to stick some tubes on a pair of headers, run the engine at full throttle at the RPM where I want to optimize power, look for the reversion ring, cut the tubes there, and retest to find the maximum power.  The reversion ring is a ring of blue discoloration on the outside of the pipe.  The tubes will be made from unplated thin wall tubing so they discolor easier.

I have never done this and the procedure in the previous paragraph I made up after a very brief conversation last year with a pipe maker.  I might be full of carp.  Will the ring be visible on the outside of the pipe?

The goal is to compare the horsepower produced by the two different headers and to get some tuned lengths for future use.  Any experts, please give me some advice.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: DND on February 28, 2012, 12:42:43 AM
Hi Wobbley

I have not heard the term Reversion Ring, can you explain it a bit more.

Thanks
Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 28, 2012, 12:52:38 AM
There is a place in the pipe where the acoustics cause an elevated temperature and this blues the pipe.  Waves banging into each other, I think.  I do not really know.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jon on February 28, 2012, 05:23:43 AM
No love for the MkIII Grum :(
I have one for my ride bike now, I don't ride my S2 much since I tidied it up.
I know most Duc riders say S2s are a crap bevel but I wasn't going to make it into another SS fake.

Mate has conned me into riding to Lake Gairdner this year, will be riding the MkIII


jon
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on February 29, 2012, 10:16:17 PM
Wobbly,
In my humble opinion, using a method (“reversion rings”) that one does not understand and for which there is no plausible explanation as to why it should work, and one which no one else has even heard of, to tune your exhaust sounds like an exercise of complete futility.  You would probably be much better off and actually learn something about the exhaust performance by ginning up some variable length sections to put into the system (or several sections of different lengths) and making dyno pulls with them.

The way you have outlined it, cutting the pipe at the “ring” and assuming that is some sort of maximum power point only gives you one data point.  Who’s to say longer or shorter wouldn’t be better?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on March 01, 2012, 12:58:45 AM
I remember reading a article on tuning a drag car where they used collector extensions and cut them at the discoloration.
They claimed a positive gain.
I have not tried it and don't know if it works but I have heard of it.

   Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 01, 2012, 09:46:26 PM
This is my thinking on the idea.  The optimal tuned length depends a lot on the cam timing, piston position during the cam events, and the speed of sound in the exhaust.  The speed of sound is directly influenced by the exhaust gas temperature.    The engine geometry will be the same on the dyno in Beaverton or on the salt at B'ville.  The exhaust temperature might be different and it likely will be.

My plan is to learn what to look for on the dyno with a pair of straight pipes attached to the headers.  I will look for the discoloration.  At the salt I will attach an identical set of pipes to the headers and make a run.  Then I will compare the two.  This will tell me the tuned length adjustment I need make when I develop pipes in Oregon for use in Utah.

The same idea will be used when I run the various cams.  Hopefully the marks will tell me the exhaust length adjustments I need for different combinations.   

I will tune a set of pipes with this method, too.  They will be the special "witch doctor" setup.  Simply put on these pipes, drop a couple of small bones into the fuel tank, and I will be ready to go.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 04, 2012, 01:28:42 PM
Last Friday I had a long conversation with the pipe expert.  He was very nice to find the time to give me help.  What he said is in quotes.  This is not exact, it is what I remember.

"Big header diameters do not always work best.  A lot of people at Bonneville rum too big a diameter pipes.  The 1.5-inch diameter ones you have should be OK with the 865cc motor."  My plan is to order a set of unchromed headers from BUB.  I measured them last summer when I visited there.  They are close enough.  I will use those.

"Megaphones with a 12'' to 18'' long 1.5" taper cones and small reverse cones should work good for that bike.  Figure on cutting the headers and putting on the meggas somewhere around 26 inches from the exhaust valves."  One of my friends got a new TIG welder and he wants to make something.  These megga cones will be a good project.  Bradley in his books "The Racing Motorcycle" show how to lay out and cut the sheets to make cones.  This will be done.

"It is a good idea to make the meggas so they slide back and forth on the headers.  Move them in 1-inch increments and record horsepower.  There should be a curve where the horsepower peaks.  My guess is the 26 inches.  Sometimes the curve drops and rises again as the headers get longer."  Will do.

"Make the bends in the headers as large a radius and as few as possible.  Bends in the headers alter the tuned lengths."  Will do.  This makes using the Arrow mufflers a problem and I will not use them.  One is fairly straight and the other bends like a snake.

"Look at the pipes.  The soot colors on the inside will turn from light to dark.  Cut the headers at this point.  Sometimes the pipes are colored on the outsides where this happens.  Jetting the bike rich makes the color changes easier to see.  My guess is 26 inches."  The standard headers are in the photo.  Sure enough, like he says, they are discolored at right near 26 inches at the cross-over tube.  Unfortunately, I cannot attach meggas there.  No room under the bike.  These are my choices, as best as I can figure.

1)  Make a set of headers that merge into a collector at the correct location around 26 inches.  I had a setup like this on one of my old bikes.  It took a lot of fab and dyno work to get it right and it was easy to get it wrong.

2)  Make headers that wrap around the sides of the engine where the meggas can be placed at the right length.  I did this once.  They were BSA Hornet pipes on my old Spitfire.  Unfortunately, exhaust systems are hot and I am trying to keep the intake air and fuel as cool as possible.

3)  Tune to a longer bounce.  This is what I will do.  My plan is to start with the headers as short as possible and lengthen them an inch at a time.  The megga ends cannot project past the back of the rear tire.  This gives me a lot of distance to work with.

Right now I am on a fixed income.  My fear is the rising gas prices will trigger inflation, in which case I am screwed.  All of this pipe work, if it happens, will be next year.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 05, 2012, 10:55:25 PM
A few weeks ago I took the fairing up to Kent Plastics in Portland.  They looked at the windshield I wanted to make.  It has too much double curvature to produce by draping a piece of plastic over a form, heating it, and letting it settle down onto the form.  The shield needs to be vacuum formed.  They gave me some guidelines and my job is to make the buck.

In the distant past I made some molds for sand casting.  They were maple.  I had some memories of making fiberglass molds from knotty pine.  This was difficult.  The wood sanded easily in the soft parts between the knots and it would not sand well where the knots were.  The mold was lumpy.  There were high sports at all of the knots and lower spots between them.  My father recommended cabinet plywood with lots of plies.  The ten ply wood like in the photo is what he said I should use.  Unfortunately I forgot what he said when I was in the lumber store.  I bought poplar boards.  They do not have knots and they will sand down evenly with no high and low spots.  The wood is soft and I need to be very careful with it.  It is easy to dent, unlike a plywood buck.

The buck is being made.  One by one I cut a poplar board to shape and add it to the buck.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on March 06, 2012, 12:55:35 AM
A few weeks ago I took the fairing up to Kent Plastics in Portland. 

Geoff's a good guy, isn't he?  Did you see any of my stuff being done?   :mrgreen:  (Anxiously awaiting a phone call to pick it up.)

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jon on March 06, 2012, 04:34:56 PM
Watchin this with interest, cant find anyone in Aus to make me a screen yet.

Are you vacuum forming it Wobbly or making the buck and taking it to Kent Plastics?


thanks
jon
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on March 06, 2012, 05:15:27 PM
There are several good sites on the internet about making windscreens  without using a mold.  They use plywood with a hole the size of the windscreen base, and involve blowing low pressure air into the plastic when it gets up to temperature. You need a large, homemade, oven with elements in the bottom and temperature control.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on March 06, 2012, 06:30:55 PM
Rod&Custom article on Darryl Starbird blowing a big bubble: http://www.rodandcustommagazine.com/techarticles/1101rc_star_kustom_shop_bubbletop_fabrication/index.html (http://www.rodandcustommagazine.com/techarticles/1101rc_star_kustom_shop_bubbletop_fabrication/index.html)

 :cheers:
Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 07, 2012, 12:55:54 AM
The bubble method will be what I do if the molding procedure does not work or is too expensive.  Right now the mold is a good thing.  Making it is forcing me to figure out exactly what I want and it gives me something use as a reference for the sheet metal work.   

The plastic sheet is rectangular.  The long dimension is plenty and I am not worried about it.  The short dimension is 24 inches wide and it is the critical one.  The the mold cannot be wider than 20 inches so everything will fit into the oven.  The flanges are 1.5 inches each.  They will be cut off after the windshield is vacuum molded.  See the sketch.

People I talk to say there are lots of different ways to do this and they need to look at the mold before they can give intelligent answers.  That is logical. 

The shield might be vacuum molded or it might not.  There are two local plastic companies in this little town and one fellow says he can lay felt over the mold and form the plastic over that using heat and his hands.  I might let him do it first and stand by to watch if he lets me.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 08, 2012, 01:45:37 AM
Any suggestions on the plastic?  My idea is to say "I need shatterproof plastic like the racers use."  That is not a very sophisticated request.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 09, 2012, 01:21:51 AM
Some internet research tells me that polycarbonate is best and hard coated poly resists scratches better.  Lexan is a brand of polycarbonate.  Next best would be top grade acrylic. Lucite and Plexiglas are acrylics.  Regular basic acrylic would be the bottom of the line choice.  I will try to get the shield made from hard coated polycarbonate.

My son sent me this picture from Afganistan where he is on patrol.  It looks like Nevada.  He will be back later this month. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on March 09, 2012, 05:56:35 AM
Bo, research polycarbonate, i.e. "Lexan" or "Margard", carefully before you start to heat and form it. It must be baked at controlled times and temperatures to drive out moisture or it bubbles internally and that's it for visibility. I'm not sure how the anti-scratch is applied but I would think it's a post forming process that would be ruined in the forming process.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on March 10, 2012, 12:06:09 AM
Let us know when he gets home.

Sometimes the last day is a killer.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 10, 2012, 01:17:57 AM
Hi Freud.  Thanks for the advice.  It is passed on to him. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 11, 2012, 01:10:57 AM
The ignition module came in the mail.  It was reprogrammed in England to Triumph Performance specs.  It has the Option 3 settings.  This is the rev limiter raised to 8,400 rpm and a remapped spark advance curve.  The settings are made for an 865cc with the #813 cams like I have.

This morning I got up early and glued the last pieces on the windshield mold, removed the mold from the fairing, and sanded it down with a belt sander.  This roughed out the shape.  Next, I sanded it with a palm sander.  Finally, I started the finishing sanding by hand with a sanding block.  It goes up to Kent Plastics on Tuesday afternoon.  It looks like a wooden turtle.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 12, 2012, 08:47:28 PM
Real early this morning I brought the mold to a local plastics company.  Initially we talked about polycarbonate windshields.  This is my first choice.  His procedure is to put felt over the mold, heat the plastic, and to stretch it over the mold.   He said polycarbonate is hard to work with.  It has a memory and it tends to spring back rather than to conform to the mold.  He said initial preparation is essential.  The plastic must be heated to get rid of gasses in it.  He said these problems were worst with thicker plastic.  Polycarbonate is a material best suited for shops who use it on a frequent basis and have the curing facilities and experience to handle it, he said.  He said it would take two or the three tries for him to get it to work.

We discussed acrylic.  The regular acrylic is used for windshields, he said.  It shatters.  He said the tougher acrylic grades are sort of between polycarbonate and regular acrylic in workability. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 12, 2012, 09:13:35 PM
This is part two.  Rosie came home with dinner and I had postus interruptus.

The conversation ended with a homework assignment for me.  It is to figure out which acrylics are suitable for racing use.  Some quick research and Tom's post says aircraft grade cell-cast acrylic might be an alternative to polycarbonate.  Hopefully the sanctioning bodies will agree.  The Polycast UV-SC is claimed to be suitable for thermal shaping.  www.polycastacrylic.com.  Tomorrow I will bring the mold to Kent Plastics and talk to them. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 14, 2012, 12:00:53 AM
Today I had some business in Portland in the morning.  In the afternoon I visited the two plastic shops I am working with to do this.  I had the mold with me.  One shop does vacuum molding.  They would start with a 3/16 inch sheet and pull it down over the mold.  It would be about 1/8 inch thick in places where it was stretched the farthest.  The minimum thickness I want is 1/8 inch so this would be OK.  The plastic would be very soft when the molding is done.  It would pick up all of the grain texture from the wood.  I would need to sand all of this out of the inside face of the windshield.  It would be a big job.  Normally they do vacuum forming over polished metal molds and this is not a problem.  My conclusion:  vacuum forming is not practical for a wood mold.

Next I visited the shop that would slowly heat the plastic, drape the plastic over the felt covered form, and pull it into shape by hand.  They would start with 1/8inch thick plastic and they did not expect it to get much thinner.  Their oven was just big enough to hold the plastic.  They did not think they could heat the plastic evenly and some spots would be cool and not workable.  They recommended a shop in Hillsboro with a bigger oven.  They also mentioned that mold defects would show up on the windshield after the molding and fewer would be there than with the vacuum process.

Both shops would use generic polycarbonate or acrylic.  Hard coated windshield polycarbonate or aircraft grade cell-cast acrylic is what I want.  I would need to supply these materials myself.  A sheet of plastic is typically 4 x 8 feet and this costs a lot of $.

My plan is to smooth out the mold a bit more and bring it up to the big plastic shop in Hillsboro on the afternoon of the 22nd.  The dyno work will be done that morning in the nearby town of Beaverton.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on March 14, 2012, 12:21:16 AM
Check Home Depot. Up here they have smaller sheets. I think they buy 4 x 8 sheets and cut them up.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 14, 2012, 09:34:24 PM
The local plastic shop has been helping me quite a bit with advice.  I will let them try it.  I sort of owe it to them.

The local shop looked at pricing for cell-cast acrylic sheets.  It is scarce and expensive.  Their supplier recommended PETG.  It is easy to thermoform and it does not have the moisture absorbing problems of polycarbonate.  Some internet research shows that it is very tough.  Type "Quinn PETG" into a browser if you are curious.  Quinn uses it for motorcycle windshields and they produce it with UV resistant additives.

The wood mold is getting the final sanding.  I asked for a price quote from a pattern maker supply for some "Duratec Vinyl-Ester Surfacing Primer."  It is especially made for sealing wood molds that will have high temperature use.

Right now I am not sure what I will do.  I am learning a lot and seem to be headed in the right direction.  Does anyone have experience with PETG windshields?   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on March 14, 2012, 10:37:13 PM
Bo,
Cell cast acrylic, or PMMA (polymethyl methacrylate), is a shatter resistant plastic.  According to Wikipedia, it has been used for such things as the windows of submersible submarines, police riot shields, transparent shields at hockey rinks, lens for automobile headlights, the transparent dome of the B-17 flying fortress, and the roof of the Astrodome.  It is used for aircraft windows.  In fact, Lexan is not accepted for aircraft windows because in case of a necessary rescue, it cannot be broken.  Although I don't think this is a big issue for open or partially streamlined motorcycles, I'm not sure I would even want lexan for the windshield of a streamliner.  If they couldn't get the door open, they wouldn't be able to rescue the driver!  There should be no question of its acceptance as a shatter resistant plastic.  I might add that it would difficult to police the issue in any case, as I'm not sure there is any way to tell the difference with a non-destructive test.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 15, 2012, 01:31:49 AM
The PETG is used for bus shelter windows.  The yobbos cannot break them.  It is also used for windows in insane asylums.  That last use sorta qualifies it for being on my bike.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 15, 2012, 09:55:13 PM
A call was made to the local plastics shop.  They are enthusiastic about using the PETG and I agreed to let them do it.  It has these advantages.  It can be draped formed and this process makes a smoother finish on the inside of the windshield than vacuum forming.  It is almost impossible for me to make a wooden mold smooth enough to give a finish that does not need to be sanded and polished if it is vacuum formed.  The PETG has little memory, unlike polycarbonate.  It will not tend to spring back to its flatter original form when it is being molded.  There is much less problems with internal bubbles due to inadequate preheating.  Preheating is not needed.  Another advantage is cost.  The cell-cast acrylic in aircraft grade is expensive, and polycarbonate and PETG are relatively cheap.  This is a material they do not normally use and I need to buy an entire sheet.

The PETG is shatterproof and it will meet AMA and FIM requirements.  The SCTA and DLRA mention polycarbonate in their rules.  I would need special permission from the them to use the shield.

It is hard to find the low spots when the finishing sanding is done.  The mold is painted with engine primer and then it is sanded.  This shows me where the low spots are.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 18, 2012, 11:12:42 PM
Tapping a big hole can be tricky.  It is difficult to center the tap so it goes in straight and square.  My method is to use the drill press to keep everything lined up.  First, I check the table to make sure it is perpendicular to the drill press spindle axis.  Then I bolt the part to the table.  Now a washer is put in the hole.  The hole in the washer is in the center of the hole to be tapped.  Next, I put a drill in the chuck upside down.  I lower the shank down and move the part around until the shank is centered in the washer hole.  Then the table is clamped tight.  Exhaust Mods 2 shows this.

This tap has a dimple in the center of the top.  I use a roller from a Matchless rod bearing to center the tap.  A Harly or BSA roller will not do.  It needs to be a Matchless one.  Or AJS.  Little taps do not have a dimple and I use a sleeve over the top of them.  Exhaust Mods 3 shows a roller and a sleeve.  Exhaust Mods 4 shows the roller in place.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 18, 2012, 11:55:24 PM
Now everything is lined up and I start to turn the tap.  One hand is on the adjustable wrench and the other is on the drill press spindle handle.  I am moving the spindle down while I rotate the tap.  Exhaust Mods 5 shows this.  I watch the upper thread in the part real close and I stop turning when this thread is just at full depth.  A common mistake is to keep going and to force a taper tap to cut deeper.  This is hard on the tap and it can break.

Tap drill sizes for pipe taps are hard to find.  I used the internet to find them and they were on www.newmantools.com/tapdrill.htm.  The tap I am using has a 1-5/32 inch tap drill size for normal embedment of 1/3 to 1/2.  In other words, the pipe end will screw in 1/3 to 1/2 of its threaded length.  I want 100 percent embedment so I use a 1-3/16 drill as a first attempt.  The tap is turned until I cut the upper thread in the part to full depth and I remove the tap.  Then I screw in the pipe end.  It goes in 1/2 of the way.  The pipe is unscrewed and I enlarge the hole with a drill one size bigger.  Then I tap till the upper thread is cut to depth and I try again.  It took another try and the threads finally got big enough and the pipe end went in to full depth.  Exhaust Mods 6 shows this.

The point I am trying to show is, if you want deeper embedment than the typical 1/3 of the male threads, use larger tap drills to make wider female threads.  Do not use a standard tap drill and all sorts of brute force to do the job. 

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 20, 2012, 01:34:42 AM
The Plan A is to try drape molding with PETG at a local shop.  Plan B, if this does not work, is to have the windshield vacuum formed from polycarbonate in Portland.  There is a limit on how smooth I can make a bare wood mold.  Some special high temperature sealer for molds is on order.  It will take a few weeks to get it.  This will allow me to make a very smooth surface which is helpful for drape molding and essential for vacuum molding.  I do not want to use anything besides a high temp sealer.  A coating that melts and contaminates the plastic will ruin everything.

The spray paint method in a prior post showed how I got rid of the low spots.  It does not tell me where the flat spots and bumps are.  To do this, I roll a straight edge over the mold and this shows me where they are.  I circle the high spots and sand them down.  The lines on the mold show where this has been done.

My middle boy is out of combat and preparing to come home.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 21, 2012, 12:56:27 AM
Thursday is dyno day.  The bike is prepared and the dyno plan is ready.  These are a few things I do.

1)  The jets are original equipment Keihin jets I have checked with a needle to make sure they are correct.  The use of shop jets can be problematic.  Their quality is not known.

2)  The mechanic always wants to know what I have changed.  He also wants to know what is the same.

3)  The correction factor I use is always SAE.  The factor influences the calculated results and it needs to be consistent from year to year.  This makes it easier to compare results from different sessions to each other.

4)  The old runs are on file and it is nice to tell him the best run from the previous year.

5)  "Do not assume, test" is what the exhaust pipe expert told me.  I have three exhaust systems, Arrow pipes with and without baffles and standard pipes with British Custom mufflers.  All will be tested.

While writing this I noticed a mistake or two in my dyno plan.  They will be fixed and It will be posted.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 21, 2012, 01:34:18 AM
Champ or chump tuner?  Engine wizard or motor lizard?  Thursday afternoon I will know.  Maybe you will too.  Depends on the results.  Dyno plan is attached. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on March 21, 2012, 02:49:14 PM
Wobbly...........check your plan for running without baffles before you actually remove them............I have not dynoed by instrument, the great white salt-flats seem to show consistent results.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on March 21, 2012, 08:38:59 PM
Hey WW
Why don't you give it a run with the three yellow/white wires from the charging system disconnected and see if it makes any difference
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 21, 2012, 09:31:52 PM
Old Scrambler, the baffles are an experimental setup I made for the street.  They probably will cost me power and I just want to see how much the loss is.

Grumm, is it a horsepower difference I should be looking for?

I am not sure this dyno day will happen.  This is what was out there a half hour ago when I put the bike on the trailer.  It is an hour's drive to the shop early in the morning.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 23, 2012, 12:45:12 AM
It was a pretty drive to Portland.  There was 4 to 6 inches of r fresh snow.  None of us are real experts here.  What is happening during these dyno pulls?  2012 Dyno Session 3 shows a red curve for pull 70.  This was early in the session.  Note the smoother shape near the horsepower peak.  The blue curve is for pull 86.  It was later.  See the dip near the peak.

2012 Dyno Session 4 shows some weirdness on pulls 81 and 102.  This was happening on intermittent pulls.  Two more curves will be shown in the next post.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 23, 2012, 12:50:09 AM
Two really funky pulls, # 91 and # 95 on 2102 Dyno Session 5.  Note the strange mixture curves.  Several pulls are plotted together on 2012 Dyno Session 6.  Note how they follow a common pattern.

We thought we hear d the clutch slip on a few of these strange pulls.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: MattGuzzetta on March 23, 2012, 02:04:38 AM
We used to have our road racing bubbles made by a company in L.A. that made optically clear bubbles by heating the sheet in a "hanging sheet" oven that heated the material evenly and they they place the sheet over a "ring" mold which was an oval hole in the top of a large box that they would pull a vacuum in (not a high vacuum, just enough to pull the sheet down)and the material was "free  formed" evenly.  They are out of business, but the method is a great way to get optically clear bubbles without touching a mold.  Here is a link (a loooong link) to a factory manual of forming acrylic that may give you a better knowledge of what is going on.
  https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:v4swlRMPdLoJ:www.atoglas.com/literature/pdf/135.pdf+hanging+sheet+oven&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgBpJ6xKMPGbQPxPGbJ5NllQm1d30poyiFXFGftcCwRleJ2r_21ujve-pyZsLbAUss0UL5aYJC1XC913A2gwDLJRvyLwrnFLeFIMIE8x4dXFtjcfLLXKiYamWq9HtFzkXqHQWKE&sig=AHIEtbQjxt7rvgSIUl-eC9DEsStoCSFLcA

Of course it is better to make the bubble, then design the fairing to fit, but the manual is worth looking through.  I have made windshields by both draping and vac forming and it was a big job sanding and polishing the vac formed parts to be able to see through them.....not very well, but they were on a sports racing car, so you mostly looked over the windscreen. Hope this helps a bit!   :-D

(http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y176/bubbamatt/star.jpg)
The windshield on this econo bike was a free blown unit and the headlamp cover was a plaster mold covered with felt and sanded after molding.

Matt Guzzetta

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jon on March 23, 2012, 02:07:41 AM
If the clutch was slipping there should be a temporay mismatch between wheel and engine rpms, did you get full data point files or just graphs?

The midrange dips, were they with standard ignition?
I've seen a few factory ignition curves that have advance dips that coincide with noise/emission testing rpm ranges.

Jon
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 24, 2012, 12:28:10 PM
Matt, the local plastic shop wants to try to drape mold the PETG over the form and I told them I would do it.  That will be Plan A.  Plan B will be to have it made with this hanging bubble method if the cost is reasonable.  Thanks for posting this.

Jon, your advice is absolutely correct.  The shop compared wheel to engine rpm on a problem pull.  The data showed that the clutch was slipping when the engine put out more than 70 horsepower.  Aftermarket plates and springs were recommended to me when I built the motor.  I was cheap and lazy.  I did not put in the plates and I replaced half of the standard springs with stiff ones.  The clutch will be beefed up in a few months when it gets warmer in the shop.

In a recent post I mentioned how I needle check my jets and use original equipment jets, only.  I gave the mechanic the jet box with the words "All of these jets are Keihin and they have been checked for size.  Use them."

There were a pair of jets marked "AB142" in that box.  I somehow did not find them and toss them out.  The holes in them are a size or two bigger than the orifices in Keihin #142's.  The mechanic put them in, they made the bike run overly rich, and they completely confused the jetting sequence.  It took a bunch of pulls and time to figure out the problem.  Those AB142's were some expensive jets when I paid the bill.  Dyno work is like racing.  A person has to check and double check to make sure everything is OK before the big day.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on March 24, 2012, 01:25:24 PM
Don't rely on jet numbers or needle size. The only way to know is to flow it.

Same sized holes don't always flow the same amount.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 25, 2012, 01:34:37 AM
How does a person flow test a jet?

The local experts on jetting these flat slide carbs say "Jet for best power.  Do not jet for what you think is the best mixture."  The procedure is to increase jet sizes incrementally until the power drops.  Last year #140 jets were the best and power dropped when bigger ones were installed.  This year #145 jets are best.  I figure I have a few more horsepower based on this increase in jet size.  The mixture that produces maximum power is leaner than normal.  That is the nature of this engine and it has always been like this.

The power curve drawn on the graph for 2012 is an average of five pulls.  The bike makes four more horsepower.  That is reasonable considering it went up two sizes on the main jets.  The bike runs a lot better on the street in low to mid range rpm.  There was a lag in the power curve at just under 4,000 rpm.  The lag is much less now.

Changes since last year are the modified intake bells, larger air cleaners, polished and matched intake manifolds, and the ignition module.  The goofy jets and the clutch problems used up a lot of time and we did not get good runs in to test the intake mods and module separately.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 25, 2012, 01:08:37 PM
A lean condition occurs when the throttle is opened suddenly on a slide carb.  The engine stumbles and the bike does not accelerate.  One cure for this is to make the low speed mixture a bit rich so it is not overly lean when the throttle is opened.  This setup makes a polluting mixture and the extra fuel is detrimental to engine life.  Another cure is to open the throttle slower so the mixture does not go lean.  This works well.  The low speed mix can be set at a leaner ratio and the engine runs cleaner and lasts longer.  More solutions are constant vacuum carbs or fuel injection.  An accelerator pump on a slide carb is an option, too.  It squirts in a little extra fuel when the throttle is opened quickly.

These Keihin flatslides have an accelerator pump.  This engine does not like the rich mixture the pump provides and it runs best if the pump is disconnected.  I keep the pump operational for starting on very cold mornings only.  Twisting the throttle once or twice squirts in some extra fuel and this makes starting easier.  This is how I set up the pump.

The linkage is shown in the photo.  A little piece of bent brass welding rod is the linkage.  The rod is made long to start and I gradually grind it shorter until I get the length I want.  A shorter rod delays when the pump activates.  The fuzzy photo shows this.  The third photo is taken outside where it is safe to do this.  The fuel tank is on a picnic table above the photo.  The fuel line is connected to the carb and I turn the throttle by hand.  The rod length is adjusted until the pump goes on when the throttle is 1/4 to 1/3 open.  Fuel squirts from the little brass nozzles in the carb venturis when the pump is working.

There are various opinions about having the accelerator pump hooked up during dyno testing.  Some operators say they know how to ignore the pump's influence on mixture.  Others want it disconnected.  My assumption is I do not know, and if the pump richens the mixture during the dyno work, the selected jets will be too lean for sustained steady state running.  This could make an engine failure.  Disconnecting the pump during dyno testing seems to be the safer option and I do this. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on March 25, 2012, 02:20:36 PM
Bo,
Four more horsepower is a significant increase, especially considering the minimal changes you have made.  Unfortunately, you and I and most people end up making several changes between runs (dyno or salt flats), so we don't really know which change made the biggest, or any difference.  Such is life.

I, too, have a pumper carb, and was plagued with bogging between gear changes.  I blamed it on overly large intake passages (velocity too slow in ports?), but I don't really know.  I went from 36mm ports to 40mm, so maybe too much change at once. Such is life!

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jon on March 25, 2012, 03:37:17 PM
Bo; is the accelerator action pump spring loaded ?
Can you change the duration of the hit by putting different size jets in?

Bo & Tom; have you looked into quickshifters same as they run on circuit racing?
IMHO they're main benefit is not from the microseconds it saves from not having to pull in the clutch, I see 2 main other benefits.
Intake velocity and mixture, because you don't close and reopen the throttle velocity in the intake is maintained and your mixture isn't going all over the shop.
You engage the clutch once to get off the line then leave it alone which has to help it live longer.

My 2 cents anyway
jon
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 26, 2012, 01:10:06 AM
Jon, today I was monkeying around with the exhaust baffles and I cured the carburation problem.  Bikes are strange creatures.  It runs OK now.  Actually, it runs really good.  I will post what I did.

Tom, try adjusting the linkage to the squirters or their jets.  Maybe they are opening too much too soon or not enough and too late.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on March 26, 2012, 09:34:54 AM
Bo & Jon,
If only I had my own test track! (or dyno) Pretty tough to try to tune out the carburetor issues on a bumpy 1/4 mile driveway with 100 feet of elevation change, especially with 15* of steering, 72" wheelbase, and no front brake.

As for quick shifter, probably a good idea, if I could find a reasonable solution that would work on the BSA.

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 27, 2012, 12:46:30 AM
Colorado has dynos in some cities that are near the same elevation as the salt flats.  Some sessions there might be helpful.  Seven feet long is shorter than some touring bikes I see now.

A big lesson was learned in 2007.  It was record inspection time and I needed to remove the cylinder head for the bore and stroke measurements.  It was getting late and I could not get it off.  It was hung up on the exhaust pipes.  I needed to remove the pipes.  This required pulling off the fairing.  To do that I needed to remove the forks.  The wheel and fender had to come off before I could do that.  The problem was solved by not removing anything and using a big hammer and prybar to bend things out of the way to extract the head.  The exhaust cross-over pipe was the problem.  There was not enough room to spread the pipes apart and to disconnect them so they could be moved out of the way.  I needed a set of pipes with no cross-over tube.

A few months later I was fondling a set of Arrow pipes at the Triumph dealer.  I could not afford them.  I liked to feel light weight and the smooth and sleek titanium.  The owner swooped in and made me an excellent offer.  Some bonehead customers dented these pipes and they could not sell them as new.  The dents matched all of the other dents on my bike.  Soon they were mine.

These pipes are made to work with the standard Triumph cams and they do this well.  I have racing cams and they would work great with the baffles out and the bike would barely run with them in.  I replaced the constant vacuum carbs with flatslides and this helped.  Then I cut the baffles apart.  The first picture shows the inside of the pipe.  A fixed baffle was in there.  I cut them it out and now there is a 1.5 inch diameter unobstructed tube down the middle of each muffler - like a straight through glasspak muffler for a car.  The removable baffles were cut in two.  One is in the second picture.  The little baffles work, barely.  There is bogging when I open the throttle suddenly, the engine runs a bit rough, and fuel mileage is in the low 40's.

The end of the tube in the little baffle projects into the exhaust flow.  This projecting end has the worst flow characteristics.  A hole with a tapered opening would flow much more gas with the same back pressure.  That was the first thing to fix - make the openings tapered in the new baffles.

A sound wave coming out of the pipe and passing through an open end reflects a wave back with the opposite polarity.  In other words, a pressure wave is reflected back as a vacuum wave.  A solid obstruction reflects back a wave with the same polarity.  A pressure wave is reflected back as a pressure wave.  The opening in the short baffle is small and it reflects a small wave of the opposite polarity.  The obstructed area is large and it reflects a stronger wave of the same polarity.  This same polarity wave discombobulates the carburetion and causes all sorts of problems.  That was the second thing to cure.  The baffle needs to be made so the tuned length reflecting the opposite polarity wave is where it was originally.  The baffle needs to have a different tuned length that reflects a wave of the same polarity.  Both the reflected vacuum and pressure waves need to arrive at the upstream end of the pipe at the a same part of the cam overlap cycle.  Picture 3 shows the new baffle from the side.  Note the different tuned lengths.  The opening that reflects the same polarity wave has a different tuned length than the opening that reflects the opposite polarity wave.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 27, 2012, 01:02:53 AM
This fourth picture shows the baffle from the upstream end.  Note the more efficient tapered opening.  The taper reflects the wave of the same polarity.  Its tuned length is shorter.  The fifth picture shows the baffle from the downstream end.  The opening that reflects the wave of the opposite polarity.  The internal diameter of the holes in both the long and short baffles are the same.  Do these new baffles work?

The bike runs much better on the street.  The dyno chart shows that both baffles cut down the power at the 3 to 4 thousand rpm range I use on the road.  The loss with the long baffles is less.  The long baffles work much better at mid range.  Both work about the same at top end and they are as good as the open pipes.  Strange.  A person would think that they would hurt power there.  Next year I will make baffles with different length tubes between the bells and the ends.  Then they will be compared on the dyno.

The pipe expert told me to start with a known good system, make incremental changes and test them, and do not assume anything.  He is correct.  Things in reality do not always work like we think they will.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 27, 2012, 11:25:56 PM
These are the horsepower and mixture curves for the baffles.  This explains why the accelerator pump makes the bike run worse.  This carb setup runs richer when the throttle is opened rather than leaner.  The pump was not connected when this dyno pull was done.

Baffles inside of pipes are not an optimal way to quiet a bike down and make power.  A collector system with a can muffler would give me the correct tuned lengths, good noise control, and minimal flow restriction.  The baffles are a "make do with what I have" solution until I can fabricate something better.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on March 27, 2012, 11:41:40 PM
Interesting curves, but strange.  Just think how much more you could learn with some carburetor variations, several different exhaust systems, re mapping the ignition, changing the jets, and all the possible permutations of the above, and about 2 weeks of dyno time. Or 20 years of changes!
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 29, 2012, 02:14:41 AM
The bike has 101 dyno runs on it.  It has paid its dues.

The primer was ordered from Freeman Manufacturing and Supply in Ohio.  www.freemansupply.com  It is Duratec VE Grey primer.  They recommend this for coating a mold over which hot plastic will be formed.  It look, smells, and acts like Kondar epoxy filler-primer I used previously for auto painting.

It comes in a gallon can.  I had it split into quarts at the local paint shop.  One quart is always not as full as the others.  He marked 1st on it.  I will use it first.  This keeps the paint good for longer than storing it in the gallon can.  I will use the quarts one at a time over the years.

This stuff is nasty and poisonous.  I mix it with a plastic disposable spoon in a disposable cup and paint it on with a throw away brush.  All is tossed in the outside trash can when I am done.  This is quick and I avoid cleanup.  Less time exposed to chemicals = less toxicity.

The instructions mention spraying this stuff.  A person needs to be spray-paint-superman to do it.  I never figured out how.  I use a brush.  The mold is a nice battleship grey color now.  Tomorrow I will sand it down.  The mold used to be on a board.  That was for vacuum forming.  The person doing the draping wants it elevated like it is now.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 31, 2012, 09:59:18 PM
Today it stopped raining for a few hours.  It was time for a trip to test hill.  The baffles I made several posts ago showed some merits for the idea.  I remade them in three lengths and all were tossed in the saddlebag.  The short baffles have female connectors on the ends.  The bike ran better than with the very short baffles I used the last few years.  The shorter extensions were screwed in and this made medium length baffles.  The bike ran better.  The longer extensions were tried and the bike ran best.  I will make some even longer extensions and try them.

This reversion was the last problem I needed to fix.  The street part of the 865cc/#813 cam motor is done.  It gets gas mileage in the 40's, runs clean at all rpm and throttle settings on el-cheapo gasoline, goes fast, and does not vibrate.  There is nothing left for me to do.  It runs perfect.  I could start on a ride to Maine tomorrow and be sure the motor would not break during the trip.  It is the best street engine I have built.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jon on March 31, 2012, 10:41:28 PM
Got to be happy with that Bo.

Do you have markers on your hill that you roll on from one to another for speed comparisons.

Used to be a decent hill about 30mile away from where I lived just after I got my license, when I built a motor I used to drive it steady there and cane it up the hill and take it easy down the other side, turn around and repeat a dozen or so times.

Not the "proper" way to run in motor but I never had trouble with rings not bedding in.


Congrats on the build
jon
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 01, 2012, 11:35:10 AM
Hi Jon.  The police around here are low on money and speeder tickets are a big revenue source.  They are aggressive.  Plus, the varmints confiscate vehicles during their drug busts and turn them into cop cars.  Almost any late model vehicle around here could be a police car.  It is an effective deterrent and this prevents and full throttle testing except for short bursts.  No longer can I blast up test hill.  The old days were the good ones in some respects.

Engine tuning is my weak point and I am happy to achieve this very modest success.  Work for next year is installing racing springs and keepers and building a racing exhaust system.  The 996cc engine will have hotter cams.  I was going to install them on the 865cc engine just to see what would happen.  Then I was going to install the hotter intake cam with the exhaust cam I am using now, and try it.  The mixed cam setup has worked for me in the past.

The board the mold is on is trimmed back like Kent Plastics wants so it will fit in the oven.  The mold was painted with primer and sanded smooth with 150 grit sandpaper.  Then I painted the mold with two coats of primer and one light coat of black engine enamel.  Now I am using 220 grit paper to sand the mold until none of the engine black shows.  The top of the mold is sanded this way and it is very smooth.  The sanded mold will go up to Kent Plastics next week.  A vacuum formed polycarbonate windshield is the goal.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on April 03, 2012, 02:01:16 PM
Answer to Post 737.

How do you flow test a jet?

Marlo Treit told me that he made an adaptor that would hold the jet, and changed the size of

the receptacle that measures the quantity of fuel that was flowed. He uses the same flow bench as he does

for any other fuel system. He flows every jet that is used in a fuel system. The number is

disregarded and the amount of fuel flowed is the important number. He may also change the pump

so there isn't too much fuel.

The treatment of the end of the orifice can make a difference in flow as well as the diameter of the orifice.

In some manufacturers jets there is a significant difference in jets with the same number.

He questioned the efficiency of doing Triumph jets if the needle needed to be in place. 

Do the needles have steps in them.

Talk to him when u see him. He will share his procedure with you.


FREUD

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stan Back on April 03, 2012, 05:39:45 PM
We found an easy and inexpensive way -- we sent them to Gene Adams.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 04, 2012, 10:09:10 PM
Thanks for the info about the jets, Stan and Freud.  This is something I will consider doing next year.

The windshield mold went up to Kent Plastics this morning.  They are doing a lot of race windows and windshields lately.  The mold was sanded very smooth.  The surface was wood in some places and grey primer in others.  "The hot plastic might raise the grain" they said.  It would have been better if the entire mold surface was sanded primer.  Raised grain will make more work for me when I sand the molding defects out of the inside surface.

Plastic was discussed.  This is what I learned.  Polycatbonate (PC) and PETG ate relatively shatterproof.  Unfortunately, the plastics are softer and easily melted when they are polished by buffing wheels.  Both scratch easily.  This makes it hard to attain and maintain optical clarity.  Acrylic is a harder material and easier to polish and keep in a good optical condition.

This windshield is tilted towards me and I will be looking through it at an angle.  Optical clarity is important for safety and the finish should be easy to maintain.  I chose an impact resistant acrylic as my first choice and I mentioned aircraft quality plastic or similar.  Second choice would be PC or PETG.  Kent Plastics will talk this over with their suppliers and call me with their recommendations.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 10, 2012, 12:03:21 AM
The Bonnie went on a test loop last Saturday.  It was the monthly shopping trip to Portland.  Aerodynamics is pretty bad, brick like, with Gretchen as passenger, a windshield, saddlebags, me, and a wooden crate on the luggage rack.  The trip is fast freeway riding at 70+ mph with stop and go driving around the city.  It is hard to get good fuel economy.

The things I were testing was the longer baffles in the photo.  Previously, the bike ran bad at about 3,500 to 4,000 rpm.  This I attributed to "camminess."  The bike runs good in that rpm range now.  Gas consumption was 45 mpg.  This is good for gasahol and as good or better than the standard 790 cc engine did.

The way to do this modification is to set the carb jetting as best as possible with open pipes.  Then, put in the shortest baffles possible.  Try them, and then try ones 1.5 inches longer.  Try longer ones in 1.5 inch increments until one set works the best.  Use them.  Reset the jetting if needed.

Although I did not do comparison tests, theory says the bell shape is important.  The 1-inch wide constricted pipe has 44% of the flow area of the 1.5-inch open pipe.  This is one thing I thought would not work.  In practice the baffled mufflers make the bike run better. 

A lot of us run straight pipes of some type.  The glass pack mufflers I use are like straight pipes in many ways.  I sure recommend trying this modification.  It is something I wish I had figured out years ago. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 10, 2012, 11:34:15 PM
A fellow I worked with retired and he builds fly rods for a living.  His lathe is a bit large for the work he does with it.  He bought a smaller one and he is selling the bigger one.  This is a big purchase.  I talked to Rose to make sure it was OK.  She had somethings to say.  "Are you nuts?  Since when do you need round things so bad?  You got along without one for almost sixty years.  What makes you need one now?  Where are we going to put it?  We are out of money."  This sounds like spousal approval to me.  I drove out to Aumsville to look at it this evening.  Aumsville was hit by the tornado.  It looks OK now except most of the big shade trees are gone from the town center and there are a lot of vacant lots in a big strip through the middle of town.  lt is sad.  These little towns do not recover from something like that.

The lathe is a 1947 or 48 Logan sold by Monkey Wards.  All the normal accessories are there including the owner's manual.  Collets and adjustable reamers, too.  It will handle stuff up to 10 inches around and 24 inches long.  It is back geared and set up to cut American threads.  The fellow told me it would not be a restoration project.  There is no need for that.  Everything is in good condition and it works.

Some money has been squirreled away for cams and valve springs.  It exchanged hands and the lathe is mine.  The big project is getting it home.  I tried to pick up one end of the lathe to see how heavy it is.  It would not come up.  I asked the fellow if the lathe was bolted to the floor.  He said "No, that thing is heavy."  They built solid machines in those days.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on April 11, 2012, 12:39:05 AM
An engine crane can be your friend Bo. Sling it from under the bed in at least two places and get it around the gearbox or at least the chuck to stabilize it so it can't flip when it's in the air. Be careful not to exert much pressure on the horizontal shafts. Lathes are definitely top heavy if they don't have an integral base.

If it works as good as it looks you'll spend many hours of fun with it.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 15, 2012, 01:41:48 AM
Logging in to www.spc.noaa.gov/climo/reports/today.html  will show what our midwestern forum members are experiencing.  Crazy.  118 tornadoes in one day was what the count was the last time I checked.  One was about half a mile wide.  I sure hope everyone is OK.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 16, 2012, 01:11:57 AM
Rose and I drove out to get the lathe today.  We took it apart to make it small enough to be able to move it.  A tooth brush, some solvent, and lots of scrubbing were used to clean up the bed.  I was planning to repaint it.  This machine is totally original and this made me change my mind.  It is a good example of what one looked like when it came from the factory.  This has a lot of value in itself.  My plans are to clean it up and keep it as original as possible while I am its custodian.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on April 16, 2012, 06:35:33 PM
Easier to see.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 17, 2012, 09:58:53 PM
Thanks, Freud.  That altered photo is much better.  That is the lathe before I bought it.  It was in a fishing rod making shop.  The fellow used it to spin the fishing poles so he could sand the correct contours onto the cork handles.

The speed vs mph chart for the last dyno session was provided by Cascade Moto Classics.  It clearly shows the clutch slipping when the engine produced maximum torque.  The clutch grabbed when the engine torque dropped at higher rpm.

The cure for this is some stronger clutch springs and replacing any worn plates.  Standard Triumph plates with "green" springs are OK for an 865 cc Triumph engine according to Triumph Performance.  I will need to put in Kevlar plates for the big motor, they say.  My plans are to replace the standard plates with Kevlar ones if any are worn.  This way, I will not need to replace anything when I build the 996 cc engine.

Kent Plastics called today.  The first windshield will be polycarbonate.  We will see how it works, if major sanding and polishing is needed, and how easy that is to do.  Plan B will be to make another one out of impact resistant acrylic.

The reasoning to go with the vacuum molded poly is the "lesser of the evils" principle.  I know all sanctioning bodies will accept polycarbonate without argument.  This is important based on my recent experience with something else on the Triumph.  It is very important to smoothly pass tech inspection.  There are very few people who make drop formed windshields.  The one example I know about did not fit as well as desired.  Fit is a problem I would have a very hard time coping with.  It is harder to reshape a metal fairing to fit a windshield than a fiberglass one.  Sanding and polishing are inherent difficulties associated with the vacuum forming process on wood molds.  They are simple problems and I can deal with them.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Kiwi Paul on April 18, 2012, 12:19:46 AM
BO--Reshaping Metal is my stock-in-trade. If you end up with a mismatch and need some adjustment, keep me in mind. I`d be up for adjusting something if needed..... :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: desperate on April 19, 2012, 01:27:41 PM
Rose and I drove out to get the lathe today.  We took it apart to make it small enough to be able to move it.  A tooth brush, some solvent, and lots of scrubbing were used to clean up the bed.  I was planning to repaint it.  This machine is totally original and this made me change my mind.  It is a good example of what one looked like when it came from the factory.  This has a lot of value in itself.  My plans are to clean it up and keep it as original as possible while I am its custodian.
I love the story of your lathe, I had a similar experiance here in the UK, but I found mine on the back of a lorry ready to be weighed in as scrap. It was rusty & had no motor, but my eyes told me it was worth having, and definately better than not having one at all, so I bought it for "scrap metal" price, £60.
I stripped it down to small enough parts for three strong men to lift, & got it home in the back of my car. Like you, it was out with the toothbrush, wire brush & emery cloth. As I rubbed the rusty (only light surface rust) bed down, I found the maker's name...."Colchester".....possibly the best lathe manufacturers in the UK. There was no serious wear to be found, so I sploshed some blue Hammerite paint on it. It looked like new, but I had no motor until I put the word around. A couple of days later my mate dropped off an industrial potato peeling machine, also destined for scrap. It had the exact motor I needed.
A half-day's work later, using old pulleys & belts that were never thrown away because they might come in handy one day, I had a working lathe. No back-gears & no auto-feed, but for £60 who cares? It's fully tooled now with 3 & 4 jaw chucks & a faceplate & I use it virtually every day. Every time I switch it on, it's like working with an old mate!
The picture shows it on the back of the lorry the day I found it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: desperate on April 19, 2012, 01:42:38 PM
Here it is, two years on & the best buy I've made for years. The work this old girl turns out is phenominal, I even re-machined my Indian flywheels on it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 21, 2012, 12:36:58 PM
Desperate, you were fortunate to find the machine and the lathe was lucky that you found it.

Paul, thanks for the offer to reshape the fairing.  The advantage of the vacuum forming method is its ability to suck the plastic down tight onto the mold.  The fit will be correct if the mold is proper.  This mold was shaped while it was on the bike.  No problems with fit are anticipated.  Polishing might be an issue.  Polycarbonate can be difficult in that respect.

The next few posts will be on setting up the lathe.  This is not directly related to LSR.  It is useful, though.

Vague memories from my apprentice days tell me I must be careful to "avoid springing the bed" as they called it.  This lathe was taken apart for transport.  There were two reasons.  First, the lathe parts could be picked up and moved and the complete machine could not.  Second, the assembled machine must be placed on a level and flat surface.  I do not have one.  One photo shows the lathe where it will be in the cellar.  The second picture shows some coins under one of the stand feet.  The money is there to keep the lathe stand from rocking back and forth.

Let's assume the coins are not there and I assembled the lathe on this uneven surface.  The weight of everything would push the feet down until all four were on the floor.  This would twist the bed.  The ways upon which the carriage travels would not be parallel to each other or to the center of rotation.  It would be difficult to do accurate work.  Another more serious problem would be the consequences of setting the lathe down on a very uneven surface.  The bed could twist far enough to be permanently bent.  It would not be an accurate tool after that, and it would be unsuitable for metal work.  It would not be a total loss.  A woodworker could make good use of it.   

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 23, 2012, 10:44:51 PM
The floor is cracked where the lathe will sit.  The soils under this house have some clay in them.  They swell a little bit in the winter when they are damp and the water table is high.  The floor rises.  The soils shrink in the summer when they dry out.  The floor settles.  The cracks make the floor rising and falling uneven.  Some parts rise more than others.  This floor shifting has caused me all sorts of alignment problems with the woodworking machinery.

A reinforced concrete pad under the lathe will not shift and the lathe will stay in alignment.  The lathe is short and at just the right height for Gidget the Midget.  The pad will s raise it up and it will be easier for me to use.

The first step is to elevate the lathe and install bolts and nuts on all four feet.  The feet are greased so concrete will not stick to them.  The feet rest on the bolts and those rest on concrete brick chunks.  Altogether, the lathe is raised 3-1/2 inches.  The bolts and washers must be grease free.  The concrete should stick to them.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 25, 2012, 12:33:59 AM
The lathe is leveled in this step.  The highest corner of the bed is determined with a level and the other corners are raised to the same height.  I used quarters, dimes, and nickels as shims between the brick chunks and the bolt heads.  The picture shows the lathe bed during the leveling.  The boards attached to the chip pan position the lathe at the desired distance from the wall.  The lathe is leveled as best as it can with a carpenter's level in this step.  A more accurate machinist level will be used during the final leveling.

The form is built around the lathe feet.  Something like this should always be reinforced.  The mounting bolts attached to the lathe feet and all nuts and washers are stainless steel.  The reinforcing bars are mild steel.  Care is taken to make sure they do not touch each other.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 30, 2012, 10:55:15 PM
A fellows never knows what will turn up here during spring cleaning.

Not much has been posted about this build.  Rosie's shift schedule changed and we have a lot more days off together.  That one little hen keeps this mighty rooster awfully busy.  She is on vacation in New York and I am trying to get back on track.

Everything is preparation for running in AUS in 2015.  No surprises is the big goal.  That is halfway across the world and getting there is all I can do.  This year I will run as a 1000cc AMA APS-AG.  The record is held by a Triumph Bonneville and I cannot beat it.  APS-AG is an altered partial streamliner with an altered gasoline powered engine.  My bike is for all practical purposes a modified partial streamliner with a production engine.  The longer tail section and the flatslide carbs put me into the altered body and engine classes.  The American AMA and Australian DLRA rules for APS streamlining are similar.  The main difference is the tail.

The AMA says "Streamlining shall not extend beyond the rear edge of the rear tire more than 8 inches.  No streamlining behind the rear axle is permitted to be lower than the top rim of the rear wheel."  The DLRA says "If a streamlined seat/tail section is used, it cannot extend further to the rear than 10 inches beyond the rear edge of the rear tire, or 1/3 of the wheelbase, whichever is less.  No part of the seat/tail section may be closer than 4 inches from the ground, or over 40 inches from the ground with the rider seated."  The AMA and DLRA tails might make the bike handle differently and I want to get this sorted before I go to AUS.  I asked BUB if I could run a tail with deeper skirts to see if the handling will be OK, with the proviso that it disqualifies me from any record.  They have not replied yet.

The AMA and DLRA front sections are similar.  Right now I have an FIM record out on loan and someday it will be time to get it back.  The fairing has cutouts so my hands and arms are visible as per FIM rules.  They are blocked off as allowed by AMA and DLRA rules.  The photo shows how I did it.  It is fairly east to put them in or to take them out.

     

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 01, 2012, 11:03:33 PM
BUB replied.  A bike has to be completely legal with class specs to run in APS.  No longer skirts are allowed, even if no record runs are made.  Plans are to run as an APS bike at BUB this year and to enter speedweek in 2013 if I get the tire dilemma figured out.  The SCTA has the same streamlining rules as the DLRA.  A run or two at speedweek will give me the opportunity to try out the setup I will use in AUS.  Also, a visit to speedweek will give Gretchen and me a chance to see the cars.  It will be the first time for both of us.

The lathe was leveled with a carpenter's level when the pad was formed and poured.  The final leveling should be done with something more accurate.  A machinist level was ordered through Fastenal.  It is an American made Starrett.  The concrete has cured and the forms were knocked off.  The mix I used was bony and there were a lot of voids on the surface.  It was ugly.  There was some blue, pink, and tan grout left over from some tiling jobs.  This was mixed up to make a grey grout and I covered the pad.  The pad is portable and some handles are cast into each end.  The builder's paper under the pad kept it from attaching itself to the floor when it is poured.
 

       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 02, 2012, 10:13:53 PM
The machinist level is placed on the ways for the final leveling.  It is much more sensitive and accurate than the carpenter's level.  Shims are put under the feet as needed to level the lathe.  The shims I cut out of 0.005 inch thick brass sheet.  They can be purchased ready-made.  Ask for arbor shims.  The shim stock is a little piece I bought at the hobby shop and it cost me much less money to make my own.  The leveled lathe will cut much more accurately than it would if I had not done this.  A lathe that cuts a taper when making long shafts usually needs to be leveled.  This is the last lathe post.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jon on May 06, 2012, 05:27:11 PM
Looking good Bo, a lathe will make a lot of jobs so much easier.

Any updates on your windscreen?

Cheers
jon
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 07, 2012, 01:21:22 AM
The windshield was brought home on Friday.  Geoff at Kent Plastics did the job for a reasonable $85 USD covering labor and materials.  Kent Plastics makes all sorts of plastic items using different materials for various purposes.  My feelings are:  they are generalists and they do as good of work as can be expected from anyone except a specialist in polycarbonate forming.

The material is Makrolon, a polycarbonate.  The sheet stuck onto the plastic is shown.  This is a legal windshield material in AMA, DLRA, FIM, USFRA, and SCTA.  The material is very clear.  There is none of the bluish or yellowish tint that some clear plastics possess.

The windshield was vacuum formed.  It is shown on the table like it was removed from the mold.  Some sawing is needed to cut off the flange and the back side.  The next few posts will discuss what I would do different next time and the things I did correctly.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 08, 2012, 12:50:57 AM
Several materials were considered for this windshield.  Aircraft grade acrylic was one.  There are several quality grades.  The premium ones for military helicopter windshields seem to be most appropriate.  The advantages are it can be drape or vacuum formed over the mold, it is comparatively easy to polish out defects, and it has less memory.  In other words, there is less tendency for it to assume its original flat state when it cools.  The disadvantages are it is not known if it is accepted by some sanctioning bodies and it is expensive.  The local shops in my area wanted me to buy a whole sheet to get the one little windshield.  They said they do not use the stuff on a normal basis and they do not want the leftovers.  This seems fair.  Unfortunately a single sheet costs over $500 for a lesser quality grade and just under $1,000 for the best grade.  This is too much money for the old walrus.  No acrylic for this guy.

PETG was considered.  Many grades are impact resistant and some are used for airplane windshields.  It can be drape or vacuum formed over the mold and the cost is very reasonable.  Just under $100 for a sheet of impact resistant material, as I recall.  See the Utah Belly Tank build diary by Elmo Rodge.  This is what I wanted to do and did not.  I was worried about SCTA and DLRA approval.

The polycarbonate is what I chose.  It could not be drape formed over the compound curves on this windshield.  It has too much memory.  It could be vacuum formed and that is the method that was used.

The shield is shown on the mold.  It shrank about 1/8 to 1/4 inch in length when it cooled and it cannot fit entirely over the mold.  I was aware this would happen and the fairing is not finished where it will attach to the windshield.  This will be done with the windshield in place.  This way, everything will fit.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 08, 2012, 11:47:32 PM
The windshield is vacuum formed with a flange around it.  It is awkward to cut it off with any of the saws I have.  This tile cutting bit in a Dremel tool does the job.

The mold was made on the bike.  It is put back on and the windshield is put on top of it.  Now it is time to form the sheet metal around the windshield base.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: maguromic on May 09, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
Very interesting build. Tony
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 09, 2012, 12:44:26 AM
Hi Tony.  A few of your ideas have been adapt-a-fitted into this thing.  We share a few things in common.  Both of us are new at this and we bring in experience from other areas of motorsport. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 20, 2012, 11:27:36 PM
This book is fairly recent with a 2011 copyright date.  It is ISBN 978-1-934709-47-4 "Performance Automotive Engine Math" by John Baechtel.  The book lists a lot of formulas like many others.  The difference between it and most are the explanations about what the numbers mean.  John is a land speed racer and there is a lot in the book that is useful for this.  It is money well spent for this guy.  The chapter on atmospherics and combustion math, by itself, made the book worth the purchase price.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 23, 2012, 12:10:52 AM
The lathe was taken apart, all parts inspected and cleaned, and it was adjusted and put together.  Only two gears were damaged, the bevel gears for the automatic cross feed on the carriage.  They work for now and I will find another pair in good condition.  All of this taking apart and putting together showed me how everything works.

In my apprentice days we moved from machine to machine through the shop.  I started on a planer, then the broacher, a mill, and a shaper.  The drill press and a file were part of the program, too.  The last machine before graduation to journeyman was the lathe.  The journeymen "picked their machine."  They were expected to master them and they rarely switched from one to another.  The job was boring most of the time.  Many of the same parts were made and I watched the same things go back and forth or spin around all day.  It was a dark and smoky place and I smelled like a fish at the end of the day.  The cutting oil.  A mechanic's job supported me when I was going through machinist school.  That was a much better job - I was always doing something interesting.  I quit before I got my journeyman card.  This is something I always regret.  I never ran the lathe.  The only time I used one was in school.  Now I get an opportunity to learn what I missed.   

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 23, 2012, 11:15:09 PM
Grinding and wood work happen in this cellar.  Sawdust and grit are the by products.  It is a good idea to cover the lathe.  This cover is on sale at Cycle Gear at 50 percent off.  $19.95 and the sale is still happening.  A great machine cover.  The "Cruiser" size fits perfect.  This is the last lathe post.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jonny Hotnuts on May 24, 2012, 12:08:05 AM
Mr. WobblyWalrus,


I was wondering if your team name was taken from the PD Eastman book:

(http://books.google.com/books?id=N5r_LejSm5oC&printsec=frontcover&img=1&zoom=1&l=220)

Stupid question, just had to know.

~JH
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 25, 2012, 12:10:57 AM
Yes, the dogs are the inspiration for the team.  They are faster.  It will take awhile to go like them.  Burt Munro is an inspiration, too.  Strangely, I get the occasional urge to pee on a tree.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 29, 2012, 12:43:03 AM
Polycarbonate is not the easiest plastic to form.  Several methods were discussed with plastics formers in Salem and Portland.  Vacuum molding was the best and probably only method that could be done with the equipment and expertise around here, I gathered from the conversations.  The local ovens are not very big.  My mold was 22 inches wide and it barely fit in the forming oven.

The windshield is a bit narrow and some windows are added to get side vision.  They are lexan and they are cut out of a Triumph windshield that Cascade Moto Classics had in their attic.

Tomorrow morning I will add the tachometer and the Spitfire decals to the sides.  This big fairing project will be finished.  The time I am spending on the build is controversial.  I get up real early in the morning and do most of it before work.  That way I can be with the family in the evenings.  It is a good system except I cannot get a lot of sleep.  It will be a good day when this thing is done for the year.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 31, 2012, 01:03:12 AM
The tach is installed in the very front of the fairing just under the windshield.  A better location than before.  Maybe I will read it now.  The fairing is done except for cleaning it up and sanding and polishing the windshield.

The drag that keeps me from getting that red hat is a combination of friction and aerodynamic resistance.  The aero drag can be expressed as frontal area x coefficient of drag.  The new fairing has much more frontal area than me sitting on the bike or the old fairing.  The only way I can compensate for this is to drastically reduce my coefficient of drag.  Metal mutilation starts on the bike's back end now.  I need to get this right in order for everything to work.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 31, 2012, 10:56:26 PM
The task now is to examine the bike sides and to remove anything extraneous that hangs out into the wind.  The goal is to minimize the separation of airflow from the fuselage and consequently, to lessen the turbulent wake.

Somewhere in the FIM regulations I read about the number plates being made from unbreakable plastic.  I made some with the thought it was required.  Lots of FIM racers, including the one that beat my old record, simply paste the numbers onto the fairing or tail sides.  I am clearly guilty of excessive thinking.  The plastic number plates went into the recycle bin and I will paste everything onto the sheet metal.  There is no shortage of that, as shown in the pix.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 06, 2012, 12:49:24 AM
Sparky, the gearing statistics for the Triumph.  Hopefully this is what you need.

Tire slip is 2% for dry tight salt, 5% for damp tight salt, 7% for wet loose salt, tire circumference is 79 inches (steel belted radial, hardly any growth), final drive is 19 tooth drive sprocket with 40 or 38 tooth driven sprockets, fifth gear ratio is 1.07 to 1, fourth gear ratio is 1.29 to 1, primary drive ratio is 1.74 to 1, target rpm is 7,500, redline is 8,400. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 07, 2012, 01:02:50 AM
The rules for AMA and BUB require that I run AMA streamlining regardless of whether or not I am running for a record.  The big reason for running this year is to try out the streamlining for the Australia trip.  I need to make sure everything works OK, figure out suspension settings and gearing, and get data to calculate the drag coefficient.  The AMA tail skirting is minimal and running AMA will not give me the experience and data I need.  Running FIM would work.  It is a lot of money and I do not have it.  RWB, run-watcha-brung, will be my class.  It is a short course class.  One mile to get up to speed, one mile timed, and one mile to shut down.  This is enough length for what I need to do.

Any streamlining work requires the rules to be handy along with tin snips, hammers, coffee, etc.  The future for me is RWB, DLRA, FIM, and maybe USFRA.  The DLRA and FIM rules are what I am building for now.

The Arrow pipes I was using had large megaphone shaped silencers that stuck up and out.  They were bad for aero.  Some smaller and more streamlined silencers will be fitted.  The shiny and triangular lower sheet on the skirting is added.  This area was occupied by the bulky Arrow mufflers.  This added skirting should be a big help.

This is an FIM tail.  It does not project more than 1/2 the rim diameter past the rear tire.  At least 135 degrees of the rear wheel is visible from the side. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 11, 2012, 12:19:28 AM
Cooler air in the intakes make more power.  The air filters are inside of the seat tail unit and there is hot air in there during runs.  Some cutouts and slots let cool air into the filters.  The back end is braced to prevent fluttering.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 11, 2012, 12:32:52 AM
The DLRA allows the tail to extend up to 10 inches beyond the rear tire.  This is 1.5 inches more that the FIM limit.  The tail is extended this amount.  It is made so the 1.5 inch extension can be quickly removed when I run FIM.

The tail can extend down to four inches above the salt with the rider seated according to DLRA rules.  It seems to be a good idea to have the tail this low if the bike has low streamlining ahead of it.  Mine does not.  The shrouding for a low tail would catch a lot of wind and it might affect the handling.  I kept the tail shrouding above the rear axle.

The entire tail section including the seat pad weighs 20 pounds.  It weighs much less than all of the touring gear that is removed when it is fitted.  This has been a lot of work.  The tail is done.  Exhaust tuning is next.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 13, 2012, 01:25:31 AM
Exhaust tuning is the last task of the year - except for putting everything together, going to the salt, racing, and squeaking past the 140 mph barrier.  This build diary addresses basic stuff.  This theme is followed for exhaust tuning.  "Performance Automotive Engine Math" by John Baechtel is used as a reference.

Two of many things to worry about in exhaust tuning are flow and sonics.  A big river is an analogy.  We watch if flow by us from the shore.  The water always goes in the same direction.  Its speed and flow are governed by channel characteristics such as size, gradient, and smoothness.  There are waves on the river.  Wind waves going one way, boat wake waves another, and waves from a tossed rock following a different path than any.  The waves travel quickly in any and all directions regardless of flow direction.  This is like the sonic waves in the exhaust system.

First, is the header I am using is the right size?  It worked good on the 790 cc engine.  Will it be OK for the 865 and 994 cc motors?  The procedure is to analyze it using three methods that were developed independently from each other:  Baechetl's formula, A. Graham Bell's method, and Meaux Racing's PipeMax program.  (Baechtel Chapter 8.)

Baechtel's relationship says that primary pipe diameter is related to the amount of exhaust that must pass through it, and this depends on cylinder volume and rpm.  This makes sense.  The attached pages show the calcs for the three motors.  The pipes I have are 1.40 inches diameter, the 790cc engine needs 1.50 inch pipes, the 865 cc one requires 1.57 inch ones, and the 994 cc needs 1.68 diameter tubes.  Clearly, the headers I am using are too small.

How much too small?  Looking at diameter and comparing the standard Triumph pipes to the ones needed for an 865 cc engine:
[(1.57 - 1.40) / 1.40] x 100 = 12%, not much smaller.  This is misleading.  Flow capacity is related to cross-sectional area.  Looking at area and comparing the standard pipes to the ones needed for an 865 cc engine:  [(1.95 - 1.58) / 1.58] x 100 = 23%.  The pipes I am using are 23% too small when looking at area.  Sometimes it is a good idea to take a good look at how things are compared to each other.  The next post will be about Bell's method.

       



 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 13, 2012, 11:21:17 PM
The A. Graham Bell equations as presented in Baechtel's book were problematic.  The Bell formulae I used were from some old notes and they are shown on the calculation sheets.  The answers from the note equations are more consistent with the PipeMax results and Baechtel's equations.  The Bell equations also show that I need bigger diameter headers.

The Bell formulae are familiar.  Baechtel's equations and PipeMax are not.  My usual method is to use both the old stuff I am used to, alongside the newer methods, until I am comfortable with the new.  Another thing I do is analyze my last good engine as well as the motor I am working on.  The old engine is a good reference point.  All of this is extra work and it pays off in the long run.  It helps me to spot errors and mistakes and to recognize useful trends.  The PipeMax analysis is next.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 15, 2012, 12:41:01 AM
The March dyno work was to sort out the spark advance curve and the intake and exhaust systems.  A slipping clutch stopped everything before the exhaust could be done.  The jetting curves for the selected advance curve and intake system are shown.  The # 145 jets were chosen with 72.56 hp at 6800 rpm and 60.37 lb-ft torque at 5,500 rpm.

This dyno session was set up to be as close as possible to the March one.  The same dyno, operator, tire, tire pressure, chain, sprockets, etc.  Neither time was the bike cinched down on the roller.  The fuel was premium non-ethanol unleaded purchased from the same pump at the Lincoln country store.  We forgot to set the correction factor to SAE on today's work.  It is SAE on the March pulls and Standard on today's.  The big difference was the exhaust system.  A set of Arrow 2 into 2 pipes with no baffles was the March setup.  Today's setup was some old stuff from my bone pile.  All of the mufflers in my junk heap are rusted out so I had to buy a new pair.  Oh the agony.. I had to purchase something.

Jetting pulls are shown.  We chose the #135 jets with the brown curve.   84.83 hp at 8,400 rpm and 60.52 lb-ft torque at 6,500 rpm.  The engine wanted to pull higher than 8,400 rpm.  The rev limiter prevented this.  I am sure glad there are Arias pistons and Carillo rods in this thing.

Posting attachments is troublesome this evening.  The charts will be on the next post or on a post tomorrow.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 15, 2012, 12:41:38 AM
The dyno graphs.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 15, 2012, 12:46:05 AM
Another attempt at posting the graphs.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 16, 2012, 07:39:37 PM
The data is collected for PipeMax.  The preliminary volumetric efficiency estimate is 100%.  The Triumph cam data was at 1 mm lift.  I had to plot out the lift vs duration curves on graph paper and figure out what they would be at .050 inch lift.  It is very important to do this.  The lobe center angle is in cam degrees.  See the camshaft chapter in Baechtel's book and he will explain this.

Calculating the volumeteric efficiency to match the dyno'ed horsepower is the first task.  My readings are from a chassis dyno.  A common assumption for bikes is a 10% loss in engine horsepower for the drive train loss and the tire to dyno roller loss.  The chassis dyno hp is multiplied by 1.1 to estimate engine dyno results.  I need to do this.  The data used to develop PipeMax is from engine dynos and I need to enter engine dyno hp to get the program to work right.

The data sheet for the 790cc engine is shown.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 16, 2012, 07:47:07 PM
The "calculate torque and horsepower" option is chosen in PipeMax.  The volumetric efficiency (VE) reading is changed a percent at a time and the program is rerun.  When the horsepower calculated by PipeMax matches what I got on the dyno (corrected to engine dyno) readings, I am done and ready for the next step.  The little motor is estimated to have had 108 percent VE.  This is a reasonable value considering its state of tune.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 17, 2012, 12:55:47 AM
The Triumph uses a single pipe with a muffler for each cylinder.  This most closely resembles a primary pipe for a header.  The PipeMax recommendations are shown.  Note the recommended pipe size and the harmonic lengths.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 17, 2012, 12:59:54 AM
The pipe and the harmonic lengths are plotted on this graph.  Note that the cross-pipe between the headers is located very close to the most desired harmonic length.  Also, the headers are a bit large for the little 790 cc motor.  This system worked very well for that engine.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Moxnix on June 17, 2012, 01:31:57 PM
At what elevation do you abide, Wobs?  Always enjoy your thread, thanks.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 17, 2012, 08:25:53 PM
Thanks for the compliment.  The elevation here is 135 feet, more or less.

There are things I do before exhaust tuning, such as everything else.  The exhaust is the last thing I do.  The jetting should be OK and I should have a dyno printout, too.  These things are what I ask myself when I look at the printout.  Do I need to do any exhaust work?  Do I need to do more than that?

First, I look at the horsepower peak.  Dost it occur at the right rpm?  Exhaust tuning might not be needed if it does.  Then I look at the torque numbers.  My experience is that I cannot significantly increase peak torque with exhaust tuning.  More work than exhaust tuning is needed if the peak torque is too low.

The peak torque is 60.37 on the chassis dyno before the exhaust tuning.  This will be the peak torque after tuning, I assume.  The 60.37 is multiplied by 1.1 to get the estimated chassis dyno torque of 66.4 lbs-ft.  This is entered into PipeMax as an average value.  The desired Peak HP RPM is entered.  This is 7,400.  The "calculate HP and torque" option is selected.  The VE is changed until the average peak torque calculated by PipeMax is the same as the dynoed value.  The VE is 108 percent.  The first attachment shows all of this.

Now Pipemax is asked to calculate the header dimensions.  The second attachment shows the results.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 17, 2012, 08:39:39 PM
PipeMax has gives me some harmonics and recommended header diameters.  The OEM header pipes with a set of new glass paks are plotted on the graph along with the harmonics.  The cross-pipe is near the 3rd harmonic.  This should work good.  I put the exhaust system on the bike.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 18, 2012, 09:44:38 PM
The last post gives shows the calcs that were used to figure out the exhaust system.  The dyno runs are done.  The last step is to use the dyno data to recalculate the VE.  The header pipe harmonics are recalculated, too.  These are "As Built data."  They go into the build records.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 18, 2012, 10:06:00 PM
The as built pipe sketch.  For all practical purposes, and when error is considered, the cross-pipe is at the 3rd harmonic.  Dyno tuning with two additional cross-pipes an inch and a half either way would be needed to perfect the system.

The graph shows how I stole torque from the midrange and shifted it to the top end.  This is exactly what I want for LSR and the glass paks with the cross-over pipe will be the race headers.  The Arrow pipes give better torque and power for the street and they will be my road setup.  Maybe.

This engine is putting out 1.8 horsepower per cubic inch.  This is a big number for an air cooled twin that runs on unleaded ragular gas with air filters.  Especially when it is tuned by some clown on his driveway with a bunch of books.  All I can do is mess it up if I work on it more.  This engine is done.  The 790cc motor was "Baby Bear."  This 865cc one is "Mama Bear."  The parts are on order for 994cc "Papa Bear."           
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 21, 2012, 01:20:00 AM
It looks like the 865 cc motor will be the one I run in AUS.  The head will be taken off this winter to install the racing valve springs and keepers.  This gives me an opportunity to increase valve sizes and change to hotter cams.

My intent is to keep the rev limiter at 8,400 rpm.  Two of the four Pipemax sheets are posted.  Does anyone see any room for improvement?  What in my setup looks good?

Any advice is appreciated.  I do not know what a lot of these numbers mean.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on June 21, 2012, 06:24:38 AM
Bo,
I'm certainly impressed by all the data you've assembled, but I can't help you with interpreting it!  Looks like I'll have to go back to school. Amazing that the "British Custom Exhaust" added almost 10 horsepower in the top end, which is what you need for Bonneville.  It also looks like you would achieve a few more horsepower with a few more RPMs.  I'd tune it for your target speed at the 8400 rpm limiter, and maybe disable the limiter for the final run if it wants to keep pulling.   In any case, you seem to be squeezing more horsepower out and I think you've go a real handle on the direction you want to take.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 24, 2012, 02:05:26 AM
Tom, a year ago I looked at the ways of making more power.  Bigger displacement was one.  Spinning the motor faster was the other.  More cubic inches looked like the best solution.  There was a lot less stress on the engine if I could keep the rpm below 8,000.   

The first few pages of the PipeMax printout is Imperial units.  The last couple are in metric.  I tossed the metric stuff.  The answers to all of my questions were in the trash can on the last page just after the metric data.  There were instructions on what to look for in all of the data.

Using PipeMax, the #813 cam with the ported head and the 2mm larger intake valves are plenty adequate for the 865cc engine.  Then I entered the bigger bore size and compression of the 994cc engine.  The cam, valves, and ports are adequate for this bigger motor, too.  This is good news.  I thought I would need a hotter cam, bigger valves, and other expensive stuff to go with the 994cc kit.  Things I cannot afford.  I do not need them and the kit is paid for.  All I need to do is to install it.  The big motor will be used in AUS.  Definitely.

The cross-pipe at the 3rd harmonic makes the exhaust system work.  Almost any non-restrictive muffler can be used, such as Norman Hide Toga's, Triumph Performance Predaters, etc.  The British Custums "sleepers" have the best aerodynamics and I could get a deal on them, price wise.  They are OK for racing where noise is not a factor.  They are too loud for the street and the way they are mounted is kinda hokey.  Triumph off-road mufflers with Triumph headers or the Arrow pipes and mufflers are what I use on the street.  They work OK and are fairly quiet.   

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 25, 2012, 01:51:49 AM
Ol' Bob Bakker (BAK189) will be missed at BUB.  He was friendly and I always felt that if I needed something he would help me.  I never did, but it was always assuring to know that he was nearby.

The front fender hit the fairing when the steering was at full lock and the forks were fully compressed.  The middle of the top of the fender is slimmed down so it will not hit.  It is an ugly job.  I tried to make it smooth and the harder I worked at it the lumpier it got.  This winter I will anneal it and beat it with a slap hammer.  That might pretty it up.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on June 25, 2012, 06:24:45 AM
Bo,
I sure could use some of your metal working skills right now to get some duct work finished on my build.  BTW, you probably won't hit maximum compression while turned to full lock.  If you do, I'd suggest you bail out!
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on June 25, 2012, 08:09:41 AM
I'm sure at that point the bailout will be totally involuntary!  :-D :-D :roll:

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: saltwheels262 on June 25, 2012, 07:36:20 PM
ww,
as I read number 803 my thoughts were exactly the same as 804 and 805.

but, you never can tell.

bf
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 26, 2012, 01:15:28 AM
Fussy tech inspections worry me more than anything else.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 27, 2012, 01:45:27 AM
The new exhaust setup that makes 84 horsepower gives me awful gas mileage on the street.  Low to mid 30's.  The cross-pipe is at the 8,000 rpm third harmonic length of at 22.5 inches.

A few months ago there were a number of posts when I was monkeying around with baffles in the Arrow headers.  The baffles were deliberately designed so the upstream end would to reflect a wave back to the engine.  Lots of trial and error testing was used to find the optimum length for the baffles.  Gas mileage was in the 40's when I used them and they had the right length.

PIpeMax shows me why the baffles work well on the street.  The 3rd harmonic is at 55.3 inches at 3,500 rpm.  That is the engine speed I usually use when I putter around.  Today I measured the Arrows with the baffles in them.  The distance between the upstream ends of the header pipes and the upstream ends of the baffles are close to this length.  This makes the engine more efficient in normal street use.

It makes sense, considering the cost of gas, to switch the exhaust system and intake bell lengths from street to race configuration and vice-versa as needed.  It is no big deal.  I run one race a year.   



 

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 28, 2012, 01:12:38 AM
The white thing is my windshield.  The wood I used for the mold shrank and expanded during the forming process.  There were little recesses across the inside of the windshield at 3/4 inch intervals.  I used poplar for the mold.  Kent plastics told me to use a hard and tight grained particle board for the mold.  They said it would not shrink or swell.  I looked at this stuff in the lumberyard and did not buy it.  It did not seem possible to get a smooth finish on it.  I was not thinking about the primer on top of the particle board.  It would have made a smooth finish and I should have used it.  The upper surface had pock marks from gas bubbles that escaped during the forming process.     

The windshield is sanded smooth on both surfaces with 220 grit paper.  This gives it the white color and I did the work by hand.  The buffer and polishing wheels do not work on this polycarbonate.  They get the plastic hot and they smear it around rather than put on a good finish.

This has been a cold and wet summer.  The berry crop is great.  Gretchen bakes the pies and I pick the berries.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on June 28, 2012, 06:12:36 AM
If it's any consolation, the pie looks great!
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 29, 2012, 01:16:28 AM
The sad thing is I was discussed the windshield several times with two plastic experts.  One was equipped for and good at vacuum forming and the other was a good drape former.  I had PETG literature and we talked about drape forming it.  The draping expert said he would do it.  I chickened out and went with polycarbonate.  What a mistake.  It will take me weeks to sand and polish this thing.  Polycarbonate is a material for experienced experts with specialized storage facilities where it can be kept dry.  Vacuum forming molds need some expert craftsmanship, too.  Homeboys like me should use PETG that is draped over felt covered forms.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on June 29, 2012, 01:34:00 AM
Having had some experience working with polycarbonate I would suggest you hang that windshield on the wall and use what you've learned to build another. By the time you manage to work it to any sort of clarity, even if you do succeed, the varying thickness will lead to large amounts of distortion to the point that you may as well use a piece of metal. The metal would probably be less annoying.

Experience is a great learning tool but too many times I hate gaining that experience!  :| :| :|

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 01, 2012, 11:48:36 PM
The defects were oriented across the windshield from one side to the other.  I sand with 220 grit paper at a 90 degree angle to the defects until they are removed.  This is sanding lengthwise along the fairing.

Now I mark a grid on the underside with a Sharpie laundry marker.  The grid is parallel and perpendicular to the windshield sides.  Next, I draw a grid on the top.  The lines are diagonal to the sides.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 02, 2012, 12:07:16 AM
Now I start sanding.  The object is to sand off the grid so it cannot be seen.  Marks oriented cross ways and length ways show me I need to sand on the underside.  Diagonal marks tell me I need to sand the topside.  Lengthwise sanding was used for these grits:  220, 400. and 800.  Crosswise sanding was used for these:  320 and 600.  I alternated the sanding direction as I worked down through from coarse to finer grits.  This week I will sand crosswise with the 1000 grit and lenthwise with the 1200.  Wet sanding works best.

My oldest daughter and her husband went from Fort Drum where he is stationed to Port Alexander on Lake Ontario.  There was a Harley Davidson rider group meet there.  Thousands of them on choppers.  They filled the town.  She just got off the phone after telling Rose and me what they saw.  All I could tell her was the old saying "there's harley guys and there is everyone else."
   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 05, 2012, 09:28:13 PM
Sandpaper is great for finishing lots of things and optical surfaces are not one of them.  The shield was sanded with 220 grit to take out as many blemishes as I could detect.  Then I moved onto 320, 400, 600, 800, and 1000 grits.  Each was sanded at right angles to the sanding direction of the coarser grit.  The sanding was done until all scratches from the previous grit were removed.  This was easy to see.  The coarser grit scratches were across the direction of sanding for the finer grit.

The Micro-mesh pads are a lot better for polishing out the plastic.  The stock removal must be done before they are used.  They are good at smoothing out surface scratches - not leveling.  The pads are sold by Rockler Woodworking, a national chain.  Mine were bought at their store in Beaverton.  The Micro-mesh grits I used were 3200, 3600, 4000, 6000, 8000, and 12000.  The 12000 grit leaves a finish surface with adequate optical quality.  No further polishing was done.

It took 4 hours of wet sanding per grit with 4 more hours each for the 220 and 3200 grits.  That is 52 hours sanding for one little bike windshield.  This should be factored into the time estimate for making a shield with this method.  A big car windshield would be a bit much.

 

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: oz on July 07, 2012, 06:45:22 AM
Thanks WW received secret weapon today I aint sure if this gives us an unfair advantage but my lips are sealed as to its power your secret is safe with us!!

Cheers Oz
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: thefrenchowl on July 07, 2012, 06:29:58 PM
Hi, wobblywalrus

When I was repairing airplane UHF radios in the French Air Force, we were making a lot of small polycarbonate tools and screwdrivers on a small lathe...

The only good way we had to polish them afterwards to perfection was tooth paste, it works a treat spread on a mop attached to a hand drill or anything than can spin a bit.

Patrick
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Dr Goggles on July 07, 2012, 08:00:44 PM
It took 4 hours of wet sanding per grit with 4 more hours each for the 220 and 3200 grits.  That is 52 hours sanding for one little bike windshield.  This should be factored into the time estimate for making a shield with this method.  A big car windshield would be a bit much.

HFS Bo!...52 hours? :-o :-o...you weren't tempted to buckle at any point and use a random orbital ? I've knocked ours back twice using wet sanding following a blast with 180-220 on the R.O.S I've then gone p600, p800, p1200, p2000...being further away means the optical clarity of ours isn't so critical but it's still pretty good. I always find it is the very last passes that are a mongrel on that stuff.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 08, 2012, 01:05:00 AM
Goggs, my experience, too.  I buggered up a PC windshield repair polish on the last pass with a mop wheel on a bench grinder.  It melted the finish and I had to start over.  I was told to slow down the wheel.  I had some luck with mounting the 6-inch diameter mop on a drill press and spinning it at 1000 rpm.

I never used an orbital sander and know nothing about them.  I would have tried it if I woulda known. 

I tried the toothpaste polish and it works good.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 10, 2012, 01:34:09 AM
The finished windshield.  The fit is perfect, the materials are the best, and the finish is wonderful.  Optical quality be funky. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on July 10, 2012, 12:40:03 PM
Wobbly, all I can say is you're a much more patient man than me.  :-D :-D :cheers: :cheers:

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: oz on July 10, 2012, 12:55:55 PM
I have never attempted to do anything like that you make it look easy...kinda you have alot of patience
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on July 10, 2012, 03:15:58 PM
The windshields, 3, that Frank Martinez made for the Target 550 'liner need NO attention at all.

There is no distortion and as clear as an automotive OEM piece.

I can give you his address if you need it.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 11, 2012, 01:11:47 AM
Sure, Freud.  I can use the address.

The experts around here told me not to exceed 1000 rpm with a 6-inch diameter mop.  The drill press is running at 850 rpm.  This is Patrick's French air force toothpaste polish trick.  The toothpaste is a very gentle abrasive and it works good on this soft plastic.   The saying goes "They wonder why their record went ... they didn't polish their shield with Pepsodent."

This method is not the best way to make a windshield.  A person needs to be perfect in the molding process to avoid distortion. This is hard for a homeboy to do.  In the future I would order one from Kent at Airtech or have one made by Gustafson, Martinez, or another expert.  This is a tight year for money and that explains my motivation.  The distortion is not that bad and I can live with it for now. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 13, 2012, 01:14:11 AM
The trailer bearings are inspected, cleaned, and regreased every year.  The hub is a real basic setup.  This time there is some evidence the bearing inner races were spinning a little bit.  See the wear marks on the axle.

My memory tells me this is an indication I did not have enough preload on the bearings when I assembled the hub last summer.  Is my thinking correct or do I have it backwards?     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: charlie101 on July 13, 2012, 07:12:14 AM
I can't tell if the inner race fitting is tight enough on the axle and can't know if you preload too little or too much, but my thinking is if the bearing runs hot, the inner ring expands and is more likely it will spin on the axle. After a while, a loose conical bearing will show fretting from vibrations on the rolls or race and a tight bearing will show contact wear from rolls sliding or lack of lubricant film (matte rings of wear on the race rings).  If the race fitting is not enough on the axle, one way to torque the inner races together and prevent any likelihood of spin is, you can make a distance tube (in one or two parts) with shims between to adjust preload with.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jon on July 13, 2012, 09:35:41 AM
Tapered rollers will last a lot longer a little bit loose compared to a little bit tight.

Cheers
jon
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 16, 2012, 12:59:47 AM
A virus got me.  It was a page that said I made some sort of federal crime of copyright infringement and I would need to send money to get my computer unlocked.  It took a few hours to get that one deleted out of the system.

Most everything I read on the internet under "small utility trailer wheel bearing adjustment" says to not use any preload.  They say to provide a very small amount of free play.  This was hard to set with the castle nut I had.  I could only set and hold the nut at 1/6 turn intervals with the cotter pin.  The castle nut is to the left in the photo.  The standard nut and pressed steel retainer on the right is from some sort of Ford.  It allows me to set and hold the nut at any place I want with the cotter pin.  This gives me a lot of precision when I set and lock the axle spindle nut. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 18, 2012, 01:12:22 AM
One of the fast Aussie bikes had some stability issues last year when a tail was fitted.  A number of us with "tailed" bikes have concerns.  I certainly was extra careful during the tail design.  The main reason I will be running in run-watca-brung class this year is it gives me an opportunity to try the new tail and to make adjustments.

The front of the tail needs to be as wide as my butt and there is a maximum length it can be.  This is from my arse to 8 inches beyond the back of the rear tire.  The wheelbase is lengthened three inches and this gives me some additional distance.  This distance is 2.65 feet.

In this 2.65 feet I could do two things.  One is to taper the tail to a point as seen from a top view.  This would eliminate base drag.  A problem is the taper angle would be fairly severe and it is likely the air flow would detach from the sides.  We almost always run in some sort of side wind.  This would mean the flow would detach from one side and not the other, or it would detach at different locations on each side.  The air pressure on the sides of the bike varies when the flow attaches and detaches.  This could lead to handling issues.  It was decided to avoid a pointy tail.

The tail skirts are 0.85 feet apart at the end of the tail.  This is a truncated end and it creates base drag.  The sides do not have a severe taper, though, and it is likely the air flow will stay attached throughout their length.  Another advantage of a slighter taper is, when and if the flow does detach, there is less turbulence downstream from the detachment point along the sides.

An open or closed truncated end was the next question.  There would be some pressure differential and associated forces at the very end of the bike if the end was closed.  Possibly a lifting force.  An open end seemed like a better idea and that was done.

Last was weight.  The tail is far from the bike's center of mass.  A heavy tail could create all sorts of stability problems besides aerodynamic ones.  Lots of care was used to keep it light.  It weighs 20 pounds including the seat.

I am no aero expert.  These are some of the basic things I did and hopefully they will work.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 20, 2012, 12:20:28 AM
Yesterday I was asked to look at some river bank protection in a city park.  There was a flood last year and some of the rock was washed away.  Look at what was uncovered.  The quality of the chrome plating on that old bumper is first rate.  It still looks good after being buried in a river bank for at least 50 years.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 26, 2012, 12:30:42 PM
Greetings from California.  Right now we are camped on my sisters back porch.  There are bears here.  One is big.  My family likes to live in the woods, for sure.  A couple if pix.  One is Gretchen, my youngest girl, out on the pumice plain east of Bend, Oregon.  The other is from Abert Rim.  This is the tallest exposed fault in North America.  I was too cheap to buy a new map and I had a 20-year old one.  It took a day of hard riding to find this place cause there were a lot of changes to the roads and trails in the last two decades.  It was worth it.

This is off-topic and I am a bonehead.  But what the heck.  It is the off season...in Australia.  Good luck with speedweek.  It is getting close.  Set lots of records and do not crash and burn.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on July 26, 2012, 05:52:48 PM
Thanks for the pics.........our daughter the MD works for the medical facilities in Fall River Mills, CA.   That can't be too far from your porch..........
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jon on July 26, 2012, 08:33:58 PM
Nice pics, doing stuff with your kids makes it all worthwhile IMHO.

jon
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 28, 2012, 09:45:44 PM
Dennis, Fall River Mills is in this area.  I'll call your daughter after the big crash.

Jon, my children exceed my maturity level in mid teenagerhood.  After this they do things with their friends and not Rose or me.  This is something I am enjoying while it lasts.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 13, 2012, 01:15:16 AM
The Triumph is coming along.  All the street stuff is off, all bolts checked for tightness, it is regeared, taped up, coated with preservative and ready to be dressed with the tail, fender, and fairing.  The fairing went on this afternoon.  It is a bit narrow.  The lever ends hit the sides and there is only a half inch clearance between the bar ends and the sides.  Fortunately I made the side panels removable so I could comply with FIM rules.  The FIM requires that the rider be visible from the sides.  I will take them off and this will fix the clearance problem for now.  This winter I will widen the fairing so I can use it with side panels.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on August 13, 2012, 08:49:12 AM
Can you use slightly narrower bars or even clip-ons? With all the other work you do preparing to race I would think that a bar change would be one of the easy changes with a pretty fair return on the effort invested.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on August 13, 2012, 04:41:03 PM
Peter, you took the words right out of my mouth, while I went to the shop to take a photo of mine.  Bo, my fairing is 23-1/2" inside, and I manage with clip on mounts, but using cut-off Honda 350 bars.  You can barely see the bars in this photo, but they work.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: saltwheels262 on August 13, 2012, 05:53:56 PM
my u bars are much easier than the clubman bars.
and a lot less vibration, also.

franey

you can cut up a set of buckhorn handlebars  to get the upside down u .
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 14, 2012, 01:20:38 AM
Thanks for the ideas.  Any solution cannot involve spending any money.  This evening after work I got out the torch, some hammers, the sawzall, and went to work.  It was hot out there in the sun.  The sweat dripping of my head got on my glasses and into my eyes.  I had to take my glasses off.  My eyes stung.  The heat, not seeing very well, and general bad attitude I have from working on this thing all year affected my judgement.  It was an ugly and violent scene.  I got it all sorted.  The bars turn.

This will be a good year.  Everything is falling into place.  Big speed will happen.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 16, 2012, 12:33:29 AM
Drop handlebar?  Shades of Burt Munro, it is.  Most of my internal fairing bracing and steering damper is in the way.

The handlebar was trimmed 3/8 inch on each end.  The sides were opened up as per FIM rules where the rider's arms and hands must be visible.  Now I have 1 inch of clearance all around.  Looking from the front, all of this is behind the widest part of the fairing and nothing is out in the wind.  Opening things up a bit should have a minimal, if any, effect on aero.  I will probably leave it like it is for AUS.

The bike will be on display with me there to talk about it this Saturday between 10:00 and 2:00 at Cascade Moto Classics, 13705 Farmington Road, Beaverton, Oregon, (503) 374-3353.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 17, 2012, 12:32:51 AM
The bike is done and on the trailer.  Side views with me on and off of it.  Bradley's book "The Racing Motorcycle" is what I used with a few tricks of my own.

The wheelbase is lengthened 3 inches by stretching the swing arm.  This puts some more weight on the front wheel and it helps the handling.  A six inch stretch is recommended for LSR.

Rear set foot pegs are best for LSR.  It is easier to tuck down if your legs and feet are back.  My foot pegs are half sets.  This is halfway between the standard location and rear sets.  Rose rides with me so I cannot move them too far back.  She needs room for her feet.

The 3 inch longer swing arm and half sets gives a good weight distribution for street riding.  Better than the standard bike.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 17, 2012, 12:47:39 AM
The front and the back.  The angle of convergence toward the tail is the maximum that will allow attached flow.  The tail is truncated.  Most of the aero literature says this causes a lot of base drag.  It seems their data is based on solid shapes.  My tail is open and it is likely to create a lot less base drag than the formulae indicate.

Engine cooling must work well.  I need to keep the temperature down if I intend to a run at full throttle for three miles and gain speed toward the end.  An overheating motor would slow down as it heats up.  The oil radiator and cam towers block a lot of paths for cool air to reach the cylinder head so cooling can be problematic.  The problem baffled me.  I used the spermatazoa method.  The engine is flooded with lots more cool air than it needs and hopefully a small amount will get to the important place.
   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: saltwheels262 on August 17, 2012, 07:36:15 PM
it turned out nice.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on August 17, 2012, 10:36:28 PM
You're certainly well tucked in Bo. Good luck!!! :-D :-D :-D

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 19, 2012, 01:37:41 AM
This motorcycle racing can be scary to think about.  It really makes sense to be safely tucked in a nice roadster for this LSR business.  I love to design and build these things.  Riding them is different.  Every year it is the same.  I get the heebee geebies about now and they do not go away until I am waved off for the first run.  My thinking clears up when the flag drops.  The first run is usually good and it shows me I was worried about nothing.  Then I make my second run with no anxiety.

Zillions of years of evolution give is the instincts to avoid doing dumb things.  Us bike racers must completely turn this off for a while.  It is hard to do.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: JimL on August 19, 2012, 02:10:47 AM
I found our Modified Roadster a lot more scary than the bike.  I like the single thrust line of the bike.

Have a fun time.....we'll be watching results soon!

JimL
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: DND on August 19, 2012, 03:44:08 AM
Heck i use to get the heebe Geebes running my B/Gasser in the 60's, after the first run then i could eat and all was ok.

I think a lot of guys & gals get them too just part of the driving package, but when you do good it is all worth it then and that is what keeps us in the seat with the gas WFO.

Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 20, 2012, 02:14:07 AM
Pete, Jim, and Don, thanks for the encouragement.  This is a development year and I will be busy collecting data and trying different things.  There will not be much time to worry and and the first run or two will be at part throttle while I gather tire slip data.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 22, 2012, 09:06:06 PM
The smallest rear sprocket in my collection had 38 teeth.  Last year the bike could pull a 40 tooth one.  I thought the 38 would be plenty small.  About three weeks ago I had a momentary burst of clear thinking.  Is a 38 that small enough?  First I looked at my speed vs power vs aero chart and figured out how fast I could go.  Then I did some calculating to figure the engine rpm at those speeds.  The 38 was OK for the added speed the 84 horsepower would make me go with last year's drag coefficient and frontal area.  It was too big a sprocket if the new aero helped me.  I needed to get 37 and 36 tooth sprockets quick.

A call to Sidewinder in St Charles, Illinois (630) 513-1000 did the trick.  Two billet sprockets arrived today at a reasonable price on very, very, short notice.  Normally I like them hardened.  There was no time for that.  These folks are more famous for dirt bike stuff.  They can do other things, too.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 24, 2012, 12:27:53 AM
Kawasaki Mach III's are a topic on Freud's birthday post.

It was 1969 or 1970 and I was in hi skool.  A fellow bought a Mach III.  It was the fastest bike around and he knew it.  He swaggered around and made sure every one else knew about it, too.  He would pass my friends with his front wheel in the air.  No one could keep up with him.  My buddies got to work with heavy figuring and and deep thinking.  They came up with a plan.  All they needed was someone dumb enough to try it.  This is when I enter the picture.

My bike was a 250cc Yamaha DT-1 with K-70 dirt track tires, a high compression head, bigger carb, some port work, and a Schwerma expansion chamber.  It was a dirt bike with lights.  It was not a fast street bike.  It could lean over very far in corners.  Its light weight gave it very precise handling.  All of this was needed.

The school was on a ridge overlooking the town and there were several city streets connecting it to the rest of the city.  All had two lanes in each direction and most had an island to divide the lanes in one direction from those going in another.  The street that Mr Kawasaki used to go home was mostly level for a mile, then it dropped and went down the side of the ridge in a long series of S curves.  Most were flat camber and some were off camber.  A gaggle of fifteen or so school busses also used this route.  Mr Kaw loved to do his after school blast on this road.

Mr Kaw had no power advantages on a steep downhill road, my buddies figured.  He could not handle corners at speed and especially off camber ones.  Our classmates in the school busses would be the witnesses to the whole thing.  My role was to ride in a gap between the buses.  Mr Kaw would pass me and I would pass him back on the downhill turns.

It took a few days for Mr Kaw, the busses, the curves, and me to be in the proper places at the right times.  Mr Kaw suspected nothing.  I never tried to race him before.  One day he blasted pass a couple of busses.  I was in the gap between them and the downhill curves were ahead.  I launched from between the busses and headed for him like a little missile.  He braked for the corners.  I did not.  One quick pass and he was left behind.  I shot down through the S curves and needled between a couple of busses.  He did not have the handling accuracy to follow me.  There was Woodminster shopping district at the bottom of the hill.  I pulled into a side street and hid.

My buddies plan worked.  It was humiliating to be beat by a clown riding a 250 dirt bike.  The guy was quieter after that.  I was too.  The episode scared me into a short bit of sensible behavior.  Anyway, this is my Kawasaki Mach III story.                   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RidgeRunner on August 24, 2012, 07:56:43 AM
    And now we know where your use of logic in measured steps approach to LSR originated  :-D

             Ed
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 27, 2012, 05:14:02 PM
We got here three hours ago.  This is not an optimal situation.  Weathered out for now.  We are ready.  Its like being a stud horse in a corral and the mare is in the pen next door.  No one will come and unlock the gate.  A nice fire in the KOA fire pit and bench racing will be in order tonight.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Kiwi Paul on August 27, 2012, 11:57:32 PM
Best of Luck, Bo. I am looking forward to your report on some successful runs.....
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: SaltPeter on August 28, 2012, 01:01:07 AM
Great stuff, go fast, keep safe most of all have fun  :cheers:

Oh yeah Wobbly, Mach 111 Kwakas had a hinge in the middle of the chassis, or mine felt like it, so most bikes went round corners quicker LOL :-D

Pete
DLRA#866
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 28, 2012, 08:13:57 PM
The sign says "Bonneville Shark Week."  This is at the boat ramp early this morning.

Guess what?  Our hillbilly butts are pitted in a corner of the Triumph factory pits.  No umbrella girls or any bling.  These folks are more low key than any factory I have ever seen.  They just came to race and they are partially clueless and having a hard time just like the rest of us - with no pretense or attitude.

The bike is teched and full of race gas.  Tomorrow the salt should be great.  Tonight I will figger up some sort of organized testing and development plan. 

Moxnix, Maj, and Konkrete Kid are here.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Moxnix on August 28, 2012, 09:40:10 PM
Bo, it's good to see you here.  I am amazed at your bike's parts & pieces.  Have a safe and fast time tomorrow.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 30, 2012, 07:15:57 PM
Thanks for the encouragement, Peter, Paul, and Moxnix.  All three runs were on Wednesday.  The streamlining for AUS is on the bike.  Handling was flawless in a variety of wind speeds and directions.  No nervous feelings about running it now.

The distortion in the view through the windshield was not bad when the bike was stationary.  Looking through while bouncing up and down during an actual run was different.  The view through the screen was like some sort of trip on drugs.  Then I thought "if I take drugs everything will compensate and the view will be perfect."  No one had any.  I could not test this theory.  I guess it is not the 1970's any more.

The engine pulled hard up to red line in fourth.  I shifted into fifth and it would not accelerate at all.  I used a 38 tooth back sprocket.  I needed a 39 or the 40 tooth one I used last year and I did not have one.  Speeds are low due to me not being able to tuck down and my gearing error.

Once a year I get to talk to Matt Capri and get advice.  That, and what I learned through experience yesterday, gives me a big help for next year.  This was a good meet from the test and tune viewpoint.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jonny Hotnuts on August 30, 2012, 09:20:28 PM
I absolutely love it.


My OCD makes me want to know the exactly the number of rivets used in the build.....

~JH

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on August 31, 2012, 09:06:15 PM
You should see his pop iviting arm
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 03, 2012, 01:01:29 PM
Jonny, there's a "whole lotta" rivets in that thing.

Grumm, it was great that you could stay stateside for a few weeks and come to BUB.  I hope you enjoyed it and it was nice to meet you.

There were a lot of Triumphs there.  The Triumph pits where I was had three parts.  One was the factory pit with Jason Di Salvo as their main rider.  Jason said, more or less, that they are established road racers with a lot of success.  That is not a big deal here.  Everyone is equal on the salt.   LSR is something new and they want to try it, learn, and have a good time.  This is not an exact quote.  It is what I remember.  I asked Jason if he had the full Bonneville experience and scared himself really good.  Yes, he said.  They are enthusiasts just us.

Triumph raced a 675 triple.  It looked pretty much like a standard bike with the typical mods a first time racer would do.  This is a very good bike and they are familiar with it from their road racing.  Jason made several down and back passes at just under 170 mph.  The other team bike was a big Rocket triple.  Jason made many down and back passes at just over 170 mph.  Lots of wheel spin limited speeds.  The Triumph team might have some 750 cc and 3000 cc FIM records.

It takes a lot of courage to ride one of those big triples.  They are huge and the riding position is not correct for maintaining control at high speeds.  Jason can do it.  I would be too scared to try. 

Another part of this Triumph pits was the South Bay Triumph/Triumph Performance group.  They are developing performance parts for the big Thunderbird twin.  It is in the photo.  Alan Cathcart, the well known British racer and author, was the rider.  The bike struggled to get over 130 mph.  The engine has EFI and it needs to run on unleaded to preserve the oxygen sensors.  The unleaded race gas that is available on the track works great in the little high revving Bonnevilles and that was their first choice for the bigger and much slower revving T-bird.  It did not work well in the engine the way they had it set up.

The remaining part of the this Triumph group was us at Team Go Dog, Go!  I am not a sponsored rider and I pay for everything like everyone else.  The only deals I get are when they offer them.  This is proper.  Their business is making race parts and they really pay their dues in money and time to do this.  Their work makes my racing possible.  They give me advice on how to use their stuff and this is a big help.               

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 04, 2012, 11:37:43 PM
This is Bill Conway with his Bridgestone 100.  They are entered in the FIM class for 100 cc bikes, they made the down and back runs and passed the record inspection in impound.  Bridgestones are rare and factory racing parts even more scarce.  Bill has some in this engine.   These bikes were very innovative and well built for their time.  My best friend had one and all of us thought well of it.  It was a fast bike, relatively speaking, for a 100.  Bridgestone is a tire company and they never made a lot of money on the bike side of the business.  It was awkward.  They were trying to get tire contracts from manufacturers they competed with for bike sales.  Eventually they quit making the motorcycles.

One of Denis Manning's goals with the BUB trials is to provide an opportunity for us regular folk to participate on the world stage.  He succeeded.  Bill's smile tells it all.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on September 04, 2012, 11:40:09 PM
She fits the size of the bike better than he does.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: generatorshovel on September 05, 2012, 04:01:37 AM
.  Bridgestones are rare and factory racing parts even more scarce. 
   
MMMM ? I have a Bridgestone engine hiding in a box in the shed somewhere ? (I think it has a gearbox problem ?)
Looking forward to meeting you during your trip to OZ Wobbly :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 05, 2012, 10:45:45 PM
Tiny, it might be the way it was originally made.  There was something strange about Bridgestone shifting.  I think it was you could shift from sixth into fifth or from sixth to neutral and then to first.  This was a long time ago and I do not remember exactly.

This is for those not familiar with BUB.  You line up for the different courses at pre-stage.  An important thing is to get on the pre-stage officer's list.  There are lines for the various courses, such as international long, run-watch-brung, mountain short, etc.  The pre-stage officer releases groups to go to the various staging points.  There are two ways to make the journey.  One is to be trailered down in the traditional fashion.  The other is simply to ride the bike.  The photo shows a group of us going from pre-stage to stage.

Darwin's concept of natural selection makes this riding to the stage area possible.  These are veteran bike racers who know how to follow instructions, mostly.  The idiots are not there.  They long ago quit riding, got killed, or learned to be mature.  It all works smoothly and it is a big help for us logistically impaired folks.  Gretchen took this photo.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on September 06, 2012, 02:43:46 PM
Logically Impaired :-D :-D :-D

Regarding the Bridgestone brand........Tohatzu sold their MC manufacturing to Bridgestone but kept on making 2-stroke outboard motors.......Bridgestone sold the MC business to Kawasaki and began selling OEM tires to Honda......The Tohatzu engineers transfered through to Kawasaki.......The 1st year of Kawasaki production looks a lot like the last 2-years of Bridgestone......My friend has a LOT of parts for sale, along with a few bikes......and another friend has a Tohatzu Run Pet 50cc racer with a factory expansion chamber produced several years before Suzuki started their own history.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 06, 2012, 11:38:21 PM
Dennis, the Kawasaki 250cc Samurai and 350cc Avenger twins were rotary valve motors just like some of the later Bridgestones.  That might be the work of those Bridgestone engineers.

My youngest boy, Werner, is at the Marine recruiter's with Rose.  He was the little blond boy that set a 175cc MPS-P record a few years ago.  Childhood is over.  Part of me wishes it would not end so soon.  The other part says it must.  It is an emotional time and more so for me than for him.  He is ready to go.

The picture shows me heading out to staging for the run-watcha-brung course.  That is the only place where I could try out the streamlining to be used in AUS.  It is a short track.  One mile of runup, one mile timed, and a mile to slow down and turn out.  Focus and aggression are the keys.  It is essential to get up to speed quick.  My strategy was pretty basic - easy in first gear, a bit more throttle in second, more throttle in third, redline the engine in fourth, and shift quick into fifth.

The times on my slips are 128.81, 130.82, and 131.18 through the mile.  This is exactly as fast as I was last year.  My speeds between the end of the kilo and the end of the mile are better indicators of how fast I went this year.  I asked BUB if they had the data to figure those out.  That is the info I will use to calculate the aero drag coefficient and other things.

I had big expectations for more speed.  The gods of speed rubbed my little puppy nose in my dung.  Some serious calculating is in order.  I need to figure out what I did wrong.  Then, it will be fixed.           
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 07, 2012, 10:02:28 PM
The official 2012 team photo.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 09, 2012, 12:58:47 PM
Lots of us like to explore the around the flats.  We went south on 93A to Hoopah Road, Ibanapah Road, and Gold Hill.  Then we looped back on The Old Lincoln Highway, Ibanapah Road, Hoopah Road, and 93A.  This can be desolate country.  We saw this county road department sign.  Most mining towns have one boom time and that is all.  Gold Hill had three.  One was in the late 1800's for gold and silver.  There was another around the first world war when arsenic was in demand and a later one when Tungsten was needed.

There were thunderstorms all day.  We missed most of them.  We were under one when we drove north near Rocky Point and Utah Peak.  There was a ridge to our left and we were in a little valley.  The truck lit up with a bright flash and there was a very loud ripping sound.  Lightning hit the ridge next to us.  I saw rocks flying into the air from the ridge during the hit.  "F**k" was heard loudly inside the truck.  There is a time and place for that word.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 10, 2012, 01:02:02 AM
The bike was apart after the post BUB desalting.  I was going to put it together for the street.  The 994cc cylinders and pistons are made so I decided to take it all apart and do the big build.  The big one will be done in stages.  First I will install the big bore kit and use my #813 cams and everything else that I have on the bike now.  This setup I will run stateside in 2013.  Then I will tune the intake and exhaust and run in AUS in 2015.  This is the first stage of the build.  I can expect a 10 percent torque increase throughout the power band.

There is a set of cams that are specially made for the big bore motor.  A lot of machine work will be needed on the cylinder heads, shim under bucket cam followers, special valve springs, and bigger valves.  This is the second stage and it should put me over 150 mph.  I wanted to do everything at once.  The folks at Triumph Performance said I need to sort everything with the milder cams before I go to the wild ones.  It is too radical of a change for me to do in one step, they say.  I am taking their advice.

The top crankcase is off as shown in the photo.  Mobil 1 oil filters and oiled foam air filters were used on this second build.  Standard Triumph oil filters and oiled gauze air filters were used on the first build.  The engine is much cleaner inside than it was when the first build was taken apart.  This is what it looked like when I opened it today.

The upper crankcase is in the box to be shipped away for machine work.  The cylinder spigot holes need to be milled out to a larger diameter to accommodate the big 994cc jugs. 

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on September 11, 2012, 07:40:58 PM
Bo,
That's one clean looking motor.  I haven't taken mine apart yet, but don't expect it to be that clean. One small piece of white metal on the sump screen, and some small specks in the drained oil seem to indicate a rebuild would be a wise move.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 12, 2012, 02:03:12 AM
Yea, Tom.  It is better to take it apart yourself than have it disassemble itself during the race.

The headers on Matt's bike show the typical megaphone system.  The upstream end of the meg is at the third harmonic point.  The headers for my bike are on the kitchen table.  The cross-over tube is at the third harmonic.  These "H" systems work well for vertical twins whose pistons rise and fall together and fire on alternate strokes.  The next few posts show how I use Pipe Max to design one for the big motor. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 13, 2012, 12:50:56 AM
My tuning philosophy is extremely simple.  I try to wind up the engine as tight as I can without blowing it apart.  This motor is reliable at 7,500 rpm and it will hold together to the 8,400 rpm red line.  I use 7,500 rpm as my target for setting the gearing.  This is the rpm I want to be at through the mile.  Why is this?  The high engine speed allows me to use a numerically high gear ratio that gives the engine good leverage on the track.  The bike runs fastest when the peak horsepower occurs at 7,500 rpm, too.  Exhaust and intake tuning can be used to shift the peak horsepower to exactly where I want it.

The 2011 dyno runs for the jetting are shown.  The Arrow "midrange" pipes were on the bike.  The engine reached peak horsepower at too low rpm.  The 2012 jetting curves are shown.  The OEM headers and glass paks were used.  The horsepower peak is at too high rpm.

The 2012 runs were to be the last for the mid size engine.  The standard Triumph headers and the glass paks were intentionally used as the first step to design the exhaust system for the big motor.  The big mill will use a variation of this "H" system.     

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 13, 2012, 12:52:12 AM
The graphs.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 14, 2012, 12:20:47 AM
The next step is to model the existing engine in Pipe Max.  The engine data is entered along with the actual peak power rpm, 8000.  The option to calculate torque and horsepower is selected.  The volumetric efficiency is adjusted until the average horsepower is around 93.3.  This is what I estimate the engine dyno power to be.  It is 1.1 times the 84.8 chassis dyno power.  The engine is modeled.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 14, 2012, 12:24:04 AM
The option in Pipe Max to calculate pipe specs is chosen.  The existing system and the proposed will be tuned to the third harmonic.  This is 22.5 inches for the existing engine.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 15, 2012, 02:33:55 PM
Peak power that happens about halfway between the Arrow and OEM header tunes should work good based on on-the-salt experience.  This is a little bit lower rpm than my 7,500 target.  Now I enter all of the engine data for the 994 cc engine with a 7,300 rpm power peak.  The 865 cc engine torque when it is tuned to produce peak hp at 7,300 rpm is estimated to be 61.6 lbs-ft.  The 994 cc kit will increase this 10% with no other changes, according to Matt.  The 994cc engine torque converted to engine dyno numbers is 74.6 lbs-ft.  The volumetric efficiency is adjusted in Pipe Max until it is close to this number.  It is 105%.  This is realistic.  The cams, valves, etc are all the same as in the 865cc mill.  The 994cc motor is modeled in Pipe Max.

The 3rd harmonic tuned length differs 2.8 inches between the 865cc engine as it is tuned now and the future 994cc motor.  A set of headers is ordered with the cross-over tube moved 2.8 inches back.  Right now I am working a bunch of overtime so I have money and no time.  No time to do this and I am a lousy welder at best.  The trained professionals at Alldens Exhaust in Horncastle, England, are making these pipes.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 18, 2012, 01:22:56 AM
The Pipe Max run for the 994cc engine says the header pipe diameter should be 1.431 to 1.556 inches OD (1.306 to 1.431 inches ID).  The OEM headers have a 1.4 inch ID.  Pipe Max was developed using data collected at near sea level in Louisiana.  Everywhere there is not very high up.  This indicates the pipe diameter should be correct for Lake Gairdner in AUS.  It is at a little over 1,000 foot elevation.

The elevation at Bonneville is just over 4,000 feet and the air is thinner.  My assumption is the air is 0.86 times as dense as at sea level.  The 994cc displacement is multiplied by 0.86 to get 855cc.  This motor has a 89.5mm bore, or 3.520 inches.  The smaller bore is entered into the Pipe Max data.  This pseudomotor sucks and blows amounts of gas similar to the 994cc one at Bonneville altitude.  The recommended header diameter range is 1.316 to 1.441 inches OD (1.191 to 1.316 inches ID).  The standard OEM headers are a little bit big for that altitude.

I check out other things on both Pipe Max data sheets like valve choke.  Everything seems to be OK at either altitude.  The exception is the maximum effort cam lift.  This is less than the lift provided by the standard Triumph cams.  This Pipe Max data is suspect.

A set of modified OEM headers should work just fine, diameterwise.  There is no need to go bigger.  This will save me some money. 

 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 19, 2012, 12:23:52 AM
This last exhaust tuning post will be on temperature.  The pressure waves bounce back and forth in the exhaust at the speed of sound.  This velocity varies with temperature as shown on the graph.  As a general rule, cooling the exhaust gases slows them down.  This has the same effect as increasing the tuned length.

The power characteristics of the engine were tested on a dyno in summer 2012.  An electric fan blew a gentle breeze across the engine and exhaust.  It did not cool them too much.  The air movement behind the old fairing was similar.  It was subdued.  The power curves observed on the dyno resembled the power that was felt on the salt.

The power should have been strong in 2012 at the highest rpm based on the dyno runs.  It did not feel that way.  It felt like the torque was falling off at higher rpm.  The fairing has a larger opening and the headers were in a very strong breeze.  My suspicions are this cooled the exhaust sufficiently to slow down the speed of sound in the gasses.  This increased the tuned length of the headers.  The peak power rpm dropped as a consequence.

This year I will wrap the front of the headers where they are in the breeze.  Next year, when I have more time, I will close the hole in the front of the faring a little bit.  This will help aero and keep the pipes warmer.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 19, 2012, 02:59:18 PM
A few years ago I took the motor apart after ten runs down the salt and lots of street miles.  This was the original engine assembled by Triumph in Hinckley.  There were dark stains around the connecting rod big ends from oxidized oil.  Parts were getting too hot.  Usual practice on these motors is to fit the white coded big end bearing shells.  They fit looser and increase the amount of oil flowing between the rod bearings and the crank journals.  This worked.  There was no sign of big end overheating on this teardown.

Gall marks showed that the small end bearing on one rod seized to the gudgeon pin and freed itself.  This was with the original Triumph built engine.  I had no idea if the initial clearance was too tight and this might have caused the problem.  I did note that the gudgeon pin and the hole for it in the small end were both steel.  Steel on steel is not always a good idea for a little end bearing in a race motor.  My solution was to install a set of Carillo rods.  They are in the engine in the photo.  The little end bearing is phosphor bronze.  This is a much better combination to go with the steel gudgeon pin.  Racers recommend these rods.

A lot of piston and bore wear was seen on the recent teardown.  The standard Triumph connecting rod is shown in a photo.  It has a hole to squirt oil up onto the piston and little ends.  The Carillo rods do not have this.  Lack of oil might be causing some wear.

The serious racers rev these engines up to 9,000 and 10,000 rpm.  Most of their engines are race motors, only.  It is easy to see why they prefer and recommend the Carillo rods.  My target rpm is 7,500 and the rev limiter is set for 8,400.  The standard rods are plenty strong for me and I am concerned about piston and bore life.  This is my street bike, too.

There are two types of Triumph connecting rods for these engines.  One is designated as the "short stroke" rod.  It has more metal around the little end bearing than the other type.  I ordered a set from Triumph.  The plan is to have phosphor bronze bushings installed in the little ends and to get them honed to fit the 994cc kit gudgeon pins.  I might have the rods polished and shot peened, too.

Who has a good reputation for doing this rod work?  Quality and doing the work on time are more important considerations to me than cost.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on September 20, 2012, 10:58:55 AM
Bo,
I'm running a Carillo rod and I had the same reservations about oiling the piston. I thought about trying to drill a hole in the top of the bottom end of the rod, but ended up with an oil squirter instead.  I've seen 8800 rpms on occasion, and the motor saw more than that when the primary chain broke.  Piston still looks ok, but may be a little loose for street use (.007" clearance after two years land speed racing).
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 20, 2012, 02:19:12 PM
That is something I might do and will consider.  There are two oil pumps on these bikes.  The rear one is very important.  It is connected to the oil pressure bleed off valve, oil pressure idiot light, crank, rods, squirters, and cam bearings.  The front pump sends lube to the tranny shafts and it circulates lube to the oil cooling system passages.  I can tap into the front pump and cause no pressure drop in the most vital rear pump system. 

The pistons were set up with 0.004 clearances.  The piston diameter is 3.54 inches and that is not unreasonable.  These short and fat pistons confuse me.  It seems some clearance is needed for the wide guys to expand when they get hot, and at the same time, they need tight skirt clearances to keep from rocking.  The rocking was at TDC.  The outlines of the piston skirts were visible on one side of the bores.  All of this did not help the ring sealing and it might be one reason of several for this year's slowness.

Years ago I ran forged pistons in another motor.  A guy told be to count up from "one alligator" to "20 alligators" before I took off on a cold engine.  This warms the pistons so they expand, he said.  He also said to take it easy for the first mile.  It no problem on the street and a challenge to do during a race.

The 865cc barrels and pistons were sent south a week or two ago for triumph performance to look at before they set the clearances for the 994cc jugs and slugs.  A asked for "street clearances."  To make this tight clearance work with no seizing I am accepting some self imposed limitations.  Modified Triumph rods with oil squirters will be used.  The 7,500 rpm target rpm and 8,400 rpm red line will be unchanged.  I will run the cooler burning 110 octane leaded on the salt rather than the 100 octane unleaded.  I will stay with the relatively mild #813 cams for now.

This is the big long term plan.  It is major work to pull the engine.  The head and cyls come off relatively easy.  This is an DOHC setup and all of the go fast stuff is on top.  The Carillo rods are top loaders and I will see if the Triumph rods can be changed to this configuration.  This allows me to check and renew the critical rod big end shells with the engine in the frame.

The 994cc engine will be the race top end that has the mongo cams, monster valves, loose race clearances, and the Carillo Rods.  The street top end will have the standard 790cc pistons, cams, the ported head with 2mm larger intake valves, and the tighter clearances.

The big issue now is finding an expert to mutilate a set of Triumph rods into some mild duty racing ones.

 

 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on September 21, 2012, 09:50:30 PM
Bo........I just got my 45-year old used and abused (sat in a water-logged motor) rod back from Alpha Bearing in the UK. They reconditioned the rod, made up a new roller-bearing on a new crank-pin, and also rebored the small end and inserted a new bronze bushing for a larger diameter pin, all for the price of NOS parts from various vendors that I have found in the US and the UK. Alpha even shot-peened the rod so its looks better than new and is very smooth along all edges.

If you don't find someone to do your rods, send me a PM and I will ask my builder, Dave, if he wants to help you out. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 22, 2012, 01:58:46 AM
It looks like there are three things I can do. 

Tom, the oil squirters need to be mounted on the front of the crankcase to squirt the backs of the cylinder bores.  It can be done.

Dennis, Alpha Bearings brings back memories from my Matchless days.  I forgot about them and I will contact them.

Carrillo does not recommend drilling oil holes in the rods I have.  They make rods for this bike with oil squirters at a reasonable price.

Given my experiences in the homemade windshield fiasco, the solution that requires the least participation or intervention on my part will work best. 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 22, 2012, 01:45:51 PM
All three options are looked at.  The oil squirters need to shoot the lube exactly where I need it if they will work.  It is about a 4-inch long distance.  There is a lot of wind inside an operating engine and I need to see what is happening inside, while it is running, to aim them correctly.  Not much of a chance to do that.  No oil squirters.

My first racing and engine building was done while I was living with my parents.  My father gave me advice.  Usually it started with "What the ...?"  One thing he said "You know what broke.  Replacing or upgrading it is easy to figure out.  It won't do much good.  Take the time and put in the effort to figure out why it broke.  Fix those problems, too."  Looking at rod failures over the years showed me that steel connecting rods in good condition rarely fail from tension or compression on mildly to moderately tuned NA motors.  Almost always a bearing failure or sometimes a piston problem is the culprit.

The Triumph and Carrillo little ends are shown.  The Triumph setup has the usual oil holes at the top.  The Carrillos have the holes at the bottom.  The channels in the "H" section on the rods catch oil and route them to the holes.  The Carrillo little ends and the gudgeon pins had almost no wear.  The Carrillo little end lubrication setup is better.

The big ends run hot when the standard tight clearance shells are installed.  Racers run the looser white coded shells.  It is hard to see in the pictures, but the wear is less and more evenly distributed on the tight shells.  It is greater and less distributed on the loose shells.  I was told this would happen and was advised to check the white shells often and to plan on renewing them more frequently.

The bolts on the Triumph rods have the nuts on the bottom and the engine needs to be taken out of the frame and completely disassembled to check and renew the shells.  The Carrillos can be ordered with bolts heads on the top and no nuts.  There is no need to take everything apart to attend to the shells.

The decision is to have some Carrillos made with oil squirters.  Although it is a lot of money, it will cost much less than a mickey mouse solution and the resulting engine blow up.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on September 22, 2012, 01:54:04 PM
If you're looking for reinforcement for your decision Wobbly, I think you're definitely on the right track with this one!  :-D :-D :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 22, 2012, 04:36:14 PM
Thanks Peter.  Right now I am building a motor for higher performance than I have ever done successfully before.  Posting what I do will hopefully bring out reinforcement for good ideas and comments about the birdbrain ones.  You were right about the windshield.  A piece of metal woulda worked just as good.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on September 22, 2012, 05:15:20 PM
The only reason we know these things is that we've usually been down a similar road in the past.  :evil: :evil: :-D

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on September 22, 2012, 06:59:34 PM
Bo,
Had I known that Carrillo would have made a rod with an oil squirter hole, I would have gone that route, as well.  My oil squirter is actually aimed at the back of the piston because there was already a tapped hole in the front, which naturally directed the oil bacwards.  I think it would be better to squirt the front inside of the piston (exhaust side).  My solution was probably cheaper,  but a failure would be much more expensive than a new correct rod or two.

I'm still wondering why you don't buy a spare motor (around $1000 on ebay) to make a race motor and keep the current motor for the street.  You would just have to give up beer for a year, or so!

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 23, 2012, 11:53:12 PM
Tom, changing engines in these bikes is a major project.  It is just like a Vincent.  The swingarm bolts to the back of the motor so it and the rear wheel need to be taken off.  Then the engine-subframe assy is unbolted from the frame-forks-front wheel assy.  The latter is lighter than the former, by far.  It is lifted up and off of the motor-subframe.  The motor is as heavy as a battleship anchor.  Two people move it using the subframe as handles.  There are a zillion bolts and nuts.  The extremely heavy engines need to go up and down a flight of stairs.  Just thinking about it hurts.  It is far easier to switch the cylinder heads.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 02, 2012, 01:31:27 AM
The dirt bike club meets at a bike shop monthly. We figure out who will do what and how we will pay for it just like all other clubs.  It is in the evening and all of the scoots are rolled into the showroom.  It is an impenetrable mass of bikes.  I do not look at them.  I hung my cap on a Huskvarna's handlebars and forgot to bring it home.  Saturday I went back to get my cap.  My son, Werner, was with me.  The bikes were spread out and it was daylight.  We checked them out.  A used one stood out.  It was a 2007 Yamaha TT, blue like the cookie monster, and in like new condition.  A guy bought it for his wife, she rode it for 45 minutes, decided she did not like bike riding, and it was parked in a heated garage for five years.  This bike was a real good one.  Not often does one see a minter like this.

Werner signed up for the Marines and he goes in right after he gets out of high school in December or June.  I bought the bike so we could trail ride with his little sister for a few months before he leaves.  Rose and I brought the bike home today.  Werner asked me to coach him so he could learn the finer points of hauling butt in the land of pointy plants.  I never wanted to be in another desert race after the big crash.  I guess I will, now.  We are going to enter in the big race of the year, China Hat.  The build diary will be a bit slow this year.  The Triumph will be on the salt in 2013 with the 994cc motor, a fixed windshield, and that's about it.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 08, 2012, 12:31:04 AM
Werner and me closed out the riding season today with a big blast through the woods.  It was the full experience.  Crashing, getting lost, breaking stuff, all great fun.  There is this Quack Attack trail I never was on before.  It was awful.  The worst I have seen in my life.  There were all sorts of strange things about this trail.  Trees alongside it were stripped of bark.  The trunks of the bigger trees were protected by metal pipes.  There was oil in places where folks broke open their oil pans.  All of the rocks in the rail were scraped up and there was broken headlight glass on the trail.

My figuring is "this is so bad it must be on the internet."  Type in "quack attack motorcycle trail"  There is a video "NEW Hoodoo trail - Page 5 - Pirate 4x4.Com"  We rode our bikes down this.  On You Tube there are several videos.  One is "quack attack 4x4 trail"  This explains what made the strange marks and damage I saw.  I never thought this was possible.  You car folks will love this.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 11, 2012, 01:28:51 AM
In the past I have used aluminum valve spring retainers and they have failed.  I was told that aluminum retainers do not have the long term fatigue resistance that is needed for street/race motors.  I was told to use steel retainers in street engines in order to resist fatigue damage.  Titanium valve spring retainers are available for the Triumph.  Does ti have long term fatigue resistance similar to steel?   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 16, 2012, 10:53:30 PM
Valve keepers are not subject to complete load reversal cycles or even load relaxation cycles.  They are always loaded in the same direction.  It is unlikely that fatigue killed my aluminum keeper.  It is most probable that the cotters pulled through because it did not have enough strength.  The ti keepers have a lot of strength so pulling through should not be a problem.  I will use them with no worry.

The fairing nose has always been a problem for me.  I cannot get the shape right.  Working conditions are partly to blame.  I do this in the winter, it is cold and I freeze my butt, it gets dark early, and its my workshop is down a flight of stairs from the bike.

The engine is out of the frame and I was able to get everything down where it is nice and warm.  Normally I do not like to brag, but this idea and setup is totally Einstein.  No excuses now.  It is time to shape this thing for speed.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on October 17, 2012, 06:26:44 AM
Hey Bo
how far are you from Independance
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 18, 2012, 12:43:22 AM
Independence, Oregon, I assume you mean.  That little town is not far from here.  There is a nice Mexican restaurant there.   Sometimes Rosie and I ride out there on a summer Sunday on the Triumph.

The latest Motorcyclist magazine came in a plastic bag.  Normally they do not.  Inside was the new issue and a reprint of their February 1952 magazine.  They are celebrating a 110-year anniversary.  The 1952 magazine was a special commemorative for their 50th anniversary.  They interviewed Harry Martin, a fellow who raced in 1902.

Harry set an international land speed record on his Excelsior at the Canning Town cinder track.  Canning Town is part of London, I think, and this was one of the English Excelsiors.  According to Harry "At Canning Town, for instance, the track had four corners and measured three laps to the mile - 12 sharp bends per mile, and in the Open-to-the-World meeting there in July 1903, I broke the 5-mile world's record in 5 mins, 39 secs from a standing start, and did the flying mile in 1 min, 5 secs."

The racers controlled their speed with an ignition lever mounted on the side of the tank.  That must have taken real skill to set that land speed record on a cinder track with one hand on the bars and the other one on the tank.  Interestingly, they did not know about speed wobbles.  They discovered them when they started to race on the big concrete surfaced track at Brooklands.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on October 18, 2012, 12:46:09 AM
Wobbly,
Fatigue damage will accumulate with any on-going variation of stress in a part that produces localized or general yielding of the material.  While full reversed cycles will cause damage more quickly than partial reversal or lower amplitude cycles, reversal is not required to produce “fatigue”.

In general, like steel, the “endurance limit” of titanium is about half of its tensile strength.  That is, stress amplitudes less than the endurance limit will likely not result in a fatigue failure and the part will have an indefinitely long life.  However, without close attention during design, most parts will contain stress concentrations that can easily multiply stress levels well above the nominal, or average, stress.

Unfortunately, aluminum does not have an endurance limit.  Lower stress amplitudes will give longer life, but eventually it will fail, hopefully not before its designed service life.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on October 18, 2012, 05:42:36 AM
Yep, Independence Oregon
I'm looking at a bike that's for sale there
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on October 18, 2012, 10:32:25 AM
The engine is out of the frame and I was able to get everything down where it is nice and warm.  Normally I do not like to brag, but this idea and setup is totally Einstein.  No excuses now.  It is time to shape this thing for speed.   

Einstein or Frankenstein?  Sorry, Bo, I couldn't help myself!  You have spent so much hard work on your project; you deserve better.

Following is a photo I took of your bike at BUB this year, and a photo of mine.  I gained 16 mph with my bodywork and no other significant changes.  I believe you didn't experience much improvement with yours. That doesn't qualify me as an expert, but comparisons can be made.  Your bike is a little higher than mine to begin with.  Is there anything you can do to get that front end and front fairing lower for less frontal area?  Secondly, that large hole behind your front wheel probably doesn't help.  One of the Harleys running full bodywork didn't have any provision for cooling air whatsoever, and the owner claimed he didn't need any.  I have only clearance for the forks, and a 3" diameter cooling duct.  Other than that, is there any gain to be made by smoothing out the rivet heads? A new windshield is indicated, as well.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 18, 2012, 04:21:58 PM
Graham, PM sent.  Tom, an eagle eye look at everything during the the engine tear down showed no signs of excess heat anywhere.  Based on that, I am closing up the opening in the front as much as I can.  The minimum room I need to accommodate the front wheel will pass enough air for cooling.

This year was inconclusive on how the streamlining works.  The 3-mile course is short and I was accelerating through the timed mile, I could not tuck down cause of the bad windshield, and the motor was really loose.  Next year I will run the longer FIM course so I can get meaningful data.

Complete agreement about dropping the windshield a few inches and reducing the frontal area.  It is on my to do list after the big motor gets sorted. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on October 18, 2012, 04:43:07 PM
Tom
A lot of the guys who run alcohol based fuels need a lot less cooling and so can get away without holes in the fairing
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: generatorshovel on October 18, 2012, 05:17:18 PM
Tom
A lot of the guys who run alcohol based fuels need a lot less cooling and so can get away without holes in the fairing
G
I can back that up Grumm, I had yet another test run yesterday, got the engine nice and warm before riding, then did 2 miles of moderate speed, followed by another 2 miles of WOT/
The temp guage indicated 90 degrees c before the ride, and 50 C after it. (with radiator)
Tiny
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 19, 2012, 01:16:46 AM
Tiny, are you using alcohol?  In the bike?

Sometimes I almost forget who I am.  I loose things and don't remember to bring what I need.  Yesterday I made something on the lathe.  It was the first time I fired up this one I have.  It was the mid 1970's when I last used one.  Everything I knew came back to memory really quick.  It is strange what things we remember. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: generatorshovel on October 19, 2012, 08:57:16 AM
Tiny, are you using alcohol?  In the bike?
Yes Wobbly, methanol + a drop or 2 of R30
With 11.5/1CR , before adding 12lb boost, gas was never a consideration.
Tiny
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on October 19, 2012, 07:06:08 PM
I can back that up Grumm, I had yet another test run yesterday, got the engine nice and warm before riding, then did 2 miles of moderate speed, followed by another 2 miles of WOT/
The temp guage indicated 90 degrees c before the ride, and 50 C after it. (with radiator)
Tiny
to be able to ride a race bike for two miles at speed somewhere
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: generatorshovel on October 19, 2012, 08:25:25 PM
I can back that up Grumm, I had yet another test run yesterday, got the engine nice and warm before riding, then did 2 miles of moderate speed, followed by another 2 miles of WOT/
The temp guage indicated 90 degrees c before the ride, and 50 C after it. (with radiator)
Tiny
to be able to ride a race bike for two miles at speed somewhere
G

One mile up, 1 mile back, 11 miles out, if there's nobody else using the road at the time, that'd make it private, right ?
Tiny
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 19, 2012, 10:49:20 PM
Back road LSR.  The advent of the GPS has made the timing apparatus redundant.  There is some of pretty serious racing on secondary roads here.  It involves a long stretch of straight road and spotters at both ends to give the "all clear" signals on their cell phones.  It is totally insane.  A two lane road seems to be about 5 feet wide at 130 mph.  These folks are running way faster than that.  We do not have to worry about kangaroos.  I guess that makes it a bit safer.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: generatorshovel on October 20, 2012, 12:20:02 AM
  We do not have to worry about kangaroos.  I guess that makes it a bit safer.
The 'Roos are out another 5 miles, with the feral goats , sheep and Emus, along with the undulations , although there IS a 5 mile straight 25 mikes from town the car guys use, not having a front brake puts me off somewhat.
Tiny
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on October 20, 2012, 06:26:00 AM
I like feral goats. In a nice curry
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 24, 2012, 12:58:19 AM
The engine parts are here.  It took a long, long, time.  A lot of this is made to order so I anticipated and planned for a wait.  Therefore, the delay is not a problem.

The 865cc engine with 10.5 to 1 compression was at a disadvantage in the 1000cc class.  This is the 994cc kit from Triumph Performance (TP).  The first picture shows most of what comes in the kit:  Arias 11.5 to 1 forged pistons, Cometec copper head and base gaskets, all sorts of o-rings, gudgeon pins, and pin clips.  The kit comes with stronger engine studs.  TP said I would not need them for my milder street engine.  Also included are heavier duty Barnett clutch plates and crank and rod bearing shells with racing clearances.

The pistons and pins of the old 865cc engine were teflon coated.  I was not very impressed with this.  This time the pistons, rings, pins, cylinder, and crank bearings have "WPC Metal Surface Treatment."

The pistons are made to the compression ratio specified by the customer.  I chose the lowest, 11.5 to 1.  This seemed to be appropriate for a street engine running on pump gas.  The piston is shown in the second picture.  Note the flat crown.  This is a lot different than the tall crowns on the pistons in my old BSA with hemi combustion chambers.  Thin or thick rings are supplied as requested.  The thin rings resist flutter at high rpm.  TP builds Bonnevilles that rev to 10,000 rpm.  My rev limiter kicks in at 8,400 rpm.  TP said the thicker rings are better for this milder use and I ordered them.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 24, 2012, 01:17:10 AM
The original equipment cylinder cannot be bored far enough out to make a 994 cc engine.  The cylinder is the heart of the kit and it is shown in the first photo.  It is milled from 6061 aluminum billet with plated bores.  I asked that it be honed to piston to cylinder wall clearances for street motors.  This means I need to break it in well before 2013 BUB.

The cylinder spigots on the top crankcase half needed to be fly cut out to a larger diameter so the cylinders would fit.  TP did this.  The second picture shows the cyls on the case.

Carrillo rods are recommended with this setup.  The ones I have been using do not have oil squirters to lube the bottoms of the pistons.  I will have a set made with squirters.  This kit cost big $$ and I saved for several years to get it.  It is worth some more expense to make sure it lasts as long as possible.

TP tossed a few essential extra parts in the box and did some things for free.  They know about racing on a budget and are helping me when I really need it.  In return I hope to win some sort of something and give them recognition.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on October 24, 2012, 09:48:15 PM
Bo,
That's a fine looking kit.  I posted on the tech site that my last mods cost me $300 per mph.  I hope you do as well.

BSA re-badged their B50-MX as a TR5-MX in 1973.  Do you think if I re-badged my bike as a Triumph, that TP might do me some favors?

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 24, 2012, 10:49:51 PM
They do not make anything for the older Triumphs.  It is in TP's interest to keep me racing.  The part is fully developed for the general public if I can't break it, screw it up, or install it wrong.  I need about 30 mph more to be competitive.  Something tells me this 30 mph will cost more to get than the last 30.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Cereal KLR on October 24, 2012, 11:20:53 PM
Now you have my full attention as I am going thru an 04 Thruxton motor this week. Kibblewhite makes a lightweight valve spring set with shim under bucket kit for these, but don`t see myself spinning it that hard. Plus its $800.00 I won`t have laying about for awhile.

Will you still run counterbalancers? I see the short track guys yanking them and shaving two pounds off flywheel.

When you say this was an expensive kit, I can just imagine as Triumph is very proud of their stock parts. I almost choked at the top end gasket set for $250.00  :cry:

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 28, 2012, 01:48:54 AM
This info might help you.  Right now I am using standard springs and keepers with Triumph Performance #813 cams. There is 0.388 inches lift on intake and exhaust.  The standard springs are almost at coil bind at this lift.  I was told this setup would work.  It does.  I check the spring tensions and free lengths during every tear down and any that show the slightest amount of sag are replaced.  I also look at the cotters and keepers under magnification.  The rev limiter is set at 8,400 rpm and there are no indications the valves are floating at red line.  This is the highest lift cam and redline that can be used with standard springs.  Right now I am not planning on using the Kibbewhite springs.  They will be used when I switch to the mongo cams.

Pulling out the balancers will reduce internal power losses.  In the old days I raced BSA's and they did not have counterbalancers.  I lost a lot of races cause things fell off or broke.  I keep mine in the engine for the sake of reliability.  They are not altered.  Two things I did remove were the spring loaded silencer gears on each cam.  Those things are sorta worthless.

The cranks do not have a lot of spinning mass and shaving the flywheels does nothing for a salt flat engine.  There is friction reduction by knife edging the crank.  Heavy metal plugs can be used to keep the balance factor.  An engine like mine with an 8,400 rpm redline does not benefit much from the edging.  Higher rpm engines do.  Contact Triumph Performance or APE crankshafts.

The build is moving slow.  I am working on the house.  Things are happening at a turtle pace.  The lower edges of the fairing are lengthened as far as possible.  One picture shows the left side with the wheel turned left and the fork springs compressed.  The other shows the left side with the wheel turned right and the forks fully extended.  The sides are being extended as far forward as they can be.  They will hit the wheel or fender if I extend them any more.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 01, 2012, 10:49:46 PM
Previous posts mentioned that I was going to order some Carrillo connecting rods for the Triumph with oil squirters.  I have the money now and I downloaded the order sheet for reverse entry rods.  There are all sorts of performance info and measurements that need to be entered.  There must be fifty blanks.  Fifty opportunities to put in the wrong info and screw everything up, as I see it.  This is getting too mental too fast.

The Carirllo rods I am using are the from the same batch as those in the South Bay Triumph turbo bike.  That scoot has run for years with no rod problems and the rods I have worked well for me.  The rod specs are proprietary and Triumph performance gave me permission to use them.  I simply said to Carrillo "Make me two connecting rods to this spec with oil squirters."  The set costs $757.  That is not bad considering what I am getting.  I am glad I do not race a V-8.

A guy look at things different when he gets older.  I said to myself "How could this whole thing possibly go wrong?"  The rod big end bearing fits are a matter of selecting the right shells from my collection.  No problem.  The little end bushing to pin fit could be an issue.  I taped both of the new pins to a piece of cardboard and sent them in with the money and the order form.  I asked them to verify that the little ends had the correct clearances.  Things are coming together nice.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: generatorshovel on November 02, 2012, 01:02:16 AM
I also went the Carrillo road for my "other" LSR bike, I found the guys at Carrillo extremely helpful, as I wanted a "one off" 'rod, 3mm longer than stock, but with reverse entry bolts, I just sent an original 'rod to them after emailing to discuss my needs, they quickly made my 'rod and shipped it and the original back to OZ for me.
I have been sidetracked since installing it ,,,,,,
(http://i1195.photobucket.com/albums/aa399/Blowncbr/IMG_30582.jpg)
Tiny
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Dr Goggles on November 02, 2012, 06:04:44 AM
Previous posts mentioned that I was going to order some Carrillo connecting rods for the Triumph with oil squirters.   Fifty opportunities to put in the wrong info and screw everything up, as I see it.  This is getting too mental too fast.
  I am glad I do not race a V-8. 

or even a miserable V6, I laughed heartily at that...then..

I have been sidetracked since installing it ,,,,,,
(http://i1195.photobucket.com/albums/aa399/Blowncbr/IMG_30582.jpg)
Tiny

Mate it's good to see that your part time career as a model for lonely women's calenders is helping the racing budget,hmm contemplative... can we see the rest of the shoot? :-P
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: generatorshovel on November 02, 2012, 07:55:27 AM
Err,,ummmm, oops, THIS, believe it or not, was 'sposta be a clip !,
I hit the wrong button Max,,,3 times, I guess you could print, cut out, and flick them to make a very short video :-D
Tiny

[/quote]
Mate it's good to see that your part time career as a model for lonely women's calenders is helping the racing budget,hmm contemplative... can we see the rest of the shoot? :-P
[/quote]
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 02, 2012, 08:32:43 PM
Tiny, is that one of those little Honda 250 four cylinder bikes?  They were not sent over here.  How fast are they in standard trim?

There were lots of Gusatffson windshields at BUB and one was on Tom's (Koncretekid) bike.  All looked nice.  Today I sent mine down to Florida for them to use as a pattern.  I asked them to make me one I could see through.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: generatorshovel on November 02, 2012, 11:22:17 PM
Tiny, is that one of those little Honda 250 four cylinder bikes?  They were not sent over here.  How fast are they in standard trim?
Yup, 1988 CBR250R, in stock trim, with a bullet shaped rider, they'll do 106 to 109, there's an Aussy had one up to 121.xxx, naturally aspirated. :evil:
My aim is to open a can o whoopazz, and do it naked, while being ridden by besser brick shaped me  :?
Tiny
PS, Hope to meet ya down under mate.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 04, 2012, 01:06:40 AM
One of those little buggers might be in the shipping crate with the Triumph on its return from AUS.

This morning I drove up to he Triumph club breakfast in Beaverton and took the train into Portland.  There is a big new and used book store there, Powell's Books.  www.powells.com  This book, "Engine Airflow" by Harold Bettes ISBN 978-1-55788-537-1 has a lot of information to help me understand the data on the PipeMax output.  Harold is a member of this forum.

   

           
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 04, 2012, 01:38:04 PM
It seems I spent the family grocery money for new connecting rods.  Team Go Dog, Go! is having a garage sale.  Werner is handling this and the items will go on E-bay.  They will be posted on the for items for sale part of this website, too.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 04, 2012, 09:48:36 PM
Nobody is buying anything at the garage sale.  Werner is tracking the things on e-bay and he is telling me about "watchers" and all sorts of other things.  I do not have a clue about what he is saying.

You'all need to buy this stuff quick.  The problem is not other people getting them.  It is me.  I might think of some bird brain future project and withdraw them from the market.  Those tires would be nice on a propeller driven ... 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 08, 2012, 09:21:55 PM
The rod order sheet arrived at Carrillo with the money and the gudgeon pins.  They e-mailed me and said the troughs in their "H" beam rods catch the oil flying around in the engine and it is directed to the small ends so they get plenty of oil.  They also said the squirter oil holes in the rod big ends are in stressed areas and they weaken the rods.  They recommended against using squirter rods.

I weighed a new bigger piston.  It weighs a few ounces more than the old one.  I need strong rods.  My worry was that I had a situation where bore wear was a problem and I was not doing anything different with the new motor.  That would be dumb.

I called Carrillo and discussed all sorts of options.  Then I asked them if this bore wear was a big problem with other folks or just me.  They said plenty of these rods have been made and I was the first one with this problem.  The air filtration is good and the oil filtration, too.  I do not rev the bike up to really high rpm.  Maybe the initial clearances during the build were too big?  They were recorded during assembly and I compared the records to the recommended skirt to bore clearances on the Arias piston website.  The clearances were too big.  The motor was worn out when assembled for all purposes.

The old Carrillo rods were pulled off e-bay and they will go in the new motor.  This is good.  My garage sale is a flop and I didn't sell a thing.  The rod money will go back into the grocery fund.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 09, 2012, 12:00:05 AM
The front of the streamlining is reshaped until I can see nothing left to do.  The hole is just large enough for the wheel to travel all the way up and down and side to side.  Now it is time to put the engine together.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 09, 2012, 12:01:16 AM
The pictures.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 09, 2012, 01:39:42 AM
I might have been jumping to conclusions about the clearances being excessive when the engine was built.  The skirt to cylinder wall clearance was 0.004 inches on both pistons for a 90 mm bore.  Arias recommends 0.003 for street use.  The honed barrels were 0.001 too big.  That is a small amount of excess width and it could not cause the problems I was seeing.

The pistons were teflon coated when the clearances were measured.  No coating was seen when the motor was taken apart after 3,000 miles.  Did the coating wear off and cause the clearance problem?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stan Back on November 09, 2012, 02:20:50 PM
"Wear" off all the way around?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 09, 2012, 10:30:41 PM
The pistons and barrels are at Triumph Performance and I cannot look at them.  The teflon coating is dark grey and it was gone all of the way around, as I recall.  These are the two pictures I have.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 09, 2012, 10:49:35 PM
Stan, the Arias pistons have very fine grooves all of the way around them.  They look like machining marks from when the parts were turned up on a lathe.  I looked carefully at the most worn parts of the pistons - the lower edges of the skirts perpendicular to the gudgeon pins.  The turning marks were still visible.  The piston skirt had not worn enough to smooth out the machining marks.

The pistons were set up loose according to Triumph Performance.  The 0.004 clearances we measured were not all that big.  This makes me suspect the coating wearing off might be the culprit, or these short and wide pistons are very, very, susceptible to rocking if the bore size is not spot on perfect.

The new monster pistons are Arias jobs with 2618 non-silicon alloy.  Arias recommends .003 clearances for street and .002 for race.  These are at .002.  They are not coated.  The WPC metal treatment is micro shot blasting.

I am clueless about this modern stuff.  Any insights are welcome.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: DND on November 09, 2012, 11:03:18 PM
Are you sure those machine mark's were not put on the skirts for oil control, keeps the piston skirt from not getting skuffed and transferring alum onto the bore.

Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 10, 2012, 01:17:38 PM
Don, I looked at all of my other pistons under the microscope.  The ones from the problem motor are down south.  You are right.  The grooves are not machining marks and it looks like they are deliberately put there as part of the surface finish.

Konkretekid sent me a link to some literature on piston alloys.  The low-silicon 2000 series alloys in these racing pistons are especially strong and well suited to turbo and fuel use.  In comparison to the 4000 series high silicon content alloy pistons, they do not wear as well and they are set up with a little more clearance.

The Arias piston to wall clearances are tightest for race motors, a little bit looser for the street, and they are looser for water cooled engines as opposed to air cooled motors.  This is the opposite of what we did in the old days.  This new stuff is definitely different.

Deck heights can be measured when the engine is put together.  I like to measure everything up before assembly and calculate the deck height by math.  It is easier.  The new and old engines use the same crank and crankcases. This makes the job much easier.  The standard OEM engine deck height was OK and it is my point of reference.

First, I bring everything I will measure to a room with temperature as close as I can get to 68 degrees.  This house is heated with wood and the rooms all have different temps.  The kitchen is closest to ideal.  All of the measuring tools are included.  Everything should be close to the same temp for measuring.  The items sit around for an hour so the tools and parts will be the same temp as the room.  That is why I am typing this post.  I am waiting.

Some parts are hard to measure because they are bigger than my micrometers.  The cylinders sit on a flat metal plate and a dial indicator is used to get a height reading.  I use my drill press table for the plate.  I measure the standard cylinders once, then the new ones, then the new ones again, then the standard ones.  The first and fourth readings should be the same and the second and third should be similar to each other.  This is ABBA measuring.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 11, 2012, 01:36:48 AM
Does anyone know the compressed thickness of a standard original equipment Hinckley Triumph Bonneville cylinder base gasket?  A new or used one is OK.  This is the thickness of a part of the gasket that does not have a ring stamped on it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 12, 2012, 02:01:28 PM
The first task is to calculate the relationship between the old engine piston crown and the top of the old cylinder deck.  Is the crown below the deck, flush, or is it above?

Typical automotive practice is to simply measure the distance with the engine short block assembled and the pistons at top dead center.  Bikes, unlike cars have base gaskets with or without o-rings between cylinders and the crankcases and the cylinders often lift when the head is removed.  The piston crown to deck clearance measurement can be erroneous and the error makes the reading smaller than it should be.  This can lead to expensive errors in engine assembly.

The method I use is to measure down from the deck to the top of the upper piston ring wear mark.  It is 0.090 on this engine for both cylinders.  I take the measurement along the gudgeon pin axis.  The pistons rock in worn cylinders and the readings at 90 degrees to the pin axis can be misleading.  A lit magnifying glass helps to make this measurement more accurate.  It is hard to do with the naked eye.

Now I put something flat on the piston crown and I measure from the upper surface of the top ring to the flat surface.  This gives me the height of the crown above the ring.  It is 0.096 for both pistons. 

0.0096 - 0.090 = 0.006  The old pistons projected up 0.006 above the deck.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 12, 2012, 03:32:59 PM
The next step is to measure the lengths of the Triumph rods from the old motor and the Carrillo rods for the new engine.  They were measured with a dial caliper and it is not the world's most accurate instrument.  I made four measurement on a rod and averaged them to get the "A" reading and did the same for the two B measurements and the final A one.  Then I compared the two and the Triumph and Carrillo rods are the same lengths within a thousandth of an inch.  The same crank will be used for both the old and the new motors.  This tells me the piston pins for the both engines will be the same distance out from the crankcase deck.

Now I measure the distance between the bottom of the gudgeon pins and the tops of the crowns of the old pistons.  One is 1.384 inches and the other is 1.387 inches.  The new pistons have a little 0.004 step in them and the new ones don't.  The bottom of pin to top of crown measurements for the new are:  1.383 + .004 = 1.387  and 1.385 + 0.004 = 1.389.  The rods are the same length and the new pistons are up to .002 inches taller.  This tells me the new pistons will project from the bore up to 0.002 inches more than the old ones.



       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 12, 2012, 05:20:40 PM
The picture shows the part of the cylinder head I am worried about.  I do not want the piston to hit it.  It is flat and flush with the outer surface that has the stud holes.  Now I measure the old head gasket thickness.  It is 0.028.  Estimating piston travel using a wear mark is plus or minus 0.01 inches, as a guess.  The piston to head clearance for the old motor is calculated like this.  Head gasket thickness - projection of piston crown above deck + or - the error, or 0.028 - 0.006 + 0.010 = 0.032 maximum, or 0.028 - 0.006 - 0.010 = 0.012 minimum.  Sorta tight.  0.030 is a typical recommended clearance.  This engine had ten LSR runs on it and it was revved up pretty high for a couple of them.  There is no sign of piston to head contact.

In past years I have handled the old base gaskets a lot and I am pretty sure they are not thicker than the head gaskets.  Using this assumption, the combined thickness of the old cylinder stack is 0.028 (head gasket) + 2.830 (cylinders) + 0.28 = 2.886 inches.  Now I remember the new pistons project 0.002 more past the deck than the old.  The combined thickness of the new cylinder stack should be at least 2.886 + 0.002 = 2.888 inches at a minimum.

The new cylinder stack is 0.042 (new head gasket) + 2.829 (new cylinders) + 0.016 (new base gasket) = 2.887 inches.  Close enough.  This is a Triumph and not the space shuttle.  That was the last thing to check.  Now it is putting it together time.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on November 12, 2012, 06:45:52 PM
Quote:

The new pistons have a little 0.004 step in them and the new ones don't.

Which new ones?

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 14, 2012, 01:10:04 AM
The new ones have the step and the old ones do not.  I was looking at all that work I did and figure that the old method of putting everything together, turning the engine over while squashing a piece of oily used chewing gum on top of the piston, and measuring its thickness might have been easier and a lot less mental. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on November 15, 2012, 10:48:05 AM
a-HA! The old reliable USED plastigage trick........I prefer the wintegreen flavor :lol:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on November 15, 2012, 10:57:34 AM
... but does the Plastigage loose its flavor on the bedpost over night?   :-D

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on November 15, 2012, 11:00:42 AM
When others used to criticize Plastigauge a friend of mine used to say "It knows, it's in there!"  :roll: :roll: :-D

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 16, 2012, 01:17:49 AM
There is not much of a champfer on he bottom of these barrels, the pistons are wide, and the rings were made to order.  I had to be really careful when I put the barrels on.  None of the ring compressors I had would work.  Finally, after a couple of hours of fiddling and trying different things, the barrels softly slid down over the pistons.  Ah, what a sweet feeling.  Total relief and satisfaction from a hard job completed.  Then I noticed something.  One piston is backwards.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: generatorshovel on November 16, 2012, 02:43:26 AM
  Then I noticed something.  One piston is backwards.
                                                                 

Dontcha HATE when that happens ?, it's a bit like trying to spin a supercharger backwards  :roll:
Tiny
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 17, 2012, 02:41:54 AM
Tiny, putting a piston in donkey backwards.  Something I would never do.  Its the mice.  They are not strong individually.  They are numerous and they see good in the dark.  The little rascals came in at night and turned it around.  They just want to make sure I am paying attention.  That's the only logical explanation.  I am sure of this. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: generatorshovel on November 17, 2012, 03:00:04 AM
Perhaps they could do your next rebuild, providing they took the time to remember their error ?
Tiny
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 17, 2012, 08:32:27 AM
You do realize that you may have hit on something there. Adding a treadmill with a dozen mice or so would add about 12 mp to your power.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 17, 2012, 02:02:57 PM
The mice will have more fun.  The engine is coming apart and they can switch the tranny gears around.  Its no big deal.  All I have done is bolt the main cases together and put on the cylinders.

The new 994cc pistons are heavy duty ones for fuel and turbo use.  They weigh 14.7 ounces with rings, pin, and clips.  The old 790cc ones weighed 12.5 oz with the rings, pin, and clips.  The Carrillo rods weigh different than the standard rods.  The crank should be rebalanced to prolong main bearing life and make it more comfortable to ride.  Less vibration.

Finding someone to do this was the big problem.  The day before yesterday I got a lead and followed it.  There is a shop in Long Beach, California that balances the cranks for the new Triumphs.  I wanted the lobes to be knife edged, too.  The balancing shop does not recommend this.  They say they need to add weight to the lobes to balance the pistons a they would need to add even more weight to compensate for the metal removed during the knife edging.  They said this could be problematic.

Looking at the crank shows why it will be.  The typical balancing process is to drill the lobes and to replace the crank steel with plugs of heavier metal.  There is not a lot of lobe on these cranks.  Major drilling will weaken them.  I agreed and I will not ask for knife edging.     



Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on November 17, 2012, 03:02:23 PM
I'm a bike builder and manufacture rigid frames for Sportster based customs along with all the components that go with it although I'm better known as a composites and aero guy but all I'd like to say is that I really appreciate all the hard graft you've put into your project. You make me proud to be a biker. I wish you all the best. Great stuff.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on November 17, 2012, 06:20:10 PM
error
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 19, 2012, 02:02:44 AM
Hi Freud.

Tauruck, tanks for the compliment.  One thing I decided to do was show all sides of the build in the diary.  Most of us are exploring into areas we do not know much about when we do this.  Composites, aero, rigid frames, and Sportsters?  It sounds like a recipe for a new partial streamliner.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 19, 2012, 10:25:43 PM
The alternator rotor does not need to come off of the crank for engine rebuilding.  It must be removed for crank balancing.  It is on a taper and a simple threaded puller is used to remove it, in theory.  A puller was threaded in and I zapped it with the impact gun.  No progress.  Then I zapped it again and the threads stripped on the puller.  The puller was shortened on the lathe so it had good threads.  Then I threaded it in again and tightened it up with the impact gun.  Then I applied heat to the female part on the taper.  The rotor would not pop loose.  I was successful at melting the electricity generating innards.  Another sacrifice to the speed gods.  Now I drilled a bunch of holes in it and took off the outer part.  Then some slots were made to weaken the part.  I applied more heat, some cussing, more cursing in German, and nothing happened.  This morning it went to the machine shop.  They put it in their ginormous press and popped it off.

The machinist explained what happened.  They probably put a warm rotor on a cooler crankshaft in Hinckley.  The rotor cooled and it contracted down onto the taper.  The fit was very tight and it conducted heat really well.  I applied heat, both the rotor and the shaft got hot at the same time, and they expanded together.  That is why heat would not work and the taper fit was so strong.

My advice is to not do what I did.  First, try the puller.  Take the crankshaft into a machinist to be pressed off if this does not work.  This will preserve the rotor. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on November 19, 2012, 11:12:21 PM
Wobbles, You have done an excellent post with an enormous amount of research and detail presented.

Many of the principles you have discussed relate to any engine. You are to be complimented for your presentation.

Besides the benefits to your project you too must have gained a ton of knowledge. I know the readers have.

A Turnip Twin: opening the eyes and minds of many enthusiasts.

Good Job.

Will I see you Feb 16th at the Reunion?

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on November 20, 2012, 09:54:58 AM
Try this next time... put a load on the puller, then smack the side of the tapered fit parts with a one pound hammer...
(note... one pound is not the definition of mass... it is the size required to do the job with just one pound)  :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on November 20, 2012, 11:48:39 AM
Good one. Glad we didn't have to be there to suffer with him. Sometimes Murphy does backflips right in front of you. I hate the SOB.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: generatorshovel on November 20, 2012, 05:11:04 PM
I often have to pull the clutch from my Shovelhead's mainshaft, and have a rather substantial puller made from some 3/8 plate and a 7/16 fine threaded central bolt.
I can tighten it as much as possible, give it a few whacks with a dumpy 2lb hammer, which does SFA usually,,but If I walk away,,,POP ! off it comes, works every time !  :-D
Tiny
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jon on November 21, 2012, 02:29:30 AM
The only addition to the 1pound - 2pound hammer bit is I generally try to get a dolly hammer on the opposite side to where I lb it so that the shaft is supported more.


jon
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 22, 2012, 08:23:30 PM
Thanks for the advice.  It seems hammers are part of the expert builder's toolkit.  I was trying to avoid using one on this sophisticated new 21st century Triumph.  I guess Triumphs will always be Triumphs, so I will keep one at arms reach at all times.  Somewhere in this shop there is a big whitworth ball peen.  I will look for it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 23, 2012, 12:18:10 AM
This post is not as interesting as Tony's avatars.  Those ladies do not leave much to the imagination.

This is taken from a recent Dennis Kirk catalog.  It is part of a custom Kawasaki KZ1000 made by Wakui Tomohiku at www.BullDoc.jp in Japan.  Note how the bellmouth is held away from the flatslide carb intake with a bracket.  It looks like there is a screen across the carb mouth.

What sort of induction trickery is this?  What is the theory behind it?   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on November 23, 2012, 12:50:25 AM
Looks like that trumpet is adjustable. Trumpet length moves the power band characteristics. At least that's what I learned/was taught.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: thefrenchowl on November 23, 2012, 07:53:33 AM
Probably some sort of venturi derived trickery...

If the engine was "normal", it probably wouldn't need that!!!

Or worse, could just be the modern way to make guys talk about your bike, cause most modern viewers have no imagination to look through the alloy to picture internal bits for themselves...

So could be similar twisted snobby stuff as fake kickers on HD evos engines...

Patrick

PS, by the way, will be back on the Salt Flats for Speed Week next year  :-D, Hope to see you all there again...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fredvance on November 23, 2012, 11:04:56 AM
The velocity stack being spaced away from the carb throat woukd make it virtually useless. A long time ago I had a set of VS that had a screen in it, they didnt work worth a crap until I took the screens off.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on November 24, 2012, 01:02:06 PM
Right on Fred. If one measured each individual strand of wire you'd probably find it was around 60% of the area of the throat.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 24, 2012, 07:32:28 PM
Thanks.  I will not use that concept.

A few years ago I opened up the shop manual and looked at the spark plug replacement interval for the truck.  They say change the plugs every 90,000 miles and they use NGK iridium plugs.  Being a cheap bastid, I decided to try the same thing with the race motor.  A pair of NGK iridiums went in when I built the engine and I left them in there until I took the motor apart to build this one.  Three years of racing and a bunch of street miles were on these plugs.  They look great with no tip erosion.  The center electrodes still have their sharp edges and the ground electrodes do, too.  I will do the same with this engine.  That is to put a new pair in and leave them there.

The first PipeMax sheet is for the new 994 cc engine with the original equipment 31 mm diameter Triumph intake valves.  Note that the cam needs to lift them pretty high to prevent choke.  Installing a new cam is an expensive proposition and it costs much less to put in some bigger intake valves.  Valves are available with 32, 33, and 35 mm head diameters.  A pair of 33 mm intake valves will work spiffy as per the second PipeMax sheet.  Kibblewhite makes all sorts of OEM replacement and racing valve train components for these bikes and their "Black Diamond" valves will be used.  www.KPMIVALVETRAIN.COM       

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Cereal KLR on November 24, 2012, 10:11:32 PM
I live about fifteen miles from Kibblewhite shop and took my ironhead sporty top end there in the 90`s. They did a beautiful job on the boring/finish and valve work. My friend commented that it even sounded different after the rebuild.

As I recall there was some time involved so if sending them something, sooner is better than later.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 25, 2012, 12:30:09 AM
Thanks for the advice.  I knew they made parts but was unaware about the machining services.  This is great.  Bigger seats might be needed for the larger intake valves.  Kibblewhite makes those bigger seats and a person needs to really know what they are doing to put them in correctly.  I asked them if they would do the machine work.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 25, 2012, 01:07:27 PM
This picture shows the oil filter being opened.  The opener is a variation of the household can opener and it splits the metal without sawing.  This one I bought from a fellow racer.  It was his extra.  I have no idea where to buy these, otherwise.  I look at the element under magnification for small particles that give me a hint about engine condition.  Then I wipe the insides of the filter can with a paper towel and look at what turns up there.  Big stuff lays in the oil pan or is caught on the pump intake screen in the sump.  Those are the most important places t look.  Everything is OK.

These Mobil 1 filters have a different filter media than the OEM Triumph ones.  They work much better.  This M1-108 fits the bike.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 26, 2012, 09:15:51 PM
The standard OEM valve springs are in the bike.  They are almost at coil bind with the #813 cam.  They also bow to one side when compressed as shown by the worn spot on the side of the spring.  The lower edges of the valve lifter cups are wearing against the spring.  It is a common practice to use the OEM springs with this cam.  This is not a good idea.  Kibblewhite makes racing springs and I will order some from Triumph Performance.  The racing springs will accommodate cams with much larger lift than the ones I am using.  It is likely they will maintain their shape in use.

Werner turned 18, went down to the bank, and withdrew his inheritance. All $1,300.  Then he bought this S-10 truck from some fellow backwoods folk.  Some rocket scientist at GM figured out how to shoehorn 4.6 liter engines into these little trucks and they are far more powerful than they should be.  This thing is a deathtrap.  The little guy works on it about two hours for every hour he spends driving it.  He made his own gun rack. Yesterday we fixed an intermittent electrical short, put on new plug wires, and did a compression check.  About 9 at night the tools were getting frosty and it was really dark.  All I wanted to do was go in and curl up asleep next to a warm wife.  And I did.  He started to pull the drive line to change the u-joints.  I slept through the explosion.

Exactly what happened is sorta mysterious.  He opens his laptop and looks at u-tube to get instructions.  Then he wedges the u-joint or driveline in the vise and heats it with MAP gas.  There is a big explosion.  The vise is blown apart.  He feels drowsy and wants to lay down on the floor.  He turns off the lights and staggers into bed.  This morning he seemed to be OK.  Rose took him down to Six States Distributing and the old guy there took him into the back and showed hm how to do it right.  All for $20.  The truck is gone so he must have fixed it.  This young man is totally normal.  A good sign.   

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on November 26, 2012, 09:40:12 PM
"TOTALLY NORMAL" :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D

It could not have been too bad of an explosion......it does not take much to break a hollow vice :wink: :wink:

Sure glad everyone is OK :-) :-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WhizzbangK.C. on November 27, 2012, 09:01:02 AM
Werner's first lesson in Thermal Expansion 101 was pretty cool. For his next trick is he going to destroy an anvil in a sand pit?  :-P
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 27, 2012, 10:49:56 AM
I learned my first lesson about "air/fuel" ratio and explosion at about the age of 14, when I had been cleaning some parts in a coffee can with gasoline.  After I dumped the gas out of the can, I threw the can onto the trash burner, at which time it rocketed about 20 feet into the air and landed on the hood of my brother's '55 Chevy.  It could have been worse, but my brother wasn't too happy.  I think I volunteered to wash his car every week for a year or so.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 27, 2012, 10:11:46 PM
None of the other four children were the slightest bit interested in fabrication, mechanics or speed.  I thought I was a failure as a parent.  Like all fathers, I grouse a bit about what he does.  Inside I am not mad.  He is a normal young fellow and just like I was at his age.  I am glad he was not hurt.

The windshields arrived from Gustafsson.  Reasonably priced, I say, remembering all the effort it takes to make one that does not work.  A drill for plastic and some practice pieces were included.   The request was for a windshield made from a plastic that is legal in SCTA and DLRA.  I knew they were legit for AMA and FIM.  There were a lot of them at BUB.  An extra was ordered.  It will be my pattern to send in if I need another one.  Gustaffson gave prompt service and were nice to work with.

The OEM valve springs buckled under the loads imposed by the performance cams.  The intake valves had some carbon on their upper faces and I know why.  The twisting springs put side loads on the valve stems and wore out the guides.  Oil leaked down the stems, burned, and left the carbon residue.  A few of the tappet bores might be worn out, too.  This cylinder head requires more than the normal amount of work and it is very specialized.  A call was made to an expert machinist that knows these engines.  The head will be shipped out tomorrow.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Kiwi Paul on November 28, 2012, 12:17:28 AM
What a great story about youth and the gaining of experience! Glad you took him down to see Don at Six States. He does all my differential work. I can do it, but he is better, faster, more consistent, and I give my or my customers money to a local concern.... :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 04, 2012, 11:55:56 PM
This is a valve adjust shim I put in upside down many races and street miles ago.  The etched size markings are still visible.  This illustrates why it is critical on these Triumphs to use the correct oil.  These are demanding engines.  The oil lubricates the transmission, the engine, and the clutch.  It is also used for cooling and the head has flat tappets.

The essential ingredients are the additives to make all of this work and it is a good idea to verify they are there.  This product data sheet from Mobil illustrates what to look for.  The JASO certification, the statement the additive package is for a bike, and the correct phosphorus and zinc content.

This bike has run on Mobil 1 for its entire life.  The reasons are I can verify the additives, zinc, and phosphorous are there, Triumph recommends it, almost always it is on sale somewhere around here and I can get it for a good price, and I see no oil related problems during the tear downs.  Other oils might be as good or better.  South Bay Triumph uses Torco in their turbo bike with success and some folks I know use Silkolene.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 05, 2012, 12:39:21 AM
That Mobil 1 spec sheet in the last post I downloaded today.  I was putting it in my notebook and I compared it to my old spec sheet from 2010.  The old zinc and phosphorus levels were higher and more like what I want.  Hmmm.  They put a new label on the oil bottle, raised the price a lot, and dropped the quality.  Those varmints.   It is time for Team Go Dog, Go! to find a new official oil. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on December 05, 2012, 06:09:33 PM
so instead of NEW & IMPROVED or NEW AND WORSE, they said nothing and let the consumer beware :-o
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 05, 2012, 09:07:45 PM
Oil is something I learned a lot about today.  A lot of bikes run cat converters and the Mobil 1 has reduced zinc and phosphorus levels so it will not clog up the cats.  They had to do this along with the other manufacturers.  They have been working on other things like esthers to do the same jobs.  I was also told that zinc's only role was to carry other atoms with it like sulphur that did the work.  There are other ways to carry the sulphur.

It was also pointed out, the pile I ride and think is a race bike is in reality very mildly tuned when compared to just about everything else out there, and any oil that works in a Busa or BMW RR 1000, et al, is more than good enough for me.  Mobil 1 is approved for these bikes.

Basically, the new Mobil 1 is OK and there are all sorts of other oils like Brad Penn that will do the job.  My thinking needed to be adjusted.  I also learned the top grade Silkolene will do what I want and I can get it for a "racer" discount at much less cost than the Mobil 1.  "Cheap uber alles" is my motto so I will start using it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 06, 2012, 08:53:03 PM
Type "Dogs Driving New Zealand" into u-tube.  Its amazing.  They teach the mutts how to drive and they do a decent job.  There are racing applications for this.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 08, 2012, 02:19:44 AM
The estimate came back for the cylinder head.  New guides and valves are needed and everything else looks OK.  The head was set up for a 790cc motor with 9.5 to 1 compression or an 865cc engine with 10.5 to 1 compression.  It was ported, the intake manifolds were matched to the carbs and the smog system was removed.  That is all.  This was a Stage I cylinder head and it worked with the OEM 790cc cams or the Triumph Performance #813 cams.  I should have used racing valve springs with the #813 cams.

This is what I ordered for the Stage II head.  It is suitable for the big bore kit with the #813 cams.  2mm larger intake valve seats with 2mm larger intake valves.  These valves are custom made from stainless steel.  New guides throughout with the ends ground to match the roofs of the ported head.  New exhaust valves.  All valves ground so their lengths will put me in the middle of the shim adjustment range.  New racing valve springs with titanium keepers and steel collets, shimmed to proper installed lengths, and a racing valve job.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 08, 2012, 10:36:12 PM
Something I rat holed away 43 years ago.  You might like it.  Page 1 of 4.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 08, 2012, 10:37:10 PM
Page 2 of 4.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 08, 2012, 10:38:04 PM
Page 3 of 4.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 08, 2012, 10:39:01 PM
Page 4 of 4.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Queeziryder on December 09, 2012, 03:33:56 AM
Bo,
I hope you don't mind but I've copied this for personal use

Neil
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on December 09, 2012, 09:02:20 AM
A true racer. Better to be reprimanded after than to seek permission first!  :-D :-D :-D  :cheers:

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on December 09, 2012, 11:05:04 AM
Could have been the ultimate American V-Twin in its time.  It could still be built.  Anyone have a spare Indian without a motor and a spare Vincent motor without a frame?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Queeziryder on December 09, 2012, 12:41:43 PM
Could have been the ultimate American V-Twin in its time.  It could still be built.  Anyone have a spare Indian without a motor and a spare Vincent motor without a frame?

Tom,
You can buy a new Vincent twin motor ready to run for about £18k GBP or $29k USD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 09, 2012, 12:54:59 PM
It is possible to buy a new Vincent engine or have one made from newly made spare parts.  These engines also can be bought new:  BSA Gold Star and Matchless G80 from a company in the Netherlands, various JAP (John A. Prestwich) engines from a Cameron in the UK, and Norton Commando twins from England.  Single cylinder engine road racing is popular in the UK and these overhead cam engines are available new:  Norton Manx, Matchless G50, and the AJS7R, I think.

The new Norton company makes, or says they do, or did, complete Manx race bikes.  New gearboxes are also available for most of these and almost all can be shoehorned into a Norton featherbed frame.  New parts are available from all sorts of sources for these chassis.  A person with money and patience can build a new old bike.

This is something I keep track of, rather than all the other stuff I should pay attention to.          
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on December 11, 2012, 07:30:36 AM
Bloody Vincents
Every time I leave a space in the workshop my boss fins another Vincent or Velo to stick in it
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 22, 2012, 12:04:08 PM
Last Sunday Rose, Werner, and me grabbed our umbrellas and took the train up to Seattle to see the International Motorcycle Show.  There were three new Hondas on display that attracted a lot of attention.  Two were 500cc parallel twins.  The other was this air cooled four.  Theses are the specs.

CB1100 (optional ABS), 1140cc DOHC air cooled inline four cylinder, 31.3 inch seat height, curb weight 540 lbs w/o ABS and 549 Lbs with it, Candy Red color.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jon on December 22, 2012, 12:38:16 PM
It's not hard to see what tree that CB1100 fell from, would look right at home sitting next to my 1976 CB550 SS.

jon
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on December 22, 2012, 06:13:50 PM
The way a stock motorcycle should look like! We used to refer to the look as UJM (Universal Japanese Motorcycle) and the English had a similar look before that.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 22, 2012, 06:14:32 PM
These are the new 500cc parallel twins.  The cylinders tilt slightly forward like a 305 superhawk.  Specs:

CBR500R (optional ABS), 471cc DOHC liquid cooled parallel twin, seat height 30.9 inches, weight 425 lbs w/o ABS, 430 lbs with it, Colors Red, White/Blue/Red, Red
CB500F (optional ABS), 471cc DOHC liquid cooled parallel twin, seat height 30.9 inches, weight 420 lbs w/o ABS, 424 with it, colors Pearl White, Black

The CBR500R would be the bike I would buy if I could purchase any one of them at the show.  
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 23, 2012, 12:26:04 PM
Jon, you are not alone.  There were a lot of people looking at that bike.  Mostly they were old silverbacks like us.

Pete, the standard bike is rare now.  This Honda and the Triumph Bonnevilles are about the only ones left. 

A while ago I was looking for a new oil.  The price is raised on the Mobil 1 to the point where I have no incentive to use it.  The people at Cascade Moto Classics help me a lot and I want to use an oil they sell.  It is good promotion for them.  This narrowed my choices a bit - Mobil 1 or Silkolene.  Mobil 1 never gives a detailed and specific answer.  The Silkolene company has the opposite approach and this is the deciding factor for oil choice.  Advice I have from Silkolene is the Pro-4 10W-40 is a 50% ester, 50% PAO mix, it was their top of the line oil till a few years ago, it comes in 10W-40, and it is recommended for street use.  The also make Pro-4 Plus 05W-40, a 75% ester, 25% PAO blend, and it is their current premium oil.  It is more expensive.  The added protection from the higher ester content makes it their recommended oil for racing.  They suggested that I do a dyno comparison with the two oils to see which one makes the most power.  The new engine will be tight this year and I will use the Pro-4 Plus, after that the Pro-4 will be good enough.

A friend in my youth had BSA 441cc Victor Shooting Star.  It was a pretty bike with its red and white fiberglass tank.  The Victor engine was developed from the Triumph Tiger Cub motor and it was as reliable as a hand grenade.  An oil seal would pop out from the engine when he rode it hard.  Oil went everywhere.  We traced this problem to excess crank case pressure.  Combustion gas blow by past the rings pressurized the lower end when he was riding hard.  The standard BSA engine breather could not bleed the gas out in time to prevent trouble.  This pressure also hurts performance, I learned later.

The job here is installing an extra breather on the filler hole where the oil is poured into the crankcase.  The plug has metric threads and I could not make one on the lathe.  It was hard to find a plug that could be modified.  Finally, I found one, it is Part # NBCA-1050S, LCF Custom OIl Filler Cap, Silver, see www.lcfabrications.com

Some sort of baffle is needed to keep the oil that flies around in the engine from going up the breather pipe.  I drill four holes in the bottom of the plug and one big one in the top.  Hopefully this will catch the oil and it will drip down rather than blow up through the pipe.  The brass spigot for the hose is turned from a piece of 1/4 inch ID brass gas line with pipe style threads.  The rubber hose is from the Triumph pollution control system that almost everyone removes, often called the "octopus."  A PCV valve and oil catch tank will be made, too.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 23, 2012, 12:27:20 PM
More case breather pix.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Graham in Aus on December 23, 2012, 07:30:13 PM
Nice job Bo!  :-D

Good to see that lathe get some jobs done!  :cheers:

Graham 8-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on December 24, 2012, 06:32:04 AM
"A friend in my youth had BSA 441cc Victor Shooting Star.  It was a pretty bike with its red and white fiberglass tank.  The Victor engine was developed from the Triumph Tiger Cub motor and it was as reliable as a hand grenade.  An oil seal would pop out from the engine when he rode it hard.  Oil went everywhere."

I resemble that remark!  Luckily the B50 is an improvement, but still likes to pressurize the crankcase with the resultant oil leaks.  The B50 breathes thru the primary case, where we attach a PCV valve at the outlet.  Seems to help.  Make sure all other breathers have a PCV valve as well.  Also, I've read that these PCV valves need to be as close to the crankcase as possible.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 24, 2012, 06:00:15 PM
The Victor had a kick starter mechanism gear that was mounted on the end of one of the transmission shafts.  The countershaft, I recall.  The bikes would kick back when fellows started them and the ends of the shafts would break off.  There was a condition attached when I wrote up the work orders for them.  "No guarantee.  We will not start the bike.  That is for you to do."  Folks understood and accepted that.  I repaired a few.  It was an expensive job.  BSA, to their credit, did something.  The Victors were the only bikes that had the problem, that I know of.  Actually, I like the single cylinder BSA's.  A Starfire 250 was one of my favorites and I wish I would have kept it.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 24, 2012, 06:25:22 PM
The crank came back today.  A most excellent Christmas present.  The price was reasonable at $80 for the dynamic balance.  It did not need heavy metal addition, just filling some of the old balance holes in the crank webs with weld.  "We balanced it at a 52% balance factor that should make it really smooth 2,500 and up" according to Larry Revis of Revco Precision in Long Beach.  Revco has experience with these engines and was why I chose them to do the work.
   
This engine, along with the other Bonnevilles and Thruxtons, has a 360 degree crank where the pistons rise and fall together and the mixture is lit on alternate strokes.  This is the traditional configuration for British twins.   The Americas, Speedmasters, and Scramblers have 270 degree cranks where the big end journals are offset 90 degrees to each other.  These latter motors are a lot smoother.  As I understand, it was either Phil Irving or Phil Vincent, of Vincent fame, that first suggested this idea for a vertical twin.  Given the choice, I would build this engine with a 270 degree crank. 

This is a street motor with a 8,400 rpm redline and it will hardly ever be over 8,000.  The cranks are not knife edged.  Triumph Performance recommends knife edging the crank for high rpm race motors and they can see 10,000 rpm.  Knife edging will almost certainly require crank web drilling and the addition of heavy metal. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 29, 2012, 08:27:59 PM
There are secret plans for the new big motor that will not be discussed here.  One aspect is the possibility, probability actually, of some blowby past the rings that will pressurize the crank case.  This is detrimental to power output and it might pop out a seal or gasket.  An extra case breather is installed and both breathers need to be connected to a catch tank.  Standard practice is simply to stuff the hose ends into a little tomato paste can and call it good.  There is an overall plan to do things less hillbilly on this new build.  A purpose built catch tank is in order.

All parts of the tank except the o-rings and hose clamps for the Tauruck tube were made from stuff laying around the cellar.  I was having so much fun I decided to make all of the brass fittings - so I spent $30 for a brass rod.  There went the project budget.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on December 31, 2012, 06:45:13 AM
And I thought my Canadian flagged stainless steel water bottle catch can was cool.  You didn't use a single pop-rivet????  Impressive!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 31, 2012, 10:43:48 PM
It has been raining here for weeks.  The last few days have been a little bit sunny.  Bored semi-old guy + big junkpile + lots of time = some nice little trinkets.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 31, 2012, 11:43:13 PM
There will be Marines in the Rose Bowl parade tomorrow.  They will be wearing uniforms from the early days to the present.  The one in the Desert Storm uniform is my middle boy, Josef. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on January 01, 2013, 03:33:54 PM
That's an honour of note. Good on you Josef. I'll look out for him.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 01, 2013, 08:46:50 PM
Tauruck, this is good duty for him and he feels proud, although he did not say it.  He was near the beginning of the parade and said he walked 6 miles while waving at people.  His arms are tired.  That is the biggest parade I have seen and I missed the very beginning.  I was out in the woodshed, lighting the fire, or feeding the cats.  Nice warm Southern California was looking good this morning.

This Lamba meter setup was all connected together in a Prince Albert tobacco can.  Totally Mickey Mouse and the next trick is to get it squared away. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Cereal KLR on January 01, 2013, 10:50:38 PM
I run an old kawasaki 4 that displaces a bit over 1100cc. Most of the people that drag race them run a vacuum pump to keep some of the pumping loses down.  I keep searching for a cheap one on ebay but they get snapped up quick.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 01, 2013, 11:19:41 PM
That pump might be just what I need.  I think I can get one cheap.  This post is related to a number of current topics on the forum.

There were a couple of options I had for building the new motor.  One is to build it as an NA engine with a bumpy cam.  They do make these and to be effective, I need to enlarge all of the valves to 5mm over standard, have some extensive machining done to the head, install a shim-under-bucket kit, knife edge the crank, reprogram the black box to a 9,500 rpm red line (1,100 rpm more than it is now), and retune the intake and exhaust.  The target rpm would be 9,000 with 4,224 fpm average piston speed.  Now it is 7,300 rpm with 3,250 fpm average piston speed.

The 994 cc engine as it will be tuned this year will make horsepower in the mid 90's, hopefully.  It was 84 hp with the old 865 engine in a pretty worn condition.  I am using the same cam in the new motor as I used in the old.  It is bumpy but it is not Mae West.

The same motor I will be running this year, with the big bump cam option, will make maybe, with good tuning, power in the low 100's. A 10 percent increase, at most.  It will be expensive to maintain.  I have a piston wear problem now, and with all those more rpm, things will not be any better.  I makes no sense to spend a lot of money going the high rpm N/A power route.  Lots of cost with not a lot more horses.

This is something I figured out a year ago when I had to make a choice of piston rings:  thin rings for reduced flutter at high rpm, or thicker ones to seal better at lower rpm with high cylinder pressures.  Also, I decided to not knife edge the crank.  Enhanced aspiration was the only route to big speeds I can afford, I figured then, when I ordered the parts to be made.  Everything I am doing now is geared toward this end.  Right now I do not know exactly how I want to do this, a turbo, fuel, spray, or a combination of these?  This is something to keep me busy when I get back from AUS in 2015.

One problem I have is I do not like to blow up engines.  My favorite method is to sneak up to the optimum settings from the safe side.  A big problem on these engines is the timing curve.  It is programmed into the box by people in England.  It is hard to get quick changes this way.  My black box was gone for a few months getting redone.  Also, they do not tell you exactly what they are doing to the curve.

A few minutes ago I found a programmable black box on the internet.  I can program my own advance curve and red line.  Perfect for the enhanced motor tuning.  I can start out a little bit retarded and inch up to the best setting, degree by degree, during a single dyno session.  Things are slowly falling into place. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Cereal KLR on January 02, 2013, 11:02:31 AM
These guys campaign 115 hp Bonnevilles at the drags. Might be worth an e-mail to see what makes them live longer. Turbo and fuel management would be a benefit on the salt.

http://stabbarps-auto.com/welcome.html
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 02, 2013, 09:24:22 PM
The pictures on their website show some seizures on the gudgeon pin to rod small end bearings with OEM parts.  I had this problem with the original parts, too, only much worse.  The Carrillo rods and Arias pins had no problems.  They looked spiffy on the last tear down.  The gudgeon pin to small end bearing clearances when the Carrillo rods were fitted were 0.00095 on one cylinder and 0.0009 on the other.

Eighty to ninety percent of drag bike horsepower is OK for me.  This is sorta like tuning for endurance racing as compared to road racing.  The engine needs to go the distance without blowing up.

It is hard to compare horsepower between bikes tested on different dynos.  The one we use here is a little stingy.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on January 03, 2013, 11:44:15 PM
Bo, maybe a stingy dyno is a good thing. Nothing worse than going out there thinking you've got more than you do. What oil do you run?.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 04, 2013, 12:59:44 AM
Mobil 1 Racing 4T 10W-40 was what I used for years.  They raised their price to what the other premium oils are and changed their formulation.  They lowered the zinc and phosphorous content.  I was worried about this.

The Triumph engine is more similar to European race engines than American motors.  I was looking for an oil that gave proven performance over there in race use.  The Silkolene synthetic was developed from the beginning to provide protection similar to that of zinc and phosphorous using esters instead of metals and it has the racing pedigree, so I switched to their premium 10W-40 synthetic.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on January 04, 2013, 10:48:35 PM
Why don't you contact Dave Canitz at Royal Purple. He's a good guy, willing to help and his product works.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 05, 2013, 11:56:00 PM
My traditional break in oil is a mineral oil to which I add some Red Line break in additive.  I was recently warned against doing this by a local hot rodder.  Some problem with the new oils.  He explained it to me and it went in one ear and out the other.  These is a Royal Purple break in oil shown on their website.  This would be what I need.  It makes more sense than taking chances with a home brew mixture.  Thanks for the suggestion.

This morning I had breakfast with the Triumph riders group and went shopping around Portland for some used machine tooling and a new vise.  Everywhere I went, the places where I could get this stuff in the old days, all were gone.  One shop was still in business and they sold wood working stuff, now.  He knew of one shop that might be able to help me.  I was always aware that we were losing industry.  The extent of the loss is something I am just starting to comprehend.  This country is a paper tiger.  We would lose a war as soon as we ran out of what we have stashed in the arsenal.  There is no industrial capacity to replace it, either the factories, the tooling, or the skilled workers.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on January 06, 2013, 11:34:21 AM
Amen, WW.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 09, 2013, 10:34:50 PM
The human character that that makes a person accumulate stuff is seldom allied with the ability to get rid of it.  Lots of asking around is paying off.  Little sort of unknown places, except to those in the know, have what I need.  These folks do not advertise much.  Dark, dank, dusty, and funky rooms full of idle, cold and inert tooling.  This Ellis indexing head, with all accessories, including the original instructions and parts list was more than I could resist.  It has a new home now.  My father rationalized buying tooling by saying "its in the family now."  Heck, I cannot argue, a lot of what I have is old stuff that has been with us for generations. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on January 12, 2013, 08:30:11 AM
That's a nice find.  Kinda like finding an old bike in a barn - - it just doesn't happen very often.  It would make a nice addition to my mill-drill (not exactly Bridgeport!) even though I have never used one.  Now you can make your own gear set - - if you have a mill.  Let's see, nice low first gear, and nice close 4th to 5th or whatever your top gears are.  Heck, I think it would even make a nice living room ornament, but I see you have it on the kitchen table; almost as good.   Don't let it out of your sight.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on January 12, 2013, 09:09:57 AM
Nice score Bo! Now you can start the search for a small mill or a mill/drill. The next bike you'll be able to build yourself.  :-D :-D :-D

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 13, 2013, 11:04:02 PM
Tom, my big project for machinist skool was making a mainshaft high gear gear for my Matchless.  It is the one that fits over the mainshaft, has splines for what we call the countershaft sprocket, and has a gear on it with internal dogs.  It was a real nightmare.  Lots of machines used and figuring.  The teeth were cut on a horizontal mill with a specially shaped cutter and an indexing head.  The internal dogs were something else.  I could not figure out how to cut them with a machine.  I took the gear home and spent a weekend cutting them with a file.  My thinking at the time was it would take me a lifetime me to make a complete transmission.  The whole fiasco made me appreciate the economy of mass production.

Pete, right now I am figuring how to get my broke behind to BUB this year and AUS in 2015.  I might delay retirement for six months or so so I can buy a mill.  A guy needs one.  Life is such a struggle, otherwise.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 20, 2013, 11:08:52 PM
Last night was movie night at the Triumph shop.  They close up shop, move the bikes out of the showroom, set up some tables with food and bunch of chairs.  The usual movie is "zombie chicks on bikes" or something similar.  The "Worlds Fastest Indian" was last night's flick.  I was really emotional seeing it this time.  A lot of the stuff in the movie I have lived.  That was not the case the first time I saw it.

On the way out I picked up a brochure.  That bike sure looks like a Beeza to me.  I almost think I see the crossed rifles on the timing cover.  Any second opinions are appreciated.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: generatorshovel on January 21, 2013, 12:33:32 AM
That bike sure looks like a Beeza to me.  I almost think I see the crossed rifles on the timing cover.  Any second opinions are appreciated.    

It sure looks like a pre-unit trumpy to me Bo.

(http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t24/generatorshovel/tinytriumph-1.jpg)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 21, 2013, 05:27:35 PM
The engine timing cover looks like the one on the Triumph you are showing.  The oil tank looks BSA to me.  In those days the BSA chassis was better than the Triumph and the opposite for the engines.  Maybe is is a Beezumph or a Tribsa.  There were a few of those around here.

The next posts will be about building the big motor.  Most of this is nothing new for an experienced racer.  Some of this might help someone who is starting their first build.

The last step before the engine is put together is to get the measurements for the build sheet.  I call it a clearance sheet and it is attached.  The pistons and gudgeon pins are measured by our local machinist at River City Machine.  He made the measurements on the 2010 clearance sheet.  I always want the same person to do the measuring.  This helps make the measurements more consistent and I have more confidence when I look at it to spot trends.  Everything else I measured.

The last engine had a big problem with piston and cylinder wear.  I looked on the 2010 clearance sheet and it said it was built with 0.004 inch skirt clearances.  That was slightly more than ideal.  It was not enough to cause the problems I was seeing.  This told me that I needed to do more investigating to figure out the cause of the trouble.  This is an example of how the clearance sheet helps.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on January 21, 2013, 05:57:05 PM
Interesting that he could read your cylinder dimensions to .0005", but all the other measurements, presumably made with micrometers, only to the nearest .001".  I would have expected measurements to the .0001, using a micrometer.  Crank end play measurement is wacky, or probably he put the decimal in the wrong place.  I don't like to see a machinist make those kind of sloppy measurements.  I would be suspicious.
Tom

P.S.  Your brochure photo looks like custom to me.  I see only a single downtube in front of the motor, like Triumph, and a Triumph like emblem on the gas tank.  Most BSA tanks were chrome.  Front fender is custom, with no front stay, but sort of looks chrome, like BSA.  Rear brake looks like cable with the brake actuating arm upward (BSA was below the axle, I believe), and no doubt has a jackshaft thru the swingarm as the pedal would be on the left. I don't know my pre-units well enough to confirm.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on January 21, 2013, 06:38:41 PM
Bo,
I forgot to respond to your post about making a sleeve gear for your Matchless.  I thought you might enjoy this photo of my first bike - - a Matchless G80TCS.  If you know your Matchless models, you will know that this was the 600cc version of the G80.  I paid $60 for it in 1966 while at University, and learned to ride on it.  I used to do burn outs on campus until I broke the crank.  My brother (a machinist) and I bored out the cases and made a sleeve to hold the main crankshaft drive side bearing which had spun.  I rebuild it as you see it here, and sold it for $350. Last I checked, the 600TCS models were selling for about $10,000.  That's life!
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 22, 2013, 10:43:31 PM
All measurements from the rings to the bottom of the page are mine.  The bearing clearances are from some official Triumph plastigage I have and it gives readings in metric.  The conversion to american is sorta hard.  The accuracy of the stuff does not warrant a conversion to the nearest 0.0001 inches.  I round it off to the nearest 0.001 when I write it down on the sheet.  Maybe I should record the metric measurements?  The crank end play is 0.0035 inches.  I wrote it down wrong. 

That is a nice Matchless in the style of the way we did things back then.  Occasionally I see one for sale.  They are worn out beyond belief and my kick start knee is, too.

The red line on these Triumphs 7,400 rpm as built in Hinckley.  I was regularly running the motor higher than that at B'ville.  There were dark stains from oxidized oil around the big ends of the rods at the first teardown.  It was getting hot there.  The Triumph bearing shells are color coded and I had "red" shells.  I put in the larger diameter "white" coded shells and this increased the crank to rod clearance a bit to 0.050mm.  This cooled things down by reducing the shear in the oil and giving better circulation.  The oil holes were sharp edged in all journals, booth main and rod.  Another thing I did was to champer them as shown.  The wear patterns look good during this teardown and there is no sign of overheating.  Problem solved.

A popular modification is to also install white coded shells in the main bearings.  I bought a set, put them in, and then plastigaged them.  The clearances were real close to the 0.080 mm wear limit.  This made me worry.  Looser main bearings allow more oil to pass through them and the rod bearings will not get as much oil as they did before.  I put in new "blue" bearings to set the clearance on the main journals at 0.050mm.  This works very good.  The wear pattern on the shells are good, there is no sign of overheating, and I am not worried about starving the rod big ends.

         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on January 22, 2013, 10:48:55 PM
It's easier to see now.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 23, 2013, 09:57:04 PM
The first time I put the engine together was very difficult.  I did it the usual way.  The cases were assembled, the pistons were installed on the connecting rods, and the cylinder was lowered down onto the case over the pistons.  There is not much chamfer on the bottom of the cylinders and the big pistons like to rock.  It was hard to get the pistons and rings up into the cylinder bores.

This time I do it different.  The pistons are installed on the rods.  It is easy to see that the pin circlips were installed correctly.  The ring end gaps are spaced where they should be on the piston and the pistons are put into the bores.  Automatic tranny fluid is used as a bore lubricant.  It is easy to install the pistons in the bores this way.  The base gasket and the five o-rings are installed on the cylinder block.

This picture shows the grooves on the Carrillo rods that direct oil to the rod small end bushing.  This feature, and the phosphor bronze pin bushings are why I use the Carrillo rods  The standard rods are plenty strong.  They do not have this oiling feature and their small ends are not bushed.  The steel on steel contact between the pin and the small end of the stock rod tends to gall when used for racing.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 23, 2013, 10:01:13 PM
The upper case is turned upside down and it is lowered down onto the cylinders.  The rods stick up through the case.  A couple of spacers are put on some of the cylinder studs in place of the cylinder head and they are held tight with nuts.  This keeps the cylinder block up tight against the upper case. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 23, 2013, 10:12:01 PM
The cam chain is put on crank and it is lowered down into the case.  The rod caps are put on and the rod bolts torqued up tight.

This is a street roadster style engine that will rarely see 8,000 rpm.  Genuine race versions of this motor are revved up to 9,500 or even 10,000 rpm.  I would use the thinner piston ring option to prevent ring flutter and have the crank webs knife edged if I was building a real race motor.  I did not do these things.

A fellow racer asked me about removing the balancers for racing.  I looked at this idea when the engine was apart.  I do not see any reason why it could not be done.  This is a street motor so they are left in place.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 23, 2013, 10:15:08 PM
The bottom case is put on and everything is tightened up.  This is a much easier method and there is a lot less chance to screw things up like bending a piston ring or not having the gudgeon clips installed correctly.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on January 24, 2013, 08:44:58 AM
If you ever want to just check the bottom end bearings, I think you can use the same method, without ever having to take off the head.  Just turn the motor upside down and remove the bottom half of the case.  Only works on a horizontally split motor.  I once rebuilt the bottom end of an old snowmobile motor this way.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: saltwheels262 on January 24, 2013, 06:09:29 PM
I'm sure that those pistons will not give you any problems.

bf
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on January 24, 2013, 06:17:44 PM
Bo:  are you going to the auto show and buy a chance on the Triumph?

(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/c0.0.403.403/p403x403/46349_593807660633814_612871252_n.jpg)

https://www.facebook.com/pages/TIP-of-PortlandVancouver/145347135479871 (https://www.facebook.com/pages/TIP-of-PortlandVancouver/145347135479871)

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 24, 2013, 11:56:03 PM
It is tempting, Mike.  I am sort of low on money right now.  This is the year when the motor is being built.  The Greeks had problems with Pandora and her box.  They would have written about race motors instead, if they had them.   

Thanks for the help with the photo, Freud.  It was hard to see it the way I did it.

The last engine wore out really fast.  About 10,000 miles and only seven runs down the salt.  Some work with PipeMax is helping me figure out what happened, I think.  The first step is to look at my last good motor as a reference.  Triumph in Hinckley built it, not me.  It was in pretty good shape after 20,000 miles and ten runs down the salt from a wear standpoint.  This first page is the engine data.  The second page is the valve and cam calculations.  First I look at minimum valve lift to prevent choke at 7,400 rpm.  It is .315 and .293 for the intake and exhaust, respectively.  The actual lifts are .374 and .370 for intake and exhaust.  The 790 cams have plenty of lift for he 790cc motor.

The "Operating RPM Ranges of Various Components" vary, but the bracket the 7,400 rpm target I have for maximum horsepower.  It looks like the cams and valves match the displacement, compression ratio, and the target RPM.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 25, 2013, 12:13:23 AM
The next page gives the port areas.  The minimum intake area on my motor is 1.55 square inches.  It is in the "Largest Intake Port Entry CSA" range according to PipeMax.  The minimum exhaust port area is 1.53 square inches.  This is in the "Torque Loss + Reversion" range on the printout.  It seems like I had big ports for a 790cc engine.

This little motor ran good.  It went 127 mph with the rudimentary streamlining I had at the time.  Most important, it did not have much reversion and the mixture was on the lean side of stochiometric at normal road rpm and throttle openings.  The bores were almost like new when I pulled the engine apart.  The pistons were worn and it was from abrasion.  I ran open stacks on the salt and oiled gauze pod filters on the street.  Neither filter out the dirt very well.

Tomorrow I will post the PipeMax output for the problem engine.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on January 25, 2013, 07:49:10 AM
Walrus,

If you list some of the other engine design parameters I'll look them over to see if I can give you some help with the math for your engine build.

Need to know:

Race/street/ or both
fuel octane to be used
power band desired
peak hp rpm desired
frequency of maintenance / miles between rebuilds, etc, etc....

If I'm reading your #'s correctly 74.7bhp (crank) @ 7400 rpm from 790cc's.  That's 94.6bhp/litre on pump gas.  Bmep of 183.8psi from PipeMax.  That's pretty tame for a 4 valve, BUT, reliable because of the 9.2/1 static C/R.    (9.94/1 effective C/R @ 108% V/E)   Are you willing to bump C/R to try to get Bmep to 195psi?    Substitute a higher C/R into PipeMax and see what that does to your output & octane requirement.....

How far do you want to push output?   What are you willing to trade away for more bhp?
 :cheers:
Fordboy

Edit:  I have not read your whole build diary yet, so please point me to any pages that may have more details on the engine.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 26, 2013, 02:55:34 PM
These next three posts are for the second motor.  The problem child.  Changes were a set of performance cams, a pair of flat slide carbs, bigger 865cc bores, higher 10.5 to 1 compression pistons, and a stage 3 spark advance curve.  I got smart and ran a pair of big oiled foam filters.  Everything else was the same.  It ran great on regular pump gas which was good.  This is a street motor that runs on the salt.

This engine was a fast little bugger.  It lasted about 10,000 miles.  The bores and pistons were very worn out.  The initial barrel to skirt clearances were 0.004 inches.  This might be .001 loose, at the most.  The pistons were 2000 series alloy, not 6000 series.  This might have been a factor.  The flat slides are like old style Amals.  There is no starting enrichener.  Lame design.  The engine was flooded when cold.  This might have been a significant problem.  The engine ran rich or very rich at low street running rpm.  It seemed that reversion was a major cause of this and any sort of muffler that quieted down the exhaust made the problem a lot worse.  This probably was a big problem, too.  Second opinions are welcome.

The first PipeMax sheet with engine info.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 26, 2013, 03:00:12 PM
The cam grinder does not want the specs shown.  They are crossed out.  The cams had enough lift to prevent choke.  The intake valve curtain area and diameter seem reasonable.  The cam lobe rpms are way high.  I do not understand how this might affect the engine, how this is calculated, if there are benefits to reducing t, and how to lower it.  Any help is wanted.

The valve and cam sheet is attached. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 26, 2013, 03:07:02 PM
The intake port minimum area is 1.55 square inches.  This is near the "Recommended Port CSA."  The exhaust port minimum area is 1.53 square inches.  This is in the "Largest Exhaust Port Exit CSA" range.  This last sheet has the port area info.  The ports are a better match for this larger engine than the smaller first one.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on January 26, 2013, 06:54:30 PM
W/Walrus,

Sorry to hack up your post, but I'm a slow & crappy typist.
These next three posts are for the second motor.  The problem child.  Changes were a set of performance cams, a pair of flat slide carbs, bigger 865cc bores, higher 10.5 to 1 compression pistons, and a stage 3 spark advance curve.  I got smart and ran a pair of big oiled foam filters.  Everything else was the same.  It ran great on regular pump gas which was good.  This is a street motor that runs on the salt.

This engine was a fast little bugger.  It lasted about 10,000 miles.  The bores and pistons were very worn out.  The initial barrel to skirt clearances were 0.004 inches.  This might be .001 loose, at the most.  The pistons were 2000 series alloy, not 6000 series.  Forged 2618 is a high expansion alloy (requires more initial clearance) & forged 4032 is a "low"(er) expansion alloy which can be fitted more tightly.   I'm unsure of which 6000 series alloys might be used.  This might have been a factor.  Yes, larger than optimal clearance to begin with causes more wear.   The flat slides are like old style Amals.  There is no starting enrichener.  Lame design.  The engine was flooded when cold.  This might have been a significant problem.  Yes, overly rich low speed mixtures are a HUGE cause of piston/bore wear.  The engine ran rich or very rich at low street running rpm.  It seemed that reversion was a major cause of this and any sort of muffler that quieted down the exhaust made the problem a lot worse.  This probably was a big problem, too.  Yes, definately.  Second opinions are welcome.   It would appear the carb's idle & low speed circuits are quite rich.  You will need to correct this.

The first PipeMax sheet with engine info.

The first thing that jumps out to me is that with bigger displacement, bigger (? probably) cams, AND 10.5 C/R, your V/E only goes up 1%!!!   Can you post up the Bmep #'s for file 865IN12.PMD?   I want to see if they went up or down.   If they went down for a higher bhp output, you are going in the wrong direction with your combination.

The cam grinder does not want the specs shown.  They are crossed out.  The cams had enough lift to prevent choke.  The intake valve curtain area and diameter seem reasonable.  The cam lobe rpms are way high.  I do not understand how this might affect the engine, how this is calculated, if there are benefits to reducing t, and how to lower it.  Any help is wanted.

The valve and cam sheet is attached.

It is hard to make any intelligent deductions without the cam numbers being shown, but if your Bmep #'s (see above) are down or flat, AND, the cam lobe rpm's are higher than you are using, sounds like too much cam for the engine spec/rev range being used.   Enough lift to prevent choke at what rpm??   Excess lift/duration/cam timing @ overlap can be the cause of reversion problems.

In general, and this is a very rough guideline, for 4 valve engines with standard size ports:
Seat to seat duration                      Rpm range
270 degrees                                  1500/7000
280 degrees                                  2500/8000
290 degrees                                  3500/9000
300 degrees                                  4500/10000
Engines with enlarged port to valve area will have a higher (1500/2000rpm higher) rpm range.......    4 valve engines breath so well at low rpm, long duration/slow acceleration cam grinds designed for 2 valve engines can be a problem.   Fast acting cams more suitable for 4 valve engines MAY have high rates of jerk, depending on the design.   It is difficult to correctly generalize about cam specs.   The shape of the displacement curve, velocity rate, acceleration rate and jerk values are more precise.   2 cams with the same lift @ say .020" or even .050" valve lift, can be vastly different because of the overall valve displacement curve shape.

If the cam specs on the 790cc @ 7400rpm engine are correct, your cam specs (valve displacement area) for the 865cc @ 8000rpm engine need to be only 10/18% more to adequately feed the flow demand @ that displacement & rpm.   This does not consider port sizing or flow numbers because I don't have that info yet.   Ie: if the port(s) flow MORE at the new valve lift(s), LESS duration (and LESS displacement area) would be needed to sustain the flow demand for a target bhp.   Etc, etc.

The intake port minimum area is 1.55 square inches.  This is near the "Recommended Port CSA."  The exhaust port minimum area is 1.53 square inches.  This is in the "Largest Exhaust Port Exit CSA" range.  This last sheet has the port area info.  The ports are a better match for this larger engine than the smaller first one.

Intake port CSA appears to be a good match.   Exhaust port CSA appears too large, the problem is the reduced flow velocity.  How is the exhaust system size & length compared to what is recommended?   How do the ports flow compared to a flow demand chart for the engine @ target Hp?  What % of intake flow is the exhaust flow?   Port size and flow MUST be carefully matched to engine flow requirements if you want a flexible, well running, dual purpose engine.   Your build is more difficult than a pure race engine where low end throttle response might be ignored in favor of top end Hp.....     This is always the case with "street/race" engines.

Hope this helps some.   Need more info to be more precise.

All facets of all components need to be properly matched and compromises need to be made in every build spec.  Mismatched components/sizes/etc contribute to poor performance in some rpm range.   The trick is to choose wisely on the compromises........     This is much easier to say than to accomplish.    
 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 27, 2013, 12:06:36 PM
The 790 pistons were original Triumph.  The word escapes me right now, but I think they were eutectic cast.  The forged racing pistons are 2618.
The 865 engine was on the dyno annually when we developed different things over three years.  The peak torque in 2012, represented by the PipeMax runs, was a few pounds feet lower than it was the year before.  The pistons were rocking and had poor ring sealing at high rpm.  Also, it needed valves and guides.

The BMEP for the 790 engine was 183.8.  The BMEP for the worn 865 engine was 194.5.

I do not have seat to seat duration numbers.  I do have maximum lift and duration at .05 inches.  A reasonable sine type curve was drawn through the three data points and it was extrapolated zero lift.  It looks like  am in the 290 to 300 degree range.  The standard cams had 12 degrees overlap, and the racing cams have 32, at .05 lift.

The intake port areas on the PipeMax notes are wrong.  I took some measurements.  The bore area in the 39 mm carb is 1.85 square inches, the carb has some tapered spigots that neck down where they connect to the inlet manifolds and the area at this connection is 1.64 square inches.  The port area where the inlet manifold connects to the cylinder head is 2.38 square inches.  I matched the exhaust port outlet to the standard header area of 1.53 square inches.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 27, 2013, 09:06:29 PM
The big motor was modeled in PipeMax months ago.  The cam and valve performance data is attached.  The intake lift to prevent choke is 0.396 inches.  This is higher than the maximum cam lift.  Also, the Intake Valve Diameter Operating Range, at 5248 to 7248 rpm is less than the 7400 rpm target for maximum power.  Some 2mm larger intake valves will do what I need.  I ordered them and they are being made.  The old valve seats were removed and new 2mm larger ones were installed.  The first attached sheet is the PipeMax printout that told me I needed larger valves.

The second sheet is the data for the bigger motor.  The 2mm larger inlet valves are represented on this sheet.

         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 27, 2013, 09:34:25 PM
The other two data sheets for the big motor are attached.  One shows the valve and cam data.  The seat to seat duration data was on the cam card.  It is less than the 270 degrees for a lower rpm cam in FordBoy's recent post.  The duration is just right for an engine with a 7,400 peak horsepower rpm, considering the cylinder head has a performance port job.  The lift is OK, too, and so are the valve diameters.  I changed the lobe center angles in PipeMax to lower the operating rpm's down to just over 8,000 rpm on both cams.  There was over 50 degrees overlap.

This 50+ degrees is too much for a street bike with four valve heads.  I will set the cams up according to the cam card with overlap is between 30 to 35 degrees.  Vizard, in his book "How to Build Horsepower" lists overlap between 10 and 35 degrees for "engines requiring best low-speed output and mileage."  He also says "This puts multi valve engines at the lower end of each range..."  The cams have plenty of overlap, but not too much, according to Vizard's guidance.

The 1.64 square inch minimum intake port cross-section area is between "Recommended Smallest Port CSA" and "Recommended Port CSA."  This is OK for this street/race engine.  The 1.53 square inch exhaust port area is in the "Largest Recommended Port Exit CSA" range.  I hope, the faster port velocities in the larger displacement big motor will cure the low rpm reversion problems.

I think I am good to go.  Second opinions are welcome on this.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 28, 2013, 09:34:17 PM
It took awhile to digest the information provided by FordBoy.  It makes sense.  The engine was run with the racing port job in the 790cc engine for years and it made the motor run much better.  The port size was big, but not too much.  The reversion problems started with the 813 cams. Probably the cams, in combination with the port job, were too much.  The low port velocities in conjunction with the overlap made the reversion.

A PipeMax model was made with the old 790 cams in the 865 cc motor.  The specs are on the first page.  The cam and valve data is on the second.  The cams lift the valves far enough and there is sufficient curtain area.  This is the way I should have built that engine.             
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 29, 2013, 09:46:26 PM
A piece of billet was laying around here with a brass rod.  All was made into a little box for the lambda meter connections and fuse.  The drill press and Shop Fox vise were used.  There are some mistakes with the depth of the cut.  That is hard to get this exact with a drill press.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on January 29, 2013, 10:39:17 PM
Considering the tools Bo that's a rather nice piece of work.  :cheers: :cheers:

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 31, 2013, 01:24:37 AM
Thanks, Pete.  Sometimes I turn the feed screws the wrong way.  That is the source of most of my problems.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on January 31, 2013, 01:42:44 AM
You can do that with a mill too. Guess how I know.  :roll: :roll: :|

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 01, 2013, 01:17:17 AM
The Triumph has 12mm x 1.25 mm tapped holes just above the exhaust ports and downstream from the exhaust valves.  Some sort of smog device tubes plugged in there at one time.  Now the device is removed and they are blocked off with bolts.  I was thinking of putting exhaust gas temperature sensors there.  Has any one done that?   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Grandpa Jones on February 01, 2013, 09:33:32 PM
Hi Wobs, I have an '01 Bonney, are these the ports next to the spark plugs? I think
that is  a small diameter passage to the exhaust port for the air injection system.

Likely not enough room for an egt probe in there. I've done a little reading, seems
the probe should be centered in the exhaust stream, and mounted a certain distance
from the exhaust valve, according to what the probe manufacturer recommends.

Aircraft Spruce has a bunch listed under "Instruments". Good reference material there,
they show several of the clamp-on type. Drill a hole in the exhaust pipe, clamp on,
and you're done. Or the weld-on bung type, which you could remove and plug when
you convert over to street-bike mode.

Cheers, Dave
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 01, 2013, 10:45:57 PM
The sensor needs to be in the typical location if my readings are going to mean anything when I compare them to reference data.  Also, the hole in the head is for the air injection system and it is much too close to the exhaust valve.  My brilliant idea won't work.

The lambda meter I use is made by Innovation Motorsports and I noticed they also have a setup for monitoring exhaust gas temp and cylinder head temp with a gauge and/or data logging.  This is the way I will go.  The standard Triumph headers are stainless steel and I am making up some stainless bungs to be welded on for the lambda meter.  I will also make a set for the EGT probe.

A few questions.  Does the inside of the exhaust pipe need to be clean before the bungs can be welded on?  Is there a good exhaust pipe welder in the Salem/Portland area?  Innovation Motorsports recommends TIG.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 03, 2013, 01:50:12 AM
This year will be the last chance for me to get back the partially streamlined world record.  I am going to run for it if I can find the money for the entry fee.  Two back-to-back runs over 160 mph are what I need to do.  The bike consistently ran 131+ with the old engine so I need to get 29 mph with maybe 10 more horsepower.  Success will require some good salt, a nice tuck, and lots of devine intervention.

The FIM requires us older folks to take and pass a cardiac stress test and electroechocardiagram.  The old doctor I had for years would look at the test results, groan and shake his head, give me a long lecture about lifestyle improvement, and finally sign off on the paperwork.  He moved on to internal medicine as a specialty and now I have a new young doctor.  He is nice enough, smart, and he takes things pretty seriously.  This is scary.  Now, I guess, I will actually need to get in shape.  Oh, what agony!  It looks like I have four months to do it and I started three days ago.  The old walrus needs to transform himself into a sleek barracuda.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Duck-Stew on February 04, 2013, 09:19:57 AM
Best of luck on your transformation, Wobbly Barracuda!

(Which doesn't sound quite right...  Perhaps time for a new screen name.) :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on February 04, 2013, 09:31:08 AM
How about "Rooster Fish" or Yellow Fin Tuna?. They're both fast. :evil:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on February 04, 2013, 07:10:53 PM
Go Barracuda Bo!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on February 04, 2013, 08:07:54 PM
Less food intake = Less $$$.......in theory.  The good food actually costs more per ounce :x

I borrowed a set of leathers and had to loose 15 lbs. to squeeze into them..........Maybe that will work for you 8-) 8-) 8-) :lol: :lol: :lol:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 04, 2013, 10:50:00 PM
My alias won't change.  My kids say I will look like a walrus no matter how much weight I lose.

The cylinder head is done.  It is a double overhead cam engine with four valves per cylinder.  There are no rocker arms.  The cams push down on inverted buckets with adjustment shims on them.  The valves tips, collets, keepers, and springs are inside the inverted buckets.  It is similar to most all modern bike engines.

The standard Triumph valve springs were used with high lift cams.  The springs buckled sideways at full compression and this pushed on the buckets and in turn, the buckets pushed sideways on the bores they slide in.  Worn bucket bores = new cylinder head needed = major outlay of $.  I was worried about this so I sent the head, cams, etc. to the best person I could find.  That is Mike Perry at Kibblewhite in Pacifica, California.  They know a lot about these modern Triumphs.  Only one bore was scuffed from the sideways movement and they were able to salvage it.  The guides were worn loose and the valve heads, too, from all of the lateral shoving at full compression.  This hurt performance.   Racing springs are installed as part of this rebuild.  I prefer steel spring keepers.  They are not available so they used the titanium ones that are.  Lesson 1:  always use racing springs with a racing cam.

Triumph does not make replacement valve guides.  They say to buy a new cylinder head if the guides are worn.  Kibblewhite pushed out my worn guides, miked the holes, made new ones, and honed them to fit the valve stems, exactly.  Lesson two, don't toss a worn head when the guides are worn.  It can be saved.

The guides and valves do not get much lubricant.  There are oil seals to keep the oil from going down the guides.  It is important that the valves and guides are compatible metals.  I did not use Triumph exhaust valves for this reason and I used Kibblewhite valves instead.  They developed their valves and guide metal to work together without a lot of wear.

The intake valves are 2mm oversize to give better flow for the 994 cc engine.  Kibblewhite removed the old valve seats, made up some new oversize ones, installed them, made up some bigger intake valves, and installed them, too.  They also did a multi angle valve job and matched the intake ports to the bigger seats.

A problem with these engines is the valves receding in the cylinder head as they wear and as valve jobs are done.  Soon enough, the adjustment shims that are needed are thinner than they make.  Kibblewhite shortened each valve as needed so I could use larger shims to start with and I would have the ability to use thinner shims later.

The bike continues to use shims on top of the buckets.  This is OK for this street/race motor with an 8,400 rpm red line.  Shim under bucket followers are needed for higher revving motors.

Incidentally, the Triumph valve shims are the same as some old Hondas, Yamahas, and Kakasakis.  New shims are available from these dealers, too.

The only Triumph part of the valve train now is the cylinder head and exhaust valve seats.  This is custom work with a lot of parts made to fit.  It isn't cheap or fast.  Budget 1K per cylinder for similar work and a month or two for turn around time.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on February 05, 2013, 08:33:07 AM
That motor is going to fly. That's some serious head work Bo. By the time you're done, there will be no wobble in the Walrus. Great news man. Wish you all the very best.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on February 05, 2013, 05:40:08 PM
So far I have not resorted to the professionals with advertising budgets, just the local pros with a LOT of experience and some fancy shop tools.  Did Kibblewhite use their new BEE-HIVE spring design in your application?

Bo.....you better work on your hand-grip strength......just to hold on to all of that new-found power 8-) 8-) 8-)   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 05, 2013, 11:25:39 PM
The head is on the UPS truck headed north.  Coming back to daddy.  My best guess without seeing them is they are inner and outer straight rate with different winding directions on each.  No bee hives that I know of.

The 865 motor was tuned pretty tight and the power was focused on the top end of the power band.  It ran fast if the gearing was perfect and I was riding good that day.  The new motor will not be all that much more powerful.  It will have a lot more torque in the upper mid range and a little bit more top end.  That is a guess.  It has not been finished and put on the dyno.

There is a tune for these engines with animalistic power character.  It involves a 10,000 rpm rev limiter, 5mm larger valves throughout, shim under bucket followers, radical cams, some cam follower machine work, thinner piston rings, and a knife-edged crank.  Triumph Performance has it all figured out and they are the experts on it.  The engine I am building should be a good street/race engine that will work with nitrous or something else I am working on. 

I found a pipe welder.  It is the guy that does all the welding for the railroad and who extended my swing arm.  He can do delicate work, too.  I vaguely remember that an exhaust system should be clean inside when it is welded.  I am going to fill the pipes with soap, water, and bolts and shake them until the bolts knock off all of the carbon.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on February 06, 2013, 12:16:33 AM
Bo, if you like to gamble and you think lady luck is on your side then go ahead and use your old pipes with carbon on the inside and chrome on the outside. There have been times in the past where I've gambled and got away with it. On the other hand if you want a good reliable exhaust system start with new tubing and u-bends and build a proper new system. It will be worth the investment. Trying to fix the system after every couple of runs or gussetting it where it cracks to try and prevent it from cracking again isn't any fun and depending on the availability of welding equipment can be problematic. Guess how I know.

Pete

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on February 06, 2013, 09:53:16 AM
I can't wait to see the parts when you get them back. Peter, do you think a fully equiped pit cart might be the answer for us?.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 08, 2013, 02:10:42 AM
Pete, I know what you mean about trying to hang on to old stuff longer than it should be used.  That covers my bike, house, tools, clothes, furniture, and everything else.  For years I used some fancy titanium Arrow pipes.  They looked cool.  The bike made less power with them and they contributed to the reversion problem I had.  These pipes are the standard Triumph stainless ones that were made in the Midlands and came with the bike.  The bike makes the most power and has the least reversion with them.  They are strong, well made, and in good shape cause I didn't use them much.  Now I don't care about titanium bling.  I just want speed and lots of it.  The OEM pipes are going back on the bike.  My task is simply to put bungs on them for the EGT and lambda sensors.

This is the head with all of the new parts and the big valves.  Saturday I will drive up to the dealer in Beaverton, borrow their valve shim box, and fit the shims.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on February 08, 2013, 03:18:03 AM
That looks like a pro job, that's a nice looking head. I've seen a Ferrari shim box and a printers tray had nothing on it. I'm sure you'll ace it. What gain in HP are you hoping for?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on February 08, 2013, 08:49:33 AM
You shouldn't have any problem if all you're doing is welding in bungs. Fabricating a system from used pipe on the other hand can be problematic. Titanium is a legitimate material for very serious racing efforts but for budget efforts it's probably not a good choice as it's a fairly difficult material to fabricate and once a crack forms, very difficult to repair successfully.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 08, 2013, 08:17:28 PM
Tauruck, the advice given to me by Matt Capri, who developed this setup, is a 10% torque increase.  That would put me in the 90's.

Pete, I will take your advice and use new tubing. 

A lot of people have gone the speeds I am trying to go on partial streamliners with less power.  The weak link in all of this is me.  Last year I was on the RWB course to test the streamlining and there was only one mile to get up to speed before the timed mile.  During the off season I rehearsed in my mind to be aggressive with the throttle from the start within the limits of traction on the salt, to stay focused from the very beginning, to tuck down early, and to bury the tach needle in the red zone before the shirt to fifth.  It worked.  Now I need to remember all of that for next year.  I am scrunched up like Duck Stew is on his Ducati.  It is hard to get down on the tank in a smooth fluid motion without thinking about it and this interrupts my concentration.  My plan is to move my feet back a little bit so it is easier to flop down onto the tank.  Going fast looks easy but it is not. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Cereal KLR on February 08, 2013, 11:01:28 PM
You should be very happy with Kibblewhites work,they made my Sporty motor sing. Triumph wants $1200 smacks for a new head so thats great you were able to fit fresh guides. I will keep this in my memory bank.

Will you be running Triumph TOR mufflers? The stock stuff can`t flow very well.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 11, 2013, 11:22:10 PM
The Triumph off-road mufflers are what I use on the street when the OEM Triumph headers.  They are reasonably quiet with not much back pressure.

The latest (February 2013) issue of "The Horse - Backstreet Choppers" has an excellent article by an expert tuner working with a Sportster.  He got 110 rear wheel hp out of the thing with one of the flattest torque curves I have seen.  It was real sensitive to changes in ignition timing.  He knows what he is about - the build was not very radical and within the grasp of most of us.

The 304 stainless was machinable.  Tapping the bungs was a real problem.  It took major twisting force.  I had to lube the tap with anti-sisze to keep it from chattering and that did not work very well.  I was using a new tap, too.  Has anyone had success with annealing this stuff before machining it?  If so, how is it done? 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on February 14, 2013, 01:16:07 PM
Don't let any information about a Sportster contaminate your Trumpet.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on February 14, 2013, 04:55:55 PM
The Triumph off-road mufflers are what I use on the street when the OEM Triumph headers.  They are reasonably quiet with not much back pressure.

The latest (February 2013) issue of "The Horse - Backstreet Choppers" has an excellent article by an expert tuner working with a Sportster.  He got 110 rear wheel hp out of the thing with one of the flattest torque curves I have seen.  It was real sensitive to changes in ignition timing.  He knows what he is about - the build was not very radical and within the grasp of most of us.

The 304 stainless was machinable.  Tapping the bungs was a real problem.  It took major twisting force.  I had to lube the tap with anti-sisze to keep it from chattering and that did not work very well.  I was using a new tap, too.  Has anyone had success with annealing this stuff before machining it?  If so, how is it done? 
PM sent on the tapping.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 14, 2013, 11:34:51 PM
Hi Freud.  I guess, as a fellow Triumph Bonneville rider, you are concerned about this.  Not to worry.  Everything on the bike is either original Triumph or racing parts made for Triumphs.  We will see you on Saturday night.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 17, 2013, 01:37:25 PM
The reunion sure was nice.  Freud does the work every year to make that happen and he does a good job.

Rosie found this on the internet.  http://screen.yahoo.com/motorcycle-ridge-riding-084000429.html (http://screen.yahoo.com/motorcycle-ridge-riding-084000429.html)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on February 17, 2013, 11:11:53 PM
I watched that clip. Insane.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 18, 2013, 12:23:31 PM
I did that ridge riding once...and I went over the edge and down the slope.  I could not get the bike back on the ridge, get it upright, climb back on the seat, and get going.  It was impossible and I was alone.  I had to carve a tiny trail along the ridge about two feet down from the top with a rock and stick.  Then flipped the bike around and rolled it back to where I started.  The bike was on the little trail and I was along side it on the ridge walking on my knees.  Never again.  Ridges are for goats.  That is why I ride that little Yamaha TT-225.  It is small and light and I can get out of trouble.

The local machinist who did the swing arm extension welded on the bungs.  The bung-pipe joints should not leak air so they are not tacked on.  These are welded all of the way around using tig.  The goal is to set the mixture on the dyno and to also get exhaust gas temperature.  I will have traces for power, mixture, and EGT from the dyno.

The bungs shrunk when they were welded on and I had to retap them.  It was no big deal.  It is something to consider when this work is done.           
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 19, 2013, 10:22:44 PM
Yesterday I was putting the head on the engine and I lubed up the cams.  One step in the assembly process is to rotate the crankshaft four revolutions before installing the cam chain tensioner.  The grease on the tappet adjusting shim tells a story.  The cam lobe is pushing on the edge of the shim when it rotates and just starts to lift the valve.  These tappet buckets have the shims on the top and lots of people use them with these cams.  I did for several years.  A problem with this setup is the shims can be spit out at high rpm.  I kept my target rpm at 7,500 and this helped to assure the shims would stay put.

This year I am very serious about speed and the intake and exhaust systems are tuned for an 8,000 rpm target.  This is a 500 rpm increase.  Some calculations show this higher rpm results in a 16% increase in the inertial force that will try to pull the shims out.  In the past the shims had an average thickness of 2.5mm.  The new valves are set up with shims having a 3.1 mm average thickness.  This is a 24% mass increase with a proportional increase in the inertial force.  In total, the forces trying to yank out the shims will be 41% more than before.

Tonight I am boxing up the head and sending it back down to get the shim-under-bucket kit fitted.  They need to pull out all of the valves, weld some stellite on the tips to make them longer, and to assemble and shim the whole thing.  A smart guy would have figured all of this out before sending it down the first time.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on February 20, 2013, 01:28:20 AM
Tonight I am boxing up the head and sending it back down to get the shim-under-bucket kit fitted.  They need to pull out all of the valves, weld some stellite on the tips to make them longer, and to assemble and shim the whole thing.  A smart guy would have figured all of this out before sending it down the first time. 

Walrus,

Must they weld the tips of the valves?   If there is a minimum of .100" (~2.5mm), from the top of the valve to the top of the keeper groove, a "Cosworth" style, "top hat" or "button" shim could be used under a "flat" top tappet follower.   I have shims up to 3.5mm thickness for 9/32 (7mm) valve stem dia.   What is your valve stem diameter?   There must be shims & buckets that will work without stellite welding the valve tips.  Seems like a make work wank, IMO.   Some shim must be used to allow valve adjustment, I can't imagine that the only adjustment is to grind the valve tip.

BTW, you are right about spitting out the flat shims @ high(er) rpm's.   My experience is that the heavier/thicker they are, about 8000rpm is the safe limit.   Had to modify the standard Cosworth Chevys (Vega engine) for the full race Cosworth Ford (DFV/BDG) setup, to solve that problem.
 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on February 20, 2013, 07:14:41 AM
Bo, you're still a smart guy in my book. Things happen for a reason. You'll be Ok. Glad I don't have to deal with shims.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Cereal KLR on February 20, 2013, 10:57:22 PM
Just a FYI that came to me when looking over your cyl head. My motor is an 2004 vintage and when I pulled it apart the cam tower bearing bolts seemed soft and the edges deformed when removed. I replaced all fasteners on re assembly and Triumph had changed the material to a light almost chrome finish. These are much better and I have had the cams out several times now without any change to the fastener.

Their part # is T3331299 :SCREW,PAN/HD ,TX,M6 *1*4       List is $1.64 each.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 22, 2013, 01:14:34 AM
Fordboy, you might be right.  I do not have anything to look at or measure.  The head went south Tuesday morning and the machinist is giving me a good price for doing the work.  I remember your advice that there are several ways to get the intake flow the engine needs, cams, porting, and/or bigger intake valves.  My advice to anyone building one of these engines is to use a standard Triumph 865cc exhaust cam, a standard Triumph 790c intake cam, a good multi angle valve job, a street port job, and bigger intake valves if PipeMax indicates they are needed.  This will give good flow without the many and expensive mods for the hotter cams.  Now I have so much money tied up in the cylinder head that I will buy an other used one in good condition for the street and use this one for racing, only.

Cereal, thanks for the advice.  I will order some.

The indexing head seemed to be a dumb purchase.  I do not have a mill.  I need some brass plugs for the bungs with fine pitch metric threads.  Chances of finding some in this backwater town are zip, so I turned up some on the lathe and figured out how to mill the flats on the drill press with the indexing head.  The setup works great.  Now the index head is starting to pay for itself. 

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 22, 2013, 10:40:44 PM
The plugs.

This build diary is going to slow down for awhile.  I thought the cylinder head would be in a lot better shape than it was and I used up all of the money I saved to go to AUS to get the engine together.  There is an opportunity to put in a lot of overtime at the job and I took it.  This will get me the money for AUS and maybe enough to go to BUB this year.  Not much free time will be available for a few months to build the bike.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on February 23, 2013, 01:23:37 AM
You did a nice job on those plugs. In these uncertain times overtime is a bonus.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on February 23, 2013, 10:50:08 PM
We can weight if you can...............it will get better with a little age.....and some overtime :-)  My budget is for a single-cylinder motor and I'm still short..............Luckily my crew chips in for travel expenses. 8-) 8-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 24, 2013, 10:57:41 PM
There is a plan hatching to life during all of this.  Everything below the head gasket is built as strong as I can make it using parts Triumph Performance developed for their turbo bike.  It can handle fuel, nitrous, a blower, etc.  The cylinder heads contain all of the goodies on these overhead double knocker motors.  It is easy to swap heads and it can be done with the engine in the frame.

The head I am working on now is a mild NA setup with 11.5 to 1 compression, a port job, 2mm larger intake valves, and the 813 cams.  It is what l will run in AUS.  Next year I will buy a used cyl head in good shape and enlarge the combustion chamber so the compression ratio is 9:1, and it will have standard valves, a Triumph 865cc intake cam, and a Triumph 790cc exhaust cam.  The low compression head will be what I use on the street and with spray for racing.

The big plan is to run fuel or gas, whichever I want.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 25, 2013, 11:07:50 PM
Trip planning for AUS started a few days ago.  Gretchen, my youngest girl, is working hard to finish high school six months early so we can go in February 2015.  It looks like we will be there for a month.  Victoria is where we will be most of the time.  Gretchen is figuring out what she wants to do.  Racing at Gairdner and visiting the Tasmanian Devil Conservation Park are all that I consider essential.  There will be all sorts of questions on this build diary about jetting for AUS race gas, etc.  Gretchen has traveled and seen a lot more of the world than me.  She has been to Ireland, New York, and Hawaii.  A lot further than I have been.  This is a big adventure for the backwoods homeboy.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on February 26, 2013, 12:17:19 AM
Good to hear that man.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: charlie101 on February 26, 2013, 02:18:25 AM
Trip planning for AUS started a few days ago.  Gretchen, my youngest girl, is working hard to finish high school six months early so we can go in February 2015.  It looks like we will be there for a month.  Victoria is where we will be most of the time.  Gretchen is figuring out what she wants to do.  Racing at Gairdner and visiting the Tasmanian Devil Conservation Park are all that I consider essential.  There will be all sorts of questions on this build diary about jetting for AUS race gas, etc.  Gretchen has traveled and seen a lot more of the world than me.  She has been to Ireland, New York, and Hawaii.  A lot further than I have been.  This is a big adventure for the backwoods homeboy.   
What baffled me with Australia was the absolute vast distances there was! Australia is a country where not just kangaroos, but also time is running leaps and bounces. A week will vanish just to take in the wiev. It was neeeverrrr evvvverrrr ending to travel by wheels.  Stunningly beautiful country, mind blowing habitants of all kinds, and well worth it!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 26, 2013, 09:49:53 PM
Vast distances?  That is something to think about.  Right now I am figuring out, roughly, how much this trip will cost.  Here is a question that only folks on this forum will know.  Which Victoria based rental outfits are dumb enough to rent a vehicle to someone going to Gairdner?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 01, 2013, 10:02:08 PM
A submarine?  Look at this! 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jon on March 01, 2013, 11:18:41 PM
roughly, how much this trip will cost.

Gas is expensive in Aus compared to what you pay.

Which Victoria based rental outfits are dumb enough to rent a vehicle to someone going to Gairdner?

All of them, they won't ask so you won't tell them :)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on March 02, 2013, 02:50:55 AM
Gas is expensive here too. We just got slapped with an 81 cent increase. That's 13 bucks/L. The conversion rate is 9 to the Dollar.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Dr Goggles on March 02, 2013, 06:04:58 AM
Trip planning for AUS started a few days ago.  Gretchen, my youngest girl, is working hard to finish high school six months early so we can go in February 2015.  It looks like we will be there for a month.  Victoria is where we will be most of the time.  Gretchen is figuring out what she wants to do.  Racing at Gairdner and visiting the Tasmanian Devil Conservation Park are all that I consider essential.  There will be all sorts of questions on this build diary about jetting for AUS race gas, etc.  Gretchen has traveled and seen a lot more of the world than me.  She has been to Ireland, New York, and Hawaii.  A lot further than I have been.  This is a big adventure for the backwoods homeboy.   
What baffled me with Australia was the absolute vast distances there was! Australia is a country where not just kangaroos, but also time is running leaps and bounces. A week will vanish just to take in the wiev. It was neeeverrrr evvvverrrr ending to travel by wheels.  Stunningly beautiful country, mind blowing habitants of all kinds, and well worth it!
Ha!, the first thing I thought was at least you'll be familiar with traveling long distances, most Europeans, like our Swedish friend and particularly the Japanese can't get their head around the scale...

"Can I drive to Uluru(Ayres Rock) in a day?"...no, from Melbourne or Sydney it is three long days drive.....

The tow to Gairdner is the best part of fourteen hours of 60mph driving from Melbourne.

You won't have any trouble hiring unless you re trying to get a camper, they get a little toey about where you are and I'd be a little wary about driving a camper out to the lake, they aren'
t that sturdy and God made the lake road to kill vehicles.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on March 02, 2013, 08:49:37 AM
....God made the lake road to kill vehicles.

We've always said that about I-80 across Wyoming and Utah in August  :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on March 02, 2013, 06:26:49 PM
....God made the lake road to kill vehicles.

We've always said that about I-80 across Wyoming and Utah in August  :cheers:


The one who made the road to the lake was Old Testament

G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Dr Goggles on March 02, 2013, 07:50:04 PM
....God made the lake road to kill vehicles.

We've always said that about I-80 across Wyoming and Utah in August  :cheers:


The one who made the road to the lake was Old Testament
G

a vengeful God, same ***t who burnt my wiring, bogged us on the way out and pushed my gate over when I was backing the trailer into the drive ......
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on March 03, 2013, 01:37:48 AM
a vengeful God, same ***t who burnt my wiring, bogged us on the way out and pushed my gate over when I was backing the trailer into the drive ......

Unlatched the canopy, blew the seal out, smeared copper coat on your arse and pushed you to 215. :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 03, 2013, 12:47:25 PM
It looks like I need to rent something durable with looks and comfort as a lower priority.

The folks racing the Triliner were at BUB last year.  It was their first visit and it seems they have a bad case of Salt Fever.  We were in the Triumph pits and it was my first close up view of a well funded team.  A minor league guy like me has to worry about everything and a big part of the effort is preserving the equipment for next year.  Lots of the work are general tasks related to taking care of stuff and making sure to not blow up the motor or crash.  The funded teams have all sorts of folks to worry about the different details, they can toss stuff after use and they do not need to take care of things, and it isn't that big of a deal if a motor is blown apart in the line of duty.  It is a different world.

The team are nice people and they treated me really well.  It was like we were in two different worlds.  I learned to not pay much attention to what was going on in their side of the pits and just to concentrate on my race.  This was with an American team, at the same race, and racing the same brand of bikes.  After we ran and the Bonnie was buttoned up and loaded, we helped James from England with his James Comet just like we helped Lars the year before.  We got along well and there was a lot more interaction, just like with Lars.  Sometimes I think that the country of our origin is not important at all.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on March 03, 2013, 02:45:33 PM
The country or the vehicle NEVER matters Bo, it's the lsr people!!!  :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 04, 2013, 01:28:18 AM
Yesterday the Triumph club had the monthly breakfast and I went to the shop and picked up a poster showing the liner.  It is a concept drawing.   Tomorrow I will shrink it on the copy machine at work and post it.  It is an anglo-american effort based on the British and American flags on it.  The shape is an original design and it looks very slippery.  It looks like a carbon fiber shell throughout with Jason DiSalvo as the driver.

The power plant is a Rocket III 2300cc triple.  An odd choice.  These are not racing engines like Busa's.  They are 2,300cc inline water cooled triples.  Sort of like an English 3 cylinder Perkins tractor engine on steroids.  They must be planning on using a blower.  Those motors cannot rev very high and they would not be competitive in N.A. form.  Carpenter racing has a lot of experience with them.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Cereal KLR on March 04, 2013, 02:43:14 AM
Large lump it is , the Carpenter kit makes 240 hp and was good for 174 and change at BUB event. It will be cool to see this motor stuff into something slippery. Great sound as it ripped by.

https://rideatriumph.com/disalvo-conquers-the-salt-flats/
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 04, 2013, 08:28:03 PM
The poster was shrank on the office copier and taped together.  Here it is.  Note the color.  Not really grey, or black.  It is "walrus."
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: saltwheels262 on March 05, 2013, 06:48:56 PM
that is is really something.

here's to hoping for some good runs.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: rgn on March 05, 2013, 08:07:50 PM
The power plant is a Rocket III 2300cc triple.  An odd choice.  These are not racing engines like Busa's.  They are 2,300cc inline water cooled triples.  Sort of like an English 3 cylinder Perkins tractor engine on steroids.  They must be planning on using a blower.  Those motors cannot rev very high and they would not be competitive in N.A. form.

I was looking at the rocket power plant a while ago.  There is evidence they will rev without modification to over 9K without concern.  The motor is capable of much much more than the conservative role assigned to it in the rocket.   :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 05, 2013, 11:06:51 PM
Some info is on www.hotrodconspiracy.com/rocket.html (http://www.hotrodconspiracy.com/rocket.html)

I could not find much more than this.  It is a fresh and different approach.  Nothing like the commonly used Hayabusa.

This Saturday at 5:30 PM I will give a short seminar "Performance Tuning for the Street Rider" at Cascade MotoClassics, 13705 SW Farmington Road, Beaverton, Oregon, 97005 (503) 574-3353  It covers the basics and is tailored for the Triumph owner. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on March 06, 2013, 06:45:20 AM
The poster was shrank on the office copier and taped together.  Here it is.  Note the color.  Not really grey, or black.  It is "walrus."
Hopefully not "Wobbly."
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 10, 2013, 03:09:03 PM
The change from the original 790cc engine in the bike I bought new to the last version of the 790cc motor was the subject of my class.  It was a very good engine.  The bores looked very fresh after the final tear down except for some salt abrasion, the valve gear was in good shape, too, and it went very fast considering what it was.

The 865cc engine was built from the 790cc one with flat slide carbs and big cams among other changes.  It wore out very fast and it this was most likely caused by a rich mixture at the smaller throttle openings and lower rpms I use on the street.  Reversion was a big problem with that engine.  Also, the engine is flooded to start it when cold with the flat slides.  The standard carbs use an enrichening circuit.

Money is tight around here and need to get a lot of years out of the 994cc engine.  It was modeled this morning in PipeMax like this:  the 994cc engine with the compression lowered from 11.5 to 1 to 10.4 to 1 using a thicker head gasket and the original 790cc cams.  According to PipeMax, the valve sizes, curtain areas, and lifts are adequate for the bigger displacement at 7,400 rpm.

The plan is to use the 790cc cams, the standard CV carbs, the thicker head gasket, and the racing valve springs without the spacer shims on the street.  The race setup will use the flat slide carbs, the thinner head gasket, and the shimmed springs.  It is a bit of work to make the change back and forth every year.  At this stage in life I have more time than money so this is no big deal.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 11, 2013, 01:22:06 AM
The thicker head gasket is readily available if I make it.  0.062 copper, it will be, and I found a place to order a sheet from.  Sheet copper as sold has some temper.  Is there anyone with a vacuum furnace that anneals copper gaskets?

The old racer has been waiting for parts and for work to be done by others.  Not much can be done on the bike.  One of my life goals is to use up my junk pile before I go.  One idea I had was to turn a set of old leaf springs into a monster cross bow.  Common sense won the day and I decided to make something a bit more useful.  I had a lot of copper fittings and a lamp shade so it was time for some industrial art.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on March 11, 2013, 01:36:34 AM
Generally you can anneal the copper head gaskets yourself by warming them up to red hot and then quenching them in water. There's lots of information on the trusty internet if you want to see it done before you try it yourself. Just google "annealing copper head gaskets".

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: generatorshovel on March 11, 2013, 02:46:07 AM
The thicker head gasket is readily available if I make it.  0.062 copper, it will be, and I found a place to order a sheet from.  Sheet copper as sold has some temper.  Is there anyone with a vacuum furnace that anneals copper gaskets?

The old racer has been waiting for parts and for work to be done by others.  Not much can be done on the bike.  One of my life goals is to use up my junk pile before I go.  One idea I had was to turn a set of old leaf springs into a monster cross bow.  Common sense won the day and I decided to make something a bit more useful.  I had a lot of copper fittings and a lamp shade so it was time for some industrial art.

I'm planning on using these Wobbly

http://www.coppergaskets.com.au/

Tiny
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 12, 2013, 01:24:56 AM
Pete, the head gaskets will be switched annually from thick to thin.  I have used the torch method and it works for a few times then the gasket seems to age and it is worst with the thinner ones.  As I understand, it is oxidation and it does not happen when the annealing is done in a vacuum or inert gas. 

Those gaskets from AUS look good.  My shocks were custom made by Ikon in Albury and the shipping and customs duty charges were pretty rough.  The gasket can be mailed like a letter and it might be easy to avoid all of that.  I will contact him.

Star Motorcycles, a division of Yamaha, has a new 2014 bike called the Bolt.  It is on their website and u-tube.  These bikes are real basic like the Triumph Bonnevilles and Sportsters and they look like good hot rod material.  They won't be blazing fast.  Instead, they will be a lot of fun and I'll bet we see a few on the salt.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on March 12, 2013, 10:13:12 AM
Wob, does Cometic make gaskets for your engine?  The do all of their MLS gaskets in almost any thickness.  Just received .060 gaskets for the GSXR 750 turbo motor I'm gathering parts to build.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 12, 2013, 09:40:43 PM
Thanks, Stainless.  I asked.  Cometic will make them.  That is what I will do.  There is a very small distance between the hole where the cam chain goes and the side of the cylinder bore with these big pistons.  The gasket is critical. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 17, 2013, 12:52:08 PM
Triumph Performance has the standard 0.043 inch thick head gaskets giving an 11.5 to 1 static comp ratio.  That is what I will use for the race build.  The street build will use a 0.063 gasket giving around a 10.7 to 1 ratio.  A pair were ordered from Cometic today.  I would lower the CR down even more but these are overhead cam engines with a chain.  Typically there is enough slop in the chain to accommodate a small increase in gasket thickness.  Using a thicker gasket advances the cams a small amount.  This is not enough to cause problems and it will be a benefit on the street by helping the low rpm power.

A pair of OEM Triumph cams for the 790 cc engine are on order.  They will be in the street build.  The cylinder head is in California while the shim-under-bucket kit is being fitted.  I asked the machinist to see if there was a way to use lighter springs on the street and I could switch to the heavier ones for racing.

The plan is to set engine up in race tune, haul it up to Cascade Moto Classics, and jet it for Bonneville.  Then, I will drain the tank and put in some race gas equivalent to the "event gas" in AUS.  I found a source here for Sunoco where I can by it by the gallon and I do not need to purchase a big can.  Is there anywhere where I can get the specs for the event gas that is available at Gairdner?

I did not hear the piston slap from the badly worn engine I am rebuilding.  Maybe I am deaf in those frequencies and I also cannot hear detonation?  I asked for information from a supplier about those Knock Link detonation sensor lights.  They glow red when the engine pings and I hope to see any problems on the on the light before I blow up the motor.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jon on March 18, 2013, 07:54:17 AM
There's no fuel available at Lake Gairdner Bo, there's not much of anything there actually.
If you need something it has to be in your van on the way in.
Plenty of Salt, Sand and flies though

jon
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 18, 2013, 11:37:57 PM
The fellow that designed the motor parts I am using, Matt Capri, says 110 octane leaded is the best fuel for the setup I have.   Some internet research shows I can get VP, Sunoco, and ERC race gas here and in AUS.  These fuels look like they might work:  ERC 110K, Sunoco Standard 110 octane leaded, and VP C12 108 octane leaded.  Some basic questions.

AUS is a big country and I am not sure where we will be based, it is either Adelaide or Victoria.  Which of these brands has the widest distribution in the South Australia/Victoria area?

The fuel spec sheets are sort of a mystery to me.  It looks like these fuels have different properties.  Am I correct to say that if I jet the bike for one of them I had better use it when I get to AUS?

Can I jet for one of these fuels and be fairly certain the jet choice will be too rich for the other two if I use them?

Are all of these legal for an attempt at the 150mph club?  I think they are based on reading the DLRA the rule book, but I am not 100% sure.

These are a lot of questions.  Any help is appreciated.       

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 20, 2013, 01:19:03 AM
Jon, are they biting flies, regular house flies, or those little brine flies?

Today did some thinking.  The density altitude at Bonneville is pretty high and that reduces the bike's compression ratios.  That explains why the engine runs well on all sorts of different gasolines.  Gairdner is only 111 feet above sea level and fuel choice will be more critical.  The various compression ratios will be higher.  In addition, the air will be thicker and I will be pushing against more aerodynamic drag.  All of this adds up to more combustion pressure and heat than I am used to.  The situation is made worse by the new engine configuration.  The old motor was an 865cc twin with 10.5 to 1 compression and the new one will be 994 cc with 11.5 to 1 comp.

A hot burning oxygenated gas might not work good in this air cooled motor.  What do I look for on the gasoline spec sheet to tell me what a good fuel would be?  It needs to be forgiving.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jon on March 20, 2013, 01:37:45 AM
They are exploratory flies Bo, they will just wander over and into you.

I think most fuels are available, if you have a specific fuel I can track some down and meet you at the lake with it if you want.

jon
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fredvance on March 20, 2013, 09:50:53 AM
I think VP mr12 would work great for you. I run 13-1 comp and it gives me 6-8 HP over ERC mul-b.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 21, 2013, 12:33:36 AM
Fred, this year I am going to go for a record at B'ville and I need all of the help I can get.  Some highly oxygenated leaded gas will be perfect.  How do you set the jetting for that stuff besides renting dyno time in SLC?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on March 21, 2013, 01:31:05 AM
Bo, why don't you blend your own "jungle juice"?. Toluene and Xylene added to gas makes HP. :-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fredvance on March 21, 2013, 11:25:43 AM
I haven't messed with jetting in 30 years. My ecu compensates for the altitude, some. This year we are going to put the bike on Scott Horners dyno in SLC. I highly recommend you use MR12 and put it on Scotts dyno.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 22, 2013, 12:00:41 AM
Jon, it seems that a person needs to belong to certain race clubs or organizations to get leaded gas and not all race groups can get all brands of fuel.  The oxygenated leaded fuel Fred is recommending is not sold in AUS.  Sunoco EXO2 is an oxygenated leaded with 10% oxygen by weight.  I can get it here and in AUS.  Can a DLRA guy, which I will be the year I am in AUS, get leaded Sunoco?

It looks like this Sunoco EX02 is some radical stuff and I will need to jet the bike richer for it.  I can do that on the dyno.  Has anyone used this gas?  It will put me into the fuel classes at BUB.

Mike, I am not confident enough to make my own fuel.  I do have xylene, toluene, acetone, etc on my paint shelf. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jon on March 22, 2013, 03:50:34 AM
Bo
If you choose a fuel I'll look around for it, if your fuel is oxygenated your in fuel for DLRA as well.
What altitude are you at there for Dyno?
I would be tempted to get your bike dynoed and jet it and set your timing curve over there at close to sea level so that any issues can be dealt with in civilisation.
jon
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 22, 2013, 09:45:09 PM
The dyno I use is almost exactly the same elevation as Gairdner.  We do not use the oxygen sensor to jet with leaded gas.  The procedure is to increase the jet sizes one at a time until power peaks and then drops.  Then, the jets that make the most power are reinstalled.  Next I try different advance curves until I find the best one.  Then I recheck the jet sizes.  It is a time consuming way to go.  It sure works, though.  That is why I do not switch fuels very often.  The Sunoco EXO2 is what I will use.  It will put me into the fuel class on a 1000cc APS-F running against Brett DeStoop's 240 mph record.  He does not have anything to worry about.  Thanks for the offer to bring some fuel.  It is 2015 when we are there and a lot can happen between now and then.  Who knows, leaded gas might be banned.

We have a city near here named Bend where I used to live.  It is near the same elev as B'ville.  I might do the jetting there for Utah.  We do not have the FIM rules yet so I am not sure they will have a fuel class.  I need to run event gas in the gas class.

Thanks for the ideas about jetting and oxygenated leaded.  The engine is built with "can tipping" in mind, and specifically nitropropane.  It is plenty strong and it should handle the stress if I get the timing and jetting right.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on March 23, 2013, 11:28:26 AM
Bo, FIM doesn't care about fuel.  Run pump gas or race gas or spray with nitrous or use 99% nitro or bug juice or anything -- they only move you based on displacement and whether or not you've got forced induction.  I think. . .
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 24, 2013, 01:18:59 AM
Slim, we are both interpreting the regulations the same way.  I ordered a can today.

The intake tuning I am doing needs some background information.  The standard Triumph air box has a little snorkel for an intake.  It is replaced by this aluminum bell mouth to increase the flow.  The standard Triumph paper filter is plenty large and it does not restrict air flow enough to reduce power.  The oiled foam filter I am using in the air box does not restrict the flow enough to cause problems, either.  The air box is divided into two chambers.  One is the filter chamber.  The other is a plenum chamber.  The pistol shaped plate divides the two.  The view in the photo is the plate from the plenum side.  The plenum is tuned using Helmholtz principles to aid performance.  The plate needs to be in the box for this to work.  The rubber intake trunks between the air box and the carb ends are tuned to produce peak power at the third harmonic between 6,000 and 7,000 rpm.  That is just right for a street motor.  The air box is a good thing.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 24, 2013, 01:42:50 AM
Unfortunately for me, I will be switching back and forth between street and racing carbs yearly.  It is a pain in the tail to change out the air box.  Pod filters will be used on the Triumph OEM carbs for the street.  This way, it is no problem to switch to the racing carbs.

A popular modification is to connect the pod filters directly onto the carb ends.  A disadvantage to this is the air tumbles into the carb ends from the filters and it is swirling and turbulent at the vacuum slide orifices and the jet orifices on the carb intake bells.  This confuses the carbs and they do not work correctly.  Also, this is the incorrect tuned length.

A pair of inlet runners are made up with the same tuned length as rubber trunks that go to the OEM air box.  Copper plumbing pipe and fittings are used.  The little ears are connection points for zip ties that help to hold the runners on to the carbs.  This added length helps to organize the air flow and when it reaches the carb it will be less turbulent.  These street carbs will work much better than they would with the filters directly attached.  The correct tuned length helps performance, too.

In summary, the OEM air box is the best setup for the street.  Pod filters with runners are next best, and the worst are pods attached directly to the carbs.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jon on March 24, 2013, 03:35:18 AM
Why don't you run the airbox on the street Bo?, your running it on the race motor?

what fuel are you using, I'll check out suppliers here if you want

jon
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 26, 2013, 12:19:08 AM
Some folks from our local Triumph club are following the build and I put that in the diary for them and others who wonder about air boxes.  I would run the box on the race bike except the plenum volume and tuned length are set for mid range power.  It is too much trouble to use it for the street setup 'cause I switch back and forth from street to race yearly.  It is hard to get the box out.  All sorts of stuff needs to come off.

The Sunoco EXO2 costs $103 for a five gallon can and it has a two year storage life.  Not bad.  That is plenty for some dyno work, two events, and some left over for the dirt bikes.  It has a 10% oxygen content by weight.  What do I get for the money?

The recommended stoichiometric ratio is 13.2 to one and air has a 21 percent oxygen content.  For 1# of fuel/gas mixture:  (13.2 / 14.2) x 0.21 = 0.195# oxygen per pound of mixture.

The fuel contribution:  (1/14.2) x 0.1 = 0.007# oxygen per pound of mixture.

(0.007 / 0.195) x 100 = 3.5%  The oxygen enrichment in the fuel increases the total oxygen content 3.5%.

This isn't much.  It tell me two things.  First, the fuel must be optimal for the motor in all other respects if this will be a benefit.  It is easy to be off that much if the burn rate or something else does not match the engine's needs.  Then no increased performance would happen.  Second, it is basically a gasoline.  It is like pulling out a banana in a gunfight as compared to nitrous and the other flammables the competition will be using in the fuel class.  I will use it.  I need all of these little increases that I can get and I ordered the can before I did all of this math and logical thinking.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Cereal KLR on March 26, 2013, 09:29:33 PM
Oh I like those copper inlets! Making anymore for the great unwashed? Agreed on airbox removal,you have to take the back half of the bike off to get it out. I went to K&N style over the foam pods and basically gutted the airbox so still had a place to mount the electrics.

Also interesting about the oxygenated fuel as I was hoping to try some at Bub`s this year.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 26, 2013, 11:09:49 PM
Jon, the plan is to compare Sunoco Standard, a 106 motor octane leaded gas with specific gravity 0.729 and no added oxygen to the Sunoco EX02, a 100 motor octane leaded gas with specific gravity 0.750 and 10% added oxygen.  The comparison will be as scientific as I can do on the dyno.  Then I will know what gas I will buy.  I will use Sunoco, either way.

Cereal, I will look through my scrap pile and see what materials I have.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on March 27, 2013, 10:22:15 AM
Bo, you really go into detail. If there was an award on the forum for extracting the last drop of power from a motor it would have to to you. I'm getting schooled here big time. I admire and respect the way you go about your racing. You inspire me. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 28, 2013, 01:06:32 AM
Hi Mike.  My Toyota truck is so well engineered that anything I do to it makes it run worse.  The little dirt bike is faster than I am so not much can be done with it.  That leaves the Triumph as the only thing left so my attention is focused on it.

There are three brands of race fuel sold here and in AUS.  VP is one and it is different here and in AUS.  They have VP "Roo" and "Dingo," etc.  Can't get that here.  ERC is sold in both countries.  The availability of it in AUS is hard to determine from the internet.  They have very little presence on the net.  AUS is a big country and I do not want to drive all over looking for gas.  Sunoco is readily available in my neighborhood and it is found in a lot of places in AUS.  They look to be the same fuels here and there, too.  It is the obvious choice for me for that reason.  I have never used it.  I always use ERC, some leaded fuel from the local "Time" gas station, or in the old days, airplane gas.

The Sunoco Standard is a basic leaded gas that is similar to ERC 110K.  The 110K is what Matt Capri recommends.  It has plenty of octane and a moderate 0.729 specific gravity.  Jetting for Standard gives me, with an altitude adjustment, a mixture I can use with the 110K at B'ville, or with no adjustment, a mixture for Gairdner.  I expect to run less spark advance with this quicker burning gas.

The Sunoco EXO2 is a denser gas with a 0.750 specific gravity.  It is likely it will have a slower burn.  It has no equivalent gas in other brands that I know of.  If I am jetted for it and cannot get it I will need to guess at the best size.  I expect to need more spark advance for this slower burning gas.

The object of all of this is to select the ignition timing for each fuel so the peak pressure in the combustion chamber happens when the piston is in the optimal position on the down stroke.  This engine is the opposite of the old Brit bikes I am used to.  It is extremely oversquare, the combustion chambers have different shapes, the pistons are flat topped with the plugs in the center of the chambers, and it has a low rod length to stroke ratio.  The rules used to tune the old motors might not apply.  I have no idea how it will react to the different fuels.  This is the part of tuning that is hard to do by theory and there is no substitute for dyno time.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on March 28, 2013, 05:07:40 AM
Bo
These guys are near me, although I do always have to check that they have things in stock before I go there
G

http://www.vpw.com.au/Category/Index/374756
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fredvance on March 28, 2013, 10:32:25 AM
What is your compression ratio?? I forgot. :roll:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on March 28, 2013, 02:24:18 PM
WW, Rick Gold at ERC is pretty easy to find -- and he should be able to help you figure out about availability in Oz.  I don't have his email with me right now -- but go to ERCracingfuels.com (I think that's it -- you might have to search if I've got it wrong) and use the "contact us" link.  It works -- and last time I tried I got a same-day response.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 29, 2013, 12:36:23 AM
Grumm, they have what I need, gas wise.

Fred, static is 11.5 to 1, dynamic at Gairdner is 10.1 to 1, dynamic at B'ville is 9.3 to 1

The volumetric efficiency is around 110%.  The cylinder volume is 994 / 2 = 497cc  The calculated combustion chamber volume is 47.44cc

The compression ratio at peak power rpm = [1.10 x (497 + 47.44)] / 47.44 = 12.6 to 1

Slim, I contacted ERC.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fredvance on March 29, 2013, 10:18:12 AM
IMHO Erc's 110 is way too high octane for your  motor. I run the 110  in my 16-1 motor. My 13-1 motor I run MULB in gas class and VP mr12 in fuel class. Call VP's tech line they are very knowledgable and helpful, as is Rick at ERC.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 31, 2013, 03:04:41 PM
Strangely, MULB is not listed in the US as an ERC fuel.  It is available in AUS as Max-ULB.

Too many hours of last night were looking for a lower octane substitute for ERC-110K.  The 110K has a 0.730 specific gravity.  This means it has a lot of the lighter fractions of gasoline and the burn speed is moderately high.  I need this so I looked at fuels with similar specific gravities in the 0.725 to 0.735 range.

The 110K distillation in degrees F at 10% is 167, at 50% is 225, and at 90% is 257.  A fuel with high distillation temps will keep the inlet tract cooler.  Twin cylinder bikes inherently have worse combustion chamber cooling than the equivalent sized fours.  There is less metal to carry the heat away.  Considering this is an air cooled engine with almost double the power it had new, cracking the cyl head between the valve seat and the plug hole is a big worry.  I looked for fuels, leaded and unleaded,with distillation temps similar to the 110K and within the S.G. range.  The closest are VP110 and Sunoco Standard.  That can of Sunoco MO2X I just bought will go into the dirt bikes.  It has distillation temps far lower than the 110K.  That was an easy decision.  I have a small fortune tied up in the Triumph cylinder head.

Jon, I am having a hard time communicating with ERC AUS over the web.  Is ERC 110K available and does the DLRA have government permission to buy it? 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jon on April 01, 2013, 06:59:05 AM
I'll give them a try on the phone Bo.

jon
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 01, 2013, 10:58:08 PM
Thanks, Jon.  The ERC folks here gave me an AUS phone number to call it would cost me a fortune.  They also gave me an internet address and I got no response.  That Western Australia race gas distributor has all sorts of good info about fuels on their website.

My father told me to not over-octane motors, too.  He recommended using the lowest octane possible that would have a controlled burn.  He said too much octane deadened the gas and too much of the burn happened when the piston was too far down toward bottom dead center.  A couple of fuel experts are saying that the fuel composition and specific gravity have more influence on burn speed and the octane properties are just about resistance to detonation.

In the past I have run the Triumph on the ERC MULB, a lower octane unleaded and the ERC 110K, a much higher octane leaded.  I did not do any back to back comparisons.  The bike ran just great on either one.  This leads me to think the folks that are telling me that octane and burn speed are not related are correct.

These things are air cooled and the top of the combustion chamber is way down between two tall cam towers.  A fellow came over from France on a naturally aspirated Bonneville like mine a few years ago.  He cracked the head and his race was done.  My cylinder head is ported with bigger valves and there is not a lot of metal between the valves.  I am sorta worried about excess heat for this reason.

Matt Capri, who developed the parts I use said "Use 110K in that bike."  He is semi retired now and I only see him once a year at Bonneville.  I asked myself, "What is special about 110K?"  I noticed it has high temperature values in its distillation curve and they are very high compared to gasolines with ethanol.  ERC says "ERC 110K has demonstrated a superior convective cooling coefficient related to extracting heat from the combustion chamber during periods of overlap flow."  This homeboy thinks this means it runs cool.               

My choice is ERC 110K, Sunoco Standard, or VP 110.  All have similar specific gravities so the jetting for one should work with any other.  All have relatively high distillation temperatures compared to their stablemates.  These are traditional blends so they should be easy to find.  I am not a fuel expert.  Is my reasoning reasonable or am I full of carp? 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: saltwheels262 on April 02, 2013, 09:45:54 PM
imo your father was right.
I believe too much octane ~~
         will make a motor-- harder to start
                                         run hotter
                                         make less power
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 03, 2013, 01:57:53 AM
This is confusing and I am getting expert opinions that are all quite different.  I need to figure out my own path through this mess.  It seems that fuels are somewhat use-specific.  In other words, they are blended to be optimal for one type of use and might not be the best for others.  The ERC blends sold at B'ville are their best attempts at making a LSR race fuel and ERC knows what they are about.  The bike runs good on MULB or 110K so they will be my bench marks.  My plan is to jet and time the bike this year for the more commonly available Sunoco gas.  The Sunoco blend will be similar to the ERC blend so I can use either one depending on availability. 

The leaded gas I have figured out.  ERC 110K and Sunoco Standard are similar and Sunoco says their gas will give good convective cooling like the ERC blend.  Both have almost the same specific gravity so the jetting that works for one should be OK for the other.

The unleaded gas is more tricky.  ERC says their MULB gives good convective cooling.  The ERC MULB specs are not on the US website.  I asked for a copy from the Western Australia ERC distributor.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 03, 2013, 11:04:22 PM
A lot of folks gave me good advice on this gasoline issue.  Rick at ERC and Kerry at Sunoco were especially helpful.  This is what I learned.

Most motor sports have acceleration and deceleration.  Quick deceleration demands a fuel that is formulated to do that.  Deceleration allows the engine to cool.  LSR is different.  Rapid acceleration is important, however, it is not as critical as with other motorsports.  Dealing with combustion heat from very long full throttle runs is a BIG issue - especially for air cooled engines.  Elevation is a factor too.  NA motors will work harder at Gairdner than at B'ville.

The racing fuel experts were unanimous in recommending leaded for this bike.  I asked about the octane and mentioned it seems to be too much.  One expert recommended a gas with even more lead than 100K or Standard.  The reasons stated for leaded were:  I will need the octane to prevent detonation in the air cooled engine, the lead is a good lubricant for the valves, and the advantages of convective cooling.  None of the manufacturer experts had the slightest bit of enthusiasm for recommending unleaded.  I was worried that leaded would be hard to find.  There will be plenty of vehicles that use it, I was assured, and it will be available.

Some inner voice told me to do some deep thinking and research on fuel.  I am glad that I did.  It saved me a lot of money and also, I won't win anything if the motor runs real strong for 30 seconds and blows apart.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 06, 2013, 10:48:43 PM
The head gasket I bought from Triumph Performance was put on the engine, the head bolts were tightened down, and I saw that I installed a piston backwards.  I took the engine apart, had the crank balanced, and put it back together again with the pistons correct.  To be safe, I had the head gasket annealed.  There is a place in town where they have blank white ceramic dinner plates, cups, etc.  Folks put different glazes on them and the store bakes the glaze onto the plates in kilns.  I gave the lady-in-charge a $5 bill and the head gasket.  She put it in the furnace and annealed it.  I said:  put it in the furnace, heat it to 1100 degrees, hold for 20 minutes, and let the gasket cool down with the oven.

Why let it cool down in the oven?  Copper can be quenched or slow cooled after heating.  It was more convenient for her to let it cool in the oven.  She programmed the oven to do the heat cycle at night when the shop was closed.

Why 1100 degrees F for 20 minutes?  Type "The Annealing of Cold-Rolled Copper" in a search engine.  A link will come up to Volume 49, Page 761 of the "Transactions of the American Institute of Mining Engineers" August 1914 publication.  The article explains how that temperature and duration were determined with all sorts of other interesting stuff.

Why not use a torch?  Temperature control is important to avoid embrittlement.  The oven gives a lot more precision.  The article shows what happens when the metal gets too hot.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on April 06, 2013, 11:06:54 PM
Nice work Bo. That Trump is really getting special attention. Detail is what counts. When are you going to run the motor?.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Cereal KLR on April 07, 2013, 03:06:37 PM
Hopefully Bo will be at BUB this year, I have got to meet him and see this build.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: charlie101 on April 07, 2013, 04:20:21 PM
Bo, you really go into detail. If there was an award on the forum for extracting the last drop of power from a motor it would have to to you. I'm getting schooled here big time. I admire and respect the way you go about your racing. You inspire me. :cheers:
Yes, that goes for me also. Great rule model I am trying to learn from. I am copying the way you do the build sheet, calculations and diagrams, very helpful!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 08, 2013, 12:46:57 AM
The cylinder head is in Calif where they are putting in the shim under bucket cam followers.  Everything else is ready to go.

A couple of years ago I was going to hang up the leathers.  An Aprilia Tuono beat me pretty hard in the twin cylinder class.  I figured it was all over for the Triumph.  Back before the recession hit I ordered and paid for a set of 994cc cylinders.  These are custom made parts and it takes awhile to get them done.  They arrived and I figured, what the heck, I will make one last engine and go for it.  The problem is, before the recession I had a lot more money for this kind of thing.  Now I really need to think about things out before I do them. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 09, 2013, 12:23:43 AM
This is what I learned about gasoline.  I will post it before I forget it.  Gasolines come in a range of specific gravities (SG) with most between 0.7 and 0.8.  That is a lot of variance.  The SG influences how high the float floats in the float bowl.  It also influences how readily the fuel will flow up through the jets.  That is something to consider when switching fuels.  The float height and jetting might need to be adjusted for the change in gasoline SG.  Conversely, using a gasoline with the same SG would reduce the need for changes.

Gasoline is made of hydrocarbon chains of various length and shapes.  Gasolines with a large fraction of the shorter and lighter molecules have lower specific gravities.  They burn quicker.  The result is the burn speed is sorta related to the SG.  A change in specific gravity between two gasolines that affects burn speeds would also mean the spark advance curve developed for one would not work with the other.

Octane is needed to maintain controlled combustion.  It does not necessarily affect burn speed.  There are fast burning high octane gasolines as well as slow burning ones.  Air cooled engines used in LSR generally need more octane than water cooled ones, I was told.

The distillation curve shows the temperatures required to vaporize fractions of the gasoline.  This has a lot to do with cold temperature starting, driveability, and other characteristics.  The gasolines that require a lot of heat to vaporize also take a lot of heat out of the intake system when they vaporize.  That is nice for an engine that needs some extra cooling of the valves and combustion chambers.  There are other factors to consider.  The oxygen content is important, too.  Larger jets are required for highly oxygenated fuels.  Lead has lubrication properties that can be a benefit for some engines.  Conversations with experts are a good idea.  The above are some topics to discuss.

The goal for me was to find a good gasoline choice for the Triumph that is widely available in AUS.  I also wanted the choices to work with the spark advance curve and jetting I develop in Oregon.  The three gasolines for the Triumph are all leaded with real close to 0.73 SG and having high heats of vaporization.  It is likely either will work with no changes to jetting or timing.  A Busa, R1000 BMW, or a Harley would all need different fuels.  This is the important thing, and it is to match the fuel to the bike.     

   

 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on April 09, 2013, 12:29:49 AM
Thanks Bo. I always learn a lot from your posts. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 10, 2013, 12:48:01 AM
My youngest boy, Werner, was the one who raced at BUB.  He wanted to get a truck.  I told him all about the merits of two wheel drive in-line fours.  The apogee of automotive engineering.  Then I reminded him he did not have a job and suggested he wait awhile.  He listened carefully, then he spent his inheritance and bought this.  It is a four wheel drive 1990 S-10 with a huge V-6 engine.  It is from the era before vehicles became politically correct.  No anti skid or anti lock anything.  Burnouts and brake slides are no problem.  Chevy made a turbo version for two years.  Insane.

He ran into something.  I am not sure about the details and I never did get the full story.  After that he did not drive it very much.  He joined the Marines and left the truck here.  Slowly I have been working on it so I can sell it.  Note the fixed front end with the new bumper.  Every week I take it out for a little blast around the 'hood to keep fresh fuel in the carb.  Every time something falls off or breaks.  These old trucks are a lot of fun.  I can see why he bought it.           
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on April 10, 2013, 10:57:27 AM
Isn't it fun having something that's not politically correct.  :-D :-D :-D

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 11, 2013, 11:55:26 PM
It sure is, Pete.  A person needs two cars.  One that is practical and another one for fun.  Werner is coming back on leave for a week after boot camp.  He can drive it around.  I will sell it after that.  There is no way this thing will run all of the way from Oregon to Camp Pendleton so he wants to sell it.

Making some rear set foot pegs is the next job.  It is easier to lay down on the bike if one's feets are toward the back.  3/8-thick aluminum plate has worked well for the brackets in the past.  The local supplier I use sells two aluminum alloys by the inch.  (I need to find someone who sells it by the inch with a wider selection.)  One alloy I use a lot is 6061 T6.  It is a good all purpose alloy.  The other I use occasionally is 2024 T4.  It is an aircraft alloy.

There are three stress properties I look at.  These brackets are subject to cyclic loading so I look at fatigue.  The Endurance Limit is the highest stress the sample will withstand when it is subjected to 500,000,000 load cycles in the testing machine.  The Endurance Stresses are 14 KSI for 6061 T6 and 20 KSI 2024 T4.  The 2024 is a better choice based on fatigue resistance.

The brackets will hold weight and another important stress is yield.  This is the maximum stress the metal can withstand and deflect back to its original shape.  It is not permanently bent.  The yield stress is 40 KSI for the 6061 T6 and 47 KSI for the 2024 T4.  The 2024 has more yield strength.

The last stress property is tensile stress.  This is the stress at which the metal sample breaks.  I want it to be substantially higher than the yield stress.  Let's say the two are close to the same.  The bracket will bend slightly under a heavy load and then suddenly it will break.  That is not good.  It is better if it bends a lot before it breaks.  The 6061 T6 tensile stress is 45 KSI and this is 12.5% higher than the yield stress.  The 2024 T4 tensile stress is 68 KSI and this is 44% higher than the yield stress.  Clearly, the 2024 T4 is less brittle than the 6061 T6.

The Comparative Characteristics chart shows that 2024 T4 is more susceptible to corrosion than 6061 T6 and it is harder to weld.

The 2024 T4 alloy is what I bought and I will paint it to prevent corrosion.  It is a better choice for this application.  It is also what I would use for triple clamps.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 12, 2013, 07:41:16 PM
The can of oxygenated gas was traded in for a can of Standard.  The plan is to jet the bike and set the ignition advance curve for this fuel in Beaverton, Oregon at elev 150.  These setting should be good for VP110, ERC110K, or Sunoco Standard here in the US at the airport races.  They should work at Gairner for Sunoco Standard, ERC110K, or BP100.  They do not have VP110 in AUS.  Sunoco is available in Europe so I can use these settings on the seafront at Brighton, the beach at Pendine, or on the bowl at Nardo.

These jet changes are recommended by SUDCO as a rule of thumb for Keihin FCR's:  drop the mains one size for every 2,000 feet and the pilots one size for every 4,000 feet elevation increase.  These revised setting should be close or OK for ERC110K at BUB or ERC110K, Sunoco Standard, or VP110 at Speedweek, World of Speed, etc.  As you can see, I have no brand preference in fuel.  I just want to get the stuff anywhere I go and to not need to rejet the bike.  That's the big plan, anyhow.

Odds and ends for machine tooling I order from Lost Creek Machine, Inc in Ottawa, Illinois.  They sent me a newsletter.  Ten lathes for sale between $995 and $2,995.  Fourteen vertical mills.  All sorts of other used machines and things.  An alternative to buying Chinese.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on April 12, 2013, 11:58:34 PM
Bo, you've done yor research. I learn new things on every post. Do you have a set of jet drills?. I hear you on buying Chinese. I won't touch the stuff but my ex business partner bought two tools that I'm stuck with. Both are junk.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Kiwi Paul on April 14, 2013, 11:16:10 PM
Bo--Does Lost Creek Machine ever show Metalshaping equipment for Sale?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 16, 2013, 01:46:20 AM
Mike, I do have jet drills.  Unfortunately my memory is no good and my organization skills are worse.  I get the drilled jets mixed up with the undrilled ones and it drives me nuttier.

Paul, they are a dealer for Edwards Mfg. American made metal working machines.  They do have forming equipment.  I simply e-mail them with what I need and they somehow find it and sell it to me for a reasonable price.  They even have a forklift for sale.  www.lostcreekmachine.com

My daughter, Gretchen, burned out a light bulb in her room.  She installed one of those Sylvania 40 watt halogen bulbs that only use 28 watts of electricity.  She turned on the light and the bulb exploded.  It covered her with hot glass.  Not good.  She is OK.  A bulb exploding like that could cause another explosion if it was in a paint booth or gunpowder factory.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on April 16, 2013, 01:56:17 AM
I'm happy that Gretchen survived the explosion.

Sometimes our technological progress isn't all it is cracked up to be.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on April 16, 2013, 02:28:57 AM
Halogen lamps are heaters that happen to give off a lot of light.

I'm glad she's ok.

  Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on April 16, 2013, 02:30:30 AM
Bo, thank God for small mercies. As long as she's OK, that's all that matters.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on April 16, 2013, 01:21:53 PM
Thank God that Gretchen was so fortunate :-) :-) :-)

I had a 300-watt tube explode in my garage a few years ago.............about 2 feet above my head :-o :-o :-o

Fortunately it was in cold weather and I had a hat and heavy jacket on.  Heed the warning about not touching the glass with your bare fingers :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 16, 2013, 09:26:53 PM
She handles things well.  The youngest of five with three older brothers.  Today I was thinking of the light bulbs we have in places where they could blow up and cause damage, like the light above the solvent tank where I used to work, or the light on my drill press that is inches from my face.  On the box it says "The inner halogen capsule operates at high temperature and pressure and could unexpectedly shatter creating the risk of personal injury, fire, or property damage."  Some internet searching shows this is not the first time this has happened.  Anyway, this is something to consider before buying these little jewels.  To their credit, they do a good job of lighting the area.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 17, 2013, 01:09:09 AM
Jetting for Bonneville.

Step 1 is to put the bike on the dyno and to run it with different size jets.  These runs show last year's data. I was missing some sizes, like the #137's.  These curves would be close together if I had them all.  The highest horsepower curve is with #135 jets as shown on the first page.  The climatic conditions during that dyno pull are on the second page.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 17, 2013, 01:28:53 AM
Step 2:  Figure out the density altitude when the dyno pull was made.  There is a website with climate data for a lot of race tracks in the country.  The have a link to this site http://airdensityonline.com/free-calcs/ (http://airdensityonline.com/free-calcs/)

The data for the dyno run is entered.  It is 81 degrees F temp, 30.150 inches mercury uncorrected, and 14% humidity.  The input asks for an altitude.  I do not put this in 'cause I am using an uncorrected barometric pressure.

The printout shows the dyno pull density altitude is 1,260 feet.  This is higher than Beaverton's 189-foot physical elevation.

Step 3;  Figure out the density altitude at B'ville.  This is a no-brainer.  Type in http://airdensityonline.com/results/?trackname=Bonneville Speedway (http://airdensityonline.com/results/?trackname=Bonneville Speedway)

The density altitude there is 5,480 feet as shown on the printout.  This is also shown on the timing slips or the sign at the ERC fuel trailer.

Step 4:  Do the calcs.  5,480 - 1,260 = 4,220 feet difference.  Using the rule of thumb given to me by SUDCO, I would go down two main jet sizes from 135 to 130.  I always play it safe and only go down one size at first.  I will use 132's.  The other rule of thumb is to go down one size on the pilots for every 4,000 feet elevation.  I will do this.

This is the wobbly approximate method for setting the jetting.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on April 21, 2013, 07:21:15 PM
Bo,
Although it is a little tough to distinguish the colors, I find it interesting that your best dyno runs show A/F ratios around 14/1 to 15/1.  So did mine when done at 5200 elevation (Longmont, CO).  But when I ran at Bonneville, I jetted down only one size from Loring, from 155 to 152.5 from memory, because it just blubbered away with the 155 jet.  I did the last dyno run after Bonneville, 2012, and after I rebuilt the motor with new big end bearings but no other changes other than a shorter exhaust.  Why do we get our best readings at 14/1?  If I had jetted up to richen the fuel mixture, I don't think it would have run as well, but I didn't try it.  (I assume the dyno sniffer determines A/F from exhaust residue, so it should be measuring fuel and/or oxygen in the exhaust and should be independent of atmospheric pressure.)  Also on your runs, the little blip in the torque curve  at 8300-8400 seems to be consistent on at least 3 of the best runs.  Is this a point at which the exhaust and/or the intake is tuned to?
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 21, 2013, 11:57:48 PM
Tom, the Triumph runs lousy when the mixture is set at stoichiometric ratio.  It always runs best at an indicated leaner mix.  There are well over a hundred dyno runs on the old girl over a nine year period with two different dynos.  It always has been this way so I know it is not an anomaly.  I do not know why.  The main jets are chosen for maximum power and the rest of the jetting is set for somewhere between 13 to 1 and 14 to 1.  The rev limiter cuts in at 8,400 rpm.  That might be what you are seeing on the curves.

The Triumph shop, Cascade Moto Classics, bought four of these bike stands to display the new Triumphs.  They have a small show room and folks tripped over the stands. They gave one to me and I use it to hold the bike up.  They are very heavy so I can climb on and off of the bike without it tipping over.  It is nice of them to do this.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 22, 2013, 12:04:27 AM
Right now I am moving the pegs back a couple of inches.  They were back a couple of inches from standard before this change.  This setting will be used on the street, too.  Rose rides with me a lot and there is no room for her feet if I move them back any more.  The sheet metal needed to be reworked on the tail section to make room for my feet.  This change will make it easier for me to tuck down onto the tank and out of the wind.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 25, 2013, 01:43:21 AM
It is time for me too start thinking seriously about going to Australia in 2015.  The little graph shows that $1.02 USD equals $1.00 AUD.  Some internet shopping in Australia and going down to the store in Oregon shows how much these items cost, all converted to USD.

A carton of 12 chicken eggs:  $1.69 in Oregon and $3.47 in AUS
A 5-gallon can Sunoco Standard 110 race gas:  $57 in Oregon and $148 in AUS
A 5-liter keg of Heineken:  $21 in Oregon and $38 in AUS
A gallon of gas for the truck:  $3.50 in Oregon and $4.81 in AUS

How can Australians afford to live there?

This is going to be one expensive trip and some decisions are made.  The bike that goes to AUS will be what I build for BUB this year, I will enter in Run-Watcha-Brung at BUB, there will be a garage sale, and working overtime.  Usually I think about how I will pay for something a day before I buy it or afterwards, if I think at all.  Planning ahead is what I need to do.  It is time for me to change my ways.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on April 25, 2013, 09:48:10 AM
It is time for me too start thinking seriously about going to Australia in 2015.  The little graph shows that $1.02 USD equals $1.00 AUD.  Some internet shopping in Australia and going down to the store in Oregon shows how much these items cost, all converted to USD.

A carton of 12 chicken eggs:  $1.69 in Oregon and $3.47 in AUS
A 5-gallon can Sunoco Standard 110 race gas:  $57 in Oregon and $148 in AUS
A 5-liter keg of Heineken:  $21 in Oregon and $38 in AUS
A gallon of gas for the truck:  $3.50 in Oregon and $4.81 in AUS

How can Australians afford to live there?

     
Bo,
That's easy.  They drink Fosters instead of Heineken, drive smaller cars and bikes, and raise their own chickens!

Those Australian prices are very close to what we pay in Nova Scotia, Canada, although I've never bought a 5 litre can of Heineken.  But...., we have free health care, cleaner air, and fewer gun toting idiots.  My wife and I spend 6 months in Nova Scotia and 6 months in Colorado, so the cost difference is real.  I try to get all my major bike purchases done before I go back to N.S.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Cereal KLR on April 25, 2013, 11:02:48 PM
Bo, the Thruxton model uses a semi rear set that is lower and farther back than the Bonnie version. Not sure if brake pedal will locate (clock)correctly though. My Thruxton sets the pedal angled downward because of the more forward tilted rider position. Recycler could have a easier(cheaper) answer you seek. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 26, 2013, 01:16:11 AM
Tom, some of the engineers at work are raising chickens to save money.  There is sort of an egg surplus around here.  A dollar will buy a dozen, no problem.  Only a few eggs are white.  Most are bluish, green, or brown and they taste good.

Cereal, you are right about the rear sets.  There are all sorts of small challenges to make the controls work.  Nothing is too bad and almost everything I need is somewhere around this place...if I can find it.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 30, 2013, 12:30:38 AM
One thing to think seriously about on a new build is tire size.  The Triumph originally has 100/90 - 19 and 130/80 - 17 tires, front and rear.  It was no problem to find H-rated tires that are good to 130 mph.  Faster tires were not available in those sizes so I had to change them to go over 130.  I have a V-rated 110/80 - 19 on the front and a ZR rated 150/70 - 17 on the back now.  The v-rated tire is good for 150 and I plan to go faster than this.  New tires are in order.

Lots of hours on the computer say there is one and only one Z-rated front tire that will fit, a Bridgestone Battle Axe 110/80 - 19.  I like to run tires on both ends that are made to be compatible, so I ordered a matching Battle Axe for the rear.  Fortunately Bike Bandit has them on sale.  I was real close to being "up the creek" as we say here.  A lesson for anyone starting a build.  Use tire sizes that can be found in the higher speed ratings.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on April 30, 2013, 07:13:31 AM
That must be the best advice on the forum. If you don't have the correct rating for the tire size, you're just building yourself into a corner. One question though, the rating is obviously based on paved surfaces. Don't tires see less heat build up on the salt/Alkaline surfaces?. Surely a tire rated for a road surface would handle higher speeds on the above mentioned. Thanks Bo.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 30, 2013, 09:46:26 PM
Mike, the tires on this bike do run cooler on the salt than they are during street touring carrying a load.

Years ago I read a technical article about tire flexure and footprint at speed.  It was a difficult article and one thing I remember is that high speed tires have less drag at speed.  To me, this is a change to conform to regulations and to enhance performance.

Check this out.  www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-22353796 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-22353796)   It is about old cars in Tadjikistan.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 30, 2013, 11:00:06 PM
There is a performance part company that makes a setup for cc'ing a cylinder head.  It has the burette, etc.  Does anyone know who it is?  I think it is someone who makes cams, but I am not sure.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: maguromic on April 30, 2013, 11:18:12 PM
Comp Cams makes it.  http://www.jegs.com/p/Comp-Cams/COMP-Cams-Cylinder-Head-CC-Kits/2383970/10002/-1  Tony
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 02, 2013, 12:20:51 AM
Thanks, Tony.  That is what I need.  Steve at our local speed shop ordered one from Comp Cams.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 05, 2013, 05:31:14 PM
The tail is done and the stickers are on.  It is configured for FIM and it will be legal in DLRA.

My typical approach is to coat the aluminum parts with ACF-50 anti-corrosion treatment and rivet them together.  Some of the lower tail near the wheel was taken apart and redone last week.  There was salt trapped between a few of the metal parts and there was no corrosion.  The stickers will not adhere to the sides if they are treated with ACF-50.  I do not use it on the sides.  Some salt got behind the stickers and the aluminum corroded and pitted there.  In a few places it corroded all the way through.  The ACF-50 saved me a lot of aluminum replacement.

The windshield is drilled and put on.  Everything is coming together.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on May 05, 2013, 07:14:50 PM
Bo,
 I see a problem with the tail section.

That wimpy little Landracing.com sticker will not do.

Contact Slim for remedy.

  Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on May 06, 2013, 06:31:25 PM
WobblyW;

Ahhh, rivets! A kindred spirit!

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ (I'm finally back home!)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on May 07, 2013, 12:30:50 AM
All I see is P51D when I look at those pics. Bo, that's art. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 07, 2013, 01:40:09 AM
Mike and Neil, thanks for the compliments.

The word from Kibblewhite is the cams are a bit loose in their journals and I need to consider this when I measure the clearances for the shim adjustments.  Originally I was going to swap cams between the street and race motor.  Now it seems there are not a lot of miles left in the original head.  It has new valves, guides, bigger inlet valves, racing springs, a port job, and the shim over bucket kit.  It should give me many years of racing if I do not use it in the street.

A fellow in the Triumph club sold me this low mileage cylinder head for $300.  I ordered a set of original 790cc cams from Triumph.  They came over from England.  This will be my street head.  Eventually I will get it ported and have 2mm larger inlet valves installed.  It is plenty good for now.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Cereal KLR on May 07, 2013, 08:42:13 PM
Looking good as usual.

You should put that club friend on the Christmas card list, a head from Triumph is $1447.89 per Bike bandit when I needed one last year.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 08, 2013, 12:38:00 AM
It was a good deal.  I am sure the guy knew what it was worth and he was helping me.

A mistake I made was putting in the racing cams and using the bike on the street.  The higher lift and duration puts a lot of extra stress on everything and this is made worse with heavy duty springs.  Eventually this cylinder head will be ported, have 2mm larger intake valves, and use the standard springs, keepers, and cams.  This setup will provide enough air flow for the 994 cc engine and it will be much longer lasting.  The only useful role for the big cams is in race engines that do not see a lot of miles and the extra power is essential.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Cereal KLR on May 09, 2013, 04:55:33 PM
With all the time and $$ in that head, I would look high and low for an answer to save it. As they run the cam directly on the aluminum, a possible line bore and 2 piece shell insert might be doable.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on May 09, 2013, 05:21:42 PM
How about line boring the head and building up the cam bearing surfaces with spray welding?

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Cereal KLR on May 09, 2013, 05:46:26 PM
As these things collect miles, more of these remedies will be sought. I noticed mine has some journal wear on the left side front cam post which I suspect is the last one that gets the oil supply. The cams are straight cut gear driven, and as the spring tension lifts the cams away from the drive gear they will be singing loud and clear.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 09, 2013, 11:49:13 PM
Pete and Cereal, the wear is not that bad right now.  I just need to be aware of it when I set the valve clearances, according to Kibblewhite.

The 813 cams are the mildest performance cams and there are two more radical grinds.  Either of them will require larger valves.  The line boring is planned for the future when I go to the real hot cams.

The cam gears sing and clatter at low rpm.  I took out the silencer gears.  It is a sound I like.

Right now I am trying to figure out how to keep racing as a pensioner.  That will be a trick, for sure.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 13, 2013, 01:27:03 AM
Some basic stuff on tires.  This has been a topic lately.

Usually a couple of rim widths are suitable for any size tire and this is discussed in the tire manufacturer's literature.  The widest contact patch occurs when the tire is used with the wider of the appropriate rims.

There are many aspects to tire performance and it is not possible to satisfy them all with a single tire.  ZR tires are designed to run cool at high speeds.  One way to do this is to reduce tire flexure and use rubber compounds that produce less heat when flexed.  Sometimes a tire with a slower rating, say an H, will flex a bit more heat up faster.  This can be an advantage for normal street use.  Usually I run quality tires with the lowest speed rating for the bike.  "H" rated would be my choice for the Triumph if land speed racing was not done.  The H rating is 130 mph maximum.

Race and some track day tires do not heat up and grip until they are ridden for awhile.  This is awfully dangerous for a street bike and especially one that is used for short trips in cold and wet weather.

Tires designed to work together tend to.  It is a good idea to spend a little extra to get a matching set.  The battleaxes are front and rear of the same model.     

Air leaks faster from tubed and spoked wheels.  A rip in the tube and leakage through the spoke holes allow this.  The tube adds weight to a spinning mass and this is not good.  Tubed tires run a bit hotter, too.  The spoked wheels and tubed tires on this Triumph are good for the 150 to 160 mph maximum speeds I will be going in the near future.  One piece "Mag" type wheels with tubeless skins would be used for anything faster.

Modern tires fit tighter to modern rims and it can be hard to change them.  Lots of tire lubricant is a trick.  It must be compatible with rubber.  This gallon size jug of Ruglide is from NAPA auto.  Baby powder should be used inside the tire and on the outside of the tube.  The talc powder works best rather than the cornstarch type.

Little pieces of leather are used between the tire levers and the rims.  Often I use three tire levers.  One is to hold one side of the bead and the other two are used to walk the other side of the bead onto the rim.  It takes a helper to do this.  They hold the single tire lever while I walk the other two.

I do not remember where I got these aluminum tire levers.  They are gentle on the tire and rim and I puncture fewer tubes when I use them.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 13, 2013, 01:43:52 AM
I got my pictures mixed up.  This one shows the aluminum tire levers.

A picture in the previous post shows an almost new tire, a one-foot long steel ruler laying atop it, and clap board siding on a house wall in the background.  The grooves on the wall are perpendicular with the center line of the tire.  Note how the ruler is tilted slightly.  This is typical wear and it is due to the crown on our roads.  The highest part of the road is at the center to our left and the lowest part is the outside edge to our right.

This biased wear makes the right side of the tire wider and the bike wants to fall to the left when it is run on a flat surface like the salt.  One way to correct this is to drive up onto a concrete sidewalk, grab the front brake and let out the clutch.  Lean the bike to the right during the ensuing burnout and scrub down the right side of the tire.  A few minutes of this will grind the tire back in to a nice symmetrical shape.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 13, 2013, 10:50:13 PM
Some more about tires.

It is important to true the rim and it does not pay to be obsessive about it.  The tire itself is not made that accurate.  Usually a rim true to 0.5 mm is OK.  Little bumps and dips where the rim is welded together are acceptable.  The wheel should be remounted in the jig to check its balance.  The typical static balance is OK for most narrower tires.  Wide ones can have heavy spots on a side and dynamic balancing is needed.  This is the time to check the tires shape.  It should not have bumps and lumps.  Occasionally a tire is made poorly and it should be rejected.  Distortion can also indicate it is mounted wrong or the tube is kinked inside of the tire.

It is common practice to use a whole lotta air pressure to seat tires on their rims. Excess air pressure is dangerous and it can hurt the wheel or tire.  About 40 psi should be all that is needed.  The trick is to brush some tire lube in the gap between the rim and the tire. Inflate it to 40 psi and leave it there for about ten minutes.  It takes time to pop some of them onto the rims.  Deflate, lube, and reinflate as needed.

Tubes in tubeless tires on spoked wheels is done as OEM practice on Triumph Bonnevilles.  It is also common for adventure bikes and we are starting to use radial tires on dirt bikes.  One thing to do if possible is to use a tube for a radial.  This one is made by Bridgestone.  They are tough.

It is hard to reach into a tubeless tire to grab the valve stem and to stuff it down through the hole in the rim.  The tires are stiff and there is not much room for fingers.  I take the valve core out and stick half of a chopstick up through the hole.  Then, I push the valve stem onto the chopstick, twist it a few times to engage the threads, and pull the valve stem down through the hole.

Tubeless tires often have little ridges on the inside and they will make wear patterns on tubes.  Sometimes I cannot get a radial tire tube so I use heavy duty IRC tubes.  The ridges will not wear through these thicker tubes.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 15, 2013, 08:47:06 PM
The cylinder head came in this afternoon.  These modifications can be ordered from Triumph Performance.  Kibblewhite did this one.  I had some custom work done and it was best if I could talk directly with the machinist.

It is ported with a multi angle valve job.  This is essential for these bikes and a person is wasting time and money if this is not done.  The intake valves are custom made and 2mm larger than standard.  This prevents choke with the 994 kit at high rpm.  The big valves are not needed, otherwise.

Racing cams were used.  I used them with the standard valve springs and they buckled under the load.  This pushed the cam followers sideways and it wore the follower bores.  Any time a performance cam is used the racing springs should be installed.  The shim under bucket kit is a good idea and it is installed.

The springs can be shimmed for race and unshimmed for street.  This is something special Kibblewhite did for me.  No shims are needed with the standard cams and this will reduce the seat pressure and valve train wear.  The shims are installed for racing.

Basically, If I spent the time and money I do on racing for the other aspects of my life, I would have a lot less problems.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on May 15, 2013, 09:53:43 PM
Bo, you are a wealth of information.  I thought I knew a lot, but I learn something new every time I read your posts! Thanks.


Basically, If I spent the time and money I do on racing for the other aspects of my life, I would have a lot less problems.       

If you spent the time and money on other aspects of life that you do on racing, you wouldn't have the time or the money to race. :-D
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Cereal KLR on May 15, 2013, 10:50:15 PM
Nice work, it should really breath now. Did you get the newer cam tower bolts? I swear they are made from a different material. My motor is an 04, not sure if upgraded later on.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 16, 2013, 01:27:19 AM
Cereal, some are the newer type.  They are silver instead of black and they are stronger.  As a Thruxton owner, you might be interested.  Jeff Brooks got third place on his Triumph Thruxton in the opening round of the Oregon Road Racing Association opening round.  The first time a Thruxton has been on the podium.  They raced at Sears Point in early May at a National.   I am not sure how they did.  Jeff is a member of our local Triumph club.

Tom, motors are to me like the white whale was to Ahab.  My plan always is to open them up no more frequently than every five years.  This way, folks and me, too, have forgotten what it was like the last time.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 18, 2013, 07:03:59 PM
This engine is built with the intent of changing the compression ratio as needed form street to race.  Experience with the cams and advance curve I am using shows it will run well on pump gas with a 10.5 to 1 compression ratio.  The big question I has was, how much change can I get by increasing the head gasket thickness?  I wanted to order pistons with a higher compression ratio that I could reduce when needed by using a thicker gasket.

My favorite gasket material for race engines is copper and I use it for both the base and head gaskets.  My feeling is it is good to conduct heat away from hot spots.  The standard head gasket is 0.043 inches thick.  Thicker gasket copper is available in 0.063 inches and 0.080 inches thicknesses.  The calculation sheet shows I can get a 10.7 to 1 static compression ratio with a 0.063 gasket.  Calculations not shown say I can use a 0.080 thick gasket to drop the compression ratio to 10.2 to 1.

A lot of things attach to the cylinder head.  I put the head on with 0.080 thick washers between it and the cylinder and check the fits of the carb manifolds, header pipes, oil lines, and the cam chain.  The 0.080 thick gasket will not work with the cam chain.  It is too short.  The cam chain has enough length to allow the 0.063 gasket to fit.

Another thing I look at is cam timing.  In general, raising the cylinder head on an overhead cam engine with chain drive advances the cam timing.  Usually is is only a degree or two and I ignore it.  On occasion I have put on slotted cam sprockets to get the cams back to the specified timing.  There is no provision on the Triumph for slotted sprockets.  As seen from the fuzzy photo, the cam marks line up really close with the 0.063 thick shims.  Cam timing should not be a problem.

I order a couple of 0.063 inch thick gaskets from Cometic.  The 10.7 to 1 ratio should be OK with pump gas.  I am not out of the woods on this little project.  There are the o-rings and that will be in tomorrow's post.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 21, 2013, 01:34:07 AM
The new head gasket is thicker and I need to seal the oil passages.  The photo shows them and the sketch lists the dimensions of the groove where the o-ring fits.  This first drawing is of the setup as shipped from Triumph Performance with the 0.043 inch thick head gasket.  This o-ring has a static axial load and the Parker o-ring book says it should have a minimum squeeze of 0.007 inches and a maximum squeeze of 30 percent of its diameter.

There are tolerances for o-rings and the narrowest one that is within tolerance is 0.100 inches thick.  It is squeezed 0.020 so it is OK.  The fattest one within tolerance is 0.106.  It is squeezed 24% so it is OK.

The groove where the o-ring goes is a "gland" in o-ring talk.  The squeezed o-ring should occupy 60 to 80% of the gland area when it is squeezed.  The smaller O-ring occupies 88% of the area and the larger one fills 98%.  This is a bit high, but OK.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 21, 2013, 01:44:36 AM
Now I draw up the gland with the thicker head gasket.  The original 3/32 inch thick o-ring can be 0.100 inches thick and the gland is .100 inches tall.  The o-ring will not seal.  A bigger one is needed.  The next larger size is 1/8 diameter.  Thickness tolerances are 0.135 to 0.143 inches as shown on the drawing.  The 30% squeeze for the fattest o-ring is OK.  It is at the edge of the recommended value.  The gland fill percentage is 126 to 142%.  This is far too much.  The o-ring will be bulging out of its groove.  This o-ring size cannot be used. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 21, 2013, 01:53:51 AM
A 3mm x 13mm o-ring is tried next.  It is between the 3/32 inch and 1/8 inch o-rings in size.  The squeeze is OK and the gland fill percentage is high and similar to the original 3/32 o-ring.  I will use this size.

The o-ring needs to withstand hot engine temperatures and withstand hot oil under pressure.  Lots of tables and other info is in the manufacturer's literature.  The Viton material seems well suited.

Some are on order from Rocket Seals.  The little buggers are expensive and they are not in stock.  They are on order from the manufacturer. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 22, 2013, 01:12:24 AM
The new valve train set up uses 9.5 mm diameter shims.  All four Japanese makers and Triumph use them for something.  They are easy to get.

The seat force is 45# with standard Triumph valve springs.  I had no valve float problems at the 8,400 rpm red line with the hotter #813 cams and the Triumph springs.  The new valve train has 52# seat force with no 0.030 spacers under the springs and a 60# seat force with the spacers.  The 52# seat force should be more than enough for anything I do.  I pulled out the spacers and I am saving them for later when I have a more radical cam or higher red line.

Advice from Kibblewhite is "There is enough clearance in the housing bore to allow the cam to tilt a bit, so if you check it with both sets of valves closed you get a different reading than if you have one set of valves open.  Also, the timing chain will exert some downward force on the cam as well, and this will affect the measurement.  You'll have to make the call as to what is the closest setup to running conditions is, and check it there, and make sure you always check it in the same position so you're always comparing apples to apples."

The cam chain runs on an idler gear so I put that in the head along with both cams.  They are timed correctly.  Then, I put the head on top of an old pair of cylinders.  Now I can turn the cams without bending the valves and this simulates the valve train in use.  The valves are reshimmed for the standard cams.  I needed a couple of shims so I went down to the Honda shop and asked for some for a 996cc Super Hawk.  They had the ones I needed.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 22, 2013, 01:33:15 AM
I hope this link works.  www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22604267 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22604267)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on May 22, 2013, 07:46:30 AM
Now that's INSANE!!!   :-o :-o :roll:

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on May 23, 2013, 07:05:07 PM
I almost think that bike wouldn't pass tech.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 25, 2013, 11:13:54 PM
Another one for you car guys.  www.bbc.co/news/world-middle-east-22664659 (http://www.bbc.co/news/world-middle-east-22664659)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 25, 2013, 11:54:36 PM
On the subject of unrelated topics, here is something that happened today in the woods.  We are preparing for a race.  The money from the ATV funds helps us to do this.  In the old days we did this with hand labor.  The ATV money allows us to buy and rent some fun tools like this little gem.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on May 25, 2013, 11:56:08 PM
Slight correction with the link.  :-D :-D :-D

www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-22664659

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 26, 2013, 12:11:53 AM
Thanks Peter.  Some motor head has infiltrated the BBC and is posting this stuff.  Stan can take his roadster to BUB if he figures out how to drive like those guys in Arabia.

We are fixing the trails up for the annual event.  This is BLM and State Forest land and we work out with them what we will do and they tell us all about the environmental and other requirements.  Filling up mud holes is a big deal.  Machinery and manual labor does the job.    
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 26, 2013, 12:21:30 AM
The sledge is the main tool for prepping the salt.  Chain saws are the big thing here.  Most of us have our own "pet" saw.  Mine is a heavy old Homelite.  This is another big saw.  The little guy is used to trim off the limbs that hang down onto the trail.  We call them face slappers.  A pre-codger fellow sleeps good after a day of this.  Rigor mortis sets in during the night and it is hard to get out of bed in the morning.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 31, 2013, 01:20:47 AM
Rose left for a trip to visit her relatives and I have been on my own for a few days.  I get up in the morning, work on the bike, go to work, come home, and work on it until dark.  Its all of those mundane little details that have me busy.  Brackets, wiring, making spacers, etc.  Nothing glamorous enough to post.  The engine assembly is waiting until I get four little o-rings in the mail. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on May 31, 2013, 02:10:00 AM
Bo, it's always interesting reading your posts. Thanks man. I'm also on my own this week and doing the same as you. Haven't showered or shaved for a week and I stink but there's no one here to smell me. The Jack Russels seem to love me more though. Sleeping in one's clothes isn't a great idea but I'm on it and need to get the work out. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 31, 2013, 11:06:58 PM
I know Mike, sometimes a person needs to focus.  It gives us more time to be with our wives when they are around.

Building anything in this remote backwater is a challenge.  All I needed was a 1/8-inch american standard pipe thread die.  Calls went out to six or seven places around town.  None had one.  I would need to order it.  This was bad news.  I need to get this bike together fast so I can break it in and do the dyno work before BUB.  There is this old hardware store downtown that has been in business since the 1920's.  I do not go there much.  It is pretty funky.  It is the last hope so I take a long morning coffee break and drive down there.  The bright eyed young fellow minding the store brings me over to the tap and die section.  He glances down and looks at the display and says "we don't have any."  His boss comes by and says "look in the back where we keep the pipe fittings.  There might be one there."  The kid comes back and says "none there."

Then I think "this is like where I work."  Only half the stuff is where it is supposed to be filed.  About half of the missing half is sorta close to it in the file cabinet.  So I start to paw around in the adjacent drawers and bins.  About six or eight taps and dies are misplaced.  Then I finger around in the dark recesses of the back of a lower shelf.  Something round like a tap is hiding back there.  I pull it out and bingo, there it is.  The guy only charged me $4.  Life is good. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on May 31, 2013, 11:49:30 PM
If it had been there long enough, it might even had been made in the USA!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on June 01, 2013, 03:06:48 AM
Hey Bo
I get to work on all sorts of bikes because I'm one of the few guys around who does wiring on old bikes
A couple of weeks ago I rewired a Vincent for a guy. It got a new Alton alternator, regulator, electric start, and an electronic ignition to replace a tired old magneto.
He was fairly happy with the job and the price, so he rings me last week to ask if I would come to another bike shop and wire his Vincati
Basically, a Vincent motor built with all new cases heads and barrels in a Ducati 750GT frame.
So on Friday I went over and wired up this bike. Nice looking thing, and the guy who's shop it's at has done a couple of these that I have also wired. I'm surrounded by Indians, Vincents, Velocettes and Triumphs. We get to talking and he mentions he has an Indian with an early Harley motor.
So he takes me out the back for a look, and sitting next to it is an Indian with a Vincent motor. So I tell him that I read some stuff  that you posted a while ago about this particular bike.
At which point he lets me know "it's a replica", he than pulls the sheet off the bike parked next to it and says "of this."

I'll try to get pictures
G

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on June 01, 2013, 04:20:01 AM
Bo, those Bingo moments are great especially when your choice of suppliers is limited. Same here and because it's old or not popular you get it cheap. That find sure saved you a lot of headaches. You'd do well over here!. :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 03, 2013, 01:05:28 AM
I know what you mean, Mike.  Sometimes it is time to learn something and there is no one there to teach us except us, and we don't know how to do it.  The university of trail and error, it is.  One of the fastest cars ever was built on a ranch in Montana.  It is a handicap that folks overcome.

Werner is coming back from boot camp on leave next week and my job is to get the extra bike running.  It is a late model Yamaha.  We ride up in the mountains around 6,000 feet elevation and it runs a bit rich with the standard jetting.  So I needed one size smaller main jet.  The local Yamaha shop is in a nearby town and they told me I will need to order it.  The big Yamaha shop in Portland said the same thing.  In the old days shops carried all sorts of jets.  No more.

This need to order everything is getting to be irritating.  It was time to learn how to make a main jet.  Experience with orifi at work tells me the diameter, length, surface finish, and edge configuration i.e. sharp or round, are all important.  The first two jets I screwed up.  The third jet turned out OK.  It is just the right size.  It is the middle one in the picture.  The other ones are Yamaha jets that are one size bigger and smaller.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on June 03, 2013, 03:08:12 PM
Do you flow your newly made jet and compare it to the others??

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Cereal KLR on June 03, 2013, 03:50:44 PM
I have done that method but only in emergencies. Found out some of the primary jets come with a tapered bore and this raises heck with them to drill em out. Even the reaming the crud out with wire can damage the bore.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stan Back on June 03, 2013, 06:45:24 PM
When in 1963 I purchased a set of Enderles ($315 complete with pump) for my Street Roadster, my only car, they came with three bypass pills.  All were way too lean and I figured I had to make them smaller.  Didn't want to buy expensive racing parts, so I soldered them up, bought 3 number drills (at about $3 each) and drilled them out.  Radius?  We don't need no stinkin' radius.  Used them for 20+ years.  All I know is each produced a different result.  Later found out the factory ones were only $1 each.  Not the first or last time I outsmarted myself.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 04, 2013, 01:28:10 AM
Grumm, how do you guys in AUS get all of those nice bikes?  British stuff is rare here, even the basic bikes like A65's and 750 Tridents.

Freud, Cereal, and Stan.  Don't worry.  There is this cinder cone here with a little hard lava plug sticking out of the top.  Titty Mountain.  The jet is the right size if the bike climbs Titty.  It is too big if the bike runs rich and sputters.  The jet is too small if I need to pull out the enrichener knob to make it up to the nipple.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on June 04, 2013, 01:41:17 AM
I've never before heard the term "pulling out the enrichener nob" when trying to get up to the nipple.

Your experience far exceeds mine.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: ratpatrol66 on June 04, 2013, 04:59:03 AM
I've never before heard the term "pulling out the enrichener nob" when trying to get up to the nipple.

Your experience far exceeds mine.

FREUD

I need to learn this technique it might help me out? I should also start fishing from the company pier?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on June 04, 2013, 09:02:06 AM
Well, Bo, if you can't get up to the nipple even by pulling on the enrichment knob, you might just have to choke the monkey.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on June 04, 2013, 09:11:03 AM
Grumm, how do you guys in AUS get all of those nice bikes?  British stuff is rare here, even the basic bikes like A65's and 750 Tridents.
.         

I guess nice bike is a relative term
I have to work on this stuff all the time. My day started with fitting an electronic regulator to a Velocette
Followed by a stinking Ducati 860 GTS
At least they were both clean
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on June 04, 2013, 05:44:17 PM
Now I know why it's difficult.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 09, 2013, 01:05:14 AM
Hi Freud.  I havn't been posting much lately.  Lots of things are going on here with work and family.  What free time I have is going into the build.  The engine has been cc'ed.  It measures out to a 995 cc motor with 10.5 to 1 compression.  The motor is in the frame.  Right now I have that slight headache that comes with lack of sleep.  Pictures will be posted when my life gets back to normal.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on June 09, 2013, 11:04:06 AM
I read you all the time. I appreciate your Scientific Method approach.

Change only one thing at a time and you know what caused the change.

Good Job.

Tell the ladies HELLO.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 13, 2013, 01:13:38 AM
Werner, my youngest boy, is a land speed racer.  He set an AMA record a few years ago in 175cc Modified Partial Streamliner, Production Engine.  He is here on leave between boot camp and infantry training school.  Look at You Tube "Marine Corps Chief Drill Instructor marches a Alpha Company platoon."  Werner is the short guy at the front of the row near the sergeant.  That row is his squad and he is the squad leader.  The sergeant is retiring and he wanted to march a platoon one last time.  Werner's was the best so they got the job.

The photos show him up in the woods on a trail ride.  He is much faster than me now.  The home made main jet worked perfect.  Mount Jefferson, an extinct volcano, is in the background.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on June 13, 2013, 12:17:17 PM
Wobbles......congratulations to You and Werner.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on June 13, 2013, 12:25:34 PM
My only child is a daughter that didn't choose to enter the military.  That said -- I can only imagine the proud feelings you have for Werner.  I salute you -- and him.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on June 13, 2013, 05:50:00 PM
And an on-going THANK YOU for his service :-) :-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 14, 2013, 01:23:16 AM
Slim, Dennis, and Freud, I passed those compliments along to Werner.  He said he has not done anything yet in the way of service except for eating a whole lot of food and staying out of trouble.  The boys are influenced by Rose, who was a non-commissioned officer in the navy.  I was a civilian all my life.

Up until now I have been using advertised displacement and compression ratio.  This is not good enough for a serious effort.  I need some real numbers to use as a baseline while I develop this motor.  The calc sheets are posted.  The next few posts will show how I got the displacement and comp ratio. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 14, 2013, 01:24:30 AM
Calc sheet 1
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 14, 2013, 01:25:29 AM
Calc sheet 2
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 14, 2013, 01:40:20 AM
The first task is to measure the volume between the cylinder wall and the top ring land, above the upper surface of the top ring, and below the piston deck.  The cylinder diameters were measured by the machinist using his micrometer.  A smart guy would measure the ring land diameter and depth before he installed the piston.  I am measuring it afterward using the shanks of these numbered drills as "Go" "No Go" gages.  These are number 60 to 80 drills.  Hobby shops have them.  Measurements are taken at the front , back, and on each side.  These are averaged to get the clearances.  The pistons rock a little bit in the bores and this makes the clearances different on the backs and fronts.

The volume is 0.00893 cubic inch or 0.146 cubic centimeter.  That is pretty small and hardly significant for this engine.  This is not always the case.  Sometimes this volume can be large enough to make a difference in the calculated compression ratio. 

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 15, 2013, 11:42:06 AM
The swept volume is measured.  This is the distance the piston travels x the bore area.  It is the engine displacement for classification, marketing, and insurance purposes.  In the past I ran 790cc and 865cc engines in the 1000cc class.  Now the motor is just a few cc shy of the 1000cc limit.  It is a good idea to verify it is legal.  Also. I need to check the stroke and deck clearances.  My experience with older British stuff tells me there can be problems here.

The piston is moved to top dead center (TDC) using a dial gage.  I check to verify the measured TDC coincides with the TDC mark on the flywheel.  I do this for both cylinders.  This is a very important thing to check on multi cylinder engines with pressed together crank shafts.  Sometimes one piston can be out of time a degree or two.  The mark might be in the wrong place, too, and this can happen on any engine.  This motor is OK.

All sorts of shim stock is dug up and I cut off little strips for feeler gages.  A valve shim for the standard engine pressed down on the cylinder deck and I measure the clearances between the two decks at four places 90 degrees apart.  The pistons rock in the bores and there are manufacturing tolerances on the piston tops.  The readings are a little bit different and I expect this.  The readings are averaged to get the deck clearances for each cyl.  The calcs say the pistons go up to within 0.010 of the top of the cylinder on each pot.

The pistons are moved to bottom dead center (BDC).  The distances between the cylinder and piston decks are measured again and they are averaged for both cylinders.  The piston stroke for swept volume calculation is the distance between the two decks at BDC minus the distance between the two decks at TDC.  It is 2.687 - 0.010 = 2.677 inches.  The engine displacement figgers out to be 995cc.

Sometimes a cylinder on a multi will "run hot."  It is important to check to make sure it is properly timed and it does not reach TDC before the others.  Also, it is critical that it has the correct compression and it does not have less deck clearance than its companions at TDC. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 15, 2013, 11:43:51 AM
Two more pix to go with the last post.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 15, 2013, 12:13:50 PM
A slightly raised part of the piston deck is visible between the valve pockets in "2013 Build Diary 287."  This deck is a couple of thousands of an inch above the cyl deck.  The cylinder head is flat in this area just behind and ahead of the valves as shown in the attached picture.  The distance between the two is the smallest piston-to-head clearance.  Arias recommends a minimum of 0.040 for engines with steel connecting rods like this one.  This motor is at that clearance with the 0.043 inch thick copper head gasket I am using.  Triumph performance makes a 0.040 thick head gasket.  I cannot use it on this motor to gain compression.  I will have too little piston-to-head clearance if I do.

This motor will loosen up with use.  The pistons are very wide in comparison to their height.  The edges of the piston decks might hit the bottom of the cylinders, at the fronts and backs of the pistons, if the piston wears enough to rock.  I need to take the head off to check for this every couple of years.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 16, 2013, 01:33:04 AM
This morning I got up and out early and finished late.  The bike runs.  It has a fuel leak like a stuck float and the front brake needs to be bled.  Sometime tomorrow it should be out on the road.  The highway cops are setting up saturation patrols on the stretch of highway that has Test Hill.  I need to find another road with a steep incline to seat the rings.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 16, 2013, 11:59:08 AM
Now it is time to measure the combustion chamber volume below the cylinder deck when the piston is at TDC.  This is a positive volume if the piston deck is below the cylinder deck and the crown is flat.  It is a negative volume is the piston deck is above the cylinder deck, or if the piston deck is below the cyl deck and the piston has a lot of crown.

First, I put a rag on the back of the engine over the transmission.  Then I put a big chunk of train track on the top of the rag.  The magnetic dial indicator base adheres to the track.  The indicator is set up to measure piston travel.  The piston is moved down exactly 0.300 inches.  This distance needs to be enough so the piston crown does not stick out above the cylinder deck.

The top ring land is sealed with moly grease as shown.  This volume is measured in a previous step.  Also, the grease keeps measuring fluid from leaking past the rings.

A plexiglas plate is made to fit over the bore.  Typically some pressure is applied to the plate to hold it down.  This will distort a thin plate.  I make the plate out of thick plastic so this will not happen.  A 1/8 inch hole is drilled in the middle to let the fluid in.  A 1/16 hole is drilled near the edge to let the air out.  Some moly grease is smeared on the cylinder deck to make a seal and the plate is placed on top of the bore.  The air hole is located at the high point along the cyl edge.

Water is hard to use for this measuring.  It has a lot of surface tension and resulting meniscus.  It is hard to read the fliud level with the graduations on the burette.  Some folks use mineral oil for the burette work.  Others use colored alcohol.  I am using Ford automatic tranny fluid 'cause I have a bottle of it and no Ford to use it in.  All of these fluids have minimal menisci and it is easy to read the burette graduations.

The portion of the burette below the valve is filled with fluid before measuring starts.  The burette is graduated and intended to be used in this condition.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 16, 2013, 12:23:39 PM
The burette is from comp Cams and it is 100cc capacity and about 2 feet tall.  The graduations are at 0.2 milliliter (ml) intervals.  This is a bit coarse for little motorcycle combustion chambers.  A smart guy would use a 50cc burette about 2 feet tall with 0.1 ml grads.  He would place some objects of known volume, like valve shims, in whatever he was measuring if it was more than 50cc.  The volume of the shims would be added to the volume from the burette to get the total volume.  This is what I did years ago and I remembered it after I ordered the burette I have.  A 100cc burette is the right size for car motors.  The picture shows the burette graduations.  The cylinder is filled with fluid until it almost pees out of the vent hole.  This is done for both pots.

The cylinder swept volume is calculated for 0.300 inches of travel.  The swept volume is subtracted from the measured volume.  The combustion chamber volume below the cylinder deck is positive if this is a positive number.  The volume below the deck is negative if it is negative.  Old style hemi engines are almost always negative.  This Triumph is positive.  The slight crown on the piston does not fully compensate for the depressions in the valve pockets.  The volumes below the cyl deck average out to 0.093 cubic inch or 1.52 cubic centimeter.  The measurements were slightly different on the cyls and this is within the precision range at which I can read the levels.  A burette with 0.1 ml graduations would be used to determine if these volumes are different.  The burette I am using and my old eyeballs are not precise enough to determine this.             
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 17, 2013, 01:10:09 AM
The doctor wants me to live for a long time.  Eating red meat and excessive drinking are verboten.  Heck, its Father's Day.  Rosie was taking me down to one of the locals for a monster steak dinner and as many pints as I could drink.  That steak and beer tastes better when a fellow does not have it very often.  We drove by a little street and Rose said "The guy I sold your truck to lives here.  I remember it from the paperwork."  The first four wheeled vehicle I owned was a 1974 Toyota HiLux truck.  My Pa sold it to me for $1,000 when I was in college.  It is a good truck and I kept it until 2008.  I would have it now except parts are hard to get.  A guy fresh out of jail bought it.  He had tattoos hiding the needle track on his arms.  He said he wanted to start a new life and he needed a nice truck and this Toyota was the one.  Rose was selling it and he bought it for $1800.

Occasionally I see the truck running around with the new owner.  We drove down the little street and there it was.  Polished up and gleaming red.  A new set of mag wheels, and otherwise it was original.  There were several cars in the driveway.  The way this one was parked showed it had pride of place.  It was his favorite.  A 39-year old truck with a charmed life.  Always loved.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 17, 2013, 11:51:32 PM
Now it is time to cc the combustion chambers.  Each one is greased and wiped of until there is only a thin ring of grease around the valve edges to seal them.  Basically, wipe out all of the grease you can.  Enough will be left behind to seal the valves.  Each chamber is filled just like it was done with the cylinders.  The volumes are averaged and it is 2.581 cubic inch per chamber or 42.3 cubic centimeters.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 18, 2013, 01:18:34 AM
The head gasket hole volumes are measured.  The holes are not assumed to be round or to be the same size.  Each hole is measured front to back and side to side.  The 0.062 inch thick gasket measures out to 0.717 cubic inch per hole, average, and the 0.043 inch thick gasket has a 0.498 cubic inch hole.  I also lay the gasket out on the head and make sure it does not project into the combustion chambers.

These are the last measurements.  Tomorrow everything will be summed up and I will figure out my compression ratios.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 19, 2013, 01:24:05 AM
The total volume is the combustion chamber volume + the swept volume.  The compression ratio is the total volume / the combustion chamber volume.  The compression ratios are 10.5 to 1 with the thinner 0.043 head gasket and 9.9 to 1 with the 0.063 gasket.  The pistons I ordered are specified as 11.5 to 1.  That is probably right for a standard original equipment cylinder head.  Note the flat valve faces and the thick valve margins on the stock head.  The valve heads sit on top of their seats.  The racing head has dished valve faces, relieving around the larger intake valves, and the valves sit farther down in their seats.  This increases the combustion chamber volume and it lowers the compression ratio.

Originally I was going to use the thinner head gasket on the salt and the thicker one for the street.  A 10.5 to 1 ratio can be used on the street so I will use the thinner gasket for road and racing.  I will use the thicker gasket if I run the standard cylinder head.

The compression ratio measuring is done.  It helps me a lot  There is no substitute for working with real numbers and I have them now. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 19, 2013, 01:45:12 AM
I forgot the picture of the standard cyl head.  Here it is.

An electroechocardiogram is needed once in a lifetime for FIM.  I had one a few years back and passed.  The stress test needs to be done every three years and this was the year to redo it.  The nurse took my baseline electrocardiogram last week and she told me to show up this afternoon for the test.  She said "Don't eat a big lunch.  We don't want you puking on our machine."  Lovely advice.  I had strawberry pie for lunch.  At least it would taste good coming back out.

The nurses wired me up.  I said "I am a pre-old guy.  Sort of delicate.  Stop the machine when I have passed the test.  Do not try to kill me like you did last time."  The nurse said "You stop the test, not us.  Tell us when you cannot handle any more."  Wonderful.  Last time that meant I wanted to barf, saw black spots in front of my eyes, and had horrible leg cramps.

The machine started.  The belt was level and it moved slow.  Gradually they increased the speed and the tilt.  I walked faster and faster.  The table was tilted steep and the speed was turned up more.  I needed to run.  I did this for a half second and said "enough."  They stopped the awful device.

The nurse said "Had enough?"  I said, "I'm not really tired.  It is undignified for a gent my age to engage in running."  She looked at the graphs, etc and said, "Well, you passed.  Another 20 seconds and we would have rated you excellent."  That would have been a long 20 seconds, for sure.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 20, 2013, 12:23:13 AM
Triumph recommends priming the oil pumps prior to engine assembly.  It is about four months between assembling the lower end and starting the engine.  I am afraid the pumps have lost their primes.  The joint where the cylinder head feed line joins the crankcase is a place to pour in some oil for priming one of the pumps.  The other pump is primed through an oil passage plug on the cylinder.  It is a good idea to fill the pumps and oil passages on motors before they are started the first time.  Yamalube All Purpose 10W-40 mineral based oil is used to break in this engine.  It meets JASO T903:2006 specs and it should give good lubrication and also allow the piston rings to seat.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 21, 2013, 12:38:20 AM
The recent math and measuring exercise shows me I am within the displacement limit for the 1000cc class, I have 10.5 to 1 compression, and I do not have enough deck clearance to raise the compression using a thinner head gasket.  I will need pistons with higher domes and that is not feasible now.

A engine with 10.5 to 1 compression can be marginal for street gas.  There are things I can do like run a different spark advance curve or use an octane supplement.  First, I need to see if I have a problem.  A fuel detonation warning light was ordered from KnockLink.  These things are pretty basic.  They glow red if there is engine knock from detonation of other something else, like a blown bearing.

The first step is to mount the sensor to the engine block.  The last post showed me filling the cooling passage in the cylinders with oil.  The plug for the passage will be removed, a sensor mount stud will be installed, and the sensor will be bolted on.  The mount has a slot in it for a small screwdriver to screw it in and out.  It is important that it not corrode in place and so I cannot unscrew it.  This area is exposed to salt during the race.

It is time to consult the old military chart.  Aluminum, steel, or zinc studs will not corrode in the aluminum cylinder block.  I need strength so mild steel is the choice.  It is sprayed with a zinc rich paint before installation.  Some Yamabond is used as a sealer.  I do not expect to have any trouble removing the plug when I need to.  The sensor, stud, and nut is shown.  The original aluminum plug is also shown.  This is the project where I used the hard-to-get pipe tap.           
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 21, 2013, 08:56:18 PM
The sensor is bolted onto the cylinder head.  The instructions say to keep the wires away from ignition components.  The wires are looped around and tied onto the clutch cable.  This route is low and away from the igniter box, coils, etc.  The brains are in the light casing.  It is made to be mounted on a car dash and it is not water or vibration proof.  I spend all afternoon making a water proof and foam lined housing for the light.  A smart guy would buy an el-cheapo flashlight, take out the guts, put the light in, and call it good.  The light will be used for setup and tuning, only.  The mount is a couple of zip ties around the handlebar.

The setup is the light, a lead from a power source that is switched on and off, the sensor wires, and a ground wire.  It is simple and no junction box is needed.  I simply solder everything together into a wiring harness.

The light does what is intended.  It tells me if my ignition curve is compatible with the gasoline I am using.  The engine does not knock on unleaded ethanol free premium.  It also does not knock on unleaded 10% ethanol regular.  There is a noticeable drop in performance when I use the gasahol.

The ignition curve is Triumph Performance Stage III.  This is their general-purpose hot street and racing curve.  It works well with the big motor.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 24, 2013, 01:56:39 AM
I hooked up a hose to the oil filler cap and noticed there is air coming out of the crankcase when the engine runs.  My goal is to bleed off this pressure so the pistons will have an easier time going up and down.  This winter I made an engine breather and an oil catch tank.  The catch tank fills up with oil after about five miles of riding.  Right now I am trying out different methods of getting the oil out of the air leaving the crankcase.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Dr Goggles on June 24, 2013, 05:37:20 AM
Bo, wear a white suit , that will guarantee that none of the oil gets away.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on June 24, 2013, 06:17:03 AM
Bo,
Wet or dry sump?  Can you tap into cam cover? There should not be a lot of oil mist there.  Or build a stand pipe to get away from the turbulent crankcase mist.  Then use a reed valve on the breather to prevent air going back in.  This will only work if all other breather points are sealed.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on June 24, 2013, 08:43:44 PM
Your 360-degree crank has now been 'improved' to pump more air with the larger pistons...........

+1 with Tom on the stand-pipe and breather.

Also, check your oil........some brands foam more than others.

I have White Leathers and no oil leaks on my Triumph ......... YET :lol:

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 25, 2013, 01:20:00 AM
It's horrible.  The savage, brutal, and catty remarks from the neighborhood peanut gallery up here about a Triumph leaking oil.

The original breather is on the work bench in the photo.  The next one shows it installed.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 25, 2013, 01:24:10 AM
The line from the primary is the original Triumph breather.  It is no problem.  The other one I installed is.  The 3/8-inch line was changed to a 7/16 line and it was looped over the carb intake.  This helped a little bit.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 25, 2013, 01:28:54 AM
This little expansion tank I am making fits in the vertical part of the breather line.  Hopefully the wind will expand and slow in the tank and the oil will drop out.  It has clear sides so I can see what happens inside.  Hopefully this will work.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Cereal KLR on June 25, 2013, 09:45:58 AM
Nice 12v vacuum pumps come up in the drag bike section of ebay every now and then but they are pricey. I would still like to try one as they they do help.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: JimL on June 25, 2013, 01:57:28 PM
There is a lot going on with crankcase pressure.  My wife has pics of her grandpa, sitting on his RFD (rural free delivery) Silent Gray Fellow.  The earliest pics show the bike just as Harley built it, when it was new.  Within a few years it had grown some mods, including a BIG canister that looks like it collects the blowby and oil capture.  This was back around 1914 or so.  Nothing new under the sun, as Dad used to say.

Today, the manufacturers (pushed by government) are extending oil change cycles.  The newer longer stroke fours are showing up with ports through the crankshaft web area of the block, directly under the bottom of the bores.  Some have large, tuned oil separation chambers in the side of the block, to add volume in the oil recovery area.  An important point is the tuning of that chamber for its MOST used engine rpm range.  Continuous high rpm operation, with these techniques, can exacerbate oil consumption.  Few customers have the patience to flog their daily driver hard enough to experience this.

With low tension Dykes ring packs, crankcase pressure balance has some effect on how quickly those low tension rings can seal on the compression stroke.  I have seen misbuilt injection molded fittings that effectively sealed the crankcase (due to closing the crankcase air lines connected to the intake tract, before the throttle).  The symptoms were mostly noticed at idle, with whistling crankshaft seals and slightly unstable idle.

Those low tension Dykes rings were showing up around 1980, in the new cars I worked on.  They became possible due to improvements in the oil control ring and the attendant oil distribution ports in that land.  Cylinder oiling is the job of the intake stroke and that oil ring control design.  I was told at the time that low throttle operation (idle or decel) was the hardest part of ring seal with low tension rings.

I didnt quite believe that until the Igniter recalls of 1983.  The timing was going into electronic advance at idle, so the ECU would pull back idle valve opening to slow the engine, and we were getting oil pooled in the dead catalytic converters!  A new Igniter, new cat, and the weird oiling issue faded away.

I've always suspected that part of the early Honda success story was engines that held oil better than most brands.  They enjoyed huge crankcase volume, compared to something like my '69 T120 Bonneville, because the clutch and trans could live on engine oil and share that huge chamber capacity to pump into.  My CX based engines have giant caves for a crankcase, and I run a 5" piece of plain hose out of the factory crank vent chamber at the end of the crankshaft.  So far, very little oil out of that simple hose.  The earlier versions of this engine had dual vent chambers adjacent to each pushrod passage in the heads.  They had twice the hose and much more volume in those chambers.  And they leaked oil all over the engines.

Mysteries abound. :|

Regards, JimL
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jon on June 25, 2013, 06:36:05 PM
If your building an expansion pot for your breather hose I've had a bit of success filling them with the coarse stainless pot scourers Bo.
The constant changing direction of the air/oil mist suspension helps drop the oil out and it clings to the scourer pad letting it run back into the motor when stopped.
Similar to the oil bath air cleaners used on older industrial and earthmoving equipment.

Cheers
jon
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on June 25, 2013, 09:19:09 PM
Bo,
Do you have a one-way valve before the crankcase breather enters your "expansion pot?"  You mentioned the original Triumph breather.  Does it have a one-way valve? 
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Cereal KLR on June 26, 2013, 12:09:48 AM
The original breather line goes into the air box. My Thruxton did not have any PCV type valve.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 26, 2013, 01:48:01 AM
Thanks for the help with this.  A few years ago Triumph Performance told me I might need a breather with this set up.  It went on the valve cover.  Last night I rooted around and found a valve cover in my parts hoard.  I forgot I had it.  Now I will give them a call.

This British Racing Green land speed record holder does not have a breather www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23051252 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23051252).   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on June 26, 2013, 07:01:16 AM
Bo,
Any crankcase ventilation scheme/device you come up with will be plagued with oil leakage problems if you do not use a one-way valve.  If the original crankcase breather is left in place, then it too must be fitted with a valve, or both vents teed together and then connected to such a valve, or you are wasting your time.  Your big 900cc motor is a big air pump that wants to push out 900cc of air with every downstroke and suck it back in on the upstroke.  By adding a one way valve you create a partial vacuum in the crankcase which will solve most if not all of your oil leakage.  I would close the breathers which are down low on the motor, and use the one that connects to the cam/valve cover.  You should only need one with such a valve, because once the pressure equalizes, there will be very little air movement thru the breather.  I am trying a homemade reed valve, but also found an inexpensive unit from MikesXS650 site that should work (haven't tried either one  on the track, yet.)
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 27, 2013, 01:51:08 AM
There was a lot of air coming out of the breather when I ran the engine.  After work I went down to the NAPA store and asked for a crankcase PCV valve for a big car motor.  This is it.  The hole in the top is small.  This tells me there is not much air coming out of an engine due to leakage past the rings.  The big breeze I was seeing must be air that is sucked in and blown out again.  The valve is installed on top of the catch tank.  It keeps air from being sucked in and only lets it blow out.  Hopefully this will clam things down and the oil will stay in the engine.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on June 27, 2013, 05:21:48 AM
Bo,
The PCV valve will work for awhile.  It doesn't like to keep up at higher RPM's.  But you can always add the reed valve in its place if you continue to blow oil out the breather line.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 28, 2013, 01:18:39 AM
The breather setup was installed and I took the bike out for a run on the freeway to see how everything worked at high rpm.  There was a little misfire for a fraction of a second, then another for about a quarter of a second, then a permanent misfire.  Nothing.  An electrical problem.  I was going to walk home and get the truck and trailer.  Then I remembered the 10 grand I have in the motor and the bike was at the side of the freeway.  It was a three mile push and both of us are home.  Golf is looking pretty good right now.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: saltwheels262 on June 28, 2013, 08:15:49 AM
I like to have a cell with me most times.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Cereal KLR on June 28, 2013, 09:59:47 AM
Three mile push will make your leathers fit better, something I need to address myself. Other than death, is there a 20 lb/month weight loss method that still includes beer?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 01, 2013, 01:34:49 AM
Cereal, bike pushing will make you lose weight.  I know this.

The breather was installed with the PVC valve and it continued to fill the catch tank.  Some looking around town was in order.  I found two different scouring pads.  The copper one is a "Chore Boy."  Odd.  I remember them called "Chore Girls" awhile back.  One pad was stainless and I did not use it.  Stainless fragments would mess up the engine more than copper ones if the pad deteriorated and some pieces got down into the motor.  This did not work, either.  The oil/air mix came up from the engine and went right up through the filter and into the catch tank.

Now I made a brass ferrule to put in the breather line above the filter.  A Keihin 198 main jet is screwed in.  This is a restrictor.  Now the oil/air mix goes into the filter, the air bubbles out, and it goes up through the orifice and into the catch tank.  One picture shows the restrictor and the other shows the setup.  The line from the original breather is routed into the catch tank, too.

This evening Rose and I rode out to Silverton, a nearby town, for dinner.  The catch tank s empty after all of this.  The breather is working OK.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 01, 2013, 01:36:17 AM
The whole setup.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on July 01, 2013, 01:41:43 AM
Bo,
What was the issue that caused the long push.

Thanks, Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on July 01, 2013, 05:24:33 AM
Bo
I have a similar problem with some new Moto Guzzi's moving all the oil from the oil pan into the airbox and then onto the back wheel
I have been using an open filter type foam in the breather which seems to work
As for breaking down, I have this Ducati 998 at work that runs perfect for me but fails every time the customer gets on it
Well it finally stopped for me on Wednesday, and this is me waiting on the freeway for my apprentice to come and pick me up
At least it wasn't raining
G
(http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc28/grumm441/Broken_zps26c41891.jpg) (http://s219.photobucket.com/user/grumm441/media/Broken_zps26c41891.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Cereal KLR on July 01, 2013, 01:06:01 PM
Any plan to run any carbs other than the CV`s?  I had heard over the years of cv type carbs fluttering at WOT and considered some of the Keihin 35mm CR-2 smooth bores. The lack of $600 to update what is now acceptable street bike performance has keep me from experimenting.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 02, 2013, 01:54:19 AM
Don, the red wire is the feed for the lambda meter setup and it passed over the top of the aluminum circuit box.  My weight on the seat pushed the wire down onto the box and it shorted and blew a fuse.  Grumm's customer might weigh more than him and the same thing might be happening on the Ducati.  The fellow that does my dyno tuning says "You have the bird nest philosophy of wiring things.  Bundle your wires neatly and tie them to something so they are not loose.  That will save you a lot of trouble."  He is correct.  Neat wiring would have saved me the big push.

Grumm, it seems these oil breathers have an unobstructed flow rate and it can be much larger than the flow rate where they can separate the air from the oil.  An obstruction like foam or an orifice that slows the flow rate down enough makes them work.

Cereal, if I used a racing carb on the street it would be one with an enrichening circuit for starting.  Do the CR's have this?  If so, they would be a better choice than the flat slides if you switched.

The OEM carbs are what I use for the street motor.  They are working great with this 994cc engine with 10.5 to 1 compression, 790 cams, 2mm larger intake valves, and a port job.  That is a lot of engine and no capacity problems are observed.  The advantage of the standard carbs is they can be jetted to provide a slightly leaner than stoichiometric ratio over a wider range of conditions and this promotes engine life.

The standard carbs and the racing cams never worked well.  Also, I needed a bit more air flow at top end.  The flat slides work great with the cams and have lots of flow capacity.  Unfortunately, starting is done by flooding the engine with raw fuel from the accelerator pump.  The last engine had very short life due to excessive top end wear.  This raw fuel at starting, and some richness at lower rpm due to reversion killed that motor.  Now I use the racing cams and carbs for Bonneville, only.       

There is a fellow in England that will bore out the OEM carbs.   

     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on July 02, 2013, 02:05:10 AM
Note taken on the wiring.

I will try not to make the same mistake.

Thanks, Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 08, 2013, 01:08:02 AM
The first 20 miles of the break in was accelerating or engine breaking.  I did not do any cruising or sustained high rpm running.  The breather catch tank filled up and oil got all over the back of the bike including the tire during this.  It took a week or so for me to forget about going sideways.  An oily tire don't grip too good.  The things I did are in the most recent posts.

Saturday morning was the monthly Triumph club breakfast so I headed up to Portland.  A lot of riding was on the freeway and I got up to 80 mph a few times.  The breather catch tank was emptied when I got home.  About a teaspoon was in it.  It was a small amount of oil with greater proportions of funk and spooge.  This is acceptable and expected.  The breather works.  I routed a hose from it to a beer can full of water.  Bubbles came out of the end when I ran the bike.

There was a #298 Keihin main jet used as a choke in the breather hose during the trip.  I drilled it out to 5/64 and put it back in.   The plan is to incrementally open the choke point in the hose until I start to collect oil.  Then I will put in a choke that is slightly smaller.

There is a coffee shop/cafe in Portland with a small store on the side with bike stuff like chain lube.  The customer are a mixed group and this is unusual for here.  Out in front there were a Moto Guzzi, a BMW, a couple of Harley baggers, a Harley chopper, a Ducati monster, and my Triumph.  The coffee and a sandwich were decent  It was the first time I was there.  seeseemotorcycles.com

There were some forum comments about my diminutive landracing.com stickers.  Slim sent me some full size ones.  There is etiquette.  The largest and most predominate stickers are for the main sponsor.  The Triumph shop is not an official sponsor.  They do put up with me and they help me a lot.  Some ginormous shop stickers solve the problem.  Now I can put on the landracing.com ones Slim sent and not commit a faux pas.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 09, 2013, 01:08:12 AM
The task now is jetting the CV carbs.  The first step is to make sure the pilot jets are clean, the float levels are set, and the needles and needle jets are not worn.  It is a good idea to replace the needles and needle jets if they have over 20,000 miles on them.  When all is good I go to the next step.

Step 2 is to hook up the lambda meter and drive around while looking at the fuel/air ratios.  I monkey around with the pilot jets and needles to get the mixture within the 12:1 to 14:1 range during normal street use.  The mixture will be on the richer side during hot days and on the leaner side during colder times.

Step 3 is to put the bike on the dyno and to adjust the main jets to produce maximum power.

Step 4 is to recheck the pilot and needle settings during actual use using the fuel/are mixture gage.

A few things to be careful about.  Gasahol can give a "weak mixture" feeling during low throttle acceleration.  Carb jetting done by feel can lead to an overly rich mixture in an attempt to cure this.  My method is to set the mixture to stoicho or slightly leaner and to live with the problem.

Sometimes it is impossible to get the mixture correct at some throttle settings and rpms.  Reversion might be the problem.  It was on the last engine and an overly rich mixture probably lead to lots of top end wear.  That, and flooding the engine to start it on cold days.

This engine is built with the standard Triumph cams, the standard carbs and headers, Triumph off-road mufflers, and the inlet lengths are the same as with the standard air box.  The only changes are higher compression, more displacement, a ported head, 2mm larger intake valves, and a stage 3 spark advance curve.  The reversion is gone and I can use an enrichener circuit, rather than flooding to start the engine.  The motor runs really well.  It is the smoother than it has ever been and lots of power at all rpm.  Credit Revco Pecision for balancing the crank.

The big difference this time around was using PipeMax to design the motor.  Carbs, cams, valves, etc. are all sized to choke at redline, and not any higher.  This gives me maximum port velocities during use.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 13, 2013, 06:13:09 PM
Tomorrow morning I leave for California.  Rose is giving her 250 Honda Rebel to the boys in Camp Pendleton.  Gas is expensive down there and 80 mpg will do them some good.  Taking the bike there will involve going down and back the entire length of Calif.  The big question.

Does anyone know of some used machine and tooling places?  Also, I want to buy some titanium bits and pieces for projects.  My problem is, I need to know the alloy I am working with.  Basic unalloyed ti is to close to high strength aluminum to be worth the extra cost.  Ti alloys can be worth the cost as a substitute for steel.  Does any one know of a source?   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on July 13, 2013, 08:11:55 PM
I can't recommend any particular source for titanium other than eBay. Look for an alloy called "6Al4V"-- it is the most common structural titanium alloy.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 14, 2013, 01:07:35 AM
Thanks, Neil, I will do that.

The FIM paperwork went out yesterday to the AMA and some was scanned and sent in today.  One thing they ask for are pictures of the bike with and without streamlining.   I knew about this and planned ahead.  All cosmetic stuff was done last year before 2013 BUB and I took the photos.  This winter I concentrated on the other things like working on the engine.  This way, the 2013 pictures will represent what I will be running this year.

The record in my class is just under 160 mph and it was set by a 1000cc Aprilia.  I think it was a Tuono.  My best speed in 2013 was just over 130 mph on a 3-mile course.  This year I should have 10 more horsepower.  I can see through the new professionally made front windshield so I can tuck down.  Also, I worked on the fairing shape in the lower front to reduce the "scoop" effect of the hole in front of the engine.  These changes will reduce the frontal area and the drag coefficient.  The ZR rated tires will help a little, too.  All these little changes and running on a five mile course will get me into the lower 150's if conditions are good, everything works, and I do not screw up.

That is the big plan.  150 mph and no crash and burn.  I will be happy with that, for sure.  However, just in case miracles happen, I am putting on a teensy rear sprocket.  That way, if the improbable occurs, like a tailwind in both directions, the engine will turn 8,000 rpm at 160 mph and it wont blow apart.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 14, 2013, 01:50:00 PM
These three places are in the i-net:  Grandis Titanium on 30422 Esperanza Rancho Station in Santa Margarita, International Metal Trading on 15330 Minnesota Ave in Paramount, and Letvin Scrap Metal on 13210 Figueroa Street in Los Angeles.  I've been to LA a few times.  I've been to the moon more times than to Paramount or Santa Margarita.  This afternoon I will make a list of what I need and the alloy properties.

Ti is a very noble metal in comparison to everything else on the jalopy.  Some thought will be needed about galvanic reaction.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 24, 2013, 12:43:45 PM
We are on the road in California.

The alloy Neil recommends is ti with 6% aluminum and 4% vanadium.  It is readily available as new and scrap stock and it is in the Grade 5 alloy classification.  It has almost twice the strength of Grade 2.  It is essential to know your alloys when buying ti.  They have vastly different properties and some are very, very, hard to machine.  All round stock in the photo is ti 6-4.

The folks at Grandis Titanium and International Metal Trading gave me good service and sold me all I could afford.  I was given this address:  Titanium Metal Supply, Poway, California, (858) 748-8510.  The list I gave them had fractional and metric sizes.  This helped.  About half is metric.  One of the rednecks down here in socal calls the metric system "communist measurements."   

The bike reminds me of how we built them back "in the day."  There are parts from at last two Hondas here and all sorts of other stuff.   Lots of fun then and now.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on July 24, 2013, 05:13:29 PM
Bo,
You gotta love the old Honda 350's!  I've got a couple of them plus a few too many spare parts. That one is just the thing for bringing home the groceries.

Good luck on your endeavor and I will see you at BUB's.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 28, 2013, 11:35:57 PM
We will see you there, Tom.

Still in California.  Today we went to San Francisco, walked around China Town, climbed up the Coit Tower, and went down to the Embarkadero.  I am not sure of the spelling.  There are all sorts of things there about the America Cup boat race there.  Those things do not use sails or airfoils to catch the wind.  They use big tall fins with what we call the ideal streamlining shape - a blunter nose tapering back in a streamlined teardrop shape.  The shape is the same on either side of the fin.  They orient the fin to the wind so there is laminar flow on one side and detached flow on the other.  The air pressure differential between the two fin sides pushes the fin toward the low pressure side.  This drives the boat along.  The boats can travel over three times the speed of the wind that hits the fin.

There are four boats running with entries from NZ, Italy, US, and Sweden.  All are hidden away so no one can see their secrets.  There is this Louis Vuitton shop there.  They have a bunch of purses and this nice looking Americas Cup windbreaker.  Nothing fancy.  There are ones with the same quality for $29.95 at K-mart.  The price is $2,300 USD.

Our little land speed racing world is looking good.  Hopefully the rich and famous will not discover it.  They can inflate the costs of everything to levels we can not afford.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 01, 2013, 12:57:25 AM
A visit to El Mirage was in order.  We entered the lake on the entrance near the BLM building.  We were directed to go to the other end of the lake to find the SCTA course after lots of asking around.  The first photo shows what I think is the course, looking from the far end, toward the start at Callahans.  The surface is shown in the second photo and it looks good and there should be no problem racing on it with the Triumph.  In my desert racing days we called this "caliche." 

There was all sorts of junk on the surface as shown in the third photo.  This is the stuff in the path I walked.  There is a lot more out there.  The bent nails are sorta unusual.  What is the story behind these?

The mirages are spectacular.  The lake appeared to be full from edge to edge with turquoise water when we looked at it from Callahans.  The lake was completely dry.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on August 01, 2013, 09:06:17 AM
Interesting collection of junk.  I'm surprised the metal salvagers didn't beat you to it.  The nails are clinched over, as when attaching thin plywood using nails that are too long.  I'm thinking maybe Ed Whizbang"s "Flying Credenza" must have exploded there.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 03, 2013, 01:47:56 AM
The better items went into the official team Go Dog Go nut and bolt bins.

Some more pix from Calif.  The 37 1/2 mph speed limit was official and not a prank.  The sign on the side of the road said it, too.  Marine Corps motorcycles.  They are diesel and similar to the ones that Hayes races at BUB.  Gas prices.  This might not seem like a lot to our British and European cousins.  Things are far apart here and a hike in gas prices is a big deal.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 04, 2013, 02:57:13 PM
There are a couple of weeks to get everything done, I know where I am, and I can see as far as I will go.  The engine is broken in and this evening I will switch to the racing cams, carbs, and mufflers.  The dyno session is on the morning of the 8th.  The motor will be finished except for a pair of hotter cams.  I will be using the old 813 grind ones.  The record I am running against is 159 mph and I need those knockers to get the power to reach 160.  There is no time or money to put them in this year.  They will go in when I get back from AUS in 2015.

Meanwhile, I need to make sure what I have is running at top form and safe.  This side cover is from a wrecked bike and it was scratched.  Normally I would polish it up and along with everything else I am making.  Not much time is left.  It will go on the bike with a rough sanded finish and all sorts of other parts will be fitted as machined.  Looks are secondary importance and the decision is to build for speed and safety.

Folks looking at this thing do not know this, of course.  They will look at the fit and finish and assume I am some sort of retarded hillbilly with an attitude.  The plan is to put the name "Leroy" on the fairing.  When people talk to me about the bike I will say it was built by my "challenged" twin brother, he has the flu, and I am doing him a favor by riding it.  A stroke of genius this is!  I should have been a politician.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on August 04, 2013, 04:54:36 PM
You put "Leroy" on yours and I'll put "Junk Yard Dog" on mine, to go along with my Pit Mate, Junk Yard Husky!   If I even had a side cover as nice as that, I'd call it a show bike.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 05, 2013, 02:07:03 AM
That breather has the Leroy touch.  The guy gets around.

Today I spent hours on the lathe and mill making a special fitting.  The last operation was cutting some male threads.  My lathe cuts american threads and I needed a metric one.  No one around here has metric dies so I ordered one from Fastenal.  14 mm x 1.25 mm.  It took a week to get here.

The threads were sorta hard to cut considering this was a brand new die.  I went to screw the fitting into the female threads in the other part.  The threads were so loose the male part slid, rather than screwed, into the female piece.  The jackass that ground the die made it undersize.  It was closer to a 13 mm x 1.25 mm one than a 14 mm x 1.25 die.  There was no brand name on the die.  It said "Made in China."  This die wrecked the part and Dyno Day is Thursday.  This is costing me valuable time.  I am a mad puppy.

Does McMaster Carr sell this low grade Chinese carp?  I am trying to avoid it if I can.  It does not bother me to pay more for something that works.  I need to find a new source for tools and supplies.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on August 05, 2013, 01:53:32 PM
 I don't suppose 20 tpi would be close enough.  I've bastardized a few fittings, in a pinch you know.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on August 05, 2013, 03:48:07 PM
13 vs 14 = CLOSE Enough to some people :-o :-o

I try to specify the country of origin for any particular brand.  We are at a point where brand-loyalty says something about our age :roll:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 07, 2013, 08:31:09 PM
The Fasenal folks here are very nice to me and they gave me a full refund for the die.  A random check of their other Chinese taps and dies shows this is not an isolated incident.  One 14 mm x 1.25 mm tap was over 15 mm dia from point to point.  They have a problem.  I no longer do.  My solution was to type "American made 14 mm x 1.25 mm die" into the internet.  I ordered a Hanson one and it arrived in two days.  The die and shipping was cheaper than the Chinese one and it cuts the threads to the right size.  Unfortunatly, I lost three machined parts.  The die cutting was the last operation on the lot.

Some time around noon on Monday I realized dyno day was actually yesterday rather than tomorrow.  The boss left his office for lunch and I went in and left a note saying I would be out for Monday afternoon and Tuesday.  How could he say no if he wasn't there?  Then I headed home and started to work.  Switching carbs was first.  The breather catch tank does not fit under the race carbs so I moved it to a frame side rail as shown in the photo.   One of my fancy brass fittings was going to connect the breather to the side cover.  The goofy die wrecked it so I used this manifold fitting from a 1972 Toyota pickup truck.  Never ever throw anything away.  There is always a time you will need it.  There was an extra spigot for a small tube.  I put a tube on it and plugged the end with a nail, Leroy style.  The photo shows this masterpiece of Mickey Mouse mayhem.

The break in oil came out and new racing oil and a filter went in.  It was getting dark and I was fagged out.  It was time to switch the cams and reshim the valves.  This is very tedious, mental, and time consuming.  The whole operation was done by brain stem thinking.  It was very dark and I got done after midnight.  All sorts of night animals wander around this place just beyond the glow of the work lights.  It is creepy.




     .       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 07, 2013, 08:37:46 PM
Up early the next morning, I was.  The last tasks were done and the pix shows the old girl is ready to go on the trailer and go north to the dyno.  A test ride was in order.  The bike is too fast to ride it and see how fast it is.  It makes that nice 'lumpa lumpa" exhaust sound on decel like a nice and proper Triumph with hot cams.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 09, 2013, 01:02:23 AM
#@6%0&!  84 hp with the old 865 motor and 84 hp with the new 995 one.  Golf is looking good right now.

What I do is wind the bike up to 8,000 rpm in fourth and shift up into fifth.  The rpm in 5th will be around 6,240 after the shift.  I want the bike to climb up to my 7,400 target rpm before it goes into the measured mile.  The little slivers of torque and horsepower are the improvements above last year.

The 10% increase in peak torque was what I expect.  My hope was the torque increase would occur throughout the entire power band.  This would put the power in the low 90's and I would have a chance at getting the record if conditions are good and I ride well.  No chance of that.  I am "dead on arrival" at BUB record wise.

The job now is to make the best of what I have.  The speeds I expect will be the topic of the next post.  All that power at low to mid rpm sure is fun on the street.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on August 09, 2013, 06:10:04 AM
I know how you feel, Bo.  All those changes, sweet torque curve, and it all comes together at 8000 rpm with no increase in peak hp (although I didn't spend as much money on intake manifolds as you did on pistons, etc!)  Maybe you should consider coming to Miller raceway the following weekend to race in the "Thruxton TransAtlantic Challenge" race. Your new torque monster should kick-a** in that class.  Of course, they might frown on the mods you have made to the "Triumph fairing."
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RidgeRunner on August 09, 2013, 12:27:39 PM
Bo

     Those numbers might not be as bad as they appear at first glance.  Although the instant peak HP didn't increase you picked up a lot of total HP and torque under the whole curve.  There is a theory that it takes time to build speed, if it applies in your case the bike will build speed faster and allow the "thin slivers of improvement" to get more work done on the top end.  The only numbers that count in the end come from the great white dyno, if they didn't everybody could save big bucks on travel fuel, food, and lodging.

     Your systematic approach and level of documentation has made this a very interesting build to follow.  I'm looking forward to seeing the results of your efforts.  All the best for staying safe, having fun, and going faster than you might be expecting.


                                                         Ed

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on August 09, 2013, 04:47:34 PM
Yes...........you have considerable more HP and TQ at your RPM goal. Do you have rear sprockets with less teeth?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 09, 2013, 10:20:50 PM
Tom, I quit serious cornering decades ago.  The incident involved a curve in the road between Hart Park and Bakersfield, a raised traffic separation island in the middle of it, and a Yamaha XS-1100.  It scared me for life.  Before that I was a fairly good pavement racer.  Thanks for the encouragement, Dennis and Ed.  I need that.

My "how fast will I go chart' is used in the next two posts.  The curves should be based on combined drag and frontal area values corrected for altitude with friction losses added.  Instead, I use some reasonable looking curves from John Bradley's book "The Racing Motorcycle."  Look at Volume 1 for instructions on how to make the curves.  Some day I will upgrade my chart.

The 2012 values are on a 3-mile course and they do not mean anything - considering everything else is from 5 mile runs.  The 2011 values are used today.  These are my last runs on the longer track.  Advice is, do development runs on the course you will be trying to set records on.  This makes the data you collect more useful.

The dashed line starts at the 2011 data points and goes along following the curves.  It represents the speed vs power relationship for the scooter with 2011 streamlining.  Note that I can go 141 mph with the power the new motor produces.  It will have 72.2 hp as corrected for salt flats density altitude.  This is 84 rear wheel hp on the dyno in Beaverton.  I need 102 rear wheel dyno hp to go 150 and 127 hp to go 160 and break the record.

         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 09, 2013, 10:31:27 PM
Decreased aero and friction drag gives more speed for the same power.  This causes the data points to move horizontally across the chart.  Note that I am a whole bunch better at reducing drag than developing power in the engine.  Going in a horizontal path from the point where 72.2 hp meets the dashed line, it will take 9 mph to get to 150 and 19 mph to reach 160.  Are two years of streamlining improvements worth 19 mph?  There is a remote possibility.  Can the better tinwork get me 9 mph?  Probably.  I will try for that.  150 mph is a great personal goal.  The next post will be about choosing the sprockets.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 10, 2013, 01:23:12 PM
This is my sprocket sheet.  It tells me the speeds I can expect with the ones I have.  7,500 rpm is right at the middle of the horsepower peak.  I try to get as close as I can to that during the measured mile.  This sheet was originally written up at a DariQueen somewhere and I edit it over the years.  My apologies for not posting something neater.

A target speed of 150 mph is chosen.  This is realistic as discussed in the last post.  A 38-tooth rear will get me there.  The advantage of it is that it will give the engine the most leverage on the salt.  The disadvantage is it will take higher rpm to do it than the others.

The 36-tooth one might get me there, too.  The good thing about it is the engine will turn lower rpm.  Sometimes this helps if the motor, as tuned, runs out of power a higher rpm.  The disadvantage is that it provides less leverage on the salt.

The 35-tooth one will be tossed into the truck for the trip.

This is a new motor so I will start out with the 36.  This will keep the revs down.  Next I will try the 38.  This second run will be the last if I go faster.  The 35 will stay in the truck.  What happens if the 38 gives less speed than the 36?  The 35 will go on and I will make a third run.

Sprocketology.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Cereal KLR on August 10, 2013, 09:43:11 PM
Can`t wait to see this in two weeks  :-D   I will make sure to find you this year and say hello.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 11, 2013, 08:13:38 PM
We had our annual event today.  I just got home.  It starts with a rider meeting just like Bonneville.  There is a meat wagon to carry folks to the hospital, porta potties, and radio communication between the checkpoints, just like on the salt.

A lot of bikes carry enough fuel to go the distance and some do not.  My job is to drive the gas truck out and back from the far reaches of the course.  It is one of the many jobs involved with holding the event.  There is no event gas.  A racer brings their own and can use whatever they like.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 11, 2013, 08:28:59 PM
This is a check.  It is like the 5 mile or 7 mile ones on the salt, except it is in the woods.  The lady is checking the riders off on a list as they come in and the radio crew is reporting all of this to the pits.  My job is to make sure they are not smoking while refueling.  A lot of bikes do not have a side stand and I hold them up while they pour in the gas.  We have fire fighting equipment at hand.  Two of those are a shovel and a pile of dirt.  This is not like that on the salt.

This is a 2014 Yamaha.  The cyl tilts towards the back.  The exhaust comes out of the back and completely loops around the cyl.  The injector is at the front.  A big problem with dirt bikes is keeping enough weight on the front wheel.  This concept seems to make that worse.  Also, it puts the injector in a location where it gets covered with mud.  There must be some benefits to offset this. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 11, 2013, 08:46:24 PM
Oregon has long winters and folks do not have much money.  Major fabrication is the result.  These guys in Estacada had the typical shop tools of every logger, a wrecked Suzuki Samurai, $500, and their junk pile.  The diffs front and rear are narrowed Suzi ones.  The transfer case is Suzi, too.  The motor is some sort of Honda.  There are a bunch of Chevy parts and there are all kinds of bicycle components.  The hood is bent up from a road sign.  They made the frame and everything else.  The only new part is the winch at the front.  The first version got to weaving at speed and flipped.  They monkeyed around with this and that.  Now it wiggles a bit and it stays upright.  The guys built this thing so they could sit side by side, drink beer, and putt around in the woods.  They did a good job.

The breather is fixed, the front fairing is on, and now I am finishing up the rear sets.  The build is coming along just great.  Tonight I will change the fork springs.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 14, 2013, 12:40:56 AM
Now it is time to adjust the carb jetting for Bonneville.  The carbs are jetted for maximum power on the dyno in Beaverton.  The climatic conditions during the dyno run with the finalized jet choice is in red on the printout.  Last year's is in blue for comparison.  The temperature is 93.36 degrees F, the air pressure is 30.02 inches mercury, and the humidity is 12 percent.

All of this is entered into the calculator at http://airdensityonline.com  An uncorrected barometric reading is entered so the 150 foot Beaverton physical elevation is not used.  The density altitude during the final jetting pull is 2,190 feet.

     

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 15, 2013, 12:24:32 AM
Rose and Gretchen have been in Virginia for the last week and a half helping my oldest boy and his wife.  She just had a baby.  My daughter in law had it, not Rose.  My days during this time are to get up in the morning, put in an hour or so on the bike, go to work, get home and have a beer, then work on the bike till 9 at night.  This is outdoors work.  Fortunately the weather is good.  The parents of one of Gretchen's friends see this.  They figure I am not eating all that good and they invite me over for dinner.  All of the steak, chicken, fish, potatoes, etc I can eat.  Beer, too.  That is a nice thing for them to do.

The bike is run on the dyno with all sorts of main jets.  The operator selects the ones he feels that give the best power.  These are a pair of #138's.  The curves are real close together on the dyno graph and tangled up like worms making love.  It is hard to make and judgements except to pick the ones that work best.

We look at the mixture curves and pick some jet sizes that are far enough apart to look at the curves and to compare them.  The 132 jets are the final selection and they are the red curves.  A pair of 128 jets are two sizes smaller and they are the green curves.  A pair of 140's are three sizes bigger and they are the blue curves.  Note that that are about one part apart on the mixture curves.

The curves show me that I lose big power if I go leaner than the 132's.  They also show me that it does not make a big difference if I go richer.  This is a big help.  Tomorrow I will figure out which jets to put in for B'ville.

   

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 16, 2013, 02:19:03 AM
This Saturday, between 10 and 3, the Triumph will be on display at Cascade Moto Classics, 13705 Farmington Road, Beaverton, Oregon, 9705 (503) 574-3353.  I will be there to answer LSR questions.  The bike is 75% done.  The tasks remaining are not cosmetic so it will look like it does when it is raced.

The bike is coming together OK, sort of.  I did major work on all sorts of things and they fit good on the street version of the bike.  Unfortunately, they were not all on the bike at the same time or on it when it is in racing trim.  I am having to remake some stuff so everything will work together.  Also, I am serious about getting more speed and it will be hard without a lot more power.  I need to make sure all of the little details are correct such as gearing, jetting, etc. 

It looks like the Triumph streamliner will be running at BUB and it will be in the same class as BUB 7.  Hopefully they will let me set up in the factory pits like last year.  This could be interesting.  I will take pictures.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on August 17, 2013, 04:32:56 AM
I probably wont make it
G :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 17, 2013, 11:48:35 PM
Sorry to hear that Grumm.  We were looking forward to seeing you.  I guess we will meet in AUS in 2015.

The exhibit went well today.  Lots of interest in LSR and quite a few from the Triumph club will be at BUB and one fellow will be a volunteer.

These are the jetting calcs.  The sensitivity analysis says it won't hurt power to run a little on the rich side so that is the plan.  The bike was jetted on Sunoco Standard, a 110 octane leaded, and it is similar to ERC-110K.  I do not need to change the jetting to account for differences between the two fuels.  Knowing this is the big benefit it from all of that gasoline research I did during the off season.

The Triumph liner with Jason DiSalvo as the pilot will run in AMA with one Rocket III motor.  It will run in FIM with 2 rocket motors.  There are a bunch of Brough Superiors running. The name Brough is said like "Bruff."

The BUB meet is pretty low key compared to speedweek.  It is basically a bunch of bike guys and gals having fun.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 18, 2013, 01:37:21 PM
The dyno has a little fan and it makes a nice breeze over the engine and exhaust system and it is nothing like the hurricane force winds that occur on the front of the motor and headers during a run at B'ville.  The greater the wind, the more it cools the pipes, is a general rule.

Sonic waves in cooler exhaust gas travel slower and this is shown on the attached graph.  These slower waves take longer to travel a distance and this changes the exhaust tuning.  Let's say the wave speed is slowed 10 percent.  The tuned length is increased 10 percent as a result.  We use Pipe Max to figure out the optimum RPM for that tuned length and it is a lower rpm.

The torque curve for my bike shows that the last thing I need is the torque peak occurring at a lower rpm.  The pipes are wrapped to keep them nice and warm during the cyclonic climate of a run.  The pipes are wrapped where they are exposed to the big winds, only.

The new version of Pipe Max has a bunch of features to account for variations in exhaust gas temperatures.  This was a weak point in the previous versions and it is corrected.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 20, 2013, 01:43:35 AM
The knocklight has a little brain that calibrates it when the engine is started.  It programs itself to ignore normal engine noises.  It glows green when there is nothing unusual.  A change in engine sound like preignition or detonation will make it glow red.  Rubbing an aluminum tire iron across the cylinder fins is causing the red glow in the photo.  My hope is it will tell me if something starts to rattle in the engine during a run.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Cereal KLR on August 20, 2013, 09:45:41 PM
How deep is the sensor? As you know, the top end on these sings a tune when working them.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 22, 2013, 01:40:18 AM
The sensor is on the side of the block.  Surface mounted and not deep.  Heck, I can show it to you next week.  My engine is real noisy.  Somehow it picks up unusual noises like the clatter when I miss a shift.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 23, 2013, 01:33:09 AM
Taping the front rim was the last job.  The old girl is ready to go.

Matt Capri will be at BUB.  I will show him the dyno curve and get his advice.  There might be some engine work in the winter of 2014 if I can find the $ somewhere.  Some small streamlining improvements are expected in winter 2014, too.  Otherwise, the bike is just like it will be in AUS in 2015.

Record chasing is in my past now.  The goal is to get to 150 mph.  Maybe I can do it this year.  My next posts will be from Wendover.  It is time to get some sleep.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 26, 2013, 11:02:19 AM
A trailer leaf spring broke in Button Point, NV.  Fortunately there is an old abandoned house there, some fences, and roadside trash.  A repair was made with old house wood, fence wire, and a beer can.  We are in Wendover KOA now.  This morning I will order a pair of springs and some shackle bolts over the e-net.  Then we will go onto the lake.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on August 26, 2013, 01:11:25 PM
Was the a lady at the ranch like when Burt Munro broke his trailer?

That was the most true to life part of the movie.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Cereal KLR on August 27, 2013, 07:21:53 PM
Met up with Bo today, he is doing well. Doing some gearing changes as I came by. Bike sounded strong and he is getting some good seat time, took me three days to find him!   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 28, 2013, 10:54:53 PM
Freud, I thought about the horny ranch lady when this happened.  There are ladies on ranches around here and they are paid professionals.  Considering I am in enough trouble as it is, I am staying away from those gals.

Late Monday I reserved a spot on Tuesday where I would be one of the first to leave in the morning.  We got up early and were on the lake at the donkey crack of dawn.  I was ready to go when I noticed the fuel leak.  I had to make a fuel cock gasket and my first run was at 11:38 AM.  It was pretty hot and breezy.  Time was 138.998 in the kilo and 138.967 in the mile.  The bike handled pretty good considering the side winds.  There was a small amount of wiggling in a few soft spots.  The runs were done with the 36-tooth rear sprocket.  This kept the r's low 'cause it is the first run on the new motor.

Sometime Tuesday afternoon I realized that I forgot to tighten down the steering damper.  It was not working during the first run.  I tightened it and changed to a 38-tooth rear to let the engine rev.  We got there on Wednesday morning at the crack of dawn and ran at 11:00.  It was hot.  I ran the engine up to 8,000 in fourth and made a quick shift into fifth.  Time was 140.671 in the kilo and 138.112 in the mile.  The bike handled great.  No problems.  Any advice on the big difference in kilo and mile times is welcome.

In the distance we saw a big black wall of rain approaching.  It was time to leave.  We broke camp, tossed everything into the truck and got the heck out of there .  We were 1/2 of the way to the boat ramp when the monsoon hit.  It was bad, very bad.  Gretchen was driving.  She will remember this for a long time.

The cylinder are oiled up on Bonnie, the chain is pulled off and washed, and the bike is ready to go home.  Tomorrow Gretchen and I will go out to the frontage road between Wendover and the potash plant.  She will learn how to shift the truck from second gear to third.  I will fix the trailer in the afternoon.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 29, 2013, 03:58:28 PM
The modern world sure has a lot less suspense.  The springs are crossing the country from somewhere in the Midwest and they arrived at Elko at 7AM this morning.  They should be here in Wendover this afternoon.  I can track them on the e-net.  Amazing stuff, this is.

This morning I did the math on the two runs.  Like Ed (Ridgerunner) said it would do, the additional power at higher midrange rpm helped.  It did everything, to be exact.  This is the first time I had the new streamlining on the 5-mile course.  It is as efficient as the old streamlining, performance wise.  It did not help me or hurt me.  I know what I need to do to it and I will do it this winter.

Peterdallen and Old Scrambler set records.  They might have something on their build diaries.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 30, 2013, 11:51:00 AM
Two years ago I was at 132 mph and I need 160 mph to get my old FIM record.  I needed 28 mph.  This year I got just over 140 in the kilo and now I need 20 mph.  I did the best I could with 2 years of solid and hard work.  A more realistic goal is 150 mph and getting into the DLRA 150 club.  I might be able to do this with another year of work.  The 1000 cc class is very competitive and a family guy with a union worker paycheck and an air cooled twin is doomed.  Benchmark speeds are a much better target.  On the bright side, I learned a lot.  Like Bruce Hornsby sings, "There will be some changes made."

The trailer is fixed and we are heading out.  The meet was great.  The chance to compete on a well prepared and safe track on the national and international levels is fantastic.  The last run I made was on a tight dry track with no crosswind.  It does not get any better.  Everyone did a great job.  The chance to meet new and old friends and chitchat is priceless, too.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 01, 2013, 01:30:07 PM
My plan to watch the action from inside the factory Triumph pits did not go as planned.  There was no room for me in there.  I set up across the street next to Baron's Speed Shop and Peter D. Allen from London.  They had a Union Jack hoisted up on a flag pole.  This helped me find my pit.  I just looked for the UK flag.

The issue of Classic Bike Guide on our news stands shows a Baron's Triumph with a red and white tank.  The one they brought is different and it will be covered in the next two issues.  It is a pre-unit Triumph with Amal carbs.  They had huge remote float bowls.  This is needed to give the needed fuel flow capacity for methanol.  This got me interested.

Previous theoretical work I have done on nitrous and nitropropane say these fuels burn too hot for these air cooled engines.  Old-timers on the salt tell me that methanol burns cooler and is very forgiving.  Watching Baron's with their Triumph and some PM's that expert folks have sent has given me a big plan, as follows.

Step 1)  Find a slightly wilder cam to work with the gasoline powered NA setup I have before I go to AUS.  This, and some streamlining changes will get me closer to 150 mph.

Step 2)  After AUS, buy another street bike so I can dedicate the Triumph to racing, only.

Step 3)  Put a turbo on the Bonnie and figure out how to run it on race gasoline.  Triumph Performance knows all about how to do this.

Step 4)  Reconfigure it to run on methanol with higher compression.

This will keep me busy and broke for the remainder of my racing career.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on September 01, 2013, 01:51:18 PM
Step 2)  After AUS, buy another street bike so I can dedicate the Triumph to racing, only.





Bo, step #2 makes racing much easier.

  Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: peterdallan on September 01, 2013, 02:05:06 PM
Bo,

It was a pleasure to meet both you and Gretchen at BUB. Sorry the weather shortened both our available run time, but as first timers we learn't it was as hard as we were led to believe, and it took us till about noon on Wednesday to figure out where we were going wrong (or at least believe). We queued on the Mountain Course Mile 1 and were 3rd in line to run with our new settings when the weather closed in. Hey, that's racing, just a shame Bonneville is over 5,000 miles away from us!

Already planning next year, hope to get the bike dialled in earlier in the week.

Peter
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 01, 2013, 11:20:59 PM
This picture is one Gretchen took right when I found the fuel leak.  I had reserved a spot in line and I would have been one of the first down the track in the morning.  On the way home I said to her "I'll bet you heard the "F" word more at this meet than any of the others."  She said "Yes, and in at least five different accents."
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 04, 2013, 12:44:58 AM
Freud made a recent post in which he lamented the attempts at replacing the camshaft with more modern ideas.  He had a link to a Swedish company.  I have been trying to find that post with no luck.  Any clues to where it is?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on September 04, 2013, 12:49:30 AM
Freud made a recent post in which he lamented the attempts at replacing the camshaft with more modern ideas.  He had a link to a Swedish company.  I have been trying to find that post with no luck.  Any clues to where it is?

http://www.landracing.com/forum/index.php/topic,13123.msg231605.html#msg231605 (http://www.landracing.com/forum/index.php/topic,13123.msg231605.html#msg231605)

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 05, 2013, 01:01:46 AM
Thanks, Mike.  There have been attempts through the years to use pneumatic and other means to control valve action.  This is the first time I have seen this technology available to guys like me.  It does not hurt to ask about it and I will do so.

It is time for me to plan the off season work so I can spend a few minutes going fast in Feb 2015 on Lake G.  The goal is to get into the 150 club and I do not have much money to spend on the bike.  Very little, actually.  I need to figure out how much horsepower I will need.

The first step is to calculate the power I need to overcome friction drag.  Equations from Kevin Cooper's work are used.  They are presented on Page 172 of John Bradley's "The Racing Motorcycle" Volume 1.  These numbers might be an overestimate as I will explain in a future post.  It is a good idea to build enough power in the engine to overcome the drag listed in the table - to be on the safe side of things.  The laden weight is from the truck stop scale measurement and the tire pressure is an average of the 36 psi front and 38 psi rear I use on the salt.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 05, 2013, 08:56:46 PM
This second chart shows the aerodynamic drag I need to overcome.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 05, 2013, 09:00:13 PM
This graph shows the combined friction and aerodynamic drag for various drag areas.  It takes a lot of power to go really fast, or, a really slippery shape.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on September 05, 2013, 09:39:54 PM
Bo............just my 2-cents.............flatten the tank and lower the 'bowling ball' of the fairing about 5-inches so you only have about 2-3 inches of wheel travel.  Also check your overall width..........try for less than 20-inches. Then practice pulling one knee at a time to your chest while laying on your back for the next 11-months.  I did and it helps.  Now I just need to lose another 10 or 15 pounds. When I cock my wrists to get the inside of my fore-arms against my tank, I no longer feel air-turbulence on the outer arms and shoulders.  That was good for 1 mph.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on September 05, 2013, 10:00:25 PM
I found that putting a 30 pound lighter and more limber than me 17 year old on the bike was worth 20 MPH.

 Don  :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 05, 2013, 11:04:56 PM
My teenager will not ride the bike.  She knows too much about it...

The dashed line shows me the additional speed I will get from more power if I do not make streamlining improvements.  Hotter cams and some different mufflers will give me 10 more horsepower according to Triumph Performance.  This will give me 145 mph, more or less, from 94 hp for around $1,250 (includes dyno time for jetting).  The preceding plus much bigger valves will give me around 100 hp.  I figure this will be $1,500 more, for $2,750.  This added six hp might get me to 149 mph.

My choice is to put the $1,250 on the cams and muffs, to tweak the streamlining a bit, and to use a couple of Old Scrambler tricks.  The added money I would spend on the big valves will not get me much more power and cost a lot.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jon on September 06, 2013, 03:29:36 AM
There was a bit of a discussion on the DLRA forum around wind resistance at Lake Gairdner and Bonnevile after our last meet.

Taken from the thread:

Wendover .... August avg temps = 33 C RH = 39% and altitude is 4219 feet.
Lake G .......feburary avg temps = 33 C RH = 57% and altitude is 396 feet.
From this data the following was calculated
Bonneville .... density altitude = 7746 ft..........air density = 0.0594 lbs per cubic foot
Lake G ........ density altitude = 3200 ft..........Air density = 0.0696 lbs per cubic foot

I've not run at either venues but people who have riden at both were talking around a 13% difference.
Similar to recent talk on Milwaukie Midget's build diary around running faster in the hotter less dense conditions.

jon
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 06, 2013, 10:25:04 PM
It is a bad road in a nasty neighborhood.  I thing Maj has been there.  Type "von Karman street" into your search engine.  There is a u-tube movie about it there, too.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jon on September 06, 2013, 11:24:12 PM
I think I missed what I was trying to say Bo.

If the 13% difference exists like people that have run at both venues say and the numbers indicate then running 150mph at Lake Gairdner takes about the same hp as running 169mph at Bonneville.
You will get more air into the motor which is good but you will be pushing more site out of your way.

Cheers
jon
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: JimL on September 07, 2013, 12:47:57 AM
Bo, I have had good luck guessing aero drag HP comparisons with:

Air drag:
Da = (density in slugs) * V^2(feet per second squared) * frontal area(in square feet) * cd (estimated) / 2

Bonneville at about 4100' is .002109 slugs, while sea level standard air is .002307 slugs.  These numbers are at standard temp, by the way.

You can calculate your drag components pretty well if you know speed you ran, and your available horsepower.  

Dr or rolling drag:
I had some numbers to plug in, from a Street Roadster, where I knew wheel horsepower, frontal area, tested cd, and speeds in the miles.  From there, I found about 100lb rolling drag worked within the formula (for that car at that speed.). I dont have permission to identify the car and its exact numbers, but its all just comparison.  Aero drag gets a lot bigger than the roll.

Also, for perspective....during pre SpeedWeek testing of the 2004 Bonneville Prius project, I made top speed push runs with a stock 245 hp Tundra pushing the Prius with no throttle application by the Prius driver.  That Tundra could run about 108 by itself, and would hold 93 pushing the Prius.  Most of that speed loss had to be the rolling drag and with the motor-generator making additional drag in very light regeneration.

Rolling drag changes in relation to how good the aero is, unfortunately, because the rear wheel loads up if your bike aero is poor and too high.  That makes it hard to figure at speed.

HP = (Da + Dr 'which is rolling drag') * Velocity in ft per second/550.

Bottom line is that good aero is cheaper than more horsepower.  You've seen pics of my bike.  It is about 75 HP to the ground, and my best speed this year was 163.829 3rd mile.

My bike is about 22" wide due to wide engine and carbs hanging sideways.  All food for thought and some comparative calculations you can ruminate over!

Hope this will be some fun figuring!  Best of luck, and give me a call some time.
JimL
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: THRUXTONERICH on September 07, 2013, 05:11:39 AM
Freud made a recent post in which he lamented the attempts at replacing the camshaft with more modern ideas.  He had a link to a Swedish company.  I have been trying to find that post with no luck.  Any clues to where it is?

This one??? http://www.agap.se/home.htm
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: JimL on September 07, 2013, 12:24:29 PM
About 20 years ago I saw a small twin set up to run solenoid controlled valves (no cams).  In addition to the reliability problems  with the solenoids, there was trouble finding a way to ramp open and closed to "chase the piston" or "be chased" in the case of exhaust valves.  The solenoids werent working in the overlap region if they were fast and strong enough.  That takes out scavenging, for sure.

The builder and I brainstormed a while about "over amp/frequency drive" techniques.  That is the cause of a type of automobile speaker damage where we'd find the ceramic magnets had hyper-extended and held at a flutter point.  The clue was erroded areas on the cone magnets and corner chipping.  The kids would put big amps against stock speakers and that condition was the result found in warranty examinations.

The right frequency, at the right amps, and you can partial, near full, or over extend and then hold at a chosen position....but with damage accumulating.

We thought that method might be a way to induce variable rates of "hold positions" for computer control of finite valve/time lift/close rates.  How to actually write that kind of code, and make it work, was mind numbing to think about!  Plus....all those broken engines in the development phase while a fellow learns how much he really dont know! :-P

I suppose somebody has figured it out, by now.  I gave up contemplating the whole deal a long time ago.  There is only so much brain damage you can stand, after all. :-D

Regards, JimL
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 08, 2013, 12:39:03 AM
There are two forms of drag we usually look at, rolling resistance and aero drag.  Rolling resistance drag is pretty much the same regardless of altitude.  Aero drag, in the simplified way we usually look at it, has the air density as a component in the numerator to the first power.  In other words, aero drag is proportional to are density.  There is less aero drag at B'ville than Lake Gairdner most of the time 'cause the Utah salt flats are at a higher altitude with thinner air.

Thinner air has less oxygen and it produces less compression in naturally aspirated engines.  NA engines produce less power at higher altitude places like B'ville than at lower venues such as Gairdner.  Some folks claim the power loss at higher altitudes is evenly compensated by the ease of pushing the thinner air.

The consequence of all of this is that the horsepower needed to overcome rolling resistance is a greater proportion of the total available power at higher altitudes for NA engines.  NA engines have an advantage at lower altitudes.

What I am getting from calcs is the opposite of what folks are saying, Jon.

This picture shows the front of the bike when it was being weighed.  The best way to get good photos for fronat area measuring is to take them from far away and then to crop and enlarge them on the computer.

The distance between the center of the roundels on the fairing sides is 25.5 inches.  This is 4.8 inches when the picture is measured with a scale.  25.5 / 4.8 = 5.31 to 1.  This is the reduction ratio for the photo.  The area inside the black lines is the frontal area and it is 7.64 square feet.  The maximum width is 28 inches.  I am about as low as I can get in the photo and still see straight ahead.
 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 08, 2013, 01:17:17 AM
Thanks for all of the info, Jim.  My bike is wider than yours.

My first exposure to the von Karman street was racing a bike having a big wide handlebar mounted windshield.  The windshield, I figured, was more aerodynamic than me, and using it would reduce the aero drag.  The harmonic frequency of the vortex shedding was nearly the same as the natural frequency of the bike rotating around the steering head at high speed.  A big speed wobble resulted. 

My old college textbook has a picture of a von Karman street, an equation and a few paragraphs, and that is all.  I did not know much about it when I designed the tail.  I did consider it, though.  The primary purpose of the shallow angle of convergence from front to back, along the sides, is to keep the flow attached to the sides in moderate side winds.  I did not want to have the pressure difference that comes with detached flow on one side and attached on the other.

The open tail end with lots of room for air to flow up under the tail and out the back is an attempt at eliminating the low pressure area that occurs behind a walled off tail.  I am hoping this will reduce turbulence behind the tail and the chance to form a von Karman street.  So far, at speeds up to the 140 mph the bike has gone, it is working.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: JimL on September 08, 2013, 09:56:35 AM
That makes sense.  I'm sure the tail could be better on my bike.  I suspect the drag is jumping up at my historic top speeds (160-165 range).  Its probably because of too short and pinched in the tail.  If I get to continue this game, I will certainly try to work on that idea.

I keep looking at current production car aero around the wheel openings.  The engineers are doing those slight flare and flatten shapes for a reason, and I'd like to understand it.  Of course, I know it is something for the highway speed range...but still curious.

Fun stuff!

JimL
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 09, 2013, 01:27:15 AM
Yea, Jim, there are some different things happening with cars.  The new Prius roof is slightly higher on the sides over the doors than it is in the middle of the roof.  I know that Toyota pays a lot of attention to aero on those little things.  Is that a styling exercise or does it help?



Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: JimL on September 10, 2013, 01:38:34 AM
I am guessing it is for the designed cruise speed aero, and so would be wrong for very high speeds.  Keep in mind that the roof shape must have changed to accept the available built in solar charging system (used for parked vehicle ventilation to reduce air conditioner load at startup in hot weather). 

The rear corners are the biggest point to pay attention to.  That is a hard, sharp break to get the Kamm effect for the body side wrap around.  In the world of metal stamping, that type of draw is a mighty tough job to keep correct.  The clamp force in the dies must occur just right to accept the sharp crease.  If you get it wrong, it pulls ridge lines lengthwise through a very visible area of the panel. 

You see this especially around the front and rear door handle reliefs on many cars.  Slight distortion in nearby panel area is a sure sign that the dies are worn and need rework and replating.  That skilled die work is the last realm of the true artisans of auto manufacturing.  I wonder if it has been turned over to computers? 

Those dies take a lot of maintenance, and their last home is often South America where your following years of crash parts may be stamped.  A friend in the trade once said that all the dies to make a brand new '65 Mustang Fastback are still sitting in some South American warehouse!  I don't know if thats really true, but its cool to consider.

Knowing that much, those sharp rear corners have really got to be worth it, to make the stamping line work so hard!  Also, a good friend was US1 for many years in his boat racing class.  The fastest boats had a very sharp corner at the hull bottom-to-transom line.  The sharper the corner, the less the water drag.  I have every intention of paying attention to that effect as I go forward with my reconfiguration of my big orange whale.

JimL
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 11, 2013, 02:47:10 AM
The Triumph is supposed to be my street bike.  It spends most of its time being worked on for LSR.  My buddies don't bother to ask me if I want to ride somewhere with them.  The bike is always apart.  Rose wants to go out for a ride.  I can't.  The bike is in pieces.  It is a nice day, which does not happen here all that much.  I want to go out for a blast around the hills.  No way.  The bike is being worked on.  It got to be too much so I went up to the Triumph shop today and bought another scoot.

One thing I wanted to do was put on my old racing pipes.  They actually are a street legal Arrow setup that Triumph sells.  Legal with the baffles in them, anyway.  Triumph has a map for them according to the dealer.  They loaded it for free.  They plugged the bike into a laptop and the bike and the computer talked to each other for half an hour.  They said it was done and showed me all sorts of colorful graphs and tables with throttle openings, rpm's, and mixtures.  Then they asked me a few questions.  I made some chimp grunts and squeals to tell them how I totally comprehend all of this new stuff.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: generatorshovel on September 11, 2013, 06:56:37 AM
MMMMMM ?
I see a twin engined Triumph streamliner coming up soon ? :?
Tiny
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on September 11, 2013, 09:27:27 PM
Before the streamliner..........there will be a garage addition :lol:

I ride an Aprilia Pegasso almost daily.........but occasionally take my '73 Honda CB750 or my '67 Triumph T100C for a run just to keep them happy.  Welcome to the world of the multi-bike garage and a well used battery tender.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on September 12, 2013, 12:32:25 AM
Nice one Bo. I hope you have miles of fun on the new one. :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 12, 2013, 01:25:42 AM
Thanks, Rich and Jim, about info on the valve actuation method.  It is interesting and I will post what I find out. 

Mike, Tiny, and Dennis, race bikes are like wives.  One is more than the average guy can take care of.  These Triumphs are pretty plain vanilla when they are standard.  The gas mileage is real good, however.  Other than the pipes, and a swap to a 790 intake cam, I will leave it alone.

The drag horsepower formula in Bradley's "The Racing Motorcycle" is rearranged to give me the drag coefficient.  First, I calculate the rpm I was running through the mile, I get the horsepower at that rpm from the dyno chart, and I read the speed through the mile from my timing slip.  Second, I subtract the rolling resistance power loss from the total power to get the aero power loss.  Then I figure out the aero drag coefficient.  Years of dinking around with the fairing and tail has reduced the coefficient by half.

The fellow who did my valves, guides, springs, and seat work at Kibblewhite offered to flow test the head.  This info I can pass along to Triumph Performance to get a new set of cams or to have some ground.  This data will be a big help.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: JimL on September 12, 2013, 11:39:51 PM
Neat formula, Bo.  It shows my cd must be about .41.  There's no way my little 650 has more than about 75hp, so that makes me think my aero problem will be more difficult than I thought. :|

Thanks for that,
JimL
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 13, 2013, 01:24:37 AM
Cascade Moto Classics gave me a Triumph shipping crate.  It was used to move a Trophy triple from the midlands to Oregon.  The Bonnie just fits with the tail removed and set forward and up on the bike.  Custom fitting the bike to the crate, and the crate to the bike, will be a winter job.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on September 13, 2013, 01:33:33 AM
Nice score Bo. That'll make things a lot easier when you go to ship it "Down Under".  :-D :-D :-D

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on September 14, 2013, 03:44:28 PM
Great Crate 8-)

I suggest you install a tie-down 'eye' between each of the tine-slots on the 'pallet' to add security by pulling from the shock mounts. By compressing the rear suspension the front straps become secondary. Another suggestion is to install a block of rigid foam below the motor to prevent blowing-out the front fork seals.

Now if you figure out how to lower the bowling-ball, your screen and all will be lower than the top 'hoop'.............and I am willing to bet you'll go faster when you get to Australia.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: joea on September 14, 2013, 04:29:00 PM
lowering the bowling ball and screen to fit the crate may be abit silly if it doesnt fit the rider when on top of the bike...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 15, 2013, 02:01:45 AM
Jim, I am not sure how accurate my method is for determining the absolute value of a drag coefficient.  I am using speed data from Bonneville with rear wheel hp from Beaverton and rolling drag formulas from tests on a little can Am that is a lot different than the whale I have.  The good thing about what I am doing is using many years of data in the same way for each year.  This is pretty good at detecting trends.  I would not worry about your drag coefficient being what it is.

Peter, these folks at Cascade Moto have been putting up with me for years and they always help when they can.

Dennis, the block under the engine and more eyes is something I will do.  An expert I talked to at BUB told me how to reshape the front to get more downdraft.

Joe, Rose takes lots of pictures of me on the bike when I am doing all of this and I will make sure there is good frontal coverage.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: joea on September 15, 2013, 12:33:14 PM
wobbly, yes I have seen many of those picks of you on bike, and realize where your helmet and torso
height and profile are....
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 16, 2013, 01:46:19 AM
Today I tried out Dennis' suggestion.  I took the tank off and sat on the bike.  I can get lower, not much, but about 2 or 3 inches.  To do this I need to move my feet back to near the passenger pegs.  This will take a lot of work so I will do it after I get back from AUS.

The attached is an aero drag formula that considers air density.  The air density that Bradley used for his formula is:  11,218 / 146,806 = 0.0764 pounds per cubic foot.  This is air slightly warmer than 60 degrees Fahrenheit near or at sea level.

It is always good to know how these things are derived and it is shown.  This was not in any of my books so I had to figure it out.  Some folks ask me why I drink.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 17, 2013, 12:36:16 AM
One thing I want to do before moving to a turbo is to run the engine on methanol.  FIM rules allow this in the class I run.  It seems smart to learn about the fuel on a NA motor, first.  One of the VP methanol blends with top end lubricant seems best.

A rule of thumb for methanol consumption is one gallon per horsepower per mile.  I did some figuring based on 100 hp.  It takes a lot of meth to make a run on the salt.  I figure I will need a standard size fuel tank to make 2 runs including warming up the engine and driving to and from the course ends.  A smaller tank will not have enough capacity.

I put the tank back on with the pegs moved back and I found I can still get pretty low down on the tank compared to what I can do now.  It is comfortable, too.  The tank supports my copious abdomen and this takes some of the load off of my arms.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: generatorshovel on September 17, 2013, 02:24:33 AM
Bo, when running straight methanol, increase all your jet sizes by 2.2,the go up a bit more as a starting point (lean don't last long, rich won't cost you too much HP, as fuel is very forgiving, Ideal C/R for fuel is 16/1 to get the most power out of it, make sure your system will handle the increased flow (BIG fuel lines)
Research your jet size flow fates, your engine's CFM requirements and get a good idea how much fuel capacity you will need (the blown 250 holds 6 liters)
Good luck mate
Oh yeah, Methanol is a PITA to clean out after use, and it HAS to be done,
Tiny
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on September 17, 2013, 04:43:24 AM
The easy way to clean out the methanol is to plug in an accessory gas tank in place of the methanol tank. Start the bike and let it idle. When the idle starts to speed up that means the gas has made it right through the system so shut it down. The fuel system is now thoroughly pickled. Drain the tank and you're done. Simple!  :-o :-o :-D

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: generatorshovel on September 17, 2013, 08:22:15 AM
The easy way to clean out the methanol is to plug in an accessory gas tank in place of the methanol tank. Start the bike and let it idle. When the idle starts to speed up that means the gas has made it right through the system so shut it down. The fuel system is now thoroughly pickled. Drain the tank and you're done. Simple!  :-o :-o :-D

Pete

Have you ever noticed what methanol & gas mix like Pete ?
Not something I'd want resting in my fuel system.
WD40 works better.
Tiny
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on September 17, 2013, 10:21:53 AM

A rule of thumb for methanol consumption is one gallon per horsepower per mile.  I did some figuring based on 100 hp.  It takes a lot of meth to make a run on the salt.  I figure I will need a standard size fuel tank to make 2 runs including warming up the engine and driving to and from the course ends.  A smaller tank will not have enough capacity.


 :-o  :-o  :-o  :-o  :-o
You're gonna need a trailer to haul that much fuel   :roll:
did ya leave something out of that equation   :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 17, 2013, 11:15:51 PM
The rate for planning purposes is 100 gallons per horsepower per hour.  Figuring on 4.5 miles full throttle on a 3-mile course with a 2 mile run up.  This is 0.03 hours at full throttle at 150 mph.  0.03 x 100 = 3.0 gallons  This does not include warming up the engine and accelerating the first half mile.  At BUB, 2.5 miles full throttle at 150 mph uses 1.7 gallons with extra needed for driving off the course and warming up the engine and accelerating the first half mile.

I was looking at building two side by side tanks on either side of the main frame tube.  This would get me down lower.  I cannot get this fuel capacity when I do it.  I need to stay with the standard tank.  It holds lots of fuel.  A few years ago I bought a dented tank from a Thruxton just for fuel use.

This fuel stuff I will do after I get back from AUS and before I put on the turbo.  I just do not want to do a lot of work  now I will need to undo later.

Thanks, Tiny and Peter, I will be asking a lot of questions when the time comes.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stan Back on September 19, 2013, 06:28:07 PM
That "per hour" kinda changes things, huh?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on September 19, 2013, 07:29:02 PM
The easy way to clean out the methanol is to plug in an accessory gas tank in place of the methanol tank. Start the bike and let it idle. When the idle starts to speed up that means the gas has made it right through the system so shut it down. The fuel system is now thoroughly pickled. Drain the tank and you're done. Simple!  :-o :-o :-D

Pete

Have you ever noticed what methanol & gas mix like Pete ?
Not something I'd want resting in my fuel system.
WD40 works better.
Tiny

I've used both WD40 and gasoline and have been much more satisfied using the gas system which tends to drive the methanol out of the system. This is with fuel injected systems with sprint cars and Indy cars. It is the standard accepted method of purging the systems on Indy cars. You may want to drain the float bowls on the carbs in that kind of engine after the purge.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 20, 2013, 01:25:10 AM
Almost all of my dyno data is corrected using the old SAE J607 standard.  This is often called the Standard or STD correction.  This gives me the horsepower I would expect where there is 60 degree F temperature, 0% humidity, and 29.29 inches of mercury station pressure.  Type "Wallace Racing" into a search engine.  All sorts of calculators there.  One will give you two different correction factors and one is SAE J607.  The correction factor is used to convert the indicated dyno horsepower into standard hp.  This allows a fellow in Denver to compare numbers with someone in London, for example.

The correction factors can be use in reverse.  The climatic data from Bonneville time slips averages out to a 1.18 correction factor.  The reciprocal is 1/1.18 = 0.847  As an example, my bike puts out 67 hp corrected using SAE J607.  I could expect 0.847 x 67 = 57 hp at Bonneville.  This is using a correction factor to estimate power loss due to altitude.

Some folks use air density to estimate power loss.  Salt flats climatic data is input into another Wallace Racing calculator to get air weight density.  The air density is 0.0762 pounds per cubic foot at standard conditions.  The average air density at Bonneville is 0.0640 lbs per cu ft.  0.0640 / 0.0762= 0.840

A third way is the airplane study.  That will be tomorrow's post. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 20, 2013, 07:50:34 PM
Tonight I am packing up the cylinder head to send to Mike Perry at Kibblewhite for the flow test.  An air cleaner, carbs, inlet manifold, cylinder head, and header pipe are in the boxes going out.  He wants all of this to give me some complete numbers.

I was going to ask him how much more lift I can accommodate with the 28mm cam follower buckets.  The cam tip should not ride on the edge of the buckets and that might be a limiting factor.  He has already told me the maximum lift the spring setup will handle without coil bind.

Is there anything else I should ask for?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 21, 2013, 01:11:00 PM
There are a bunch of dyno correction factors in use.  Some of the newer ones are more realistic.  They are more sophisticated about computing friction losses and they are based on standard atmospheric conditions we might experience.  Unfortunately, a lot of the info we have available, like on "airdensityonline," are based on the older standard atmosphere used for J607.

My feeling for a long time is that power losses due to increased altitude are more than those predicted by J607 or simply comparing air densities.  Air density comparison and similar methods like J607 assume the power loss is directly proportional to the amount of available oxygen.  Increasing altitude also lowers the compression ratio and this has a detrimental effect on performance.

Some recent looking around on the i-net dredged up this old study where folks looked at the effects of altitude and engine internal friction and pumping losses.  It is at www.naca.central.cranfield.ac.uk/reports/1929/naca-report-295.pdf (http://www.naca.central.cranfield.ac.uk/reports/1929/naca-report-295.pdf)  They used standard altitude.  I am assuming this corresponds to our modern concept of density altitude.

An old study where I know how they worked up the numbers beats a lot of the newer stuff where I do not, is this skeptical old bastid's opinion.  Based on a 5,800 foot average density altitude at B'ville durng BUB, the power correction factor is 0.81 using Curve E of the airplane study.

Educated second opinions on all of this are welcome.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 21, 2013, 01:15:58 PM
I just tried the link.  It brings up the report index and not the report.  It is Report No. 295, "The Variation in Engine Power with Altitude Determined from Measurements in Flight with a Hub Dynamometer" by W.D. Gove. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fredvance on September 21, 2013, 01:33:29 PM
A friend of mine, who is way smarter than I am, says the you lose 1/2 point of compression for every 1000ft of altitude. That is why I start with about 16-1. :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 21, 2013, 01:44:46 PM
Fred, are you running methanol?  Assuming 1500 feet DA in Belverde and 6,000 feet on the flats, that would be 4,500 feet difference.  16 - (4.5 x .5) = 13.7 to 1.

That link I gave you all is not very direct.  It brings you to a bunch of options.  Select "MAGiC NACA ARCHIVE."  Go to Citation #41 of year 1929.  There is a link to the paper there.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fredvance on September 21, 2013, 02:09:36 PM
I run ERC 110 in gas class and VP Q16 in Fuel class. The Busa does a lot of compensating for altitude, temp, etc. I am not sure what the etc is?? :roll: I have always run on my Dyno tune and it has worked well. My tuner says we are leaving some on the table. Next year we are going to try and put the 1660 bike on Scott Horners dyno in SLC.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 22, 2013, 02:37:48 AM
The knock light I used this year worked great.  It flickered a bit and this showed me I was getting sporadic traces of out of control combustion.  This is with a 10.5 to 1 compression ratio and 110 octane leaded.  I am probably close to the limit on compression with this air-cooled twin.  Those Busa's are pretty amazing at what they do.  The triumph would be a rolling grenade with 16:1 compression.

Speeds on time slips, dyno horsepower, and drag coefficients based on air density all play a part in figuring out the aero drag coefficients.  The speeds are what they are.  I cannot adjust them for different altitudes.  The air density and horsepower can.  Everything is adjusted to Bonneville Salt Flats conditions on this table.  The STD dyno horsepower correction factor is 1.18.  The reciprocal is 1 / 1.18 = 0.85  The dyno horsepower is multiplied by 0.85 to estimate what it was on the salt flats.  The constant in the drag coefficient equation is based on the formula that includes air weight density.  The 0.0640 pounds per cubic foot Bonneville air density is used.

The drag coefficients using input data from the salt flats with other data corrected to Bonneville conditions are shown on the attached table.  The drag coefficients change a few percent from the earlier table where I did not used corrected values.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 22, 2013, 02:05:11 PM
Weather data are available from the Woomera Aerodrome and Nonning using links on the DLRA website.  There are some other nearby stations, too.  I can use this to figure out the Lake Gairdner climate.  Better would be some collected data from the location during the races for temperature, humidity, uncorrected baro pressure, and density altitude.  Does anyone have any?

As I recall, the race date might, or has changed.  What time of the year will the 2015 speed week be held?

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on September 23, 2013, 10:26:49 AM
Bo......................10.5 Compression is a LONG way from a relatively mild 12 or 13 to 1 for a competitive landspeed effort.  If you have the valve to piston clearance.........maybe a thinner head-gasket will help. Maybe TRIUMPH has some limitations I am not aware of? 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on September 23, 2013, 12:08:54 PM
Bo, Your attention to detail is unbelievable and I hope you get what you're aiming for. If I was a man of means (MEGA $$$$) you'd be doing my motor for sure. You're a good example to us all. I mean that. Thanks.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 23, 2013, 11:43:55 PM
Us west coast tuners pay a lot of attention to this stuff.  A bike might race at Sears Point at elevation less than 100 feet and at Toelle which is as high up as Bonneville.

Check this out.  Maybe, if I show up early on Sunday morning...with a box of chocolates for the lady at the front desk...www.test-trak.com/woomera.htm (http://www.test-trak.com/woomera.htm)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 24, 2013, 01:39:51 AM
The south end of Lake Gairdner is 360 feet above sea level.  There are no weather stations there.  The DLRA list two nearby stations.  One is at Woomera Aerodrome to the northeast and the other is at the mine at Nonning to the southeast.  Both are at slightly higher elevation.  Salt flats are visible in the background in pictures of Woomera.

The Australian government gives us some data www.bom.gov.au/climate/averages/tables/cw_016032.shtml (http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/averages/tables/cw_016032.shtml).   The race is held at the end of February and the beginning of March and I figure on running down the salt around midday.  Data from the morning and the afternoon of both months is averaged to get a temp of 79 degrees Fahrenheit.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 24, 2013, 01:47:58 AM
The relative humidity is also averaged the same way.  It is estimated to be 40% on the average.  This is high for places out in the dez.  Water evaporating from the lakes must contribute to this airborne moisture.

No air pressure data is provided in the summaries.  The airport near Red Bluff is at a similar altitude and there is a lot of accessible climate data for it.  It is at altitude 352 feet.  Data is available from the National Weather Service website.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 24, 2013, 02:21:28 AM
Make sure to use the uncorrected "Station Pressure" when you do this.  Data from the weather service for the last seven days is looked over and the pressure is recorded for all readings with the temps from 78 to 80 degrees.  All fourteen readings are averaged to get a station pressure of 29.45 inches mercury.  Note how the station pressures vary a lot.  Pressure is the most important input variable in these equations.  This is a weakness in all of this figuring.

Next, the pressure, temp, and humidity is entered into Wallace Racing's "Dyno HP Correction Calculator" at www.wallaceracing.com/dyno-cor-calc.php (http://www.wallaceracing.com/dyno-cor-calc.php)  The SAE J607 dyno correction factor is 1.04

Now the pressure and temp are entered into Wallace Racing's "Air Density Calculator" at www.wallaceracing.com/air-density-calc.php (http://www.wallaceracing.com/air-density-calc.php)   The estimated air density at Lake G is 0.0724 pounds per cubic foot.

The statistically correct way to do this is to calculate the dyno correction factor and the air density for each day and to average those.  I do not have enough information to do this.  This procedure makes the best use of what I have.
     
     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: thefrenchowl on September 24, 2013, 09:01:06 AM
Quote
A rule of thumb for methanol consumption is one gallon per horsepower per mile

Wobbly, it seems a bit excessive for an estimate... This year, my KHK 900cc bike went 121.775 at about 5300rpm (loads of wheel slip) using about 1 litre of methanol per mile.

We kept increasing the main jet, it is still a touch lean probably, that's a 4mm diameter main jet for a 47mm carb, plus an adjustable main jet for fine tuning, 3mm diameter with a Mikuni adj. needle in it, at the moment 1 turn 1/2 out.

Still, way more increase than the often stated 2.2 bigger surface than on gas... As it stands, for my bike, that is nearer 5 times more jet surface than gas jet for that carb...

Patrick
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: joea on September 24, 2013, 03:48:37 PM
wobbly...I hope you really are not using the "knock sensor" as gospel with respect to tuning....

as evidenced by your thinking you have "unstable combustion" by the "flickering knock sensor light"...
with 10.5 -1 static CR....running at a DA of over 5000 ft....with very stable ERC 110 fuel....
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 24, 2013, 09:11:55 PM
Patrick, that should be "hour" instead of "mile."

Joe and Dennis, you are right.  The engine was broken in by 600 miles of street running and the silly thing was so fast that I could not blow out the carbon.  Almost all of the flickering was on the first run.  I think it pre ignition by glowing carbon while I cleaned out the combustion chamber.  The light barely flickered on the second run.

Dennis, the NA route will get very expensive with limited returns.  Plans are to install a turbo in a few years.  Some backwoods racers told me in 1975 to make sure there is plenty of metal around the valve seats to carry heat away and to keep the compression ratio is moderate.

What happens if I show up at Lake G with a big toothy grin and exactly the same setup as in 2013?  Not much.  Maybe 1 to 2 mph better.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 26, 2013, 02:08:06 AM
Hi Mike, thanks for the compliment.  You do not want me to work on your motor.  This math stuff is what I need to master to get up to the next level.  Most of the data is printed on the time slips and all sorts of calculators are available on line.  This makes me think I am not the first guy to do this.

My new Triumph is "Clyde."  Rosie named it.  The other one is Bonnie, so she thought it would fit.  It seemed appropriate to me to considering the dent those two bikes make in my bank account.  I did not tell Rose that.  Some thoughts are best kept to oneself.

Drag coefficient reduction is the only thing I can count on from year-to-year.  There are a bunch of changes planned for this winter.  This curve realistically estimates the improvement I can get.  Note how the curve is steep at first when I made the easy improvements.  It flattens out now 'cause it is harder to do them.  The easy things have been done.  I figure I cannot get it below 0.3 so I draw the curve in a shape that will flatten out at that level.  A 0.41 drag coefficient is a reasonable estimate after this year's work is done.

The lower drag coefficient is plugged into the equation for expected speed at Lake G.  The new speed is estimated to be 145.2 mph.  I need to do more than this to get past 150.  The horsepower was increased while the drag coefficient was kept at 0.455.  It took about 8 hp to get the speed up to 145+ mph.  The drop in drag coefficient is worth 8 hp.  That is the beauty of streamlining.  It is cheap horsepower. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on September 26, 2013, 09:00:01 AM
It does become expensive to get those last ponies you need. It's a tough one and then you have to hope the weather doesn't interfere.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fredvance on September 26, 2013, 10:22:41 AM
Aerodynamics is the cheapest horsepower you will ever get!! A few years ago I was with some friends in the wind tunnel, with a few minor changes they picked up the equivalent of 20-25 HP. There could not buy 20hp in the motor, it was maxed out.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 27, 2013, 12:49:16 AM
Fred, my big retirement gift to myself will be to haul the bike back east to A2 and put it in the tunnel.

Right now I try to scrunch down on to the tank and the ends of my feets stick out.  Moving them to some further back footrests will keep them tucked in and I can get tighter on to the tank.  The windshield can be lowered an inch and a half without exposing my shoulders.  This reduces the frontal area and increases speed a mph.  Bigger benefits will be in lowering the Cd.

The British Customs mufflers I have now are too restrictive for a 1000cc engine according to Triumph Performance.  They are selling me a used pair of Predator Sport "mufflers."  These things will be loud.  They say I will get another 5 hp on top.  This will give me another 4 mph.

The cams I will have ground will give me another 5 hp, according to TP.  This calculates out to 153 MPH.  I was using an 18 hp rolling resistance loss for 140 mph.  The rolling loss for 150 mph is 22 hp.  It is much more and it slows me down to 150 mph.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on September 27, 2013, 12:55:24 AM
You may want to check out the new tunnel in SLC Bo. The money you save in travel distance may get you there sooner.  :-D :-D :-D

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 27, 2013, 12:59:54 AM
Pete, any info so I can find out more will be great.

The last thing is to look at increasing the tire pressures.  I try 40 and 42 psi pressures.  Using 42 psi gets me up to 150 mph.  Enough for the 150 club.

A couple of weeks ago I was a guy with no plan.  Now I have one that might actually work thanks to a laptop, Bradley's books, help from TP, pencils, paper, and hi-skool math.      
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on September 27, 2013, 09:36:47 AM
Sorry, it's actually in Ogden. Looks like the same fan layout as A-1.

http://www.darkotech.com/

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 27, 2013, 10:32:08 PM
That trip to Utah sure would save a lot of gas!  Are there people there to help a guy figure out what works?  I hear that is a good point about A-2.

There are recent reference to a class structure in LSR on a recent thread.  Something about "lower classes."  Surely that does not apply to any bike folks.  We's all hi-class and we have our own racing oriented publication now.  There are all sorts of go-fast goodies listed in here, frames, engines, etc.

Powell's Books and Barnes and Nobles has it here in Oregon. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on September 27, 2013, 11:19:53 PM
Sorry, it's actually in Ogden. Looks like the same fan layout as A-1.

http://www.darkotech.com/

Pete

Sorry, I meant A-2. Old age sneaks up on me every once in a while.  :-D :-D :-D

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 28, 2013, 09:46:20 PM
Any recommendations on a bike shipper to Adelaide for a crated Triumph?  This heap is priceless to me so I am willing to pay more for quality work.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on September 28, 2013, 11:14:35 PM

A couple of weeks ago I was a guy with no plan.  Now I have one that might actually work thanks to a laptop, Bradley's books, help from TP, pencils, paper, and hi-skool math.       

You forgot the requirement for another bucket of money!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 29, 2013, 02:40:55 AM
Hi Tom.  More air in the tires is free and the streamlining work is almost free.  The mufflers will be some used ones off a wrecked bike and they will not cost much.  I have the oil and a filter in my stash.  The only things I need to buy that might cost a lot are the cams, a head gasket, and some dyno time.

Rose is talking about swimming across the Columbia River on Labor Day.  She is going to cross one of the wider areas so the current is not swift.  It is 1.1 miles from one side to the other near Hood River where she will be.  She made room reservations today so I know she is serious.  She practices almost every day and it takes a zillion laps in the pool to make a mile.  That is where I will be on Labor day instead of at 2014 BUB.  My job is to be the peanut gallery and cheering section.           
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: JimL on September 29, 2013, 03:31:07 AM
Bo, that sounds spooky for a non-swimmer like me...especially after the bad deal in the Willamette last week.  Let me know if'n you want to borrow one of my Hobie Mirage kayaks to escort her across.  They are real stable, and the pedal drive leaves your hands free to assist, or take pics and videos. 

We use them in big and rough waters with no problems, and they can handle much more wind than conventional kayaks or canoes.  They also tow whatever real well (I've rescued two powerboats, one sailboat, and several conventional kayaks in offshore conditions).  I've set up all three with Turbo Fins that I modified to have much lower pitch than the production setup.  It lets you keep going for hours, easily, with better forward drive.

Daddy always said, "It takes a lazy man to invent a better way!" 8-)

Regards, JimL
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on September 29, 2013, 09:27:02 AM
Go Rose. A mile across a river is no joke. Wish you all a safe trip.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on September 29, 2013, 09:51:41 AM
Bo,
I've been to Hood River with the hopes of windsurfing back in the 90s when it was the place to go for that sport.  That being said, the wind blows with regularity.  Good luck to Rose and pray for no wind!
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 29, 2013, 01:21:18 PM
It is part of a big organized swim.  People are there to fish her out if anything happens.  There are massive sturgeons in there.  Any water with fish in it bigger than me is scary and I do not want to go in.  Watching from the shore is my job.  The wind might make things harder.  I hope she knows what she is doing.

The bottom of the front fairing got crunched when I had an accident while fitting the bike to the crate.  It is fixed now and I am reading all of the partial streamline rules for the FIM and DLRA.  AMA is out of the question.  I will need to hack up the tail streamlining to meet MPS rules, the 1000cc MPS-AF record is 219, and the 1000cc MPS-AG record is 208.  No hope for me there and I will not run AMA.  The streamlining is built to conform to FIM and A class in DLRA.  The rules have not changed so I am OK for now.

The DLRA partial streamline rules have pretty much the same language as the controversial AMA APS ones.  They are exactly the same by saying the A class is for purpose built bikes.  I will write them and verify that a bike with a standard OEM frame and lengthened swing arm is OK for that class.     



 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 30, 2013, 09:42:11 PM
Lately I am busy convincing myself that I do not know what I am doing.  There is a fellow at BUB who's bike is about 100 mph faster than mine and he has the same short wheel base configuration.  The bike was rolled over so he could see it and I asked for help.

One problem I have is the front of the fairing has a rounded surface that will catch air and give uplift.  This is not good.  It is being reshaped so the air in front of it is pushed to the sides rather than down in front of the engine.  The curved bar shows its before shape and the angular bar is the after.  The windshield is to the lower right in the picture and the bottom of the fairing is on the lower left.

One principle of aerodynamics is to avoid or minimize accelerating the air.  This takes energy and acceleration is changing air velocity or direction of movement.  The way I had it set up the air in front of the lower nose was redirected downward, then toward the engine, then through the big hole in the fairing, then around all sorts of stuff, then out.  That is a lot of directional changes.  Now the air is shoved over to the side and that is all.  It is less of what we call "directional acceleration."
 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on September 30, 2013, 10:44:29 PM
Easier to see.

To bad we can't build the changes as easily.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on October 02, 2013, 10:14:47 AM
I think your onto something good......................moving more air to the sides and over the top effectively removes excess air from compressing against the salt.....which creates LIFT.  At higher speeds the lift of just meeting the air at the front must be controlled. Bill Warner commented (complained) that he had trouble keeping the front-end down when approaching 300 mph. There is a lesson to be learned.

As you increase your speed, the air at the rear must also be directed to avoid LIFT. Someone a lot smarter than me once said something about every action has an opposite and equal reaction...............so when your going down the highway of speed, think about how the air will react to being hit with your speeding bullet.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 03, 2013, 12:55:02 AM
Thanks, Freud, for enlightening the subject.  Some day I might put some mirrors on the ceiling to catch the light and reflect it back down onto the work.  That will make it brighter.

Dennis, these bikes have a rearward weight bias from the factory and it has been a battle to keep enough weight on the front.  You are right by saying the weight distribution shifts to the rear at speed.  These changes should help a little bit.

Alcohol burns cooler and there is not as much of a need for an air opening in front of the engine as with a gasoline motor.  One thing I am considering is burning some sort of alcohol mix, lowering the bike, and blending the nose streamlining in with the front fender.  This will give me a slick shape with little uplift.  There will be less airflow to the engine and this should not be a problem with alky.  There is a lot of work associated with this and it is something I will do after AUS.     

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on October 03, 2013, 11:46:31 AM
No mirrors on the ceiling Bo.

Just use a tripod and no flash.

Everything will be illuminated evenly.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 03, 2013, 11:33:57 PM
What I think you are saying is to put the camera on a tripod and to use a slow shutter speed to let in more light.  Sort of the same as with astronomy photos?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on October 04, 2013, 12:13:12 AM
Exactly.

It wlll have even illumination in the entire foto.

It doesn't matter if the shutter is open for several seconds.

Nothing is going to move.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 10, 2013, 01:23:57 AM
In the past I have been using fully synthetic race oil.  It is expensive and I am looking at ways to save $.  The bike has a naturally aspirated flat tappet engine with less than 100 horsepower per liter.  Is semi-synthetic a good option, and specifically, the Silkolene Comp 4?  I can get a good price on the stuff.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 11, 2013, 12:10:13 AM
Our 2013 team picture.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on October 11, 2013, 05:32:11 PM
Any oil is better than no oil.................light-weight oil is usually best for short-term, high-performance runs.  But you may have to change more often.  I use 5w-20w synthetic ............but after only a few runs on virtually new internals (crankcase only - no tranny or primary & clutch) it turned dark and cloudy....had a few ounces of 15-40w Shell Rotella remaining from initial break-in.

I have used Castrol blended in my street bikes with good success.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 11, 2013, 10:58:07 PM
Thanks, Dennis, for the info.  I will do the same thing.  Synthetic for the race bike and semi-syn for the street scoot.

The tech expert at Silkolene wrote me.  The higher ester content in the Pro grade fully synthetic will give me some extra engine protection.  He also said I will get a little more power with the Pro grade.

A picture from the very early morning.  Note how the light is so much better.  It was taken with an i-phone.  I sure wish it was with an actual camera so I could get a good quality enlargement.  Photo credit to Gretchen.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 13, 2013, 11:47:02 PM
Two turbos are offered to me at no cost.  This catches me by surprise and I have no idea if they will work.  All of the books I find are for cars and not bikes.  Is there a good reference to give me the info I need to figure out if they will be the right size?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jon on October 14, 2013, 02:29:32 AM
Compressor maps and a couple formulas will tell you the story Bo.
http://turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarrett/compressor_maps

If you are running into detonation issues now with pretty mild compression it will need to be low to handle boost without backing the timing out a heap.

jon
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on October 14, 2013, 09:24:52 AM
Dude, that's a great photo. Nice one Gretchen!!!
 Bo,  did you ever contact my guy at Royal Purple?.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bak189 on October 14, 2013, 10:55:34 AM
Good book on turbo, super charging and giggle gas for M/C'S by Joe Haile....
Tech book series, Whitehorse Press, North Conway, New Hampshire, USA.

"Motorcycle Turbocharging, Supercharging & Nitrous Oxide"..................
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Sumner on October 14, 2013, 04:02:47 PM
Two turbos are offered to me at no cost.  This catches me by surprise and I have no idea if they will work.  All of the books I find are for cars and not bikes.  Is there a good reference to give me the info I need to figure out if they will be the right size?

First whose turbos are they and do you have the model and can you find maps for them?

The best source for sizing/finding a turbo for an application is Borg Warner's MatchBot....

http://www.turbodriven.com/performanceturbos/matchbot.aspx (http://www.turbodriven.com/performanceturbos/matchbot.aspx)

.... it is best used with their turbos but they probably won't work for this application.  Still use their interactive program and then take the pressure ratios and air flows at the different rpm/boost points and plot them on the turbo map for the turbo you are considering.

I have more on how to do that on this two pages...

http://purplesagetradingpost.com/sumner/Hooley%202013/13%20-%20hooley-construction-2013-1-a.html (http://purplesagetradingpost.com/sumner/Hooley%202013/13%20-%20hooley-construction-2013-1-a.html)

http://purplesagetradingpost.com/sumner/Hooley%202013/13%20-%20hooley-construction-2013-1-b.html (http://purplesagetradingpost.com/sumner/Hooley%202013/13%20-%20hooley-construction-2013-1-b.html)

I would not use any turbo unless I had a turbo map for it and I could plot my needs on it unless it was a turbo that was well know to work in the application.

You can find two turbos that will support say 800 HP but not for the same motor.  One might be for a small cu. in. motor that needs a turbo that puts out the air flow at a very high boost.  The other motor might be large cu. in. and needs a lot of air at a low boost.  We ran into that with Hooley's 572.  We are looking for about 700-800 HP per turbo and the ones we selected will do that, but would be better suited to a smaller displacement motor.  Of course the ones that would be ideal are priced above our budget.

Squirrel Performance ...

http://www.squirrelpf.com/turbocalc/ (http://www.squirrelpf.com/turbocalc/)

... also has a program but it doesn't consider as many things as the MatchBot does.  Here is a map showing  Squirrel's data for the 572 at 1400 HP for a T-76 turbo ...

(http://purplesagetradingpost.com/sumner/Hooley%202013/2013-Hooley-1400%20HP%20-%20Page%202.jpg)

.... The calculated air flow and pressure ratios at different rpm's/HP fell nicely on the map.

Next I took the data from MatchBot and plotted it on the T-76 map....

(http://purplesagetradingpost.com/sumner/Hooley%202013/T%2076%201400%20HP.jpg)

.... and you can see that the last two points are going off the map.

The T-76 might of worked according to the Squirrel program, but the MatchBot made if look more iffy.

Play with them all, but make sure you have a map for the turbo you are considering or you might not have a good match at all,

Sum
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 15, 2013, 12:20:47 AM
Jon, the head was taken off to send it out for flow testing after B-ville.  Everything looked just great with no signs of detonation and the plug electrodes showed the timing curve was OK.  The bike had a 600 mile break in on the street and it is so fast that I could not run it with high enough combustion chamber pressure for a long enough time to blow out the carbon.  I think I did that on the first run down the salt and glowing pieces of carbon caused some erratic combustion.  There was no knock light indicated detonation on the second run.

There are some good articles on turbos in CarCraft and Hot Rod magazines on the internet.  Duttweiler and other famous tuners had a lot to say that is the opposite of what I thought I knew.  Basically, I am on the right track by building a very strong engine with a good flowing head and a moderate compression ratio.  There are some modern turbos with low back pressure, interchangeable parts to alter their capacities as needed without having to redo everything in order to change to a different turbo, and with excellent tech support.  It will be smart for me to start out with the best stuff I can afford and work from there rather than using something from a snowmobile.

Jon, Sum, and Bak, this stuff you linked me up with I will read.  Thanks.

Mike, the Royal Purple is good oil.  My local dealer helps me and I use their lubes to give them publicity.  This limits me to Mobil 1 or Silkolene.  I had some tech questions.  Mobil gave me answers and they sure sounded like public relations men or lawyer responses.  Not really what I needed.  Silkolene referred me to the oil chemist that developed the oil and another expert.  Most of us technical guys are on the same level and we can talk to each other no matter who we work for.  They gave me direct and honest answers and that made me choose their oil.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 16, 2013, 09:05:57 PM
Thanks for the post showing the islands.  It took awhile and I finally figured it out.  This turbo stuff is plenty mental.  It is an "after Australia" task.  I am pretty sure Matt Capri has a turbo setup figured out and I can by it. 

Rose has watched me rebuild everything on a bunch of cars, bikes, and all sorts of other vehicles out on a concrete slab in the sun, rain, and snow.  It never bothered me much, even now.  She has said for years that I need a shed.  A few days ago she got together with a bunch of friends who build things and started the job.  It will be a 12' x 16.5' carriage shed with two swing out doors on the front and a little side door.  Just big enough to work on bikes or a little Model B roadster.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on October 16, 2013, 09:37:28 PM
Wobbly, the ladies in your life form an awesome support group. You're a very lucky man.  :-D :-D :-D

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on October 17, 2013, 12:37:17 AM
I second that. Some builders over here could take lessons on that foundation. I see the inspector is checking out the progress. Is Rose building the shed to be for her stuff or are you going to requisition it?. :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on October 17, 2013, 12:45:26 AM
That cat can't believe its luck.   :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 17, 2013, 01:05:27 AM
This is a backwoods special.  Rose did not want to trouble the building inspector.  They have such a hard job as it is.  We can build up to 200 sf floor area without a permit.

We never recovered from the recession and there are all sorts of skilled people out of work who are glad to do anything.  This project would be unaffordable in normal times.  Rose is doing things on it.  I am at work when all of this is happening so I do not see them build it.

That is Buster, the shop cat.  What you say about him is true.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on October 17, 2013, 10:28:57 AM
Bo, would you please be so kind as to send rose and her chums to Skandia, Michigan?  I've got plenty of room for a new workshop/shed, and I'd even provide them with free lunches and the phone number of the local lumber yard.  We live way out in the township -- building permits are a formality that many of us out here elect to forgo, so we wouldn't be restricted on size.

PM me for the address and to get flight information.  Thanks. :roll:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 17, 2013, 10:04:01 PM
Allow me see what this structure looks like when it is done.  Before I make any recommendations.  Do you remember that poem "This is the house Jack built?"
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 20, 2013, 01:13:45 AM
The new 2013 Triumph has fuel injection.  It runs as a closed loop system at idle and lower throttle openings.  It is adaptive in the sense that readings are taken from the oxygen sensor and the fuel mixture is adjusted as needed to optimize it.  The system is open loop at larger throttle openings and it works from the fueling map that is programmed into it.

In a single day's riding here we can go from near sea level to over 6,000 feet elevation, from humid to dry air, and with a 20 to 30 degree temperature change.  Also, the gasoline can have from zero to 20 percent alcohol added and be oxygenated during the winter season.

It is popular here to select an aftermarket map for specified performance modifications, to install the map, to make the modifications, and to disconnect the oxygen sensors.  These maps are made to be used as open loop systems, only.  The common thought here is the air pressure, air temperature, and throttle position sensors are adequate to adjust the mixture for varying air density and a closed loop system is not needed.  My thoughts are this might be true, but how does the open loop system adjust the mixture for the wide range oxygen content in fuels?  Is it better to use a closed loop system when fuel oxygen content can significantly vary?

LSR racing is done at full throttle and the Triumph EFI system is in open loop mode and working from a map.  This seems to have the same disadvantage as a carb - the lack of feedback to adapt the mixture to actual conditions.  It appears from reading that most racing EFI systems are closed loop at full throttle.  Am I right on this?

This brings me to the last question and it assumes racing EFI systems are closed loop at full throttle.  Has anyone figured out how to make a Triumph EFI system work in this manner?

Lots of questions.  This EFI stuff is a new experience for this cave man.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: THRUXTONERICH on October 20, 2013, 05:28:30 AM
The new 2013 Triumph has fuel injection.  It runs as a closed loop system at idle and lower throttle openings.  It is adaptive in the sense that readings are taken from the oxygen sensor and the fuel mixture is adjusted as needed to optimize it.  The system is open loop at larger throttle openings and it works from the fueling map that is programmed into it.

In a single day's riding here we can go from near sea level to over 6,000 feet elevation, from humid to dry air, and with a 20 to 30 degree temperature change.  Also, the gasoline can have from zero to 20 percent alcohol added and be oxygenated during the winter season.

It is popular here to select an aftermarket map for specified performance modifications, to install the map, to make the modifications, and to disconnect the oxygen sensors.  These maps are made to be used as open loop systems, only.  The common thought here is the air pressure, air temperature, and throttle position sensors are adequate to adjust the mixture for varying air density and a closed loop system is not needed.  My thoughts are this might be true, but how does the open loop system adjust the mixture for the wide range oxygen content in fuels?  Is it better to use a closed loop system when fuel oxygen content can significantly vary?

LSR racing is done at full throttle and the Triumph EFI system is in open loop mode and working from a map.  This seems to have the same disadvantage as a carb - the lack of feedback to adapt the mixture to actual conditions.  It appears from reading that most racing EFI systems are closed loop at full throttle.  Am I right on this?

This brings me to the last question and it assumes racing EFI systems are closed loop at full throttle.  Has anyone figured out how to make a Triumph EFI system work in this manner?

Lots of questions.  This EFI stuff is a new experience for this cave man.


Turbo- and EFI-Bonneville?? Have a look here, Jörgen Lindskog has been building turbo/efi-bonnevilles for many years.... http://www.stabbarps-auto.com/welcome.html
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: joea on October 20, 2013, 01:13:43 PM
open loop can work well, closed loop can work well, efi can work well
metered fuel leaks (aka carburetors) can work well, store bought systems
triumph specific from Capri, and even a local to me guy turboconnection.com can
work well, fabbing your own can save alot of money and work as well....
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: SaltPeter on October 20, 2013, 11:32:14 PM
Bo, as far as I know, most Race EFI systems are Open Loop. The map is set on the safe side based on AFR readings and left,

or

If you have the Data and the knowledge of your system, can be adjusted according to the conditions on Race Day if you are chasing every last bit of Power.

Check this stuff out maybe

This site has a lot of info and looks like a good place to start with the basics

http://www.enginebasics.com

These are a few Books, I have read the Bell Books, and found them really helpful in understanding the fundamentals of Turbo/EFI set ups.

Engine Management Advanced Tuning by Greg Banish. (Has been recommended on a number of Forums)

Maximum Boost by Corky Bell.

Forced Induction Performance Tuning by A. Graham Bell

Have a look around there is a lot of info out there, but I had to get the basics down first and then go from there, I am by no means an expert, I am like you learning and listening.

Pete :cheers:

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 20, 2013, 11:58:56 PM
Years of racing these Bonnevilles has left me with a big hoard of parts and the knowledge about small changes that give good results.  All I want to do with the new street Bonnie is to put on the Triumph off-road silencers that flow better and are reasonably quiet, change to a 790cc intake cam, and remove the noise abatement snorkel from the air box.  These little changes add up to quite a bit more performance and I have the parts.  Triumph makes a map for the silencer change, only, and it is closed loop at idle and adaptive at other throttle openings.  The Triumph map does not consider the cam and intake changes.

There are proprietary maps and they are all open loop.  I am worried about their ability to work with the highly variable gasolines we have in Oregon.

Then, there is making a new map.  This takes a lot of dyno work and all sorts of $.

This would be a no-brainer with carbs.  Simply a few runs on the dyno to figure out the jet changes and it is done.  Is there a simple solution that I am overlooking? 

The race bike will run carbs.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: joea on October 21, 2013, 12:25:33 AM
Yeah...ur overcomplicating it.... Its quite abit easier in most cases to dial in FI, and u dont even have to get your hands dirty...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: SaltPeter on October 21, 2013, 07:29:37 AM
Bo, given the changes you're describing, I'd have to agree with joea, anyone who is a Qualified Dyno Tuner should be able to do exactly the same thing with your EFI as you described that you can do with Carbs.

I don't know you're budget but maybe check this out http://www.revzilla.com/motorcycle/dynojet-power-commander-v-for-triumph-bonneville-t100-thruxton-2009-2010

Pete

Title: Re: Re: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Hellcat Customs on October 21, 2013, 08:52:18 AM
Compressor maps and a couple formulas will tell you the story Bo.
http://turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarrett/compressor_maps

If you are running into detonation issues now with pretty mild compression it will need to be low to handle boost without backing the timing out a heap.

jon

You could use water injection to curb detonation with a turbo setup... Or play some tricks with injectors. there are a few of us playing with turbo Sportsters, mine runs 9:1 with no intercooler and no water injection... The water injection dropped the intake temp so fast at Bonneville it confused the ecu and it went into cold start mode which over fueled it... So it was turned back off fir the remaining runs
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 21, 2013, 09:28:12 PM
All sorts of advice came my way.  Some by PM.  Thanks for all of it.  Evidently the cams and snorkel removal are small changes and the quieter TOR silencers are a small change, too.  Overall the alterations are within the capability of the Triumph maps for either TOR silencers or the more free flowing Arrow silencers.

The Triumph system is adaptive and it can display the amount of its adaptive range that is being used.  Let's say 50% of the range is being used at a particular point, it will say this and I am OK. Otherwise, I need to redo the map.  I need to idle the motor after making changes for a specified period so it can do the adapting.

None of this I knew.  I guess my problems are solved.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 24, 2013, 10:37:23 PM
This is the oil filter used when the big motor went through the 600 mile break-in period.  I am opening the top and looking inside.  There was nothing exceptional laying inside the filter end.  Just fine dust like particles that looked like broken off high spots from the cylinder hone. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 24, 2013, 10:40:21 PM
The paper is cut out with a box knife.  I put it in a jar with some laquer thinner and shook it up.  Then I poured everything out on a paper towel.  This got rid of the oil so I could see the paper clearly. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 24, 2013, 10:46:57 PM
Not good.  There were some tiny flat silvery flakes on the paper.  I had not seen this on earlier inspections of the medium sized motor.  Either I am losing a bearing shell or it is some machining swarf from new parts.  The cylinders, pistons, and oil pump are new, and I had quite a bit of machine work done on the cylinder head.  Does anyone know of someone I can send this to for analysis?  It is a good idea to make sure the problem is actually a bearing before I tear everything down.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on October 24, 2013, 11:55:13 PM
Bo, some guys don't take as many precautions as you'd expect. They don't clean customer parts after working them as you might.  I'm hoping that you have a minor problem and that it's not a bearing. Maybe a second filter test might come up clean. I'd do that before doing a tear down.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: charlie101 on October 25, 2013, 03:53:08 AM
I agree, when there is not larger or more particles than that, a second filter test might come up clean. Otherwise you have the excellent site Bobistheoilguy, where they debate all things oil and there is several contacts for oil analys, maybe close to you.
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 26, 2013, 11:02:16 PM
The oil and filter used at B'ville are on the bike.  I will check them tomorrow.

The nose shape I had this year was costing me speed.  The first picture was from when I made it and it shows the rounded shape it had.  The lower part of the nose caught air and it is was pushed down into the opening in front of the engine.  This was a high drag situation.  The air was shoved down into a confined space where it had to change direction and velocity a lot of times before it escaped.  All of this took a lot of energy to do.  Also, the shape contributed to front end lift at speed.

The nose is reshaped so the air is shoved to the sides.  The air following the flow path around the sides of the bike has fewer velocity and direction changes.  Less drag results.  Also, there is less front end lift.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 26, 2013, 11:09:50 PM
The first picture is of an old 1000cc Suzuki air cooled road racer and it produced a little over 100 hp per liter.  Almost all of those air cooled bikes in the last year or two they raced, before water cooling, had large openings in the fronts of the fairings for cooling.  That is one thing I left alone on the fairing.  It still has a plenty big hole in the front. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: charlie101 on October 27, 2013, 10:27:48 AM
Here's a quite interesting compilation of oil analysis based on quite a lot of data, albeit of car engines in normal usage, but it enlighten one very important topic: statistical normalcy. And it will kill some of the "well known facts" that we think we know. Like frequent oil changes is better for the engine. New oil is in fact wearing more on the engine than when it is used a while!

One thing that I think I can read out of it is that car oil filters of today are of pretty good quality!

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/used-oil-analysis-how-to-decide-what-is-normal/
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 28, 2013, 02:17:32 AM
It seems the oil analysis works if a testing program is set up from the beginning with enough samples and history to make a statistically valid baseline.  This is what I got out of reading all that stuff on Bob the Oil Guy's site.  That is what I am going to do with the new motor.  I will save all of my filter papers so I can see if there are any changes that indicate things are not normal.

This is something to worry about.  Parts for these engines are very expensive and they do have a history of spinning main bearings and sometimes rod bearings.  None of the people I know can say why.  The used cylinder head I recently bought came from a motor that spun a main bearing.

The filter I looked at today was used for two runs on the salt and the 2013 dyno work.  It had some flakes and there were much fewer of them than the break in filter paper.  The flakes were looked at under a microscope.  They could be bearing surface flakes or machining chips.  It is hard to tell.  My figuring is, if it was a bearing shell, I would see more chips on the newer paper than on the old one.  I think everything is OK.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on October 28, 2013, 07:54:51 PM
That's good news Bo. I'm glad you didn't have to strip the motor. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: charlie101 on October 29, 2013, 01:20:34 AM
It seems the oil analysis works if a testing program is set up from the beginning with enough samples and history to make a statistically valid baseline.  This is what I got out of reading all that stuff on Bob the Oil Guy's site.  That is what I am going to do with the new motor.  I will save all of my filter papers so I can see if there are any changes that indicate things are not normal.

This is something to worry about.  Parts for these engines are very expensive and they do have a history of spinning main bearings and sometimes rod bearings.  None of the people I know can say why.  The used cylinder head I recently bought came from a motor that spun a main bearing.

The filter I looked at today was used for two runs on the salt and the 2013 dyno work.  It had some flakes and there were much fewer of them than the break in filter paper.  The flakes were looked at under a microscope.  They could be bearing surface flakes or machining chips.  It is hard to tell.  My figuring is, if it was a bearing shell, I would see more chips on the newer paper than on the old one.  I think everything is OK.    

The absolute quickest analys is the one you do, cut and examine the filter with a loupe. The spun bearings are bothersome, maybe some read about foaming and oil behaviour in the crankshaft could be interesting? I have absolute no knowledge about the oil system in a Triumph, but it is a interesting topic.
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=3111483#Post3111483
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 30, 2013, 02:01:08 AM
Thanks, Charlie.  Those folks on that site are serious about oil.  There is conjecture that the shell to journal clearances on these Triumphs can be on the tight side for race use.  Most racers use a looser clearance.  Mine are set up as close as possible to halfway between the "as new" clearance and the wear limit.  Also, the oil holes are chamfered.  They are not on a standard crank.

A forum member was talking to me about his old Honda and how he cannot get crank and rod bearings for it any more.  He says using old style oil with zinc and phosphorous helps his precious bearings to last longer.  I was going to switch over to Silkolene and then I found all sorts of Mobil 1 that I bought on sale, hid away, forgot about, and rediscovered.  Mobil lowered their zinc and phosphorous content.  I will bring it back up to the old level using some break in additive.  The phosphorous in the oil might help those bearings.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 01, 2013, 01:15:13 AM
The shed is coming together and the roof is on.  The old carpenter is 78 and he does everything except for the heaviest lifting.  His son does that.  Rose lifts lighter things.  There are some Model T and Model A dimensions on the i-net and I measured out a car size rectangle on the floor.  The horseless carriages will barely fit through the door and there will be hardly any room to work on them when they are inside with a small work bench.  There is no room in the shed for a car if I keep the bikes in it.  It seems I will always be a bike racer.  It takes a lot of floor space to build a car.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on November 01, 2013, 03:24:20 AM
That's a nice looking shed Bo. Your wife is definitely a keeper!  :-D :-D :-D

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 01, 2013, 10:25:01 PM
Pete, maybe she is thinking this.  "You spend enough time with that bike.  Now you can spend all of your time with it."  And then she tosses me out of the house and I live in the shed.  A fellow never knows exactly what a lady is up to.

The back of the windshield is lowered an inch and a half.  This will reduce frontal area and lower the Cd.

A lot of time was spent on gasoline choice during the last off season.  There were two schools of thought.  One was a lively oxygenated unleaded would work OK.  The other was to stay with a non-oxygenated leaded.  My choice was to be safe and use the leaded.

The head was taken off so I could get the flow testing done.  There are no signs of overheating and the PipeMax printout says 95.5 to 96.5 (R + M)/2 octane is OK.  It is halfway down the printout.  I can get Sunuco gas near my house and in AUS.  That is what I will use and their gas comparison table is shown.

The leaded Standard is what I use now.  It is a fairly light gas with a fast burn that works well.  S.G. = 0.729  Sunuco recommends Green E-15 as an oxygenated gas choice.  It is a bit denser at S.G. = 0.742  The density vs burn speed relationship for oxygenated fuel is not the same as for non-ethanol gas, according to Sunuco, and the E-15 should burn about as fast as the Standard.  Normally, with alcohol free gas, the denser fuel would burn slower.  Unfortunately, Green E-15 is not readily available in AUS.  It would need to be imported.

The 260 GT Plus was also recommended by Sunuco, although they said the E-15 was their best recommendation.  It has S.G. = 0.762 and they said it burns a little bit slower than Standard.

My big plan is to put the engine back together with the cams I have and the less restrictive pipes.  Two ignition modules will be brought to the dyno session.  One will be the module I am using now with the Stage 3 curve.  The other will be the Stage 3 curve with more advance.  I was figuring 2 or 3 degrees added will be enough.  The dyno session comparison will be the Standard fuel with both advance curves and the 260 GT Plus gas with both advance curves.  That will be four combinations and I will use the best one in AUS.

All of this will be a 1000cc APS-F or APS-G bike running for the DLRA 150 club.  I am not sure if 260 GT Plus is allowed in the gas class.  Some more reading is needed.                 
Title: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jon on November 02, 2013, 04:09:42 PM


My big plan is to put the engine back together with the cams I have and the less restrictive pipes.  Two ignition modules will be brought to the dyno session.  One will be the module I am using now with the Stage 3 curve.  The other will be the Stage 3 curve with more advance.  I was figuring 2 or 3 degrees added will be enough.  The dyno session comparison will be the Standard fuel with both advance curves and the 260 GT Plus gas with both advance curves.      

From this I'm guessing that the ignition module is not easily programmable Bo.

Maybe worthwhile getting an ignition unit that is easily mapable and setting it up on the dyno.
Some motor/fuel combinations respond well to more timing, some don't.
A lot of later model curves are ver conservative for emission and noise testing and to let Joe Public with his partner on the back pull up a long hill on a summers day a gear too high without damaging anything.

I've used the Ignitech units on a few different bikes including DavieB's (my son) salt bike with pretty good results. They are a pretty simple unit with easy to learn interface and you can generally get them with an adaptor loom.

http://www.ignitech.cz/en/

Not sure about pipemax but Engine Analyser Pro will give you "best power" ignition timing for an engine combination given a fuel octane input.

You would never run a carburettor that you had to send to the factory to get the fuel curve changed.

jon
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on November 02, 2013, 05:09:11 PM
Easier to see........

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 02, 2013, 05:22:39 PM
As far as I know, most ignition maps are for acceleration; not necessarily top end which is what we need in land speed racing.  I checked my ignition after my latest record runs and found that I had less advance than was ever recommended for my motor.  On the dyno, watch the last few hundred RPM very carefully.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: SaltPeter on November 02, 2013, 10:43:14 PM
Bo

I don't know if it's applicable to your Engine, apparently the trick to getting "Over Rev" on a 2 Stroke is to retard the timing right after the HP peak for that last 1000 odd RPM.

I am still working on my "Curve" as it drops off sharply after 11500 rpm, that's what 2 Strokes do, but it can be "flattened" a bit with Retard.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 03, 2013, 01:53:36 AM
Thanks, Freud, Jon, Tom, and Peter.  The ignition modules on these Triumphs are programmed in England for a Stage 1, Stage 2, or Stage 3 curve, depending on the level of the engine modifications.  Right now I use a Stage 3 curve.  It is the one recommended for the engine set up I have with conventional gasoline.

The modules are easy to change and dyno time is expensive.  I like to have the a few of them handy with different curves programmed into them so so they can be quickly changed without any computer work.  The dyno session goes quicker that way.

This morning was the monthly Triumph club breakfast and I asked a lot of questions.  A programmable ignition module is available and it seems to work good based on what folks tell me.  One is on order for me now and I should have it in a week or two.

The fellow in England that programs these things has a lot of knowledge.  The plan is to tell him what I am planning to do and get his ideas about what to change.   

 

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on November 03, 2013, 06:17:08 AM
That sounds like a good move Bo. Plug and play. 8-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 03, 2013, 06:25:37 PM
Hi Mike.  An engine builder who has helped me through the years told me the compression is low and the valves are a bit small for maximum power.  I know this.  There is not much I can do about it.  Late one night I was reading all sorts of fuel stuff on the internet.  One manufacturer makes an unleaded with 10% oxygen content for crate motors and other engines with "cylinder head limitations."  This gave me the idea.

This bike has crate motor compression and less cyl head flow than I need so the oxygenated fuel might be a big help.  Plus, I am learning some concepts about combustion that will be vital when it is turbo time.  I just need to be careful and not blow up the motor.  Timing and jetting need to be correct.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 09, 2013, 03:56:59 PM
There sure are a lot of oxygenated fuels, both leaded and unleaded.  My figuring is, between the less restrictive glass paks and the fuel change, a 10 % power increase is a reasonable assumption.  The unoxygenated leaded I use now has a 110 (R + M) / 2 octane and a 0.729 specific gravity.  It is a moderately fast burning fuel and it works well in the thin air at B-ville.

The first job is to look at octane requirements.  The static compression ratio is used a lot and it's relation to detonation is what we call a "very vague abstraction" in engineering.  My guess this is a number 4 in accuracy.  Right now I am looking at BMEPs.  They are a much better abstraction than the static CR and maybe ranked 3.  Virtual modeling in Engine Analyser Pro would be better at a #2 ranking.  The actual pressure readings from sensors would be the #1 most accurate and best way.

Method #1 is out.  This would be like trying to teach a monkey how to do watch repair, #2 will be after AUS when I have some money, Method 3 is what I am doing now, and Method 4 is too mickey mouse.

The first printout shows the assumption that using the fuel and pipes will move the peak power 500 rpm higher than where it is now.  Note the VE is a moderate 107 percent and the BMEP is 189 psi.  This is not too radical of a VE or BMEP change.  The second printout models an "across the board" torque increase with the 10% power increase happening at 7,300 rpm, where it does now.  The VE changes to 112% and the BMEP goes up to 200 psi.  Big changes.

This little modeling exercise tell me this.  First, use the knock light during dyno work.  There is a good chance I will be in unexplored territory as per VE and BMEP.  Second, pay attention to torque curve shape.  Curves with peaks at a lower rpms are a big concern.  Third, start out with an oxygenated gas with some substantial octane.  My best guess is (R = M)/2 over 100.  This eliminates a lot of the oxygen enriched unleaded gasolines on the market.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 10, 2013, 01:11:04 AM
The gasoline will be MULC-E-(AUS).  A fast burning unleaded with 8.2 % oxygen content.  This puts me in the fuel class, for sure.

Any description with pictures showing a "fuel shut-off operable without moving the hands from the handlebar grips" will be a big help.  Some quality made thing I can buy and not make is ideal for this guy.

Also, any handy devices to measure fuel flow during a dyno session.

Tipping the can is new territory for this backwoods boy.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on November 10, 2013, 01:57:25 AM
Bo, The Pingel Guzzler with remote shut off is what we use.

Not cheap but they work.

I believe they are a Bubs sponsor.

 Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: joea on November 10, 2013, 10:57:29 AM
Pingel remote with guzzler valve...is swell...your kind of people...your kind of parts...:)...

used one for many years...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 10, 2013, 01:10:30 PM
Tom and Pete, what do I look for on the dyno curves during the last few hundred rpm?

Joea and Don, right now there are a few Pingel things on the bike and they are working great.  I will try those parts you suggest.  Heck, I am traveling halfway across the planet to end up on some sheep farm in the outback.  Reliable stuff is what I need and it is no problem to spend a few extra $.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: peterdallan on November 10, 2013, 02:17:45 PM
Bo,

I used the Pingel Guzzler on our bike you saw at BUB this year, worked impeccably.

Peter
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: mc2032 on November 10, 2013, 03:52:31 PM
i use the pingle remote nitro valve (it has an AN 8 threaded outlet fitting) but they make many styles and sizes.  pingle will make the remote cable to any length, at least they did for me.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 10, 2013, 11:19:07 PM
Today I was going to go out and figure out where to locate the valve. The poor bike is between and under this massive stack of tarps, plywood, scaffolding, etc.  Fortunately all of the sheet metal is off of it so there will be no damage.

The new Triumph Bonnevilles have been made since 2001 with pretty minor changes.  My middle boy, Josef, just bought a 2014 T-100 in black with the red stripes.  He is lucky.  These are in big demand and hard to get.

Being a backwoods guy, I am always looking for a deal and scrounging for stuff.  I do not know exactly what I have any more.  Sorta like a squirrel that forgets where he hid the nuts.  The kid talked me out of my titanium Arrow pipes.  Looking for them, I found a pair of saddlebags for him, and some old style English handlebars.

That is something I never thought would happen.  Passing on my old hot rod parts.  Not sure who is happier.  The boy or the old man.               
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 12, 2013, 01:13:18 AM
Today I was going to make a set of baffles for the Arrow pipes to match my son's cams.  Data is input into PipeMax first.  The Triumph cam timing data is for 1.0mm valve lift and I converted it to 0.050 inch data for the program.  The exhaust valve lift vs degree curve crosses the intake curve at 0.05 inch lift.  There are zero degrees overlap.  The intake valve has only 220 degrees duration and the exhaust has 210 degrees at 0.050.  All very unimpressive specs.

The torque and power data for the modeling came from the is road test comparison in the February 2013 Motorcyclist.  Note the long duration of the torque curve.   The bike performs well with those very mild cams.  It is an 865cc engine with 10.2 to 1 compression, catalytic converters, and air injection into the exhaust.  None of this is good for producing power. 

I cannot figure out what Triumph did to make this engine perform as good as it does.  That broad and flat torque curve would be great for my race motors.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 12, 2013, 04:49:17 PM
Should be a good cam for adding that supercharger you have planned!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 13, 2013, 01:00:09 AM
You are thinking, Tom.  As soon as the warranty is up some tasteful mods will be made to the new bike to make it run better, last longer, and get better gas mileage.  One of the changes will be pulling out those low perf cams.  They will become property of the racing program and be used for the blown motor or as cores for some custom ones.

The race gas is ordered.  Three 5-gallon cans are being blended with the AUS mixture.  One drum will be used to tune the bike before the trip and the others will be used for record chasing when I get back.  I could have ordered a 16 gallon drum.  It would be partially full for years.  The unopened cans are better for storing fuel.  There is less chance of oxidation.  These MUL mixtures have a very long shelf life so I can do this.  Blendzall is being mixed in.  This is a recommended top end lube. 

The fuel demand is estimated to be 15% more than it is now.  The delivery system is being upgraded to assure this will happen.  The timing curve I am using for the Sunuco Standard is expected to be close to the one needed for the the MULC.  Curves will be available during the dyno session that are 2 degrees advanced and retarded from the one I have now.  Mixture will be set first, then the spark curve.  All of this is keeping me very busy.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on November 13, 2013, 01:09:19 AM
Bo, you never sleep it seems. What time is it there. 1AM? :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 21, 2013, 12:41:12 AM
Hi Mike.  The time posted on the site is what it is at Slim and Nancy's house on the UP back east at the big lakes.  Oregon is on the west coast and a couple of few hours behind them.

These next posts are about setting the timing curves on the Triumph.  This stuff is not on the net or in the manual and I had to figure it out.  This might be a help to anyone who races one of these.

The first step to working on Triumph electrics is to have a stiff drink.  Be aware that a lot of the stuff you will be working with has color codes different than what is in the manual and wires of different colors connect to each other.  Also, the manual does not give a lot of info about any of this.

The ignition timing is based on throttle opening and rpm.  The throttle opening is measured by a Throttle Position Sensor (TPS).  It is a rheostat and it is the black thing with wires coming out of it that is attached to the side of the carb.  Three wires come out of it.  One is a ground and it is black.  Another green wire is the feed and it should read a steady voltage between 4.5 and 5.5 volts.  The third wire is light colored and it is the output.  It should read less than a volt when the throttle is shut and around 4 volts at full throttle.  The colors on the Triumph wiring diagram are different.

It is a little over 20 degrees out and the flat slide carbs are on the bike.  It is warmer inside so the standard carbs are used to demonstrate this.  The black plug would be plugged in and the ignition turned on for an actual test.  A needle is stuck up the connector to touch a terminal for the voltage readings.  The next post will be on how to adjust the TPS.

 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 22, 2013, 01:44:59 AM
The TPS is held on to the carb with two screws.  They can be loosened and the TPS is rotated to adjust it.  The triumph twin power website has a procedure where they check the resistance through the TPS at full and closed throttle.

Another way is to screw out the idle throttle stop adjuster until the throttle plates are fully closed.  Then, the resistance through the TPS should be 6000 ohms when the throttle is shut and 500 ohms when it is fully open.  The TPS is rotated slightly until this occurs if it is out of adjustment.

My final check is to hook up the TPS and to measure the voltage in the TPS output wire while turning the throttle.  The voltage should smoothly increase when the throttle is turned.  A jerky or erratic voltage increase is a sign of trouble.  Proper ignition timing depends on the TPS being correctly adjusted.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 22, 2013, 08:31:54 PM
The first step is done, and that is to verify the TPS is working OK. 

The second step is not going as planned.  This programmable black box I ordered is made in China.  The software is vague.  Tech support does not return e-mails.  It has a baseline TPS voltage vs spark advance curve programmed into it, along with a baseline rpm vs spark advance curve, and a baseline rev limit.  Nobody seems to know what these curves and limits are.  All I can do is to adjust these unknown curves.  Too risky.

The fellow in England won't tell me what his curves are, either.  They work great, though.  I am back to the original plan of using his Stage 3 curve as a start and trying boxes with 2 degrees advance and 2 degrees retard.  I found a deal on some new Triumph black boxes so I will send two to him to be reprogrammed.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Geo on November 22, 2013, 08:38:19 PM
WW,

You need to correctly text them.  Begin with 计算机编程黑框中   :?

Interesting the setting values on the TPS.  On the cars I work with there is an idle setting value and you do not worry about anything else.  :-D

Geo
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fredvance on November 23, 2013, 10:21:13 AM
WW, have you talked to Jon Minono? He probably knows more about Triumphs Than just about anybody.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 23, 2013, 04:21:32 PM
Geo, the TPS has a constant feed into it with 4.5 to 5.5 volts pressure.  It is a rheostat with a sorta liner response to throttle opening.  The two I have give 0.5 volts output pressure at closed throttle and around 4.5 volts pressure at full throttle.  The output goes into the black box and it is programmed to provide varying amounts of spark advance at different input voltages.  The box has a map for TPS output voltage vs spark advance.

The TPS replicates a vacuum advance.  It gives a lot of advance at cruising throttle openings and less advance at idle and full throttle.  The most advance happens at 2 to 3 volts output, I am told.  The problem is, if the silly thing is wearing out or if the connections are corroded, the output input voltage could be 2 to 3 volts at full throttle.  This gives the black box the signal to give maximum spark advance at full throttle rather than at cruising rpm.  The timing settings on a production bike are so mild that this would be barely noticed.  It could be a disaster on a highly tuned race bike.  This is why I am so fussy about the output voltage at full throttle.

The ideal solution is a programmable black box where the advance curve can be programmed in so it is based on RPM, only, or based on RPM and TPS where the TPS advance contribution is constant throughout the TPS output voltage range.  A "out of spec" TPS output voltage would not be catastrophic in either case.

My solution is to send three black boxes England and to tell the programmer my concerns.  I cannot find a fully programmable black box with decent software and tech support.

Fred, Thanks for the advice.  I will contact him.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 27, 2013, 01:39:21 AM
The predators arrived today.  They are the megaphone shaped mufflers.  The sleepers are the other ones and I have been using them.  Both are straight through glass-packs regardless of their shapes.  Two Triumph tuners on either side of the Atlantic recommended these predators over the sleepers.  Interesting.  The sleeper's tuned lengths are better matches to PipeMax recommendations and the holes through the middle are 12 percent bigger than the predator's.  The sleepers should work better in theory.  A comparison needs to be made on the dyno.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: stay`tee on November 27, 2013, 04:52:33 AM
back in the day, early to mid seventies, i ran a set of Dunstall mufflers on my 71 Bonneville, not only did that sound good, thay also improved performance a little,,, a friend of mine also had a set on his XS650 Yamaha, thay really improved the performance on that piece,, not sure if the Dunstalls are still avilable,,, also, just remembered, a mate had a set on his T150 Trident, now that thing sounded so sweet when it was up in the revs,, 8-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on November 27, 2013, 11:57:43 AM
Bo, does the glass affect the performance in any way?.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 27, 2013, 11:54:18 PM
Stay-tee, the Dunstalls gave me good results in the past on my BSA.  I am not sure if they make mufflers for the modern Triumphs.  To the best of my knowledge, Paul Dunstall went on to become a successful real estate developer.  I am not sure if I could get any Dunstall mufflers now.

Mike, I really do not know.  I cannot afford to do comparison testing so I rely on advice from trusted experts.  Two recommend the predators.  In the past I have got some big numbers and nice looking torque and power curves with an "H" system and predator style glass-paks.  Their recommendation does not seem to be unreasonable.
           

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on November 28, 2013, 12:06:58 AM
A asked because we used to play around with pipes. It wasn't a scientific project so there was no way of measuring performance gains. are there SCTA rules on noise levels or are exhausts open?.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 28, 2013, 01:08:07 AM
No sound rules at BUB.  Not sure about the SCTA.  In the past I have run open ended "straight pipes."  The power was great when the resonance was right or lousy when it wasn't.  This made the bike hard to ride and unpleasantly loud.  The glass-paks act like megaphones.  They soften up the peaks and valleys so the bike is easier to ride and less obnoxious.     

 

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: stay`tee on November 28, 2013, 06:21:49 AM
just done a quick google search and theres plenty Dunstall replicas for sale on ebay, :-)

sorry Wobbly, i realize you are going with the mufflers you have, and im following this thread with interest,, i guess im just reminisceing a little about the Dunstalls,, as you were mate,,
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on November 28, 2013, 10:24:14 AM
No SCTA sound level/exhaust noise rules as far as I know.  And the bike I ran at SpeedWeek last August would likely have been over the limit if there had been any rules.  It's pretty loud, especially compared to many of the other metric 4-cyl bikes.  There are lots of bikes running straight open pipes, some using a bit or more of nitro (which adds another distinctive bit of quality to the noise).  And they aren't forced to quiet down.

Nope - no noise rules out on the salt.  If there were -- I don't think you'd ever see a rotary engine running out there. :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on November 28, 2013, 12:34:10 PM
 :-D I raced F2 cars in the 80s and we used the 12A Peripheral port motors. Fans used to get off the grandstands and run. :lol:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 28, 2013, 11:46:43 PM
It was time to reach up into the top tray for some fresh flashlight batteries.  A bad idea.  It was best to look for the batteries somewhere else.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: generatorshovel on November 28, 2013, 11:50:02 PM
Bo, a little off topic, but I stumbled upon  this video, it will get you in the mood for your visit in 2015, and warm your toes.
Although it contains some racing (including a later model Triumph Bonneville) the video has a lot of the drive to the lake, the basic camping at the saltbush camp (closer than the DLRA camp, which has great showers , toilets, and limited 240 volt (yup, mains power is 240 V in OZ) power supply, cool rooms, a few semi permanent members quarters , a sheep shearing shed, and MORE dust)
The only thing it cant prepare you for is the heat (you will get used to the taste of flies quickly)

http://youtu.be/i3BAvYxESyM

Tiny
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 02, 2013, 12:46:39 AM
Thanks for posting the video.  You guys and gals are tough hombres.  Here in Oregon we have mosquitos, no-see-ums, and biting flies.  What I have found is, if I can keep them off my face, life is a lot less miserable.  I will bring my bug hat.  It is a simple brimmed hat with a net veil that hangs down on to my shoulders.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on December 02, 2013, 07:38:14 AM
  Here in Oregon we have mosquitos, no-see-ums, and biting flies. 


Sounds like home (Nova Scotia).  These flystrips for your hat from Lee Valley Tools do a good job on the deer flies.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on December 02, 2013, 10:24:46 AM
Geez, I'll never complain again. :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on December 02, 2013, 11:51:01 PM
Tiny, I sure enjoyed that video.   :cheers:

I was told by Dr. Goggles how long and treacherous the trip to lake Gairdner is.

Well, I timed it and it only took two minutes.  :roll:

 Thanks, Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 08, 2013, 07:55:15 PM
The compressed fuel air mixture is ignited by a kernel of flame around the spark plug tip.  The flame front expands outward toward the combustion chamber edges.  Pressure is applied to the piston and it travels down the bore.  The maximum combustion pressure should occur when the piston and connecting rod big end are in the optimum position.  A pressure spike that occurs when the piston is too close to top dead center produces poor leverage on the crank. The big end bearing is too high in the cylinder stroke.  Excessive combustion chamber pressure occurs and head gaskets blow, rod bearings get hammered, etc.  Power is not optimum.

A pressure spike that occurs when the piston is too far down the bore happens when the crank pin is in a great position to provide leverage.  Unfortunately, the piston is a ways down from the cylinder head and compression is low.  The peak combustion pressure is low.  Power is not at its best.

The peak combustion spike should occur exactly when the rod big end is far enough down to provide good leverage and the piston is high enough in the bore to provide a compressed mixture for combustion.  Optimum power results.  Two things can be adjusted to get everything working right at a given rpm, and these are fuel burn characteristics and ignition timing.

Some fuels have a large fraction of heavier hydrocarbons and other characteristics that make them burn slower with a less pronounced combustion pressure spike.  These are "forgiving" and they will work with a wide range of ignition timing settings and combustion chamber shapes.  Other fuels are fast burning and produce more pronounced combustion pressure spikes.  These "flashy" fuels will produce more power.  To do this, ignition timing needs to be correct.

The first step in this tuning is to get the exhaust and intake harmonics sorted and the mixture correct.  A conservative ignition timing curve is used for this.  The next step, in the old days, was to scribe marks on the points plate so it could be rotated at 2 degree increments in relation to crank position.  The Triumph has a "black box" instead of contact breakers.  Three are being sent to Dorset, in southern England, for for programming.  The curves will be 2 degrees apart.

The peak torque is measured on the dyno with the conservative timing setting.  The timing is advanced in 2 degree increments and the power increases, usually.  There will be a few settings when it dose not change.  Finally, at some far advanced setting, the power will drop.  This work develops a timing vs power curve.  The ignition curve that is selected produces a smidge under peak torque on the retarded side of the curve.

The timing setting done here should be OK for Gairdner.  Both places are at similar altitudes.  The same gasoline will be used for testing here and racing in AUS.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 13, 2013, 09:04:05 PM
This hillbilly needs some help.  A winter project is upgrading the fuel system hoses.  The plan is to use "AN" connections and braided lines throughout.  I was told "Use this Parker 909 hose.  All the racers do.  You can see it in the hot rod magazines.  It is fire resistant and they do not put sleeve over it."  A 909 hose is in the background in the picture.  Do you all run in DLRA and SCTA with this hose without fire sleeve?

A fellow sold me the silver colored connector on the right.  He said to use female ends with that specific taper and shape.  Our local hydraulics guy sold me the brass fitting on the right.  He said "Don't worry about the differences in tapers.  The female end deforms to conform to the male end after the nut is tightened."  Is he right?
   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on December 14, 2013, 11:49:18 AM
Wobbly;

That Parker 909 hose is good but it is not a replacement for a fire sleeve.

The photos did not appear but I'm guessing that the brass fitting the hydraulics guy sold you is a 45 degree SAE flare fitting. It will NOT mate with a 37 degree AN flare fitting! If this is the case, then that guy does not know what he is talking about.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stan Back on December 14, 2013, 12:23:34 PM
"The female end deforms to conform to the male end after the nut is tightened."

Now, just what are you doing?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: JimL on December 14, 2013, 09:39:37 PM
Bo, I have an AN flaring tool.  If you need to borrow it for a while I can mail it up.  I wont be to the "AN line fitting time" for several more months....just getting to started on the blower brackets.  This cold snap has really knocked the stuffing out of me and my shop time.

JimL
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 15, 2013, 12:20:32 AM
The photo is attached.

Neil, that "advice" seemed to be sketchy so I checked it out with you'all here on the forum.  The local speed shop can make me hoses to fit AN fittings and sell me the fittings.  It will cost me more than going to the tractor supply.  The extra cost will be worth it, I figure.

Stan, sex and triumph repair are sorta similar.  Grunting, pounding, and sweating.

Jim, I remember making brake lines for a car.  They were all metal lines and we cut and flared the ends.  The braided lines have ends that are pre-flared and a fellow simply pushes them on the hose and crimps the cover down onto the hose to hold it tight.  Is this the tool you are mentioning?         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: JimL on December 15, 2013, 02:09:48 AM
I use it to flare stainless or mild steel tubing to fit AN couplers, to accept the braided hoses.  You can get a great deal on pre-made braided hoses from Speedway, in many lengths.  You may save money and space by making some sections from tube....which is what my tool flares.  There are places where the braided hose is just too big around or is too close to "tender things" such as engines cases or harnesses.  Those stainless braided hoses are VERY effective saws!

Be careful, and be sure to look at my stainless brake hose support on page 33 of my book.  Thats a quick and easy way to avoid trouble.

JimL
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 15, 2013, 02:31:47 AM
Thanks, Jim.  Protecting tender things is a goal of this project.  I will give you a call.

The Guzzler fuel valves I ordered have 5/16 hose barbs.  I ordered them before I went on the AN fitting binge.  This limits me a bit.  I need a flexible hose material that can slip over a barb on one end and be attached to an AN fitting on the other.  These fuel lines can do this and they are designed for gasoline with some ethanol mixed in with it.  They are fire resistant.  I was figuring on using them with fire sleeves.  Are there better choices?  Has anyone used these?

www.gates.com/brocure.cfm?brocure=5090&location_id=5245 (http://www.gates.com/brocure.cfm?brocure=5090&location_id=5245)  

ph.parker.com/us/15551/en/fire-resistant-marine-fuel-hose-221fr (http://ph.parker.com/us/15551/en/fire-resistant-marine-fuel-hose-221fr)  

I will look at using some tube and the Speedway hoses, too.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: JimL on December 15, 2013, 03:35:29 AM
I bet there is a fitting to connect AN to a barb that takes 5/16" hose.  Anyway, Here is a 1/2-20 part that gets you to AN, and there are 1/2-20 to 5/16" barbs available.  A 1/2-20 female coupler would join those.  That short section of barb fitted hose could be helpful in a tight area, and you can use that 1/8" model airplane stainless landing gear wire to support at the AN side of the fitting.

http://www.speedwaymotors.com/97-Style-Carburetor-AN-Fuel-Inlet-Fitting,951.html

Prob'ly someone knows a better-cheaper way.

JimL
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on December 15, 2013, 10:26:52 AM
Since you seem to be a bit of a machinist, when your valves arrive look at reworking them to an AN fitting.  Either tap the valve for a fitting or if there is not enough meat weld on a fitting. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on December 15, 2013, 12:23:37 PM
Bo,
 You can buy just the outlet part of the "Guzzlers" (I had to change mine).

I don't know the rules for other venues but for the SCTA 7.B.25 states that "All non-valve portions of fuel or gas lines, shall have fire-resistant or fireproof connecting lines and fittings".

So you may not need fire sleeve.

Hope this helps, Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on December 15, 2013, 07:02:31 PM
The photo is attached.

Neil, that "advice" seemed to be sketchy so I checked it out with you'all here on the forum.  The local speed shop can make me hoses to fit AN fittings and sell me the fittings.  It will cost me more than going to the tractor supply.  The extra cost will be worth it, I figure.

Stan, sex and triumph repair are sorta similar.  Grunting, pounding, and sweating.

Jim, I remember making brake lines for a car.  They were all metal lines and we cut and flared the ends.  The braided lines have ends that are pre-flared and a fellow simply pushes them on the hose and crimps the cover down onto the hose to hold it tight.  Is this the tool you are mentioning?         

I don't see any photos but maybe I'm doing something wrong.

Mixing SAE 45 degree fittings with AN 37 degree fittings is an all-to-common error. It will leak and no amount of tightening will solve the problem. If a fitting is brass, chances are it is a 45 degree flare fitting; a blue anodized aluminum one is almost always a 37 degree AN fitting. Stainless AN fittings are around-- just not common because of cost. Steel AN fittings are also encountered sometimes. Pipe thread fittings are available in SAE or AN but the SAE brass ones are much more common and less expensive.

Real AN fittings are very nicely made but "AN lookalike" fittings might be OK or not.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on December 15, 2013, 11:06:19 PM
Neil, I also don't see photos.

Bo, get the Aeroquip catalogue if you can. There's a lot of good info in there. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 16, 2013, 12:40:34 AM
I tried twice to post the photo.  Weird.  I will try again.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on December 16, 2013, 09:45:38 AM
Two totally different systems not to be used together Bo.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on December 16, 2013, 12:10:36 PM
I tried twice to post the photo.  Weird.  I will try again.

Yep-- the one on the left is a 37 degree AN fitting; the one on the right is a 45 degree SAE fitting. 45 degree fittings are what you find at automotive shops and hardware stores.
 They are NOT compatible!

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 17, 2013, 12:06:27 AM
The female Parker 22 Series connectors the fellow was selling me have dual tapered seats.  They fit the 37 and 45 degree tapers male connectors in the picture.  Those guys use those female connectors cause some of us guys are not that particular about what we connect together.  I thought the counterman was an idiot.  In reality he is smart like a fox.

The hose I need will fit over barbs and it needs to be flexible so a rubber rather than a teflon or nylon liner is best.  It needs to be fire resistant.  In addition, it needs to work with gasoline/alcohol blends.  That last requirement sure eliminates a lot of hoses.  There are some fire resistant tubes that work great with gasoline and not with gasahol.  The Aeroquip/Eaton, Gates, and Parker catalogs were consulted.  The only hoses meeting my picky and unreasonable expectations are the Parker 221FR.  The hose is blue.  My printer is running out of ink and it shows it as pink.

Some literature says these fire resistant marine fuel hoses do not need fire sleeves.  I need to ask the DLRA for their opinion on this.  It would be nice to use the hose without it.
     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 17, 2013, 12:43:43 AM
These are the dual seat fittings.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on December 17, 2013, 12:08:19 PM
Wobbly, I've never heard of those fittings. Interesting idea but I still prefer ones that have full-contact flares.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on December 17, 2013, 02:21:38 PM
I tend to agree with Neil but at the same time it's difficult to find a brand name with any more credibility than Parker.  :? :? :?

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 17, 2013, 08:34:46 PM
Me too.  I like the larger contact area given by two 37 degree seats.

Two 5/16- inch inside diameter hoses are shown.  One is the typical braided hose I usually use.  The other is the 221FR hose.  The stuff is not cheap at $14.46 a foot.  The fire hose is some heavy duty stuff.

I tried a silver Aeroquip fire sleeve on it.  It gets really thick then and it is hard to fit.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 18, 2013, 09:57:18 PM
"Make sure the tank has a good breather.  Those gas cap vents are not enough many times.  A tube stuck to the gas cap is best with the end out in the breeze."  This advice is given to me by the fuel expert.  The gas consumption will be about 15 percent greater with he oxygenated fuel so I need to pay attention to this.

The Triumph gas cap has a little pressure valve in the base.  Tank fumes go up through the valve and they exit out from under the chrome plated gas cap cover.  The cap is taken apart and the little valve is removed and discarded. The cover is tossed, too.  The base, spring, ratchet mechanism, and circlip are kept.

The gas cap is replicated in aluminum.  A threaded hole is made in the center for a breather.  The two tabs are essential to make the ratchet mechanism work.  An O-ring is used to keep the fumes from going out anywhere except through the breather in the center.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 18, 2013, 10:07:19 PM
This is the cap with the o-ring in place.  A Viton ring is used.  The fuel is oxygenated with alcohol and this material is resistant to gasahol damage.  The next picture shows the assembled cap.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 18, 2013, 10:12:44 PM
The cap is on the tank.  The ratchet mechanism is used to point the breather line in the correct direction.  It is not needed if the breather line points straight up.

The tank has another breather that goes out from the bottom of the tank to to the charcoal canister.  It will be open, too.  The gas cap breather supplements it to insure there is plenty of venting for good fuel flow.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on December 18, 2013, 10:55:56 PM
That's a neat job Bo. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 22, 2013, 10:29:19 PM
Thanks, Mike.  The days are short here.  Long nights and foul weather.  Lots of time for machining.    This morning there was a bright glow to the south.  I thought the Russkies nuked California.  Then I remembered.  The sun.  That is what it looks like.

This is not LSR.  It is interesting.  The old race mufflers on Bonnie, the race bike, were some stainless steel glass paks.  A couple of tuners told me they were not adequate for a big bore motor.  They looked great Clyde the street bike.  Unfortunately, the internal diameter is 1.75 inches and they are far to loud for street use.  The job is to quiet them down without killing street performance.  Also, the changes need to match the EFI mapping.

First, I tried a simple choke ring as shown on the left in the photo.  It made the bike quieter but performance was poor.  It seemed to run too rich or lean at different rpm compared to the mapping.  The choke ring has a flat surface perpendicular to the flow that reflects a strong and distinct pressure wave back down towards the exhaust valve.  Maybe this is the problem.

Next I tried a baffle with a single step at a 45 degree angle, as shown to the right in the photo.  This worked much better.  It reflected a less distinct wave.

Finally, I made the baffles shown in the second photo.  They step down from the 1.746 original pipe diameter to 0.975 inches in five increments.  All steps are beveled at 45 degree angles.  The heights of the steps and the distances between them are not the same.  This is intentionally done to reduce the intensity of any reflected waves.  These baffles work great.  They quiet the bike down and do not hurt performance on the street, as best as I can tell.  They match the mapping.   
 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RidgeRunner on December 23, 2013, 09:44:26 AM
     Down home old school "try it and see what happens" engineering.  The kind I like and all very interesting. 

     Thanks for shareing.

                                   Ed

                         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on December 23, 2013, 01:51:29 PM
RR, you're right.

There is always something going on in Bo's thread.

Lots of innovation. A true hot rodder. :cheers: :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 24, 2013, 12:03:10 AM
My baffle setup is not optimum.  It is the best I can do at present.  All of these aftermarket Triumph mufflers I can find are variations on a common theme regardless of their external shape.  They have big tubes down the middle with louvered or holed walls that are surrounded by packing.  The only way to quiet them down is to choke them.  This restricts flow and causes back pressure.

What I am loooking for are old style chamber mufflers where the flow is simply directed in different directions and the entire chamber is used to convey the gas.  This way the openings are large and non restrictive.  The picture from Google shows a typical style.

Flow and performance testing in my younger days showed me these big old mufflers worked just great.  Making one is beyond me.  It is sort of like building a ship in a bottle, as best as I can tell.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 25, 2013, 09:49:51 PM
The carriage shed is happening.  These photos are from the night before last.  The bike bench is in the interior photo.  It was built early so the carpenters can use it as a table.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on December 25, 2013, 10:05:05 PM
Bo, that looks suspiciously like a doghouse/spare room for when you've forgot an anniversary or something.  That fold down table would support a sleeping bag and you, right? :evil:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on December 25, 2013, 11:01:03 PM
Awesome looking shop Bo. That should automatically add a few mph to the bike.  :-D :-D :-D

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on December 25, 2013, 11:44:04 PM
It looks great.

Methinks Rose should use her talents for something on the two wheeled side. :-D :-D

Are those electrical sockets all around the walls?.

That is a building job of note. :cheers: :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 26, 2013, 08:50:15 PM
Slim, there is no need to sleep on the bike bench.  It has 220V and 110V, and it will have a small loft with a bed and a cooler.  I got the idea from Lars.  Right now in the house there is a golden retriever, my son in law, two of my daughters, my youngest son, Rose and me, four parakeets and three cats.  Rose will move into the shed if I do not fill it with bikes.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 27, 2013, 09:50:10 PM
The Parker 221 FR fire resistant hose has thick walls and the availability of AN connectors is limited.  The need to use a salt resistant material such as brass further reduces the choices.  Connectors are available.  My advice is to make a complete parts list of what you will need and to check all of the component prices.  Do this before you make the decision to use this hose with AN fittings.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 29, 2013, 01:06:35 AM
There are three AN connection types to fit these hoses, one is kind crimped and the other two styles are "field connectors" that thread on to the ends of the hoses.  Only one type of connector is brass rather than galvanized and it is a field one.  I was quoted 30+ dollars for a male connection and 70+ dollars for a female swivel end.  AN connectors are too expensive.  The much more readily available and less expensive connectors with 45 degree seats are used.  Hose end covers are from our local speed shop.  These two changes brought the cost of this breather setup down from insane to expensive.

The first picture shows the gas cap.  This cap was valved for pressure release, only, as set up by Triumph.  Now it breathes both ways.  The second picture shows the three way tee.  One quarter inch line comes from the gas cap on the left and another quarter inch line from the standard tank vent comes in from below.  The line to the right is 5/16 inch and it goes to the vent end.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 29, 2013, 01:15:12 AM
The advice I get is to run with a full tank to maximize fuel flow out of the petcock.  There will be a lot of fuel going out of the breather if I go down.  This is a big fire danger.

The vent end goes into a Pingel Guzzler fuel valve that is threaded into an aluminum tube.  The end mounts between where the speedo and tach were on the street setup.  This is shown in the first picture.

The petcock is operated by a cable and a lever on the handlebar as shown in the second picture.  The tether pulls the lever to the "valve closed" position if I come off of the bike.  This setup is not required by safety regs.  It is something extra I am doing.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on December 29, 2013, 01:24:17 AM
Extra is good. You all advised that overkill is your friend.
Smart move Bo. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 01, 2014, 01:19:38 AM
The Pingel remote guzzler is turned on by twisting the valve knob by hand like a normal petcock.  It cannot be turned off the same way.  Instead, a lever on the bars is turned, this pulls a Bowden cable, the cable pulls a pin, this releases the spring loaded fuel valve, and it shuts.

The lever comes with clamps for 7/8-inch handlebar.  The Triumph one is 1 inch diameter.  In addition, there is nowhere near the throttle to mount the levers on the bars.  I would need to make room by sawing off the brake master cylinder from the throttle.  Sometime in the future I might need a front brake so disabling it is not a good idea.  A solution is to make a big and flat brake master cylinder cover.  The levers are mounted to it as shown.  Now, the levers are easy to operate with my hand on the bars and I can keep my front brake cylinder.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on January 01, 2014, 02:14:02 AM
Happy New Year.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 01, 2014, 02:37:49 AM
Happy new year to you, Freud, and all of the rest of you.  We will be at the reunion this year. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 01, 2014, 06:28:58 PM
This system uses the fire resistant marine lines by Parker.  The first picture shows the line under the tank for the standard Triumph tank breather.  Writing on the line says to use crimp fittings on the ends.  This is needed to meet ISO standards.  The Parker field connectors or the clamps I am using meet wobblywalrus standards and not the ISO.

The second picture shows the connection where the standard Triumph breather connects to the rest of the system.  It is not necessary to use fire resistant hose for breathers.

The third picture shows the petcock.  It is turned on by hand and turned off by the lever attached to the Bowden cable.  There is a satisfying "thunk" sound when the spring loaded valve closes.  This cock is needed to meet DLRA regs which say "Fuel motorcycles shall have a fuel shut-off operable without moving the hands from the handlebar grips."     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 01, 2014, 06:35:34 PM
This picture shows the breather end and the guzzler valve attached to it.  This shuts of the breathers.  It is operated by a tether if I fall off or by the lever if I am on the bike.

This next picture shows the breather line between the gas cap and the rest of the system. 

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 01, 2014, 06:57:14 PM
The levers are shown in this photo.  The one controlling the fuel shutoff I can reach up and flick back with my hand on the handlebar.  The other one is for the tank vent shut off.  I can reach it easily but my hand if off the bar a little bit.

A short section of fuel line was stuck on and we made a flow test with a full tank of gas.  The fellow who is helping me says to always run with a full tank as much as possible to maximize fuel flow.  I held a big can under the hose end and Rosie timed how long it took to fill the can.  The flow was 121.6 ounces in 1 minute 15 seconds.  This is 45.6 gallons per hour and far more than the standard system.  I wish I could pee like that.

The brake specific fuel consumption is 0.5 pounds gasoline per horsepower-hour.  I am told to assume 15 percent more fuel consumption with this oxygenated gasoline.  Also, the 0.5 use rate is based on automotive engine dyno work and I have a bike.  A 0.90 conversion factor is needed to reflect bike chassis dyno numbers.  The BSF for this fuel on this bike is expected to be 0.639 pounds per horsepower-hour.

A horsepower to fuel flow rate formula is in Baechtel's "Performance Automotive Engine Math."  The flow at the hose end feeding the carb will support 435 horsepower.  This will be enough for turbo and NA applications.  Now the remaining task is to verify the flow through the float valves is adequate.         

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Vinsky on January 01, 2014, 08:20:26 PM
Good ideas there Wobbly, and a photo is worth a thousand words.
I'd like to see other photos on the same subject of the manual shutoff used in conjunction with the
tether shutoff. I don't have a Guzzler with a cable but one similar which is mounted on the Hilborn pump.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jon on January 02, 2014, 04:34:58 PM
Looking good Bo

Had you thought of running your rear brake from your front brake lever?
Instinct will have your hand go there to stop, the other bonus is when your wheeling your bike around by hand you still have a functioning brake you can get to easily, great for loading and unloading etc.

jon
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 03, 2014, 12:18:49 AM
Jon, the rear brake will be modified this year.  I will look at that option.

A lot of this work is not needed.  Yesterday when I was putting the parts on the bike I noticed the 2003 790cc parts I was taking off were slightly different than the Thruxton parts I was looking at when I made this setup.  Both were carburetor bikes.  The differences were minor but they were there, the location of the breather, how the gas cap works, etc.

Today after work Rose and me made a flow test with the 790cc gas cap on the bike.  The flow was unchanged.  Then I put on the 790cc breather hose instead of my modified breather.  We made another test and flow was unchanged.  I might keep the system on 'cause it is fire resistant.  I do not need the extra venting to give fuel flow.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 05, 2014, 01:20:34 PM
The fuel vent system I made is a first attempt at doing something I have not done before.  It is mickey-mouse.  Those tethers will pull the valves shut if I fall off at just the correct angle to pull them back.  Good luck with this.  We cannot script and choreograph our get offs.

My plan is to remove the vent shutoff lever and tether.  The Pingel shutoff valve will remain.  I will manually turn it on before the run at the same time I turn on the fuel.  This tip over valve will be installed in the vent line to close it.  This is something I found on a website for F1 car fuel systems.

The tank will be sealed when the fuel petcock and vent shutoff cocks are closed.  This in-line pressure release valve will be used to keep internal tank pressure under control and to keep the volatiles from evaporating out of the fuel and going out the vent line.

Is there some sort of tip over valve that will work in a gravity fuel line?  All of the ones I find on the I-net are for vent lines.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 09, 2014, 12:26:53 AM
The carriage shed is the biggest allowed by the local building code.  The small offset doors meets the code.  These buildings are meant to be sheds, not garages.  The inside lighting, outlets, and insulation is in excess of code allowances.  The dang possums sneak in here at night and do this.  They are small but there are lots of them so they can do big work.  There are a lot of these sheds around here and some have the old style carriage doors from early last century.

There is a loft in the back top with a window and railing.  It is sorta like a "fun room" in Hefner's Playboy Mansion.  The main users will be the grand kids so the stairs are close together for little legs and feet to climb.  Below that is a shelf to store the race gas, floor jacks, and other items for working on things.  There is a 220V outlet for a welder.  The lights are ex pool table and the small side door was once on a Works Progress Administration snow chalet near Mount Hood.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 09, 2014, 12:29:01 AM
A few more pictures.  It is not finished yet.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on January 09, 2014, 01:31:07 AM
Nice setup Bo. Your Rose is a precious lady!  :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on January 09, 2014, 05:23:36 AM
I agree. It's great.

 :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on January 09, 2014, 08:58:22 AM
Bo, you win the "Granpa's thinking of us little kids" for putting the stair lifts close together.  I don't think I would have thought of that detail -- but it's marvelous. :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 09, 2014, 08:41:13 PM
The carpenters came up with the stairs for kids idea, Slim.  My knuckle dragger mind did notta thunk it.

The Triumph has a tank vent valve and a tipover valve from the factory.  They have enough capacity for the standard bike or a moderately hopped up one, plus, the tipover valve is plastic.  There might not be enough flow capacity for what I am doing and I want metal fire resistant ones.

These are metal valves made by Newton in London www.newtn-equipment.com (http://www.newtn-equipment.com)  They are small and just right for a bike although some are recommended for F1.  They were bought from Fuel Safe here in America www.fuelsafe.com (http://www.fuelsafe.com)

The little guy is a TRL7 in-line tipover valve.  Air can be pulled into the system through it or expelled out if the valve is nearly vertical.  The valve shuts if it is tipped to the side and liquid tries to pass out through it.  This will keep fuel from flowing out of the vent in a tipover.

The big fellow is a TPV8 tank vent pressure release valve.  It allows air to go into the tank if internal pressure drops down to less than 0.08 psi below atmospheric.  This lets air in as the fuel level drops or the fuel cools and shrinks.  The valve lets vapor out if the tank pressure is more than 0.725 psi above atmospheric.  This keeps the fumes in the tank and it releases them if there is substantial internal pressure, only.

There is some debate if a gravity flow fuel system should pull against any valve, even one as soft as this.  The tank vent valve will be bypassed during racing.  The vent will be open to the atmosphere.  ERC recommends this.

 

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 13, 2014, 01:07:22 AM
Work is seasonal here.  Deep winter is when I order parts and machine new things.  Sometime in mid February it gets warm, dry, and light enough to go out and do serious work on the bike.  That changed today.  I was given the key to the shed.  Now I can work on the bike in mid-winter.  There is some painting and cleanup to do before the shed is completely done.

One of the first jobs after I get the bike inside is to put on these two longer foot peg brackets.  They move my feet back 4.25 inches from where they were with the old brackets.  Getting my feet back will help me to tuck down on the tank.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on January 13, 2014, 01:16:54 AM
I can't say I've ever experienced seasonal work but I understand.

Nice pieces Bo.

I'm sure that extra distance will help you getting down low. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: peterdallan on January 13, 2014, 06:32:48 AM
Hi Bo

I just started work on my footpegs too, now back a further 4" or so, just a temporary steel bracket for now to test in various positions for comfort, but already easier to lie down flatter than before.

Peter

(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/01/13/gysenevy.jpg)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on January 13, 2014, 09:21:55 AM
Put you leathers, riding boots and helmet on to test the fit...

Don't ask how I know  :?
 :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: peterdallan on January 13, 2014, 09:52:11 AM
;-)

I'll do that.

Thanks

Peter
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on January 13, 2014, 06:31:09 PM
Hi Bo

I just started work on my footpegs too, now back a further 4" or so, just a temporary steel bracket for now to test in various positions for comfort, but already easier to lie down flatter than before.

Peter

(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/01/13/gysenevy.jpg)
Peter,
Not our thread, but you look uncomfortable.  I found that downward turned handlebars are much more comfortable.  I used standard clip on mounts, but used cut-off Honda cb350 bars to achieve this.  I had to pin the bars to the mounts to keep them from rotating; otherwise, cheap bars.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 13, 2014, 08:52:03 PM
It is more comfortable with the pegs back a bit, Mike.  I could not get them back far enough to be comfortable.  There is the big need to keep my feet tucked up inside the streamlining.  This is hard to do if they are far back.  Sort of like a bird.  Those guys keep their feet tucked into their bellies when they fly.

Peter, that sure is a classic bike.  A beauty.  There is a picture an old racer gave me.  It is a bike like yours running at the land speed trials on Daytona beach a looong time ago.  You are smart to not put a lot of work into the brackets until you figure out what you want to do.  Are your legs blocking the stacks?

A package with "Royal Mail" stamps all over it arrived today.  These three ignition modules are in it.  One is the Stage 3 curve I use now.  One is 2 degrees advanced from that.  It is Stage 4.  Another is 2 degrees advanced from that, and it is Stage 5.

One notices when they vary the ignition timing that there are a few settings several degrees apart that produce similar power.  The "advanced setting" happens when the piston is closer to TDC during the combustion peak pressure.  The wallop is greater but the rod big end is also closer to TDC and it is in a poor position to twist the crank.  The "retarded setting" occurs when the piston is a bit farther down in the bore.  The explosion is less intense and the combustion pressures are less.  The crank pin is in a better position to provide leverage.  The same driving force is produced as with the advanced setting.  The retarded setting is what I use and this allows me to haul-a without blowing the motor apart. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: peterdallan on January 14, 2014, 03:40:20 AM
Hi Tom

The bars you see are the multi adjustable Tomasselli clipons, beautifully made. They can be moved to the position you show on your bike so I will give that a go on Saturday and see how it feels.

Thanks

Peter
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: peterdallan on January 14, 2014, 03:41:54 AM
Bo, not sure about the stacks but will also check that Saturday.
Cheers

Peter
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 21, 2014, 01:35:28 AM
There was a high-level project management team decision made last week.  Not sure about the details.  I wasn't there.  It looks like my job is to finish the shed.  The build will be dormant for awhile.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on January 21, 2014, 09:35:02 AM
It's that inspector in the foreground that shafted you for sure! :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 22, 2014, 10:49:05 PM
The building inspectors do not know about this.  It is a shed and just a few fractions of an inch under the size needing a permit.  Nobody involved with this job wanted to deal with them.  Most are reasonable.  There are one or two with bad attitude and we could not pick our inspector, so we avoided all.  The insides are fancier than allowed.  What happens behind closed doors is a private matter, according to the French, so we applied this reasoning here.

That is Buster the shop cat on mouse and bird watch and patrol.

Finishing this job is moving along quick.  Normally I am fussy about having everything in order when doing finish carpentry.  It takes a lot of time to do that.  I just remind myself the building is a shed and not the Taj Mahal.  Sorta close is good enough so the work gets done faster.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 28, 2014, 01:32:56 AM
This little project is like Cheech and Chong launching a rocket to Mars.  I am in over my head.

The new Bonnevilles originally came with 790cc engines in 2001.  They had 9.1 to 1 compression and nice cams like to the left in the photo.  The engine was enlarged to 865cc in the late 2000's and the compression was maintained at 9.1 to 1.  Eventually they raised the compression in the 865cc engines to 10.1 to 1.  The added displacement was to compensate for the emissions cams.  One of them is that sad and pitiful thing to the right.

The new Triumph runs sort of OK.  It is pretty bland and the gas mileage is not good.  It is in the high thirties like my street/race engines.  The old 790 engine gave me better mileage so I asked myself "What if I put 790 cams in that 865 engine?"  It has more displacement and compression than the 790 motor.  Maybe it will go faster and get better fuel mileage.

The fellows in Dorset that reprogrammed my ignition modules make a map for the 790 cams in the 865 motor.  I ordered it with a USP driver cable.  Now I can get into the ignition box and reprogram it.  Changes had to be made to the bike so it would be like the one used to develop the map.  First, The glass pak mufflers I used at B'ville went on with some baffles to quiet them down.  Second, the noise reducing snorkel was taken out of the air box and it was replaced by this aluminum intake ring.  It is another part left over from earlier LSR efforts.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 28, 2014, 01:59:42 AM
The third thing was to remove the internal baffle from the air box.  That was a big job.  Half the bike needed to be taken apart to get the air box in and out so I could remove it.  Next, the cams were swapped.  This pair of 790 knockers has only 600 miles on them.  They are like new and they were resting peacefully in the spare parts pile.

Now comes the hard part.  Installing the map.  This is not the hammer and screwdriver stuff I usually do.  There is a 1/4 inch tall pile of manuals and user instructions I read about 3 times each before I could get all the stuff I scrambled unscrambled.  Drivers, serial ports, etc. Finally I got everything working and found out I ordered the wrong map.  The Dorset folks sent me the right one and this morning and I loaded it in, fired up the bike, and rocketed off down the street.  Then it started to rain and I had to come back home.  The short test ride says there is less low end power, more mid range, and a lot more horses on top.  Perfect.  Just what I like.

There is more to be done.  I need to syncrhonize the throttle butterflies, adjust the throttle position sensor, and to figure out how to turn off the idiot light on the tach that says the engine management system is not working.  This experience will help the LSR program.  It is a fun way to learn.           

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on January 28, 2014, 11:43:43 AM
So how many current Bonnies could you convert in a day.................??? 

If the word gets out, your new shop could get quite busy.  Maybe a source of funding???
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on January 28, 2014, 12:13:27 PM
I agree, Bo you could do some serious work there.

You know that Trump better than most. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 29, 2014, 02:42:31 AM
Any plan that involves more work is best avoided.  One job is enough.  I need time to build the LSR bike.

Rose brought Werner down to Camp Pendleton and helped him get back to normal.  He had six or seven bones broken in his foot so he is on restricted duty while he finishes healing.   They are taking good care of him, according to Rose, so he is OK.  His deployment will be a WestPac cruise where he sails all around the Pacific visiting Okinawa, Australia, Thailand, Hawaii, etc.  This"tough duty" will give him time to fully recover.

His bike is wrecked.  They took off the head and cylinders and a few other parts and Rose packed them in her luggage.  She took the Starlight back to Oregon.  The porter picked up her suitcase and said "What the h___ do you have in here, bricks?"  Rose said "Just some motorcycle parts."  Now Team Go Dog, Go is in possession of an almost new Triumph top end.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on January 29, 2014, 07:24:36 AM
Holy Cow, Bo, What happened?  I'm glad Werner is OK and will have time to recover while doing R&R, er, duty.  People just don't believe me when I tell them racing is safer than riding on the road.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: JimL on January 29, 2014, 02:36:21 PM
Bo, worst pain you ever feel is when your kids or wife crash.  I've followed those ambulances when the boys took the rides into a hospital from tracks, and carried my first wife into a hospital after she crashed in a TT event.

We've all loved the bikes, and they all still ride, but its not always a free ride.  I hope you all get healed real well,  body and souls.

Best wishes, JimL
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: firemanjim on January 29, 2014, 04:18:26 PM
Are you using TuneECU? Been using that on my Triumphs for several years now. What map? If you need any pointers give me a ring. 707 548-7906. I do have a dyno shop,BTW-------in Norcal.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 30, 2014, 08:46:20 PM
Finding a suitable rider for the rocket backpack powered Triumph is a challenge.  The search is over... 

www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-259510029 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-259510029)

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on January 30, 2014, 08:47:25 PM
BBC News BBC Sport

404 - Page Not Found

 :?  :?  :?

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on February 01, 2014, 12:30:30 AM
This is what happened when I tried to open your link:


404 - Page Not Found

This might be because you typed the web address incorrectly. Please check the address and spelling ensuring that it does not contain capital letters or spaces.

It is possible that the page you were looking for may have been moved, updated or deleted.

Please click the back button to try another link.

Or
Visit the BBC News Home Page.
Visit the BBC Sport Home Page.
Explore our full list of sites and services.


FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 01, 2014, 02:19:30 AM
Trywww.bbc.uk/news/magazine-25951029 (http://www.bbc.uk/news/magazine-25951029)  I had one too many zeros in the first attempt.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 01, 2014, 02:25:29 AM
One more try:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25951029 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25951029)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 02, 2014, 02:42:38 AM
Tom, a drunk crossed over into Werner's lane one night on a road in Camp Pendleton.  We are pretty sure he was distracted by a personal electronic device.  He hit Werner head on at about 60 mph.  Werner saw the guy coming and slowed down.  The impact pulled Werner's feet out of his combat boots and broke a bunch of bones in them.  The guy ran over the Scrambler and he stopped about a half mile down the road.  A lady was driving by and she called the meat wagon.  They took Werner to Scripps hospital and he was there for awhile.  He came back to Oregon for a month and Rose took care of him.  Now he is back with the marines and he is on light duty.  He is pretty much healed up.

He was asleep at our house and there was a copy of Hot Rod magazine on the table near him.  We asked him about this.    Werner said he is interested in cars now.  Steve, the owner of our local speed shop has his roadster in the back room.  We went and looked at it and Werner said he wants to build a roadster.  Right before he left to go back to Camp P., we went to Portland and bought that book  "How to Build a Cheap Hot Rod" and I gave him my copy of Jim L's book on building a custom Model T rod.

Fireman Jim, I am using "Tune ECU."  The people in Dorset give good technical support and they told me what to do to fix the idiot light.  It works now.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 03, 2014, 02:10:29 AM
The bike build is getting intense.  It is time for a day off.  Gretchen and me went to the Triumph Cub breakfast and then we goofed around in Portland.  This is one of our highway department bridges.  They had a hard time finding the money to build it.  The little district at the end of the bridge where we are held dances, bake sales, etc to help pay for it.  They are proud of it.  That pukey green color is standard issue state bridge paint.  It is very salt resistant.  The Triumph would be painted with that stuff if I could get it in a prettier color.

This is an old Signal gas station.  It is a pizza parlor now and they make a good pie.  The pump price dial goes up to 99.9 cents per gallon and no more.  It would not have enough digits for today's prices.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 04, 2014, 12:36:26 AM
The race bike was sitting outside like it usually does.  The forks and wheels were off.  This weekend I put it back together enough to roll and got in the shed and up on the bench.  It sure is better to work on it somewhere that is warm and light.  Every inch of the bike is looked over every year.  Now enough parts are made or bought so I can start putting it together.  A bolt that is torqued down and not to be removed until I get back from Australia is marked with green fingernail polish.  It sure is a good feeling to see more and more green spots on those fasteners. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on February 04, 2014, 08:12:20 AM
Bo,
I wouldn't have taken you to be a person that uses green finger nail polish.  What we don't know about our friends :-D!
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on February 04, 2014, 08:18:01 AM
Good photos Bo.

I always thought red might be your color?. :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 06, 2014, 09:07:17 PM
Youse wiseguys have a problem wit my nail polish?

The picture I took of that bridge a few posts ago was near the front door of a German style brewery in St Johns, Portland.  The family likes their beer so I put a few growlers in the truck or saddlebag when I visit Portland.  The growler bottles weigh a lot so I bought a few of these mini-kegs.  They are lighter.  One thing we sops accidentally discovered is these little kegs have better seals and they keep the carbonization longer.  They also hold the same amount of beer as the growlers.  This is not directly related to land speed.  it is useful info, though.
 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on February 06, 2014, 11:01:04 PM
Is that Stainless?.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on February 06, 2014, 11:50:33 PM
Is that Stainless?.

No, that's me in the Austrailian Belly Tank thread with Dr. G.... and a mere reflection of MM

Oh, nice growler... I'll bet if you drop it, it wont shatter all over the floor and spill that fine craft beer.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 07, 2014, 11:02:47 PM
Yes, it is stainless steel.  They are USD $50.

It does not snow a lot here, only a few times a year.  It is snowing now and this is the perfect time to spend a weekend making hardware.  The first job is to make a 3-inch long threaded stud with 8mm x 1.25 mm threads.  Stainless steel will be used and the alloy I have is difficult to machine.  These are some tricks I use to deal with this steel and titanium.  Both are hard to work.

These metals can be tough to thread. One thing I do is to trim the rod down to "Minimum Screw" diameter before I thread it.  This reduces the amount of metal the die removes and it makes the rod easier to thread.  Also, if I am drilling a hole to be threaded, I will drill it out to "Maximum Nut" diameter.  This makes the hole easier to tap.  Figure 2 from an old machinist handbook shows this.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: JimL on February 07, 2014, 11:14:15 PM
I have 8mm x 1.25 all-thread if'n you need a little.  A long phosporic acid soak makes it pretty corrosion proof and not so brittle. 

Also, there was another book I did, before the one you have, on converting front-wheel drive engine to rear-wheel drive for a small roadster project.  I will make you a disk copy to run on your computer, and bring it to the NW Reunion.  It might give Werner more food for thought.
JimL

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 08, 2014, 11:12:55 AM
Jim, could you post the phosphate trick? 

Werner just got promoted to lance corporal, Rose told me last night.  He would do something like you describe in the book.  He built a lot of the bike he raced at BUB a few years ago so he is not afraid to mangle metal.  That book might be a big help.

These tables are in the machinist handbook.  This is the loose fit table.  Column 4 lists the minimum major diameter for the shaft to be threaded.  Column 9 gives the maximum diameter for the hole to be threaded.  The small shaft and big hole will reduce the amount of metal the die or tap needs to cut.  This makes it possible to cut or tap threads on very tough metals.

A person needs to realize this method also provides minimum thread engagement.  It is not the best solution for critical or heavily loaded fasteners. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: JimL on February 08, 2014, 12:10:26 PM
Pretty simple, really.  Clean the bolt with lacquer thinner, first.  If they are galvanized, I throw them in muriatic acid (outdoors, downwind!) to strip the zinc.  After rinse, it can go straight to the phosphoric bath.

I put phosphoric acid in an old glass cake pan or bowl, and leave soak a day or two.  The metal turns brown or purple when you get it right.  Its about like gun bluing, you are just trying to get the phosphorus to slip between the iron crystals and take up valence bonds where water would like to join the party.

Thats the same thing chromium does in stainless steel, and both results are more brittle than good old iron.  The acid method doesnt go that deep, so the bolt keeps its strength better, and can be unscrewed without using anti-seize.

  I dont use stainless bolts where I expect a lot of bending force or chafing, and especilly where there is a long section of thread needed.  It always gets nasty and wont come apart.  Stainless is especially bad where thermal cycling goes on.  Thats why air-fuel ratio sensors almost always require throwing the stainless steel exhaust manifolds away, when the sensor needs replacement on modern vehicles.

On my ocean sailboats, I used bronze hardware instead of stainless, for all underwater or deck mounting (where salt water would pool during long days on the same tack).  Stainless just rusted and snapped off in salt water.

I'm not much on metallurgy, I just learned some things the hard way, sometimes a long way offshore. :-P
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on February 08, 2014, 12:26:16 PM
JimL;

If you have a choice, use a fastener with rolled threads after heat-treat instead of cut threads-- rolled threads are much stronger and have better fatigue strength.

Also.. could you re-thread the hole to 3/8" or 7/16" and then use a standard SAE stud?

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Vinsky on February 08, 2014, 08:22:06 PM
Any time you can use a roll form tap in aluminum you will have a much stronger thread too.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 09, 2014, 02:42:53 AM
Tanks for the advice.  These posts and replies show that there are many ways to do the same thing.  The roll thread taps and dies are something I will look into.  The acid method, too.

Stainless and titanium can be tough metals to thread with dies.  There are three methods I use.  One is to cut the threads on the lathe to 80 or 90 percent depth and then to finish the thread with a die.  Another method is to use adjustable dies that can be opened up to cut a set of treads and then closed to recut the threads deeper.

Over the years I bought a whole lot of different sized metric dies including the odd sizes.  This is how I use the odd size dies.  This stud is made from a bolt.  The first pass down this stud was made with a 9mm x 1.25 mm die.  It cut the beginning of the thread.  Then, the final pass was made with the 8mm x 1.25 mm die.  This made the threads much easier to cut.  Anti-sieze was used as a lube during the thread cutting.

Cut threads are weaker than rolled threads.  One way to use cut threads successfully is to use more or larger fasteners to compensate for their lower strength.

Stainless steel screws can seize up in aluminum parts and this is especially bad where salt water is present.  These are three methods I use to prevent this.  One is to install a stainless stud into the aluminum part and to use a use a stainless nut to clamp the two parts together.  This way, there is no need to unscrew anything out of the aluminum part.  The stud stays in place.  Another method is to use blue loctite or anti seize on the threads of the stainless bolt or screw.  This keeps the threads from locking due to corrosion.  The third way is to install a threaded stainless steel, brass, or steel insert in the aluminum part.  The stainless screw or bolt is screwed into the insert rather than the aluminum.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 09, 2014, 01:44:14 PM
The rear brake system on the Triumph has a pressure switch to actuate the brake light.  It is not needed for racing and it will be replaced with a banjo bolt.  A non-corrodible replacement would be nice and I have a rod of 304 stainless somewhere around here.  I cannot find it right now.  I did find a 19mm dia rod of 6-4 titanium and that is what I will use for the banjo bolt.  The freshly made banjo bolt is in the picture next to the old switch.

It is important to know the ti alloy you are using.  Some alloys have much less strength than others.  All of my rod stock is 6-4.  This is often called structural ti and it is alloyed with 6% aluminum and 4% vanadium.  The proof stress of this alloy in the annealed (weakest) state is 827 Newton per square millimeter.  Mild steel, by comparison, has a value of 220.  This allow is plenty strong for the banjo bolt and it is corrosion resistant.  There is a lot of info on Ti in John Bradley's "The Racing Motorcycle, Volume 2."

The ti I buy are cutoffs and scraps.  These purchases are best done in-person with cash in hand.  It does not hurt to mention that you are a land speed racer with limited funds.  It is a good idea to bring a sample of ti with you and to have it handy.  Ti and stainless steel look similar and the stainless weighs more.  It is easy to detect this if you have a piece of ti to pick up at the same time you are handling the piece they are selling you.  I have been burned when I bought a hunk of stainless at ti price.

Galvanized or zinc plated steel have similar ranking on the galvanic scale and they are compatible, corrosion wise.  Ti is very noble and aluminum is not.  There are two things I can do to prevent the bolt from locking up in the aluminum caliper.  One is to use a sealant or marine grade anti-seize to keep water out of the threads.  The other is to install a noble metal threaded insert in the caliper. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on February 09, 2014, 04:33:12 PM
It is commonly known as the titanium alloy "6Al-4V". Good stuff.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on February 10, 2014, 01:11:02 AM
I've always wondered about the availability of metric fasteners over there.
We have the opposite problem finding (inches) stuff but not on thread type, more on shank length.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on February 10, 2014, 01:11:32 AM
Bo, did you go to the motorcycle show this weekend? 

http://www.oregonlive.com/multimedia/index.ssf/2014/02/the_one_motorcycle_show_one-of.html#incart_river_default (http://www.oregonlive.com/multimedia/index.ssf/2014/02/the_one_motorcycle_show_one-of.html#incart_river_default)

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 10, 2014, 11:16:01 PM
Mike, stainless fasteners are readily available here cause of the climate.  Almost everything I use is stainless.  Lots of US coarse, US fine, and metric coarse stuff is available in stainless.  Metric fine is hard to find in stainless for some odd reason.  Something like a metric banjo bolt in stainless would be very hard to find.

4-barrel Mike, that was the one motorcycle show I did not want to miss.  It was snowing heavy here and we stayed home all weekend.

These comments apply to 6AL-4V Ti.  The metal does a poor job of conducting heat away from the tool bit during cutting.  This limits cutting speed.  Aqueous cutting fluids do a good job of removing the heat so a steady stream is needed to enable fast cutting.  My tooling is cooled by an old guy dribbling oil out of a can so the heat removal is not optimum.  This limits cutting speed.  The bolt was made with the lathe running at 179 rpm.  That is pretty slow but anything faster overheated the tool bit.

The material is tough.  Deep cuts make the drive belt slip on the lathe or they bog down the motor.  The cut depth for the bolt was 0.010  The back gears were set to advance the bit 0.0046 inches per spindle revolution.  These were about the deepest cuts I could go.  Plan on spending some time when machining 6-4.  The chips tell the story.  Blue chips mean things are too hot and yellow chips also say it is time to slow down.  I use the deepest cut that will not bog down the lathe and produce silver chips.

The banjo bolt has a hole drilled down the center, one drilled in from the side, and a waist cut into the shank where the side hole is.  It is essential to do all of this after the part is threaded.  The force required to thread the part would bend the end if it was threaded after the it was drilled and waisted.  The bolt shown is ready to be threaded.

This is a 10mm x 1.25 mm screw thread.  10mm is 0.394 inches.  It is tempting to turn the shank down to 0.394 before it is threaded.  Don't.  Cut some threads with the die on a scrap part and measure them.  I did and the cut thread OD is 0.385 inches.  The shank was cut to 0.385 inches before it was threaded.  This is a very important step.  It is almost impossible to run a die over an oversize ti shank.

The upper thread on the banjo bolt does not look right.  It is full of anti-seize.  That is what I use for a threading lubricant.   

Note the spiffy finish.  This was "as cut."  This is one good thing about ti.  There should be no surface tearing or chatter marks when everything is set up OK.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 15, 2014, 01:19:30 PM
The lathe does not cut metric threads.  The Armstrong die cutting method is used.  The die and shaft are lubed with anti-seize and the cutting commences.  It takes a lot of brute force to cut the threads.  This metal is very tough.  Do not do it like shown in he first picture.  The force is so great that it bends the end of the shaft.  Use a two handled die wrench or the method in the second pix.  The lathe center, t-handle, and socket keep the die supported and in line  The chuck wrench is used as a key to turn the chuck by hand to make the threads.  This method does not bend the shaft.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 15, 2014, 01:27:50 PM
Now the part is drilled and the waist is cut in the shaft for the brake fluid passage.  This weakens the shaft so it is done after the threads are cut.  Drilling works OK with conventional drills.  The speed needs to be kept slow so the bits do not burn up.  Oil is used as a lubricant and coolant.

A couple of nuts are pulled out of the used fasteners can.  They have the same head size as the part being made.  They are drilled out.  The hole size is the major diameter of the threads on the banjo bolt.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 15, 2014, 01:33:05 PM
The next step is to file the flats on the bolt head.  The drilled nuts are slipped onto the shaft and they are held in place by a nut with threads that is screwed onto the end of the banjo bolt.  These drilled nuts are a guide to help me file the correct flats.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 15, 2014, 01:41:34 PM
The nuts are removed and the bolt is cut from the shaft using a saw.  The bolt is clamped in the chuck with the head end facing out.  The top of the head is faced off.  The turned, cut, and filed finish is shown.  There was no polishing.    There are now two titanium alloy banjo bolts ready for service.  Some folks told me it is impossible to work with ti using my crummy old equipment.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on February 15, 2014, 02:45:05 PM
  Some folks told me it is impossible to work with ti using my crummy old equipment.   
But they forgot to tell BSA (nor Triumph & Norton) that they couldn't make motorcycles with the crummy old equipment they had, either! Nice work!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on February 15, 2014, 03:57:34 PM
Bo, that's awesome.

Those Banjo bolts are great.

I guess it's not the old equipment but the guy swinging the handles. :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on February 15, 2014, 04:08:17 PM
The fact is that on most of the lathes that we use in our home shops we're better off using the original style tool bits that need to be formed and sharpened rather than insert tooling. They're run at lesser feeds and speeds than the insert tooling normally uses but they leave a better finish. I think it's because they cause lighter loads for the machine. My own feeling is that the home sharpened tools are actually sharper than the commercial insert tooling because we aren't sharpening them with the thought of applying heavy loads.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on February 15, 2014, 04:15:00 PM
Bo, you may want to look into a die holder that fits into your tail stock. Most are held by a drill chuck held in the tail stock. I built my own and milled three flats on the shank so it wouldn't rotate in the chuck.

If you check in the KBC Tools catalogue you'll see the item I mean. If you don't have a KBC catalogue go into their web site and order one. It's free, about the size of a telephone book, and you'll find all sorts of stuff you never knew you needed.  :-D :-D :-D

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 16, 2014, 02:30:30 PM
I found this problem, too, Peter.  That tail stock bit holder looks like a good birthday present for me to buy for myself.  There is some modern carbide insert tooling in my cabinet.  Special sharp bits can be ordered for it.  They are a specialty item and they are very expensive.  Too costly for me.

In Oregon we are in a backwater as far as machine tooling is concerned.  There is nowhere I know where I can walk in, toss some money on the counter, and get much of any tooling.  Everything has to be ordered.  Our local catalog outlets have no stock in their warehouses.  They order everything.  I place an order and wait for the package to be shipped twice before I get the part.  The modern carbide insert systems require that a lot of stuff be bought in order to make changes in setup.  It is easy for me to experiment around with grinding my own bits and tilting the tool holder at different angles to figure out the best setup.  No need to order anything.  Like Peter says, the old stuff works better.  This is really true when cost is a concern.

Anyone with an aversion to Mickey Mouse should go to onto another thread right now.

The bolts were parted from the rod stock with a sawzall.  That is sorta primitive.  The picture shows the little parting bit that fits my tool holder at the top of the column of raked bits.  It was like a Dachsund trying to bring down a bull when it was used to part the ti.  Something stronger was needed.  I drove up to Portland to the big machinist supply and they had two or three parting blades.  One of them is shown in the tool holder.  It is a cobalt steel blade with no back rake.  There is a good section in Wickedpedia about back rake and tool bits if anyone is interested.  No rake seems to be the best setup for this ti alloy.  The top of the tool bit set at dead level with its elevation the same as the part's axis of rotation.

The picture shows a column of bits with back rake and another column of them with no rake.  The no rake ones are what I use on ti.
           
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 16, 2014, 02:34:01 PM
The bit is squared up using a little square.  The adjustment is made by tightening and loosening the bolts as shown.  The cutoff tool is upside down in relation to the blade.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 16, 2014, 02:40:22 PM
The blurry photo shows me holding a gage block against the part and the blade to make sure the blade is perpendicular to the part.  The second photo shows the parting being done.  The c-clamp on the end of the parting tool give some weight to dampen out the singing sound it makes when it chatters.  The blade is fed in manually.  The feed rate is varied until one is found that cuts well with no chatter. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 16, 2014, 02:50:35 PM
The surface of this ti alloy tends to work harden from the cutting stresses.  This is a big problem when parting cause each cut is directly under the previous.  A solution is to drill a hole down the parting line.  This way the blade has an opportunity to dig down to soft metal each revolution.  This makes the parting much easier.

The bits I have been using vary from HSS steel through carbide.  All work OK.  The secret with the steel bits is to keep the speeds low so the bit is not burned.  None of my work is dry.  Oil is used as a cutting fluid.  It is the leftovers from everything else, so it is motor oil, atf, fork oil, etc.
   
Hopefully some of you will read this and give ti a try. 

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 17, 2014, 12:30:19 PM
The banjo bolts were what I needed to finish the brakes and shifter.  Corrosion is a big problem on the rear brake caliper with street use.  It is a worse issue when salt racing.  It is on the lower edge of the disc and water on it drains down into the caliper.  Also, the caliper is upside down so it collects water.  The folks in Dorset that reprogrammed the ignition modules and developed the map for the street bike EFI make this bracket to mount the caliper on top of the disk.

The photo of the caliper in place shows a dull finish.  This is residue from a wax based chain lube that is applied to all steel and painted parts except the disc surface.  The wax minimizes corrosion and it is easier to remove the caked salt.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 17, 2014, 12:37:29 PM
This build started years ago and I am stiffer and fatter now.  It is hard to tuck down with the pegs forward.  A rigorous lifestyle change is needed to promote weight loss and flexibility with exercise, proper eating, and stretching.  Or, I can forget about doing that, move the pegs back, and that is what I did.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on February 17, 2014, 01:17:23 PM
Bo, I just learned a lot. The info on the carbide inserts vs the traditional is excellent.

Actually all the work you did on the ti taught me a whole bunch of things I won't forget.

Thanks man. That was great. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 22, 2014, 12:41:45 PM
Hi Mike.  The old style carbide inserts fused to the end of the tool bit work good.  The tooling for the little detachable inserts is quite expensive.  One thing I learned is the old style cutting tools, including high speed and cobalt steel, will work with ti if cutting speeds are kept low.

The oil seal around this aluminum rear wheel spacer wears out quite fast.  The spacer is a loose fit in the worn seal and water can get inside of the wheel assembly.  This is bad for the wheel bearings and the corrosion it causes makes it hard to remove the axle.  The solution has been to pack all crevices with blue waterproof boat trailer wheel bearing grease.  This works and it is a messy and mickey mouse solution.  It is time to make a legitimate repair.

The worst thing a builder can do is to hop to conclusions about oil seals.  The obvious are checked first.  The seal is the correct size, type, and material.  It is installed properly and the seal material is compatible with the outside environment and the goop it needs to contain.  No problems here.

Next, seal info is obtained.  This is a page off of the i-net.  Shaft tolerance is checked first.  The writing on the seal says it is made for a 35mm diameter shaft.  The shaft diameter is the outside diameter of the spacer and it is less than 4 inches.  The shaft tolerances are 35mm plus or minus 0.003 inches.  This is 1.375 to 1.381 inches.  The spacer O.D. is 1.372 inches diameter.  It is 0.003 inches too small.  A problem is found.

The seal rests in its own circular bore.  The bearing fits in another bore.  The centerlines of these two holes should be close together.  The Shaft Offset table on the technical information page says the offset between the two centerlines should not be more than 0.008 inches for a 1.38 inch diameter shaft.  This measurement is made by removing the seal, installing the axle, and measuring the distances between the sides of the axle and the seal housing at different locations.  The measurements show the seal housing and axle centerlines to be really close, and within 0.0001 inches.  No problem here.

Now all of the items under the "Configuration of the Bore" heading on the technical paper are checked.  This is pretty straight forward.  All are OK.

Shaft runout is checked last.  Silicon rubber seals are the blue line on the graph.  The other seal types are on the red line.  This seal is NBR as best as I can tell by looking at it.  The wheel turns just over 2,000 rpm at 150 mph.  The chart says the maximum shaft runout is 0.007 inches for this speed and material.

The clearance between the axle and the inside diameter of the spacer is 0.017 inches.  This means the spacer can be installed in a way that makes the shaft runout as great as 0.017 inches.  This is far too much.  The excessively offset spacer was wearing out the oil seal.

The solution is to make a new spacer.  It is turned to 1.378 inches OD and this is right in the middle of the recommended tolerance range.  The inner diameter of the spacer is turned to give 0.005 clearance between it and the axle.  Problem solved.  It is always good practice to check all of this stuff before putting anything together.  It saves a lot of trouble later on.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: firemanjim on February 22, 2014, 04:06:43 PM
Make sure that the extension rod you used on the shifter linkage does not deflect or bend under a hard shift, had to go back and reinforce the one on our 750 when we moved pegs back. Shaft was OK at stock length but too weak at the extended length.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: JimL on February 23, 2014, 06:45:50 PM
Bo, page 14 shows response of your Bosch sensor.  Yours is actually used on an 81mm bore Volvo, but detection range is acceptable if you follow the mounting torque and wire routing info.  I think your primary KNK will be about 6.5-6.8 kHz for your 96 mm bore; that is what the scope patterns show for the 93.5 bore in a Prado.

http://360.haubits.net/VolvoRacing.se/Sensors.pdf

Never bolt these onto a painted surface, or your voltage output will be greatly diminished.  We blew up some perfectly good engines because the blocks looked so nice with an extra coat of shiny paint!

Thanks for your time, today.

JimL
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 23, 2014, 10:50:08 PM
Thanks, Jim.  This is a big help.  Next Saturday I will post what all of this means.

The last post discussed the wheel spacer on one side of the rear axle.  It is an excessively sloppy fit and it is aluminum.  The spacer on the other side is correctly sized.  It is steel, it corrodes badly, and I need to clean and paint it every year.  Both of these bad actors need to exit the stage.  Last summer a scrap of titanium alloy rod was purchased to make new wheel spacers.

The forces and loads on these spacers are not great enough to permanently deform them.  They spring back after they are loaded.  This is called elastic deformation.  We are accustomed to dealing with rates for suspension springs.  The equivalent of these rates for metals are the Young's moduli.  They are listed under "E" in the table.  Note that steels are three times more rigid than aluminum and steels are twice as rigid as titanium alloy, approximately.

Most all Triumph axle spacers are steel.  This aluminum one is an anomaly.  My figuring is it is made from this springier metal to absorb and reduce tensile shock loads on the axle when the wheel hits a bump.  The replacement spacers should not be stiffer than the originals is a design goal.

The spacers carry compression loads during use and I do not want them to flex more than they did before.  The bike handles goofy enough the way it is now, so the other design goal is to make the replacement spacers as strong as they are now.

The spacers are shown on the axle.  Note the ti spacer on the right is beefier than the steel one it replaces.  The next three posts will go through the way these dimensions were figgered.

 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 23, 2014, 11:02:44 PM
The equation used is a simplistic one to determine the compression of an axially loaded column where there is no buckling or permanent metal deformation.  It is not exact.  It is good enough.  This is a Triumph and not the space shuttle.  A one ton load is used.  The load is picked because it is easy to remember.  It does not need to be the actual load.  This is simply a comparison of deflection between metal types so a convenient value can be used.

The original aluminum spacer is analyzed first.  It compresses 0.000088 inches under a 1 ton load.  The original steel spacer has a complex shape.  Deflection of three parts will be calculated and all will be added to get the total deflection.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 23, 2014, 11:10:11 PM
Firemanjim, the rod seems plenty stout, I just checked it.  It is 1/4 inch dia stainless.  Thanks for mentioning this.

Compression of the three parts of the steel spacer are analyzed next.  All three parts, along with the aluminum spacer, compress 0.000177 inches under a one ton load.

The right spacer, which has been made, compresses 0.000055 inches under a ton load.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 24, 2014, 12:00:49 AM
The NW Reunion was last night.  Freud And Ray Therat did a good job.  Lots of folks from Landracing.com where there including a few that came all the way from Kansas.  It is nice to see everyone.  This is the only time in the year when the BUB, SCTA, and USFRA folks are in the same place.

The middle section of the new spacer will have the same dimensions as the old one.  The outer diameter of the upper and lower sections of the new left spacer will be increased or decreased, as compared to the old, to get equivalent stiffness.  The OD is increased from 1.027 and 0.945 inches on the old one to 1.193 and 0.193 inches on the new ones.  Now the new spacers will have the same stiffness as the old.

One finds, when looking at stiffness, that greater amounts of the lighter metals are often needed to provide the same rigidity as steel.  A steel part in some instances takes up less room and is lighter.  This combined with steel's excellent fatigue resistance, make it the true "wonder metal."   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 02, 2014, 11:29:06 AM
The issues I am dealing with are the same as folks have that travel to the US for Bonneville.  There is the need to build the bike and handle the trip logistics.  All of that combined with a full time job, chores, a retired wife, and kids at home are using up all of my time.  It is important to spend some hours with the family during the evenings so I go to bed at a normal time and get up really early, long before the rooster crows, to work on the bike.  No time to post or keep up on the forum.  A guy needs to sleep sometime.

There is a AUS record in the modified class I was aiming for as well as the DLRA 150 Club.  The 150 runs will need the  streamlining and the modified class does not allow it.  The videos of Lake G show flies everywhere and great heat.  It is a big job to unstreamline that bike and the thought of doing it in those conditions does not appeal.  Plus, the majority of the bike is pretty much salt free with the streamlining and it will be covered with salt in the modified state.  I am not sure if I will have the facilities and time to desalt it.  Plans to go for that record are dropped and the goal is to go over 150 mph and not crash.

Some shrouds are made for the back wheel.  Three posts are made to tie them together as shown in the first photo.  They are on and taped up.  The ti wheel spacers are on that axle.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 02, 2014, 11:30:09 AM
The other side.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on March 02, 2014, 12:07:59 PM
Wobble.....thanks for bringing Rose and Gretchen to the banquet.

The ladies generally account for about 30% of the attendance.

This year it was 27%.

I am happy that Ray was there and our group had an opportunity

to rub elbows with him. I am trying to find the images that he shot

since I never did any at all. I'd love to have that part of our history.

FREUD



Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on March 02, 2014, 01:07:29 PM
Bo, those wheel covers look very nice, did you form them?

I need to make a set too.

It was great to see you and your family at the NWR.

Thanks, Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: charlie101 on March 02, 2014, 04:08:06 PM
Those flies was absolute driving me bonkers when I was in the desert, the tiny buggers are incredibly quick in the heat and gets absolute everywhere especially irritating in the face. Also annoying when they crawl on your sweaty arms and everywhere on exposed skin. I bought a net shirt and found great relief. The net shirt covered the upper body including the whole head. The shirt wasn't restricting any movement and saved me all of that constant ozzy fending and waving off. If you look ridicuolus in it? That feeling lasts about 3 minutes in a fly infested area. No, make that 30 seconds.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 02, 2014, 11:44:36 PM
Freud, the ladies enjoyed the evening.  Don, they are just flat sheet aluminum cut to fit.  Nothing fancy.  Charlie, I will bring my army surplus Vietnam era mosquito hat and buy one of those shirts you are talking about.  Are they harmless brine flies or do they bite like deer flies?

I was going to post something, read about Ray, and then completely forgot about what I was going to say.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: charlie101 on March 03, 2014, 02:44:42 AM
Before I bought it in the area I was, they where not biting just utterly annoying and I don't remember if they where biting in the areas I went to afterwards. I went to Indonesia later and had use of it for the mosquitos. I will miss Ray's photos. Target 550 is a role model in the photoreportage field thanks to Ray. I'm so grateful for the opportunity to follow the build, thanks to Marlo.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 09, 2014, 11:44:22 PM
Gretchen, my youngest daughter is going with me to Australia.  Almost always she sees the stuff I get from AUS so she knows what is expected.  That picture of Animal mc'ing the awards meeting in his underwear is something I did not show her.

The front axle spacer on the right side is always getting rusty and I repaint it.  The other side has the speedo drive and it is disconnected.  Last summer I bought a thick ti rod with the expectation of replacing both parts.  They were turned up this week.  Both sets of calculate out to having the same deflection under a 2000# axial load.  The ti parts are much larger.  It is a springier metal with a Young's modulus of 15,500,000 psi as compared to steel's 29,000,00 psi.  It takes more ti to get the stiffness of the steel parts.  This negates any weight savings from using the lighter metal.

One good thing about the material is the smooth "as machined" finish.  The oil seals rotate relatively freely around these spacers with little drag.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on March 13, 2014, 03:37:23 AM
The flies aren't as bad on the lake, only off the lake
And I don't think we celebrate the 150 club anymore
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 13, 2014, 11:25:32 PM
No 150 club...

Corrosion is a problem on the rear brakes on these bikes on the street.  The salt does not help.  The first picture shows the caliper apart.  The two pins the pucks ride on are circled and they had to be drilled out of the caliper in pieces.  The little black pin that is alone in the circle is something I will remake in corrosion resistant ti.  Other parts that are circled will be replaced with stainless parts.

A package came from the Royal Mail today with the stainless parts.  These are good quality and very reasonably priced.  The company is in Lancashire.  They are the only place I know that sells the parts.

Stainless pieces are perfectly capable of corroding solidly into the aluminum caliper.  Periodically the caliper needs to be taken apart, cleaned, and assembled with marine grade anti-seize.  The stainless helps a lot by reducing the number of parts that need to be replated or painted when things are apart.   

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 16, 2014, 11:39:05 PM
The DLRA rules say the axle pinch bolts must be safety wired.  This is a problem for me.  One bolt has a recessed allen head.  A new bolt is needed with a projecting hex head that can be wired.  It is made from structural ti and this tough material is hard to machine.  This is how I did it.

The picture shows the bolt with the threaded end inside the chuck.  A new die was bought so it was nice and sharp.  A few threads were cut on an old bolt and I measured the outside diameter of the threads the die cuts.  Then, 0.10 mm was subtracted from that diameter.  The bolt shank was turned to this major diameter.  The threads are cut down in stages.  The lathe could be used to do this, except it is not set up for metric threads.  An adjustable tap could be used.  Instead, the first pass was made with a 9 mm x 1.25 mm die and the second pass with a 8 mm x 1.25 mm die.  All of these steps are essential when threading structural ti based on my experience.

The head will be filed to shape.  A little stub is machined to the end of the bolt to hold a 6 mm x 1.0 mm nut.  This will be my guide during the filing.  It is not important that it have full depth threads. 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 16, 2014, 11:45:25 PM
The major and minor diameters of a 6 mm x 1.0 mm thread are averaged to get the diameter I used for the little stub.  It is cut to this size before it is threaded.  The next picture shows the bolt after the hex is filed, the 6 mm x 1.0 mm nut is removed, the stub is cut off, and center punch marks are made for the safety wire holes. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 16, 2014, 11:51:57 PM
Ti is very tough and it is easy to break the drill when the bit exits the far side of the part.  These six safety wire holes are blind bores that almost go into the middle of the part.  These is no danger of breaking the drill 'cause it never leaves the metal or intersects another hole.  A hole is drilled down the middle of the head.  It intersects all of the other six holes.  Now there are lotsa holes for the safety wire.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 16, 2014, 11:55:29 PM
This is the finished bolt.  Some of these little tricks were in earlier posts that are spread out over the years.  Here they are all at the same time.  All of this I find to be essential to make ti bolts.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Speed Limit 1000 on March 17, 2014, 02:10:23 AM
Very nice work :cheers: Looking forward to see it run.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on March 17, 2014, 12:59:18 PM
Wobbly;

Nice work on that bolt. Did you form a radius under the bolt head?

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 20, 2014, 01:51:19 AM
Neil, it has one now.

Titanium is expensive.  It is tough and it takes a long time to machine it using conventional tools or it can be quickly made using costly specialized tooling.  Ti parts cost a lot and for good reason.

One side project I am working on is fine tuning the street Triumph EFI system.  This is being an excellent way to learn about fuel injection.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on March 20, 2014, 12:30:24 PM
Wobbly;

I agree with everything you said about titanium. I try to find reasonably priced surplus aerospace Ti bolts and use them when I can.

I still have to learn about EFI-- my current build uses mechanical injection but I foresee the time when it is time to convert it to EFI.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 21, 2014, 12:17:50 AM
Neil, the "TuneECU" website on the i-net has a downloadable program that works with a lot of different bike fuel injection systems.  The Triumph has a Keihin system and Tune ECU allows me to go in and monkey around with things.  It is a real advantage to start with a working system, make changes one at a time, and then to drive around and see the cause-effect relationships.  This is the way we learned how to work with carbs when we were younger.  Right now I am changing stuff to see what happens and restoring it to its original settings when I am done.

There are some Triumph maps on TuneECU, too.  Comparing the maps is really helpful.  The existing hardware is used for all of this and existing maps are modified.  The only expense is the interface cable so my laptop can talk to the bike.

I am not sure if there is an equivalent of this in the world of cars.  It would be fun if there was.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RidgeRunner on March 21, 2014, 07:46:44 AM
Wobbly;


I still have to learn about EFI-- my current build uses mechanical injection but I foresee the time when it is time to convert it to EFI.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ

     The best single source for info I have found so far is "How To Tune and Modify Automotive Engine Management Systems All-New Edition", 2013, by Jeff Hartman ISBN-13: 978-0-7603-4345-6 published by MBI.  It covers both OEM and aftermarket systems in an easy for me to understand manner - electricity and electronics were never my strong points.  The original 2004 edition was good but this one covers all that plus the significant advances made since then with both OBD II and aftermarket systems, has many more pages.

                  Ed
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on March 21, 2014, 11:40:50 AM
Thanks, Wobbly. I have an ECU controller-- an Accel DFI but I have not used it yet. Lots to learn about the subject.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 21, 2014, 11:08:52 PM
I will look for that engine management book when I am in Portland.  Thanks for the tip.

The mechanical injection might be a good thing if it works.  The EFI issue is one I looked hard at for racing.  The demands for land speed are pretty simple.  It is mainly wide open throttle.  The carbs give the engine all of the mixture it can digest with good atomization.  This engine is not sensitive to mixture.  Anything close to optimum gives good power.  The carbs will stay on for now.  It will take a big power gain to justify getting rid of a simple system that is paid for and putting on a complex one I need to buy. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on March 23, 2014, 04:59:02 PM
This is the finished bolt.  Some of these little tricks were in earlier posts that are spread out over the years.  Here they are all at the same time.  All of this I find to be essential to make ti bolts.

You could've just used a longer allen screw and drilled a hole in the threaded end where it came out the other side
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 24, 2014, 01:36:29 AM
That is a smart solution I never thought of.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 26, 2014, 11:22:44 PM
The EFI stuff is a side show I am doing to help my son and myself to get our Triumphs running better.  A copy of that book mentioned a few post earlier was available at Powell's books in Portland so I brought it home today.

One thing I am learning is the abruptness of power delivery upon throttle opening and closing is mostly due to the rotating plate throttle.  Carbs with round venturis increase have relatively low increases in flow area when the slide is pulled up from closed.  That goes a long way to giving us the "off idle" throttle control we appreciate.  The rotating plate throttles increase flow area much more quickly when they are opened.  This gives the harsher power delivery.  This is something I could not tune out of the EFI system.

Triumph has all sorts of maps available for different states of tune.  One thing I learned was to look in the upper right corner of the "F" fueling tables to get an idea of how much fuel was being delivered at higher rpm and throttle openings.  Lots of experience with various tunes on the carb bike is a big help.  The fueling table we are using now is the one for triumph off-road mufflers.  It is called a TOR map and part of it is shown in the attachment.  It is a little bit lean for our bikes.  It is designed for free flowing mufflers on a standard engine.  We have free flowing mufflers and we have also taken the noise baffles out of the intake tract.

There is another Triumph map for an Arrow 2 into 1 header and 10% gasahol.  It gives a bit more fuel than the TOR map as shown on the attached.  This afternoon I loaded it onto my bike.  It seems to run better although it started to rain and I could not test it at high speeds.

The Triumph engine management units take wide band lamda sensor data and they trim the fueling tables to fit the bike and fuel.  This fine tunes the mapping and it works if the map is pretty close to begin with.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 29, 2014, 10:13:26 PM
One axle spacer I made for the front wheel replacs the speedometer drive.  The original speedo drive had a 73mm x 55mm x 6mm oil seal.  The spacer I made has a smaller diameter.  A 73mm x 45mm x 10mm seal would ft it and I ordered a couple.  The seals arrived.  They are made in China and junk.  The dimensions stamped on the seals are not what they are.  The idiots made them the wrong size.  I am sending them back for a refund.

All of this makes me mad and I do not want to buy anything except from folks that I know will do a decent job.  Triumph seals are good.  They have quality control staff to make sure they get the right stuff.  A Triumph 75 x 55 x 6 seal was ordered.  Now I need to make a collar to enlarge the wheel spacer from 45mm to 55mm diameter.

A collar is turned from piece of scrap aluminum bar left over from another job.  It will be heated in Rose's kitchen oven to 500 degrees F.  I do not use a torch for this.  It is important to keep the temperature low enough to expand the metal without removing its temper.  This is 6064 Aluminum with a nice T4 or T6 temper and I do not want to anneal it.  The expansion coefficient for this alloy is 12.8 EE -6 inches per degree F.  A 45mm diameter hole expands 0.0056 inches when heated from 65 to 500 degrees F.

The spacer is titanium alloy with a 4.9 EE -6 expansion coefficient.  It will be put in the icebox to cool it down from 65 to 30 degrees F.  It will contract 0.0003 inches.

These added up are 0.0059 inches or 0.006 inches for all practical purposes.  The spacer is 1.772 inches in diameter at 65 degrees F.  Subtracting 0.006 inches from this is 1.766 inches.  The hole in the collar is turned to this size.  There will be about a 0.001 interference fit when the cold spacer is rammed into the hot collar.  The parts will cool and warm to the same temp.  The collar will contract down onto spacer.  This will hold it in place.

The first picture shows the collar being turned.  It will be left attached to the rest of the bar.  This larger part will retain heat better, and stay expanded longer, during the ramming process.  The second picture shows the spacer in the icebox.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 29, 2014, 10:22:34 PM
The collar is put on top of a chunk of billet and both are washed clean of oil and put in the oven.  They are heated up to 500 degrees F.  The billet acts as a heat reservoir to keep the collar hot during the ramming.  The hot collar and billet are taken out of the oven.  The frozen spacer is put on top of it and it is rammed down.  The first picture shows the collar before heating.  The second shows the ramming.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on March 29, 2014, 11:08:07 PM
Wobbly,
It’s a bit late to note now, but the SKF (Ex-Chicago Rawhide) catalog lists 45x75x8 and 45x75x10 radial shaft seals.  Also, 55x75x8 and 55x75x10.  Probably available from a bearing supply house.  Also, your 73mm OD seems to be completely non-standard--could it have been 72? 
If you want to know more about seals than you ever thought possible, take a look at their pdf download.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on March 29, 2014, 11:59:54 PM
Average Joes just buy the Chinese junk because they either don't care or don't know.
 I hate the stuff.

I use the same process for fitting collars. I have a bunch in the deep freeze in zip lock bags just waiting. :-D

Bo, you do great work. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 30, 2014, 11:25:50 PM
Observer, it is a goofy size.  This is an English bike and 73mm is almost directly equivalent to 2-7/8 inches. 

Mike, thanks for the compliment.  A fellow from Britain told me this is "colonial" engineering.   

The pressing did not go as planned.  I had the spacer a little bit cockeyed and it jammed in the collar.  The spacer heated up and expanded and the collar cooled and contracted by the time I got everything lined up.  The spacer was frozen tight in the collar.  It was time for Plan B.

The whole works, spacer, collar, and billet chunk were heated in the oven to 500 degrees again.  Aluminum expands 2.6 times more than Ti for every degree, so this heating reduced the amount of interference in the fit.   The parts were pressed together in the big vise, as seen in the pix.  It took several iterations to get the collar all of the way onto the shaft.  The collar and shaft assembly are cut out of the billet with a hole saw as shown in the second picture.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 30, 2014, 11:31:39 PM
The little hole in the billet alongside the big one is a path for chip exit.  It makes the hole saw cutting much easier.  There is less tendency for the chips to jam the saw in the hole.

The final step is to cut the outside diameter for the seal.  This must be done after fitting rather than before.  The fitting stretches and expands the collar.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 30, 2014, 11:40:13 PM
All done.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 31, 2014, 11:52:45 PM
Saving for the trip to AUS means no significant money for addressing the Team Go Dog, Go! major problem.  This is lack of speed.  So, the next best thing is to look hip, cool, and stylish while going slow.  This ring held on with allen bolts covers up the ugly part of the front wheel hub that is exposed when the disc is removed.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: firemanjim on April 01, 2014, 12:18:28 AM
Wobbly, unless Triumph has changed something they are not using wideband sensors. My 1050 Tiger has an O2 sensor but it is only narrowband and tunes a very small area for EPA stuff.
Unless of course, you installed a wideband and are using it to adjust tune.
I assume you are using Tune ECU? Been playing with this for a number of years on a bunch of Triumphs. And needed to tune them on a dyno to get them spot on.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on April 01, 2014, 01:24:17 PM
Bo,
I believe front wheel only needs to have 25% open area.  Why not make discs that fit closely to spokes, fastened on one side to those screw holes with spacers between the discs to attach the off side?  I think you could go as large as 12" diameter and still be legal.  "Bacon Slicers"
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 01, 2014, 11:25:53 PM
Jim, I used Tune ECU.  I tried all sorts of different changes to the basic Triumph maps and came to the conclusion that Triumph knows what they are doing.  Then, I read the injector opening durations vs rpm and throttle opening on a bunch of their maps.  One seemed to match the mild increases in state of tune that I have.  I tried it and it works good.  My feeling is it is the map is close enough to the actual fuel needs that the narrowband sensor can adapt it.  No money at this time for dyno work.  That might change after I get back from AUS.  There are a bunch of fuel maps and ignition maps to make a single map package.  It sure is complicated for my little brain.  If I coulda known that EFI is the future I woulda smoked a lot fewer green cigarettes.

Tom, the next race is going to be on the other side of the world.  Pretty scary and I am not going to do too many different things.  Plans are to see how this thing handles in side winds with the back wheel blanked off.  The front might get that treatment if everything is OK.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: firemanjim on April 02, 2014, 12:17:17 AM
Recommend you invest in a wideband monitor as the narrow band one on your bike has very narrow range of adjustment up and down and only works in small are down low to keep bike within needed range in the EPA test area.
Pay me now or pay me later---
And I am hoping to head downunder again next year.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on April 02, 2014, 09:53:07 AM
Bo,
Does your system have data logging capability?  As I understand the ECUs used by the OEM manufacturers, they only involve the O2 sensor in cruising mode to obtain best fuel mileage in conformation with EPA guidelines.  At anything over 85% throttle position, the system goes open and takes the O2 sensor out of the equation.  At that point, the maps take over and set the pulse widths, ... period.  There is no control unless there are some max exhaust gas temperatures that shut it down (but I doubt it). Therefore, because Triumph very likely didn't test their bikes/motors at WFO throttle for 3 miles at 100 degrees F, nobody knows what the actual results will be.  I added some Innovate gauges with the Pocket Data Logger so that I can at least get actual temperatures and AFRs throughout the run.  With luck, I'll be able to make changes after the first run if things look dangerously hot or lean. I haven't even started the motor yet, so I can't tell you more than that. About $600 plus a lot of wiring, but motor failures are way more expensive than that.

With your experience, you might be able to read the spark plugs to make decisions. But then, can you change the maps to increase pulse widths or change the ignition timing at selected RPM?

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 03, 2014, 11:28:36 PM
Jim, we are going to AUS to race in 2015, too.

Tom, right now my middle son and me are monkeying around with our street Triumphs.  The race bike has flat slides and they will stay on until I go to forced induction.  The objective is to gain some knowledge.  Right now the need to get the bike running and the AUS trip is most important.  The EFI project will wait until I get back.

We are trying to figure out where to ship the bike to and set up base camp.  Adelaide looks nice.  There are a lot of things to do there, it is on the ocean, and the cost of living is moderate.  It is the closest big city to Gairdner. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 04, 2014, 12:23:36 AM
External threads were cut in tough material in the last posts.  Now it is time for internal threads.  There are three things I remember when starting out.  First, avoid internal threading if possible, fine threads will be easier to cut than coarse, and cut the threads first.  This way, if the tap breaks, there is less work invested in the part.

This is a little brake part, it is carbon steel, and it is badly pitted after seven trips to B'ville.  The metal used for the new one is structural ti.  It is plenty strong, weighs less, and is corrosion resistant.

This ti is plenty tough to tap.  I ask myself "how many threads do I need for this 8 mm dia by 1.25 mm pitch hole?"  Some nuts in the nut can with the same thread size tell me that 8 mm of internal threads works OK on a nut.  Cutting a limited number of threads puts less strain on the tap.  I will cut an 8mm threaded length.

The stock is chucked up and drilled with a 1/4-inch diameter hole 3/4 inches deep.  This drilled hole is too small in diameter to thread with a tap.  An aluminum disk is also drilled with the 1/4 inch drill.  It is carefully and slowly tapped.  This soft material can be tapped if the pilot hole is slightly small.

Now I measure the diameter of the threaded hole in the aluminum.  It is 0.259 inches.  Then, I add 0.01 mm to this and it is 0.263 inches.  This will be my pilot hole size.
 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 04, 2014, 12:42:12 AM
A "G" drill has a 0.261 diameter.  A little small, but OK if this hole was in less tough materials.  A 17/64 drill has a 0.266 diameter.  A bit on the big side.  It would be the chosen size for a tap drill based on my prior experience with this tough stuff.  This is a lathe job so I can be precise and I grind a little boring bar out of a tool bit blank.  It is a good quality high speed steel bit and it will cut ti OK.   A mark is made on the bit.  It is 8mm inside of the inner edge of the cutting prong.

The hole is bored to size and the inner end of the hole is enlarged to 8 mm diameter.  An 8 mm long section of the bore near the end is kept at 0.263 inches diameter.  The mark comes in handy now.  The tap will cut threads on this 8 mm long section and then the tip will move into a clear area.  This reduces the number of threads that need to be cut and the stress on the tap.  An air grinder bit with a ball shaped cutter on the tip is used to do this on non-lathe jobs.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 04, 2014, 12:53:54 AM
I buy a new high quality and and lube it with anti-seize.  The tap is lined up with the tail stock so it is square with the work.  Tapping starts.  Ti makes long chips so I back the tap off every 1.4 turn or so to break the chips.  The tail stock is used to keep the tap in line.  It should not be used tp put driving pressure on the tap.

The flippin' tap seizes up on the last thread and it snaps.  I look in the tap box to see if I have any more.  Lo and behold.  There is a spiral flute tap I ordered and used for another tough-metal job a few years ago.  I forgot I had it.  Always use specialty taps made for ti when tapping it.  Do not use hardware store style straight flute taps.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 04, 2014, 12:59:05 AM
Ti was losing its appeal so I made the little guy out of 304 stainless.  It is another tough metal but not as nasty as 6Al-4V ti.  The old part had an allen head.  I could not make that so I put a hex on it. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on April 07, 2014, 01:10:41 AM
You are one dedicated hermit.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 11, 2014, 11:27:15 PM
Hi Freud.  One thing I miss is building things with my family and friends.  The boys all moved out and my shop hours are 5:00 AM to 6:50 AM weekday mornings, 8:30 PM till 10:00 PM on weekday nights, and a few hours on the weekend if I get the time.  Sorta hard to get out of the "working alone like a hermit" lifestyle with those hours. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 14, 2014, 01:34:24 AM
The Portland swap meet was last week.  Some us have a weakness and make impulse buys.  I know I have a problem so I drove up to the station nearest the swap meet and took the train up to the meet.  This limited me somewhat.  I could not get a roadster, etc, back home with me.

This is the biggest meet I have been to.  It took all of an afternoon to cover about a third of it.  Never have I seen so many manifolds.  The micrometer is an old American made one in good condition.  It cost five bucks.  The center gage for a combination square was two dollars.  The oil bottle has a spout like they used at gas stations in the old days before quart cans, it was $15.  Perfect for filling dirt bikes.  The hat was on sale.  I got a racers discount.

It was a pleasant way to spend a Saturday afternoon. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on April 14, 2014, 09:33:45 AM
Nice cheap day and I wish we had something like that here!  If I flew out, I'd never get thru the metal detectors to get back on the plane.

I see you even got your own face printed on the oil can - - priceless!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 15, 2014, 12:44:40 AM
There are two ways to get a college degree in the US.  One is to go straight into a 4-year college or university.  That is what kids do whose fathers have oil wells in their back yards.  The other is to go to a 2-year community college, get a transfer degree, and to finish the last two years in a four year school.  This costs a lot less and it is what most people in our area do.  Gretchen is working hard to graduate from high school in December 2014 so we can go to AUS in Feb/March 2015.  She is working extra-extra hard to get a state scholarship to the two year school.  It is based on merit.  That scholarship, some money I saved, and her working should get her a four year degree.  I am also trying to talk her into joining our illustrious military.  That is not working at present.

The high school wants here here in Spring 2015 for some classes and tests prior to going to college.  It is part of the scholarship.  That is when we were going to be in AUS.  Now I am looking at things we can do in Summer 2015.  Racing in SA on the Kilahari, the Queensland lake, or Pendine are things we are talking about.  Not sure where we will go at this time.

The bike is coming along pretty well.  This is just a lot of hard work and nothing notable to post or crow about.   The tail is having new lower skirts installed to fit around the new mufflers.  Some hacking is involved to get my feet to fit on the moved-to-the-rear pegs.  The bike has a production frame and full streamlining.  This is illegal for any AMA class.  We will run at BUB this year in FIM in 1000cc streamlined twin cylinder.  It is a 159 mph record so I will get it this year.  I can see how close I am and this tells me what I need to do to get the record back where it belongs.  On my wall.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on April 15, 2014, 01:21:31 AM
Bo, I had to go look but all I found was mud in my back yard, no oil.   :-D

 Don, with one kid in a 4 year college and another headed there in 5 months.

 Student loans and scholarships, It's not easy.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on April 15, 2014, 04:17:48 AM


The high school wants here here in Spring 2015 for some classes and tests prior to going to college.  It is part of the scholarship.  That is when we were going to be in AUS.  Now I am looking at things we can do in Summer 2015.  Racing in SA on the Kilahari, the Queensland lake, or Pendine are things we are talking about.  Not sure where we will go at this time.



And I thought there might be bad news
Well, if you're going to miss out, at least it's for a good cause
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Hoody on April 15, 2014, 03:21:10 PM
or Pendine are things we are talking about. 

May be worth contacting the Pendine organisers first if you are considering that? Last i heard there may be a question mark over whether it is taking part there this year?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 15, 2014, 10:41:15 PM
Don, I know what you mean.  My oldest girl did the 4-year school thing.  There was at least 0.75 roadsters worth of samolians spent on that.

That post I made has a typographical error.  There is no way I will get 159 mph this year.  I will get some performance data to tell me if it can be done and what I need to do.

Right now I am looking real hard at running in SA.  The currency exchange rate makes it look god.  They race on the Haskeen Pan for times and not records.  The experience of getting there and back is worth a lot and this is especially true for the young lady.  Its value to her is more than any record is to me, I figure.  We are also looking at Pendine.  We know some folks that race at BUB and on the sands. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on April 15, 2014, 11:18:24 PM
Bo,
  Parental involvement is important and you seem to have a good handle on it.

Gretchen is a lucky girl.


 Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on April 17, 2014, 04:36:10 PM
Gretchen is a marvelous young lady.

She helps me so well at the Bonneville NW Reunion.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on April 17, 2014, 06:59:31 PM
Don, I know what you mean.  My oldest girl did the 4-year school thing.  There was at least 0.75 roadsters worth of samolians spent on that.

That post I made has a typographical error.  There is no way I will get 159 mph this year.  I will get some performance data to tell me if it can be done and what I need to do.

Right now I am looking real hard at running in SA.  The currency exchange rate makes it look god.  They race on the Haskeen Pan for times and not records.  The experience of getting there and back is worth a lot and this is especially true for the young lady.  Its value to her is more than any record is to me, I figure.  We are also looking at Pendine.  We know some folks that race at BUB and on the sands. 

You have a place to stay in Johannesburg if you like. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on April 17, 2014, 10:20:04 PM

I am also trying to talk her into joining our illustrious military.  That is not working at present.


Wobbly,

My youngest up and joined "our illustrious military" with no warning 2 1/2 years ago.    One year in, and his brigade was deployed to Afghanistan for 9 months.    Neither I or my wife got much sleep during that time.

His company lost 7 soldiers during the deployment, including 2 girls who were 68 Whiskeys, Combat Medics.

Not a choice I would have made or advised for him, but I am adjusting to the fact that he is not me, nor even a clone of me.

Just 2 cents from a dad who doesn't want his kid returned in a box . . . . . . .   a sentiment shared by every parent, I'm sure.
 :cheers:
Fordboy

Sorry for the thread hi-jack.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 04, 2014, 04:56:03 PM
The overseas trip is on hold for now and we will be running at BUB on an 159 mph FIM record.  That is a higher speed than I was originally building for with a much shorter time to get ready.  Needless to say, I am a busy beaver.

The picture is one of Scooter's we used for an article in an English magazine a couple of years ago.  Note how my head is high and my back is not flat and matching the slope on the the top of the tail.

The bike is assembled on the bench with all of the streamlining on it.  This is essential before I start to cut and hack.  I need to see the shape of the entire thing.  This assures it will be what I want when I am done.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 04, 2014, 05:00:14 PM
My feet are being moved back so it is easier to get down on the tank.  Also, I am going on a diet.  It is working.  I lost 10 lbs already.  This is one performance mod that actually saves money.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 04, 2014, 07:00:25 PM
This afternoon I put on the monkey suit, boots, and lid, and Rose took some pix.

The first shows the top part of me.  My vision seez a view with the horizon at the bottom and the upper edge of the helmet eyeport at the top.  The only thing I can do is grow a longer neck to get my helmet more horizontal.  That is not happening so my head is as low as it can go.

The second shows my leg and foot.  There is an opportunity to add some sheet metal along the sides here.  FIM regs say all of me, including my hands, need to be visible from the sides, so I cannot add too much.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 04, 2014, 07:05:38 PM
This pic shows the angle between my back and the tail.  The top of my back and the upper surface of the tail should be in line.  Some yoga is what I need along with the diet.

The last pic shows the view from the back.  Traditional Brit twin cylinder bikes are nice in this aspect.  They are narrow.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 07, 2014, 01:37:08 AM
The rear brake pedal hit the mufflers and it would not go down far enough.  A new one was made in two parts out of 6061 T4 or T6 aluminum billet.  I forget the exact temper.  They were scraps from another project.

The pivot was made with a roundish shape and the pedal in an "L" shape.  The short leg of the L fits in a slot in the pivot.  This way, the two parts are held together by two fillet welds in shear rather than a butt weld in compression and tension.  I try to avoid butt welds when I can.

The part is turned over in the second picture.  The pointer shows where a weld could be made across the pedal face.  I avoided doing that.  The weld would destroy the temper in the L in a stressed critical place and its added strength is not needed.

     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on May 07, 2014, 07:28:38 PM
Check your lid for the arched-style eye-relief used on road-racer style helmets............maybe you already have it.  Also, check you side profile by RAISING you but from the seat an inch or so...............I have the same problem with drag from a sloped back.............or just bury your head and steer straight :-D :-D :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 08, 2014, 01:19:15 AM
Thanks for the advice, Dennis.  I will try on some of those road race lids. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 15, 2014, 01:52:41 AM
There was some sort of party here awhile ago.  I stayed there for a little bit and then I went downstairs to make a bolt on the lathe.  A lady was playing tug-of-war with the golden retriever.  The dog let go of the rope.  The lady fell backwards onto my laptop.  She crunched it up pretty bad with impact from her arm and big butt.  She bought me a new laptop and it comes with Windows 8.

This W8 has to be experienced to be believed.  It might make sense to someone on drugs, maybe.  The folks at the computer store say the new computer has W8 and I an stuck with it.  Has anyone figured out how to outwit Microsoft and to avoid using W8?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on May 15, 2014, 01:59:44 AM
Reformat the hard drive and install a copy of Windows 7.

Regards, Neil   Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on May 15, 2014, 02:00:08 AM
Once again we miss Ray the Rat.  He went through a situation like yours and

replaced Windows 8. He had Y E A R S of experience with computers and

claimed Windows 8 was as bad as it gets.

Miss you Ray.

FREUD and Wobbles
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on May 15, 2014, 02:06:15 AM
Do the full upgrades to 8.1(upgrade).  I only use it on a touch tablet (and have since it was in Beta), but with the latest upgrades, the transition shouldn't be too hard.  PM me if you need some coaching.

"Change is good" ;-)

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on May 15, 2014, 09:08:26 AM
Mike, the computer on your table didn't look like a tablet...  :roll: thought I had a picture, but can't find it.  Never saw a tablet with a 5 inch floppy drive.  :?
 :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on May 15, 2014, 10:10:08 AM
I too struggled with Windows 8 but with a little help from my wife and Gus it's working for me now.

I'll bet your daughter could figure it out.

About like learning a new language, hang in there.   :-P

 Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on May 15, 2014, 12:34:46 PM
Mike, the computer on your table didn't look like a tablet...  :roll: thought I had a picture, but can't find it.  Never saw a tablet with a 5 inch floppy drive.  :?
 :cheers:

You're right!  It would be hard to mistake a TRS-80 Model I for a tablet.  It's not there now, though; its place has been taken by an IBM PCjr.   :mrgreen:

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 15, 2014, 10:08:55 PM
All of the advice is a big help.  The "Change is good." concept was very appealing, so I got a refund on the PC and bought a Mac.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on May 15, 2014, 10:36:20 PM
I've had Macs for 24 years and get a lot done with them.

Welcome Walrus..............

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on May 16, 2014, 12:36:00 AM
He he he and here I am thinking XP is the bomb. :-D

Bo, you've moved to another level now.

We might have to call you Sir Wobbly or MacMiller!. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 16, 2014, 02:22:16 AM
Hi Mike and Freud.  The big plan was to have the new PC stripped clean of Windows 8 and all of the other programs it had on it, and then to reload it with Windows 7.  Windows does not sell the old version so I would need to order the Windows 7 disk on the i-net and bring it in to the store to have it loaded.  This would take awhile for me to do and I was having a problem with buying another Microsoft product to replace a bad one they sold me.  I asked the computer techs at the store what they recommended.  A few of them were standing behind the service counter.  One told me they work on computers all day and they do not want to fiddle with them when they are at home.  He said most of them use the Apple computers for personal use.  That is what convinced me to change.  Programs like PipeMax and Tune ECU need a windows operating system so I will keep my squashed laptop to run them.  The old girl still works, it is held together with duck tape.

           
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on May 16, 2014, 03:42:18 AM
My mate Lee says that if Widows were a car they'd be selling it without wheels. The new stuff goes out the door unfinished. :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: peterdallan on May 16, 2014, 04:41:46 AM
Bo, using a program called Parallels on your Mac will allow you to load your preferred version of Windows on to your Mac and simultaneously run OSX and Windows programs. That's what I use, works faultlessly.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on May 16, 2014, 01:13:27 PM
If you have a PC that will run the needed programs, use it.

Don't contaminate the new Mac with a disease called PC.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on May 16, 2014, 01:57:49 PM
Apple is good -- and if it's a new unit, considering buying the "AppleCare" extended warranty.  I've done so with all of the Macs we've had, and not only is the customer service very good -- but each and every person with whom I've talked over the years has spoken like American English is his native language.  Well, a few of them have been Canadian... :evil:

But - please think about buying it, if for no other reason than to help navigate through issues you're having with old PC programs that you want to use on the Apple device.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 21, 2014, 01:56:39 AM
Thanks, Slim, I will do what you recommend.

We are racing in the US this summer and I looked at all of the options.  Safety is a big issue.  The track at an all-bike meet is likely to be in better condition.  It is not torn up by heavy and powerful cars.  Last year's Speedweek got me to thinking about this.  So, we are signed up for Delvene's first meet, as FIM, partially streamlined, 1000cc, naturally aspirated, twin cylinder.  The record is 159+ and we have done 140.  Some serious hours and hardly any money, 'cause I do not have it, is going into this year's attempt.  Things are looking good.  Torch and hammer work, mainly, with some can tipping, that is the big plan.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 25, 2014, 10:26:27 PM
The trip back to Oregon from the salt flats is pretty long and there is time for serious planning and thinking.  Where do I go from here?  That is the big question I asked myself.  This is the data I need to make intelligent decisions about the engine.

1)  The long block, including intake and exhaust systems optimized to the best of my ability and in good condition. Done.
2)  A logical choice of fuels based on best available data.  Done.
3) Spark advance curves optimised for fuels.  To do in July.
4)  Flow bench testing of the header, carb, air filter, manifold, and cylinder head with cam.  Done.
5)  Dyno testing.  To be done in July.
6)  Measured compression ratios and cam timing.  Compression ratio done.  Cam timing to be done in September.

My original plan was to take all of this data to a professional, along with some money, and to pay for an expert opinion.  Now I am thinking of using one of the better engine performance software packages to figure out any changes I need to make big HP.

Is there any additional data I need to collect?   . 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on May 26, 2014, 06:00:47 PM
To go along with all of the power you can find..................good aero..............and check your tires for the speed rating :wink:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 27, 2014, 01:13:19 AM
The aero is what I am working on now.  The first picture shows the foot peg moved back 5 inches with the new mounting plate, linkage, brake pedal, etc.  This will let me get down on the tank with my chest.  I could not do that before.  The pegs were too far forward.

The second picture shows the belly pan and the spat in front of the rear wheel.  This is new for this year.  It should reduce the drag caused by turbulence under the vehicle.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on May 27, 2014, 01:25:13 AM
The never ending evolution.

Bo, you deserve whatever it is you're hoping to achieve.
There should be a forum trophy for what you do. SSS?????? :evil:

I can't wait to hear how she runs.

You mentioned wanting to use an expert to help you get an optimum set up.
If he isn't at race day with you why do you need one?. IMO no one knows this bike better than you. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 01, 2014, 01:08:05 PM
Hi Mike.  The engine is as far along as I can go with my tuning ability.  There is an NA record I am after so I need to know the best combination of compression, cams, and valve size to get a few more HP.  Right now I have 10.5 to 1 compression and all-purpose scrambles type cams.  There is a lot of untapped potential in the motor.  All of this engine work will be done after this year's meet.

The before photo is on top.  The pegs are moved back and that is all.  The after photo is on the bottom.  The fairing is extended at the bottom and the tail is reworked so it fits closer to the back of my legs.  Also, I sit on the bike every day and this is helping me to get lower.  The only thing keeping me form getting further down is the eye port in the helmet.  Is there a "not made in China" helmet with a tall eye port?

The FIM requires pictures of the bike with and without the streamlining and they need to have them in early July.  This evening I will be done with the tin work and it will be time to take the "with streamlining" pictures.   

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on June 01, 2014, 01:18:36 PM
WW;

A dopey question from a non- bike guy: Since the helmet eye port (and the limit of eyeball motion) determine how far you can lower your head, has anyone tried putting a mirror below your head to reflect a forward view? It might be a weird feeling trying to steer the bike while looking through a mirror but has it been tried?

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Speed Limit 1000 on June 01, 2014, 02:08:51 PM
Neil,

 Now your just a trouble maker :-D Us bikers are a large heard of cats that has over the years given the "Foke me doke" SCTA fokes lots of sleepless nights. The only reason they put up with us is they want our $s to support uncle ELMO 8-) 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Sporty Dan on June 01, 2014, 03:19:22 PM
Speaking of helmets, have you thought about getting a helmet from the manufacturer? When I was drag racing I was able to get a Simpson with what they called a "Drag Bike Cut". That is, they cut the neck higher in the back in order to let your head rotate more. The last helmet I got was 8 years ago so that is the last time I know they did that for sure. I know I will be checking into it next year when I order a new helmet before going to the salt next year.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 02, 2014, 01:18:02 AM
Neil, the bike bounces around a lot.  It is hard to look through anything attached to it.

Dan, I will try what you say. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 03, 2014, 01:33:44 AM
The FIM requires pictures of the bike with and without streamlining.  These are sent in with the entry forms.  It takes some planning and effort to make sure the streamlining is finished in time.  The first picture shows the side.  Unlike the AMA or DLRA, the rider's hands must be visible.  The second picture shows the front of the bike.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 03, 2014, 01:38:00 AM
This is the back end.  The blunt nosed teardrop shape is calculated to be stable in side winds.  It works so I am not going to monkey around with it and make chimprovements.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wheelrdealer on June 03, 2014, 09:39:30 AM
Excellently Executed!

The streamlining is great. Love the rivets.

BR

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on June 03, 2014, 10:47:21 AM
Great pic of the 'gray panther'...............looks very fast. :lol:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 04, 2014, 01:49:25 AM
Thanks for the compliments, fellows.  There is a quote somewhere on this forum from Enzo Ferrari that says streamlining is for people who cannot build motors.  He would need to improve his game to race at this this place.  A person needs to be good at both to be competitive in the faster classes at LSR.

The motor is next.  Cylinder head flow testing is needed to get serious about performance.  Kibblewhite in Pacifica, Northern California, does my head work.  They flow tested the head for me at no charge.  This is a favor from them for Team Go Dog, Go!

The intake tract was tested with the air cleaner, intake bell, carb, and manifold attached.  Flow is 209.7 cfs at .388 inches maximum valve lift.  This is corrected flow at 28 inches water.  Exhaust flow is 179.8 cfs under the same conditions.  A pipe stub was fitted to the head to resemble a header.

Assumed horsepower increase is 10% due to the switch to oxygenated fuel and the free flowing Predator Sport mufflers.  Peak power will be produced somewhere between 7,300 and 7,800 rpm.  First, I looked at intake flow using PipeMax.  It says up to 198.5 cfs is needed.  As for exhaust flow, up to 148.5 cfs is required.  The cylinder head flows plenty good and the cam lift is adequate.

Header diameter is next.  The 790cc Triumph twins use 1.5 inch dia headers and the 865 twins use 1-5/8 dia pipes.  It would be easy to do a switcheroo between the race and street bikes.  PipeMax says header inside diameter can range from 1.348 to 1.473 inches.  The 790cc engine headers have 1.400 internal dia.  They are OK and there is no need to go bigger.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 05, 2014, 12:59:53 AM
These header sizing programs often give minimum and maximum recommended diameters.  My preference is to keep the dia on the small side.  The air at B'vill is thinner than at sea level so I am less worried about having a pipe big enough to handle the flow.  Instead, the concern is about having enough gas velocity and inertia to maximize the acoustical tuning.  Second opinions are welcome on this.

The flow needs to be about 15% greater for Australian rocket gas than for the usual non-oxygenated race fuel.  There are three fuel valves available from Pingel.  One is their standard street valve.  I was using one of them.  A remote shutoff is needed for fuel class.  There is none on the street valve so I fitted a standard guzzler with a cable actuated shutoff switch.  Last fall I tested the standard guzzler and it flows enough fuel to support over 400 horsepower.  There is no need to use the higher flowing methanol guzzler so I am using the standard one.

The website http://factorypro.co./tech/carbkei.html (http://factorypro.co./tech/carbkei.html) has float valve sizing info for Keihin flat slides.  A 3.2 mm dia valve will support 39 to 50 hp per cylinder using gravity flow (Page 10).  That size is adequate for standard gasoline.  I need 15 % more flow capacity than this.  A needle valve's ability to convey flow is somewhere between being proportional to its diameter and its circumference.  A 3.8 mm diameter valve has 17% more circumference and 41% more area than the 3.2 mm valve.  It is a safe bet that it is good enough so I am trying to find a pair of 3.8 or 4.0 mm valves.  Keihin makes methanol valves and other parts for very high flow rates.  At this time I see no need for them.

Keihin makes needles and seats for downdraft and sidedraft flat slide carbs with gravity or pressure flow.  I need to be real explicit about exactly what I want.  All of this stuff is interchangeable and it is easy to order and fit the wrong parts.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 06, 2014, 11:11:55 PM
Lessons learned on EFI.  The new Triumph has Keihin EFI.  There is a program and hardware called TuneECU that loads, modifies, and unloads maps.  It also has diagnostics and other tuning features, like synchronizing the throttle plates.

The bike ran good before I "improved" it.  The changes I made are the ones done to the carb models.  A pair of hotter cams for the 790cc model, removing the two noise baffles in the intake system, and putting on a pair of Triumph TOR off-road mufflers.  All of this I had in my parts collection so no money was spent.  So far, all is OK.

Next, I loaded different Triumph performance maps for fuels with 10% alcohol and 25% alcohol.  I could get it to run good and get lousy gas mileage, or I got it getting good mileage but running bad.  It took some figuring to solve this one.

The EFI cannot directly sense the need for fuel.  It bases its decisions on manifold air pressure, throttle position, rpm, lambda, and other data it collects.  The EFI system was not calibrated for the changes in flow the flow vs manifold air pressure relationship from my intake changes.  The system was confused and it did not always provide the right mixture.

The noise baffles were reinstalled and the adaptation process was made to recalibrate the system.  Now it runs great.  The cams and the off-road mufflers do the trick.

What I learned is the EFI system has the ability to adjust to a small amount of performance tuning.  The changes should be made downstream from the intake manofold- unless the EFI is remapped.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 08, 2014, 02:23:13 AM
The custom helmets with tall eye ports are expensive.  One on the internet cost $1,800.  This morning we had the Triumph Club breakfast and went to the cycle shop when we were done.  I asked some of the guys that race for advice.  They showed me the adventure bike helmets.  Adventure bikes are the big and fast dual sport ones.  The helmets are full face with detachable visors and the eye ports are taller.  The fellows unscrew the visors and toss them.  I found a solid color Snell 2010 approved Arai lid at a reasonable price with the tall eye port.  It is on order.      .   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on June 08, 2014, 03:56:42 AM
Good one Bo but man you really pay a price for being tall.

Midgets like me battle to just see over the tank. :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 10, 2014, 11:51:38 PM
Mike, its figured out now.  I can see when I am down on the tank.  Can't get lower than that.

The street Triumph has Keihin EFI.  It runs in a semi closed loop fashion.  The idle mixture is adjusted to the desired fuel-air mixture using O2 sensor input during a 20 minute procedure called "adaptation."  The partial throttle mixture is adjusted at periodic intervals using O2 sensor data.  I ride north toward Portland from Salem on the freeway.  About 10 to 15 minuted out of town it does the partial throttle adaptation.  The adaptations go well if the mixture is sorta close to the one predicted by the maps.  Otherwise, the EFI defaults to the "limp home" mode and the mixture is set very rich.  Performance and fuel mileage go to Helena.

As can be imagined, the idle adaptation is not much use to us racers and the partial throttle adaptation occurs to late to do any of us any benefit.  Besides, what is this "partial throttle" business?  Absurd.  The O2 sensors are great for the street but not needed for racing.  That can be switched off using Tune ECU.  Most racers do this.

There are tables for each of the two cylinders at lower throttle openings.  These "L" maps are based on injector opening duration vs engine RPM and manifold air pressure.  These are important for street use.  Unfortunately, any modifications to the inlet tract foul up the calibration for these curves.  Us racers almost always modify the intake system so this can be a problem.  Fortunately, there is an "F-L" table that lists the throttle opening thresholds when the ECU goes from the low to high rpm curves.  The changeover point can be set to 0 rpm using TuneECU.  This prevents the use of the "L" tables.  Most racers do this.

The remaining tables are the "F" ones, and there is one for each cylinder.  They are injector opening time vs throttle opening and rpm.  These are the high speed large throttle opening tables and they are what racers use.

There is also an air-fuel table for the engine under load and in neutral.  The desired stoicho ratio is in these tables.  The ignition advance is another table/is can be set in these tables.

The F and L tables can be adjusted in percent by a fuel trim table, and the ignition advance curve can be adjusted in degrees by an ignition trim table.

The TuneECU program can be used to set up the system for racing.  The O2 sensors are disconnected and the L tables are deactivated by setting their operation threshold at 0 rpm.  The mapping is done using the wide band sensor on the dyno and it is used to develop F tables, only.  The air-fuel table is changed to reflect the fuels being used.

This is what I think is happening and I am no expert.  Basically with modifying EFI, unless you are a nerd, the bike will run like a t*rd. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on June 11, 2014, 01:14:18 AM
I don't know how you figure all this stuff but I admire you.

Those nerds come in useful though. :wink:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 14, 2014, 01:45:46 AM
There is a lot of false information about these EFI systems that is "common knowledge" in the Triumph community.  The i-net and listening to most, but not all, of my friends was counterproductive.  There are a couple of books on the subject.  The only way I figured out a lot of the stuff was to change the settings and ride the bike around.

My family vacations for the last 30 years involved children so I took the trucks.  Now, none of the kids want to go so I am on my own.  It looks like I will be on the bike every day for a couple of weeks.  This will be the real test of EFI.  There are all sorts of mountain passes I need to cross and one is at 8,000 feet.  A lot of these roads I drove on with my BSA Lightning with monoblocs or the Spitfire with concentrics.  Keihin EFI or Amal carbs, which are best?  The big question.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Speed Limit 1000 on June 14, 2014, 02:07:37 AM
  Keihin EFI or Amal carbs, which are best?  The big question.   

EFI if you have the ability to tune it :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 15, 2014, 01:14:47 AM
Advice given to me about this oxygenated fuel is to make sure the system provides enough flow.  It was tested a couple of years ago and it gave me plenty, about 400 to 500 horsepower worth, as I recall.  Some new components are being used so it is time to check it again.

Flow in a gravity system lessens when the fuel level drops.  Usually I have more than two gallons when I run so I will have plenty of pressure.  The test is done with 1.5 gallons in the tank.  This is a "worst case" situation.  The plugs on the bottom of the carbs are removed and little metal chutes will carry the gas down to funnels on bottles.  The vents are hooked up, the fuel is switched on, and it is time to measure how long it takes to fill the bottles.  The left carb flows 18.05 ounces in 22 seconds.  The right flows 18.15 ounces in the same amount of time.

The fuel line connects to a "T" fitting that directs the flow to each carb.  The leg on the T for the right carb is about half as long as the one for the left.  This is why the right carb always flows better.  It is important to check with all carbs flowing at the same time, so as to detect these patterns.

The fuel is switched on by turning the valve under the tank.  It is turned off by the switch on the bars as shown, sorta, in the blurry photo.  This is done to meet a DLRA rule when I was going to race in AUS in the fuel class.  It is not required by FIM.  I am keeping it on the bike 'cause it is a good idea.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 15, 2014, 01:51:47 AM
The book "Performance Automotive Engine Math" by John Baechtel is used as a reference.

The expected horsepower this year with the oxygenated fuel and the new mufflers is no more than 100.  Advice about the fuel is to assume, for planning purposes, 15% more consumption, so 100 x 1.15 = 115 HP.  I need 115 hp worth of rocket fuel to get 100 HP at the rear wheel.

The info in Baechtel's book is for cars and it is assumed to be based on engine dyno HP.  Converting rear wheel HP to engine HP:  115 x 1.1 = 127 HP.  There are two cylinders on the bike, so each needs enough fuel to support 63 engine HP

Brake specific fuel consumption rates are listed in the book.  A 0.48 pounds per horsepower per hour demand is listed for a performance engine with a good head, like mine.  Bachtel also uses a conversion factor of 6.09 in his formulae.  This is for fuel with a specific gravity of 0.72 at 65 degrees F.  This is real close to the Sunoco Standard used in this test.  No adjustment is needed to this factor.

The calculations for the left cylinder:  (18.05 oz / 22 seconds) x (1 gallon / 128 oz) x (3600 sec / 1 hour) = 23.1 gals per hour delivered

For the right:  (18.15 / 22) x (3600 / 128) = 23.2 gallons per hour delivered

Supported HP = (flow rate in gals per hr / brake specific fuel consumption in lbs fuel per HP per hr) x 6.09

(23.1 / 0.48) x 6.09 = 293 HP per cyl.  Fuel delivery is not a problem.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Sporty Dan on June 15, 2014, 01:12:32 PM
Excellent calculations about fuel requirements for hp, Wobbly!  :-D Where did you get your petcock at? And where did you mount the shutoff lever on the handlebars?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 17, 2014, 12:59:58 AM
Hi, Dan.  The fuel cock was an internet order from Pingel.  It is a what they call a "remote guzzler."  The front brake master cylinder reservoir cap is replaced by the home-made one shown.  The lever is attached to the cable that connects to the fuel valve that is screwed onto the tank.  The lever goes wherever the tank does.  The tank is off of the bike and the lever is, too.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 18, 2014, 01:19:42 AM
The fuel system is done for this year.  The fuel hoses are like the one with the stainless steel braid covering.  It is #5 (5/16) ID with a #6 OD.  This is thick walled hose.  Otherwise it would be #5 ID with #5 OD.  The hose is too stiff to make sharp bends.  The most efficient way, flow wise, to make it go around a corner is the bent brake line.  The largest diameter tube that fits inside the hose is used.  The tube ends are "bubbled" rather than flared.  Hillbilly AN fittings are used with hose camps.  This setup flowed better than bends made from authentic AN fittings.

The vent lines are fire resistant hoses made for commercial marine use.  This is the blue hose in the picture.  It is a thick walled hose with a #5 hose ID and a #6 hose OD.  Corrosion resistant AN fittings for these hoses cost a lot of money, so more hillbilly AN fittings are employed.

The fuel lines are covered with fire sleeve.  This is needed according to the tech requirements.  It also helps to keep the fuel cool so it will make a bit more power.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 18, 2014, 01:38:43 AM
The off side is shown in the photo.  The silver hose is the fuel line from the tank valve on the near side.  The brass fittings are on it to break the line when the tank is removed.  The blue line coming out of the bottom of the tank is the tank vent line.   Originally I had a tip-over valve and a vent valve on the line.  This was bulky and it hindered access to the carb bottoms.  The little crimson valve does both functions in a lot less space.  It was hard to find and I ordered it from England.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 18, 2014, 01:47:35 AM
"Install an open ended breather on the top of the tank with the end out in the breeze" is advice I got about running this fuel.  The gas cap is modified to breathe through this open-ended hose.  The Pingel guzzler acts as a shutoff valve so the vent can be closed when not in use.  This prevents the loss of important volatiles in the fuel through vaporization  when the bike is parked.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on June 18, 2014, 02:11:53 AM
That is a neat job Bo and as usual you've left nothing to chance.
Your attention to detail is 100%.

I hope to see the bike in person one day.  :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 20, 2014, 08:43:09 PM
The big credit for this goes to Rick G. at ERC.  He gives me all sorts of advice on set up for this fuel.  Experts that give specific, detailed, and intelligent answers to questions are a big help.  Also, good support folks tell you the things you need to do that you do not know enough to ask about.  Now, tech support is a number one consideration when I choose a product or service.   It was not always like this.  I had to learn the hard way.

The Triumph uses 10W-40 oil with special additives for its wet clutch and transmission.  These are special bike oils and they are made to conform to the latest street use specifications.  This makes sense when the limited market for them is considered.

The phosphorous content in the brand I use was 1600 ppm for years.  It has been lowered to 1200 ppm to conform to newer standards.  A particular break in additive, when 4 oz is added to 4 quarts of oil, raises the phosphorous content 575 ppm.  The bike uses 4 quarts, so the math is simple to raise the phosphorous content 400 ppm:  (400 / 575) x 4 oz = 2.8 oz.  That is how much break in additive I add to 4 quarts of oil.

A word of caution.  This oil uses phosphorous as an anti-wear additive and the detergent package is designed so it does not remove the phosphorous glaze.  This is not the case with many oils, and adding the phosphorous to them does no good.  This is something I researched before I chose to use the additive. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 23, 2014, 01:20:44 AM
The scoot fired up and ran on Sat morning.  No oil leaks, gas leaks, or anything bad.  We went up the local car show on Sat evening parked the bike in the line up with the fender, fairing, belly pan, and tail next to it.  It was the the only motorcycle there.

The FIM wants pictures of each side of the bike with and without the streamlining.  The "with streamlining" photos were posted a few weeks ago.  These are the "without streamlining" ones.  All will be sent in to the American Motorcyclist Association as part of the entry process.  The rider does not enter to run FIM on his/her own.  They race as part of the group of riders from a country and they represent their national organization.  Us gringos represent the AMA.

This is one side.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 23, 2014, 01:21:49 AM
And the other.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on June 23, 2014, 02:20:55 AM
Bo, it looks right just sitting there. :cheers:

The amount of R&D that has gone into the bike let alone the Ti machining is an achievement of note.

All I can say is go Gringo go!!!!!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 24, 2014, 01:13:05 AM
Something tells me this will be my big year.  I just need to get there, have a track of good salt with decent weather, and not screw up the riding part.  There are no excuses, now.  The bike is as good as it can be.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 26, 2014, 09:51:01 PM
The bike was on the dyno at 10:30 this morning.  It was being warmed up and suddenly all sorts of smoke came out of the right muffler.  F**k.  This will not be easy.  Almost everything in that engine is custom made.  Tonight it will be torn down.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on June 26, 2014, 10:29:29 PM
WW;

I hope it isn't too bad once you get into it.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on June 26, 2014, 10:33:10 PM
Ah, man!  I'm feeling for you Bo.

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on June 26, 2014, 10:53:43 PM
WW;

I hope it isn't too bad once you get into it.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ


My feeling too.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: SaltPeter on June 26, 2014, 11:50:14 PM
Oh no  :-(

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 27, 2014, 12:34:40 AM
Thanks for the concern, fellows.  Golf was looking good this afternoon.  Everything looks perfect inside the motor.  Except for the lower compression ring on the right cylinder.  I installed it upside down.  The bike was ridden on the street for 600 miles, put through a long dyno session, and raced for a year.  Why it started smoking now, rather than before, is a big mystery.

Tomorrow I am taking a day off from work, will get up at 5:00, and I will put it together.  Then, another dyno session will be scheduled. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on June 27, 2014, 06:04:15 AM
Bo, things always happen for a reason.
I'm glad you found the "little glich" now rather than in August.

You'll be good to go in no time. I'm happy for you man. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on June 27, 2014, 10:09:57 AM
Thanks for the concern, fellows.  Golf was looking good this afternoon.  Everything looks perfect inside the motor.  Except for the lower compression ring on the right cylinder.  I installed it upside down.  The bike was ridden on the street for 600 miles, put through a long dyno session, and raced for a year.  Why it started smoking now, rather than before, is a big mystery.

Tomorrow I am taking a day off from work, will get up at 5:00, and I will put it together.  Then, another dyno session will be scheduled. 

Bo,

Engine loading on the dyno can be much more "severe" than the load you can impose by "unloaded running-in" or even "enthusiastic" street riding.    On the street/track, higher load levels are typically not achieved until the engine "sees" top gear and high rpm's.    And even those loads may not be as high as the dyno can impose.    The "heavy" loading tends to "reveal" problems that did not occur previously, at lower load/stress levels.

Glad you discovered it now and not later.

Golf?    The perfect game for those who don't get enough stress in their normal lives . . . . .   :-D
 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on June 27, 2014, 10:35:16 AM
Mike, my handicap is ......................................................Golf. :-D

I love watching it though.

Sorry Bo.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Kiwi Paul on June 27, 2014, 11:50:13 PM
Mike--I`m with you.Watching it relaxes me a great deal. During my younger days, I suffered with Insomnia a great deal. Watching Golf in those 2/3/4 AM hours cured it....
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: JimL on June 28, 2014, 01:05:58 AM
They can run pretty good this way, but it is difficult in general use to get enough heat deep enough in the muffler to burn off the oil puddle that was building there.

I suspect it wasnt a "finally broke" event.  It was just accumulation over time and finally got the fire lit (so to speak).  It will have a lot more smoke, for a while...even after you fix it.  Just keep in mind how little oil it takes to make a 2-stroke smoke.  

This oiled exhaust was every day life, back in the years we were fixing pre-chamber seals on early Honda cars.  We had to tell the customers to expect a lot of smoke, some day, up a big hill.

There is possibility that this ring is roached due to poor sealing under pressure.  They lose a corner that way, sometimes.  Hard to say.....

JimL
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 28, 2014, 11:01:39 AM
The pistons and rings are custom made and there is eight weeks lead time, minimum, between ordering them and the little box arriving in the big brown truck.  The ring was looked at under a watchmaker's loupe.  It is sealing good and installing it upside down is not a big issue.  It worked OK for the big 2013 dyno session and running at B'ville last year.

The bike was run for the first time this year on the Saturday of the car show.  It was taken off the trailer and ridden from the parking lot to the show, and it was ridden back to the trailer when the show was done.  The plug caps were pulled off and the plugs and the leads were grounded to the head.  The air cleaners were taken off and the float bowls drained.  Then, I opened up the throttle to max, cranked the engine over, and squirted mystery oil into each cylinder.  That oil burning off might have been the problem.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Sporty Dan on June 28, 2014, 04:22:50 PM
WW, that more than likely is the issue. On the dyno it was working hard enough to get the oil trapped in the oil ring to burn off, causing all the smoke. If everything else looks ok, the rest of the rings, piston cylinder wall, then that should be the problem.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 29, 2014, 06:11:34 PM
This morning i got up early and finished putting it together then fired it up.  No smoke for about 30 seconds, then it started.  Lots from the right cylinder.  Next, the left started to smoke.  That was the problem, oil was in the muffler packing from the oil downs I do after running the motor.  It was burning off and it took awhile to get hot enough.

This is the first engine I took from the bench to the dyno.  I always broke in and sorted them on the street.  Now it was time to locate the proper venue for this.  My old "test hill" is a major state highway and this bike is in no way street legal.

Some serious thinking was required so I had a beer and a dish of ice cream to keep my brain from overheating.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 29, 2014, 06:22:19 PM
There is a place in the county called Coon Hollow.  Not many folks go there.  The first photo shows where I parked looking north.  The road dips down into a little ravine and climbs back out.  Notice the rolling terrain.  We call these "the rollers" and it is easy to get a car airborne there.  They should be named "the flippers" to reflect the true situation.

The next pic shows the road I used for testing and sorting.  There is none better than this.  It drops down into Coon Hollow.  Testing was going well.  A black cat ran across the road in front of me.  Then, I realized I was having far too much fun and pushing my luck.  The bike went back on the trailer.  No smoke now.  Only the sweet smell of leaded gas exhaust. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on June 29, 2014, 07:27:26 PM
Just like the operating manual for a Triumph.

One sign says Triumph Road and the other sign that is at a right angle to it also says Triumph Road.

A left hand thread that the manual says gets tighter if you turn it clockwise.

That's why a Garmin GPS repeats and repeats, "re-calculating, re-calculating."

Keen observer........right?

FREUD

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on June 29, 2014, 08:14:03 PM
 :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Sporty Dan on June 30, 2014, 12:06:27 AM
Glad to hear you got it sorted out.  :-D Especially since all you had to do was "blow the gunk out"!  :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 01, 2014, 01:40:32 AM
Freud, I remember that reverse thread nut.  It held on one of the rider's foot pegs.  The one on the other side had normal threads.  The pegs were mounted to the frame on tapered spindles.  The reverse nut was made that way so it would tighten if the foot peg assembly rotated on the spindle.  It would loosen if it had normal threads.

These bikes are simple and easy to work on as compared to most modern bikes.  The head and cylinders came off without needing to remove the engine from the frame.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on July 01, 2014, 01:56:42 AM
Great news Bo.

Life throws those "wobblies" at us just to keep us sharp. :-D

That looks like a great place to ride.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 03, 2014, 01:31:42 AM
Hi Mike.  We can ride here pretty much all year except it is wet for most of them and not much fun.  There is a short dry season between 4 July and 15 October during most years.  We ride as much as we can during those few months.

Dyno day is tomorrow.  The 39 mm flat slides have an accelerator pump that squirts gas into the carbs when the throttle is opened.  This dyno is typical for a small bike shop and they use sweep testing where the engine is revved through its rpm range.  The added gas from the pump confuses things so it is disconnected.  These flat slides have main jets for both fuel and air.  The main air jets are the maximum size.

The bike will be delivered to the dyno with the jetting set rich, the most retarded of my ignition modules, and a tank of leaded premium.  The module has the Stage 3 spark advance curve.  Smaller main fuel jets will be tried sequentially until the power drops off.  One or two sizes will produce the best power.  The richest of these optimum jets will be used for the next step.

The Stage 3 and Stage 4 ignition boxes will be compared using ABBA testing.  Then, the Stage 4 and Stage 5 curves will be compared using the same method.  The most retarded box that gives decent power will be selected for the next stage.  The knock light is observed during all of this.  A green glow says OK and a red light says the timing might be too advanced and to not use that curve.  Now the engine is optimized for leaded non-oxygenated gas.  This provides an all-important baseline for evaluating the present tune and the effectiveness of the oxygenated fuel.

The fuel is switched.  The main jet diameter from the previous step is determined from a handy chart and the orifice area is calculated.  Main jets with 15% more area are used initially with the oxygenated fuel.  The jetting is optimized for the fuel using the same procedure as before and the richest jets that produce the best power are selected.  The advance curves are compared using ABBA testing and the most retarded one that produces maximum power is selected.  Now the bike is optimized for the climatic conditions in the dyno room.     

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 04, 2014, 12:47:43 AM
Last year the HP was 83.6 at 7,300 rpm with 66.6 lbs-ft torque.  Leaded non-oxygenated gas was used.

Today, the rear tire pressure is 38 psi cold as used in 2013.  The chain, sprockets, and tire are the same as last year.  The smoothing factor is set at 5 with "Standard" correction like last year.  Everything else including the fuel blend is as last year.  The only difference is the mufflers.

Number 150 main jets are used initially.  Smaller jets are tried sequentially.  Number 132 and 135 jets produce the most power.  The #135 jets are the richest jets that produces maximum power.   They are used for the next step.  HP is 88.1 at 7,400 rpm with 72.3 lbs-ft torque.  I was told the muffler switch would give me 5 HP.  That is a pretty darn accurate prediction.

Now, the spark advance curves are optimized.  The Stage 4 curve is 2 degrees advanced from the Stage 3 curve used for the initial testing.  Three runs are made with it at varying engine temperatures.  The average torque is 71.2   lbs-ft.  This is the same torque as the Stage 3 curve for practical purposes.  Three pulls are made with the Stage 5 curve.  It is 2 degrees farther advanced than the Stage 4.  Average torque is 71.2 lbs-ft.  All three of these curves produce the same torque.  They are on the plateau of the spark advance vs peak torque relationship.

The piston is further down in the bore when maximum pressure occurs with the retarded Stage 3 curve.  The maximum pressure in the combustion chamber is less.  The connecting rod big end is further past TDC when the maximum pressure occurs with the retarded # 3 curve.  It has more leverage on the crankshaft.  These factors contribute to making the retarded Stage 3 curve as effective as the others in producing torque - with less combustion chamber pressure and force on the rod bearings.  The Stage 3 curve is selected as the optimal for this fuel and engine tune.  The motor will last a lot longer with it.

Saturday we will tune with the rocket fuel. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on July 04, 2014, 12:56:49 AM
I'm looking forward to hearing how it goes.
You'll be fine. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 05, 2014, 10:14:54 AM
It is early in the morning here and I leave to be at today's dyno work in about 1/2 hour.

The advice I get on spark plug heat value is the #9 plugs from the manufacturer I use are in the middle of the range that most folks use with this fuel.  Also, the fine wire electrode ones I am using can give me an extra HP.  The bike comes from the factory with #8 heat value plugs and they are one step hotter than the #9's.  By "hotter" I mean the positive electrode is less able to conduct heat to the cylinder head.  It stays warmer in use than a colder plug.

Heat in the combustion chamber is roughly proportional to power output and this motor produces far more ponies than the production one.  A new set of #9's went in for this year.  They are better at conducting heat to the cyl head and there is less danger the positive electrodes will overheat.  Visual examination of an 8 used last year backs this up.  The deposit coloration on the center electrode and insulator indicates it is getting a bit warm during operation.

Advice is to go not pay attention to jet numbers.  Instead, it is to go with 15% more main jet area, initially, for this fuel change.   The jets are #135 for the non-oxygenated unleaded.  Some jets in the 140's calculate out to having 15% more area.  I am playing it safe and will use #150 jets to start the tuning.

Dyno printouts mean as much to me as time slips.  A good power gain means a nice year regardless of what happens on the salt.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 06, 2014, 01:07:28 AM
The first dyno session evaluated the new mufflers.  There is a 3 to 5 HP gain throughout the power band between 3500 and 8000 rpm.  There is some non-exactness to this.  The dyno runs are a year apart.  Maximum power this year with the leaded is developed with one size larger main jet.  This is about right for that power increase.  It is likely the added power is real.

The fuel comparison was done today.  Both fuels produce almost identical power and torque.  Both work great with the Stage 3 advance curve.  The oxygenated unleaded gas requires three sizes larger main jets to make the same power as the non-oxygenated leaded.

Expectations for this year deflated.  It will take a substantial HP increase to go 160 mph and get a record, A few HP will not do it.  The goal now is to have fun being on the salt and to put some points on the graph so will I know what to do next year.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on July 06, 2014, 03:44:57 AM
Bo, what more do you have to do to get the HP you still need?.

Isn't having fun and being out there what it's all about?. :wink:

The good news is that what you thought was a problem turned out to be nothing and you sound like you're good to go for Speed Week. :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

Have a great time brother. Wish I could be there with you.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RidgeRunner on July 06, 2014, 08:02:53 AM
     Don't let the test numbers get you too down too quick.  Maybe not as high as you would like to see but there is a solid gain where it counts - across a wide range.  Your aero tweak improvements should help the speeds as well.  Theories and dynos are great tools to be used as much as possible but don't always provide the final answers, a big part of what keeps it all interesting.  I'm looking forward to hear what the great white dyno says.

     All the best for staying safe, having fun, and going faster with no expensive noises while doing so,

                                                                                                                                            Ed
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 06, 2014, 03:17:00 PM
The bike is set up for the AUS blend and I have 3/4 of a 16 gallon drum remaining.  The stuff has a long storage life.  It will be a few years before I need to buy any more race gas.  My guess is the burn characteristics of the non-oxygenated fuel are optimal for that engine.  As they say in boxing, that fuel "punches above its weight" and it is hard to do better with other fuels.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 07, 2014, 11:55:53 AM
It is family vacation time and everybody is busy.  It will be an old guy riding one of his trusty Triumphs for about two weeks.  It is a big country.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on July 07, 2014, 12:31:37 PM
It sure is a big country, Bo.  where are you thinking of going - or at least, which way are you going to point when you get out on the road?  When I used to do weeks-ling motorcycle trips I'd, for instance, pick one of the old national highways (i.e. US 12 or US45 or such)  and ride it from one end to the other.  US 41 starts in Copper Harbor, Michigan and ends in Miami Beach.  Have you got any plans?

I'd just make sure I had a bunch of maps - good maps - with me and head out, the destination in mind being to get back home within the allowed time.  then I'd just ride, ride, ride, camp when I was tired or stay at a motel if I really needed a shower, and - next morning - get back on the bike and ride some more.

Here's to a fine trip for you.  Stay safe - and have fun. :-D :-D :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on July 07, 2014, 03:32:26 PM
He can go a lot farther East than he can West.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 21, 2014, 01:08:25 AM
Arrived back at home a few hours ago.  We, my middle boy Josef and me, rode to the top of Palomar Mountain.  You can see across the Mexican border from there on a clear day.  We were pretty far south.  At 17, my first bike was a Yamaha DT-1 250cc single and I toured California and part of Arizona on that thing.  It had 16 horsepower and it was suicide to ride it on the freeway.  It was best on back roads.  I still tour like that.  Hardly any freeway and lots of remote roads and twisty ones where ever I can find them.  The big plan was to sorta go south till I got to Camp Pendleton then ride with my boy for two days.  Then I would ride in kinda a north direction till I got home.  A few things I learned have LSR applications.  They will get posted in a few days.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 21, 2014, 10:32:35 PM
My dirt bike helmet was bought new in 1986.  It is time to get a new one.  I also needed a helmet for the big road trip.  In addition, a taller eye port will help me to see at B'ville when I am crouched down on the tank.  A single lid that meets all requirements is best from a cheapskate viewpoint.

The bucket shown is one of the new convertible helmets.  It can be used with the visor and no shield for the dirt.  The shield can be installed with no visor for speed work.  The visor and shield can be used together for road riding.

The visor is no problem at speeds up to 70 mph or so.  It shades the face shield so there is much less glare and eye strain when riding toward the sun.  The internal ventilation is better than any road helmet I have used.  This is a helmet I would definitely consider if I was using it in a car.  There is ample clearance around the nose for occasional bugger excavation.  Road helmets do not have enough room for this.

The wind noise in the helmet is loud.  This seems to be typical of full face ones.  I tried all sorts of fancy ear plugs and none worked very well.  A cheap pair of orange "foamies" like we use around construction projects did the trick.  No more noise.

The bike felt skaty through sweeping turns, like I was at the limits of cornering speed, at 55 or 60 mph.  It was pretty heavily loaded and I thought this was the problem.  This changed dramatically when I used the foamies.  I could easily add 5 to 10 mph to my speeds in the quiet environment with no strain.  I have no idea why this happens.  Foamies will be used at B'ville, for sure. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 21, 2014, 10:35:12 PM
Road vs convertible helmet in top view.  Both lids are Snell approved and legal for LSR.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 23, 2014, 12:30:23 AM
There is an aggressive form of rattlesnake in the near Ridgecrest called the Mohave Green.  Normal rattler antivenom will not work for these guy's bites.  My late uncle lived there and he told me about this.  Cowboys looped a rope around where they slept with the theory that the reptile will not cross the rope.  This rope has been soaked in stale racing gas to make sure the critters stay away. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on July 23, 2014, 06:24:05 PM
I did a bit of riding in '70-'71 in the Ridgecrest / Red Rock Canyon area................only came in direct contact with one rattler...........got him with both wheels :lol:  When I see you at the salt-flats I'll tell you about sleeping with them :roll:

Hope you get a chance to get to the Kennedy Meadows area..............and have a fishing line :-) :-) :-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stan Back on July 23, 2014, 06:26:16 PM
. . . and mosquito nets.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 23, 2014, 11:27:00 PM
Kennedy Meadows is beautiful place.  My aunt was going to scatter my uncle's ashes up there.  Someone built a ski resort where she wanted to do it.  She drove home to Ridgecrest and sprinkled him on his little flower garden.

This is Bridge Street south of Beaumont.  A bunch of oil bottles along side the road, an old worn out racing tire, and these odd marks on the pavement.  Bootleg drag racing on hot summer nights.  There are similar places where I ran in my youth.  Gosford Road near bakersfield was the only place where bets were made and money exchanged hands, that I know of.

Early in the night I was one of the faster or fastest bikes.  My downfall was a fondness for green cigarettes.  They do not help with drag racing.  The guy you are racing against is halfway down the track before you realize the starter lowered the flashlight.  This racing seems minor league and dumb now.  It was a great place to learn the fundamentals.  I am sure some more of us LSR folks did this at one time.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on July 24, 2014, 01:06:29 AM
Green cigarettes??? :-D
Good one Bo.

Sounds like you had a great trip?. On the road I mean. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 24, 2014, 09:54:31 PM
It has been a long time since I lit one of those.  They are legal now in some places.  It is hard to stay focused when Mary Jane is your girlfriend.

The happy fellow in the picture is a famous northern California racer, Craig Breedlove.  He is putting the finishing touches on a model of the car he is developing.  Car is maybe not the right term.  It is a double engined jet with no wings.

The model is made from a lamination of sheets fused together.  The sheets are cut on a printer.  It is hollow inside and it gives a good representation of the internal and external size of the jet car.  The actual design is being done using SolidWorks with both wind tunnel and virtual aerodynamic modeling.

It was impressive to listen to an expert talk about cutting-edge LSR who has done it, knows exactly what to do, and how hard it will be.  Two things I learned are how important it is to keep up with the state of the art and the great value of testing in real world conditions. 

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on July 25, 2014, 11:42:59 AM
It has been a long time since I lit one of those.  They are legal now in some places.  It is hard to stay focused when Mary Jane is your girlfriend.

The happy fellow in the picture is a famous northern California racer, Craig Breedlove.  He is putting the finishing touches on a model of the car he is developing.  Car is maybe not the right term.  It is a double engined jet with no wings.

The model is made from a lamination of sheets fused together.  The sheets are cut on a printer.  It is hollow inside and it gives a good representation of the internal and external size of the jet car.  The actual design is being done using SolidWorks with both wind tunnel and virtual aerodynamic modeling.

It was impressive to listen to an expert talk about cutting-edge LSR who has done it, knows exactly what to do, and how hard it will be.  Two things I learned are how important it is to keep up with the state of the art and the great value of testing in real world conditions. 



Incredibly Credible :-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 26, 2014, 02:52:39 PM
Prior to the trip I described how I would ride the same roads with this fuel injected bike that I did with an Amal equipped BSA.  Today's and tomorrow's posts are on what I learned about the two systems

SoCal, and to a lesser degree, Northern California, have extremes in urban area traffic conditions.  The freeways are choked with dense traffic traveling at high speeds.  The hills and mountains around the cities are crisscrossed with beautiful twisty roads having little traffic.  A very small amount of this trip was done on freeways and most on back roads.

The first picture shows a store at Mount Palomar near San Diego.  Sport bike riders are always coming and going from there.  There are twisty roads all around.  Cafe Racers are a big deal in California, people say.  None were seen the entire trip.  My middle son is on the red and black Triumph.

These EFI equipped bikes lurch on and off the power when the throttle is opened and shut from closed.  I wondered if the problems on my bike are due to the hotter cams.  My son has standard cams and the same difficulty.  The secret to going fast on these roads is to smoothly back off the throttle when leaning into a turn and to slowly open it when exiting. The most critical time for perfect throttle control are those times when the bike is leaned over real far.  Throttle control with these EFI systems is awful in these circumstances.  It takes far too much concentration to ride the EFI equipped bikes and a lot of speed is lost.  Amals are far better for street racing.

The next picture is of a state highway, believe it or not, in the hills above Saratoga in Northern Calif.  In this case the bike was fully loaded and the road was wet.  This is like a lot of the roads where I grew up.  Throttle control is essential for riding on these.  This was a day where I had some time to fiddle with things.  Adjusting the EFI requires a laptop and a the bike needs to be on a battery charger.  Adjusting the Animal carbs used a few jets out of a Sucrets cough drop can I carried in my riding jacket.  The monoblocs are the best.  All jets can be changed without taking the carb apart.  Amals are better when field adjustments are needed.

Some work will be done during the next few months to try and fix this problem on the EFI.  Plans are to use EFI with forced induction in the future.  Goofy EFI throttle response combined with the quirky power delivery from a turbo will be a real problem.  It is worth it for me to spend a little time working with this more modern fuel system.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on July 26, 2014, 05:51:16 PM
Bo,
Some of us just dream about taking another long road trip; others like you do it!  A 100 mile day trip seems to be my limit anymore.  I'm envious and you are to be congratulated as well as lucky to have a family member to ride with. 

I was surprised that the EFI systems are not as smooth as carburated ones.  I've never ridden a fuel injected bike - - maybe I won't!  I have a nice 850 Norton just waiting to be tweaked and I think it will be my roadie.

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 27, 2014, 01:09:07 AM
Tom, tomorrow I will post the good side of EFI. 

You will harden up during the trip.  The first day will seem kinda difficult and each one after that will get easier.  Toward the end you will be a riding animal.  One thing to make it easier is to book KOA cabins or motel rooms ahead of time so you do not have to camp and carry all of the gear.  I camped so I had to carry everything.

I was working a lot of overtime and actually was in the office on the 4th.  Preparation for the trip was minimal.  I threw a bunch of camping gear on the bike and headed south.  There were a lot of side winds south of Klamath Falls and all through California.  A lot of bulky camp gear and non essentials were left along side the road for the hobos to find.  I bought lighter backpacking gear to replace it in the cities I drove through.  It is important to pack light.  A big difference I noticed since my last big trips are there are a lot fewer gas stations in rural areas.  A long range tank, like on the Interstate, would be a good idea.  There are some bike shops handling the old British stuff.  You probably can get anything you need in an emergency in a few days using express delivery.

Che Guevara rode a Norton with his buddy on pillion from Buenos Aires to somewhere north of Valparaiso, Chile before it died.  They crossed the Andes.  Based on that, the newer Norton should work OK.   

               
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 27, 2014, 10:57:04 AM
A lot of climatic changes were encountered during this trip.  The picture in the redwoods in yesterday's post was on a cool humid morning a few hundred feet above sea level.  There were a lot of mountain passes over 7,000 feet.  It got hot, too.  It was 107 degrees when this picture was taken near Taft in the oil fields.  The EFI selected the correct mixture in all cases.  Mileage with the early model cams, glass pak mufflers, and using regular grade 10 percent gasahol was in the 50's on rural roads where I could maintain speed.  55 mpg was the best.  Mileage dipped down to the mid 30's when I was in city traffic like when I went up Highway 1 through Orange and Los Angeles counties.  34 mpg was the worst.

Mileage and performance like this is far better than I can get using carbs.  This really shows me the value of EFI for use when density altitude varies a lot.  Plans are to work with the EFI this winter to get the throttle response problem figured out.  My son recommends a throttle drum with a progressive cam that opens the butterflies slowly at first.  Other alternatives are to use the throttle position-rpm-injector opening duration maps, only, without the manifold vacuum-rpm-injector maps, and/or to fiddle around the the spark timing curves.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Sporty Dan on July 27, 2014, 12:59:43 PM
Looks like a great road trip!  :-D I'm jealous! Glad to hear the EFI is working so well for you.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 29, 2014, 01:51:01 AM
The optimum power happened with #142 main jets using the oxygenated gas.  This was a three sizes larger than the optimum main jets using the leaded gas.  This is as expected.

The Stage 3 spark advance curve is the one used my most race engine builders.  Average peak torque for three runs was 71.1 pounds-feet.  The Stage 4 curve is 2 degrees advanced from the Stage 3.  It gave a 3-run average of 70.9 lbs-ft.  The Stage 5 curve is 4 degrees advanced from the Stage 3.  It gave a 3-run average of 69.7 lbs-ft.  The best policy is to run the most retarded curve that gives decent power.  This is the Stage 3 one.

Average power is 87.2 with the 142 mains and the Stage 3 curve.  ERC suggests, and I agree, that something is holding this motor back so it cannot take advantage of the oxygenated gas.  They have some suggestions.  This winter I will implement them.

The next step is to figure out the density altitude in the dyno room when the jetting runs were made.  The climatic conditions during the three pulls are listed on the printouts.  Avg temp is 91.4 degrees F, uncorrected barometric pressure is 30.22 inches Hg, humidity is 12%.  The Airdensityonline website has a calculator.  Using it, the density altitude in the dyno room was 1,853 feet.

The general rules of thumb for Keihin FCR's are to decrease the main jet one size for every 2,000 feet increase in elevation and to decrease the pilot jet one size for every 4,000 feet.

The average of the three highest density altitudes on my time slips from B'ville are 6,590 feet, the average of all density altitudes is 6,020 feet, and the average DA of the lowest three is 5,390 feet.

6,590 - 1,853 = 4,740
6,020 - 1,853 = 4,170
5,390 - 1,853 = 3,540

Decreasing the main jet two sizes and the pilot one size should be ideal.  What I will do is to decrease the main jets one size and to leave the pilots alone.   It is better to have a slightly rich mixture in an air cooled motor.  A little bit of extra fuel cools them down some.     

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 30, 2014, 01:18:51 AM
The bar tender at one of my locals asked me how my week was going.  I said "not so good" and I told him about my missing horsepower.  They did not know I land speed raced.  I was maintaining a facade of sanity and normalcy.  One thing led to another, and our annual team picture with the bike ready to go will be taken at around 5:00 PM on Tuesday at Santiam Brewery, 2544 19th St. S.E., Salem, Oregon.  Salem is divided into five parts and the S.E. section is the southeast corner of the town.  Anyone in the area is welcome.  The brewery is at the far back of an industrial park so it takes a bit of looking to find it.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 30, 2014, 08:25:40 PM
These are the three pulls we did with jets making the most power combined with the most retarded spark advance curve that made optimum peak torque.  Note how the mixture goes rich at high rpm.  Any ideas?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on July 30, 2014, 09:55:36 PM
I know nothing about your Triumph, but in the Ford 2.3 Turbo world, AFR ~12.5 @ 8000rpm would be considered to be lean, tending toward dangerously lean.

Watching, as always, with great interest.

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 31, 2014, 12:48:36 AM
This motor has always produces best power with leaner mixtures.  No signs of overheating during any of the many tear downs.  Usually A 5-gallon can of gas lasts a full year including dyno runs.  Can't complain.

The bike will be on exhibit from 10 till closing, at Cascade Moto Classics, 13705 Farmington Road, Beaverton, Oregon.  I will be there to answer any questions, etc.  At 9:00 that morning we have the Triumph breakfast nearby.  Details are at www.cascademoto.com

Now a few late night sessions are needed to put the dang thing together.
       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 03, 2014, 02:02:36 PM
The engine is built to be a hot street motor that will run on regular grade gasoline, have low enough cranking pressure to fire up on cold mornings without a roller starter, be drivable in the city and on the open road, and to give good gas mileage.  Also, it will not wear itself out real quick.  The VE is 105%.  Probably with some tweaking to the carbs and advance curve, I can get it up to 108% or so.  This is the best I can do with these street motors based on past experience.  This motor is a raving success for what it is built to do.

The book "How to Build Horsepower" by Vizard, on Pages 27 and 28 describes my problem.  Reversion through the intake tract at wide open throttle and high rpm is causing the mixture to go rich.  These FCR flat slide carbs have main air jets and main fuel jets.  Use of a bigger main air jet could be a solution.  Unfortunately, the #200 jets I am using are the biggest available.  What I need are new emulsion tubes with more holes toward the tops or to add a hole or two to the ones I have.  This will lean out the mixture at high rpm WOT to compensate for the reversion.

My timing curves are proprietary and I need to know what they are.  I need to find the software to make them what I want them to be.  Fixed advance curves from 5,000 rpm to redline are what I need.  The ones I have might or might not do this.

Figuring out what I need to do to get 160 mph out of the bike was a project I did last winter.  Expected aero improvements, less restrictive mufflers, more air pressure in the tires, and a hotter cams should do the trick.  My gamble was to use the oxygenated fuel in place of the cams.  That did not work so a realistic goal is 150 mph.  That is 10 mph faster than I have been before.  A 38-tooth rear sprocket is on the bike.  The engine will rev to 7,500 rpm with 0 percent slip or to 7,660 rpm with 2 percent slip.  This fits in perfect with the horsepower curve shown a few posts previous.

The big three things for fuel selection, in my experience are sufficient octane to provide controlled combustion, enough caloric heat to make lots of energy for good power, and optimum burn speed.  The leaded gas I use is fairly light with a specific gravity of 0.729.  My guess is it is typical of lighter fuels and it is volatile and fast burning.  I do not know about the burn speed of the oxygenated gas I am using.  This winter my plan is to test an oxygenated gas with similar burn speed to the leaded gas that is working well now.

This picture is from yesterday and it is the 996 Honda Superhawk I was offered to use as an LSR bike  This was back when I first started and I declined.  The yellow devil scared me.  Dyno curves for one of these is in my notebook.  Now the Triumph produces more power and torque than the hawk.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on August 04, 2014, 12:37:05 AM
Never owned a Honda.

That bike doesn't suit you.
If I never knew I'd say the black  Merc was your car and you owned the bike dealership. :-D :-D :-D
Take no notice, I'm delirious with flu.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 05, 2014, 02:31:14 AM
Mike, I work for the state highway department.  A stick shift four cylnder pickup, Bonnie the race bike, Clyde the street bike, two mangy dirt bikes, and a funky home made trailer comprise the entire rolling stock around here.  The Superhawk a good bike if you are built like an orangutan with short legs and real long arms.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on August 05, 2014, 06:36:16 PM
You've got it all Bo. :cheers:
 I'd love having the stuff on that list but I must say that the mangy dirt bikes are my favourite.
I can ride those. The rest not so much.
The State Highway Dept?. Nothing wrong with that. If your day job gets the same attention as the bikes do I'd say that Oregon is in perfect shape.
This thread is the first I check out when I log on. :cheers:

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 06, 2014, 01:57:54 AM
We are proud of our road system.  The generation before us did a good job and we try to follow their example.

The photo shoot in the brewery tasting room went OK.  They had a paid photographer to shoot photos for their Facebook site.  This is a new concept for me.  The bird on one shoulder tells me this social media is the modern way of doing things and I should be comfortable with all of the exposure.  The bird on the other shoulder says it is a distraction and nothing but trouble.  The photographer left and the place calmed down.  One of the brewers took our team picture for this year.  Rose and our youngest daughter, Gretchen, are in the photo.  The heading will be put on sometime this winter when I figure out how to print using Apple. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on August 06, 2014, 10:21:06 PM
Nice photo Bo.

I agree with that bird on your shoulder. :evil:

How come you only have an option to "Like" on Facebook?. :-D

You're looking trim and ready. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 10, 2014, 02:20:34 AM
Mike, I am ready to go.  The bike is fresh and running good and I am as good as I have ever been.

Years ago I built a long bike rack for the trailer.  The Bonneville was too big to fit on the rails made for the dirt bikes.  It was a moment of suboptimal thinking when I chose American Standard steel channel for the rail and loading ramp.  That stuff is strong and megaheavy.  The first picture shows those steel parts. 

The trailer spring that broke last year is a sign. I need to pare weight from the trailer or its load.  This new rail and loading ramp do that.  They are made from 6061 alloy with T-6 temper.  The channel rolled to Aluminum Association cross-section.  They are much lighter.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on August 10, 2014, 03:22:30 AM
Bo,It was nice talking to you and having a look at your bike at the brewery.

Thanks, Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on August 10, 2014, 04:15:41 AM
I always learn something from you Bo.

I got a nice ramp from a friend and you could load a Heritage softail or any other heavy bike with it.

I'm selling all the bike stuff including my Bobber rolling chassis but the ramp will stay.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 11, 2014, 01:01:33 AM
Don, thanks for the landracing.com stickers.  They are on the bike.

Mike, sorry to hear about you selling all of your bike stuff.  It will clear up some room in the garage so there is a benefit.

Standard operating procedure is to look at the water near the boat ramp before we go out onto the lake.  This is done if it looks like the trailer hubs will be submerged or heavily splashed.  The rubber cover, called a bearing buddy bra, is pulled off of the trailer hub.  Enough boat trailer wheel bearing grease is squirted into the hub, through the grease fitting, to preload the spring.  This creates positive pressure in the hub.  Then, down into the drink I drive.  No wheel bearing problems occur when I do this.

Last year a trailer spring broke and the bearing buddy came off on one side.  It was replaced with the standard pressed steel cap found on most hubs.  There was no positive pressure inside that hub when the wheel was submerged near the boat ramp.  Salt water got inside the hub from the oil seal side and it trashed the inside bearing.  I was lucky.  I got home and made three round trips to Portland and back with that bad bearing.  Now there is a bearing buddy on that side, too.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 15, 2014, 08:39:47 PM
The goal this year is to go just over 150 mph.  The black band to the right in the picture is the engine rpm between 0 and 2 percent wheel slip for 150 mph with a 38 tooth rear sprocket.  The black band to the left is for a 36 tooth sprocket.  Note how the horsepower is the same for all practical purposes.  The 38 tooth chainwheel gives the engine about 5% more leverage on the track.  It is good for a few mph.

Usually I never run my engines real hard unless I am trying to set or up a record.  The plan is to run the 36 tooth sprocket at first to see if 150 mph can be exceeded.  It is easier on the engine to turn lower rpm.  Another run will be made with the 38 if I need a few more mph.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 17, 2014, 01:52:35 AM
Rose and Gretchen left on the southbound train for a week to visit relatives.  The thrash begins.  Perhaps this in not the right word.  It implies brain stem logic and spasmodic and reactionary action.  In this case everything is totally calm and cerebral.

These bikes from the factory have a wide gap between the back of the countershaft cover and the leading edge of the chain guard.  It was even wider after the swing arm was extended.  About 8 inches of unshielded chain.  A chain guard was made to cover the gap.

The loading ramps are made out of 6061 T-6 aluminum.  There was enough left over to make the chain guard.  This is a moderately high strength aluminum alloy and temper.  It compares favorably to mild steel in some respects.

The pictures show the chain guard.  It is hard to figure out what it is from looking at the photos.  It was even more confusing to design and build. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on August 17, 2014, 08:32:51 PM
6061-T6 is the highest strength aluminum alloy that is commercially available. It has a good combination of properties.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 17, 2014, 08:56:25 PM
Neil, you are right.  We could get the stronger tempers of 2024 here until a few years ago.  Now it is hard to find.

Last week I dropped my 1/2 inch torque wrench and broke it.  Both the 3/8 and 1/2 inch ones I had since I was a professional mechanic over 30 years ago.  The graduations on the rotating sleeve were painted on and mostly worn off.  It was time to replace both wrenches.

This was discussed with my middle son.  He told me the marines use Armstrong torque wrenches that are made in the USA and I can find the same ones at Home Depot.  He is right.  I bought two and the price is reasonable.  The graduations are stamped into the metal on both the rotating sleeve and the body.  The marks will not wear off.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on August 18, 2014, 02:52:15 PM
I always try to work with a carpet on the floor................We leave Wednesday..........see you on the big white dyno.......... :-) :-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 19, 2014, 01:01:36 AM
We will be there, Tom.  The boss was talking to me about working a bunch of overtime this week.  He was about 25 feet away when he said it and I kept walking and did not look at him.  Pretended not to hear him.  This could get ugly for the WW.  I am still working on the scoot and have not started to pack for the trip.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 21, 2014, 01:03:10 AM
The class designations with big letters are on the bike.  "Cat 1" means "motorcycles propelled by the action of one wheel in contact with the ground."  There are other categories for bikes with two powered wheels like Rokons and bikes with tracks instead of wheels.

"Group A1" is for "solo motorcycles."  These are "2-wheeler bikes making one track on the ground."  There are other groups for sidecar bikes and cycle cars like Morgans.

"Division B" is "Partially-Streamlined."  Naked bikes are in Div A and full streamliners are in Div C.

"Type 1" means "Internal combustion, spark ignition, naturally aspirated."

"Class 10" is for "over 750 cc to 1000 cc"

"(2 Cyl)" means the twins class with Honda Superhawks, BSA A-65's,etc.  Abbreviations like APS-AF would not mean a lot to a guy in Indonesia or elsewhere.  The way the FIM does it makes sense from an international perspective.

One big difference between FIM and other organizations is a two hour turn around time between the down and back runs.  This means a fellow or lady has to be pretty organized.  Those two hours pass pretty quick.

Our team ran and set records on a couple of bikes in the AMA modified partial streamliner - production engine class, MPS-P.  Production engines were made illegal for modified or altered partial streamliners.  The engine was changed to make it altered so it could run in MPS-AG or APS-AG.  Then, production frames were made illegal for MPS or APS.  This was getting silly.  Now the bike had no AMA class to run in.  It has a Triumph frame.  The FIM rules are much more stable.  I can be fairly sure that what I raced last year can be run this year.  It was hard to do this with the AMA.

The FIM rules give builders more latitude.  Electric motor driven forced air induction would be legal in Type II.  A bike like mine with lots of streamlining and a production frame is illegal in AMA.

This explains a little bit about the FIM and why it makes sense for this guy to race in it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 22, 2014, 01:24:45 PM
The bike was done, so I thought.  The throttle would not spring shut so the tank, rear section, came off and the carbs were pulled off.  The throttle return mechanism got bent and it was straightened.  An auxiliary spring was attached to make sure it shut.  Up till midnight last night.  That is a mini thrash by walrus standards and the two wheeled Jezebel is off the bench and going on the trailer.

Any cams beyond the Triumph 790 ones need valve train work.  Kibblewhite built a custom setup for this bike.  They flow tested the head as a favor.  This is a big help.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 22, 2014, 01:29:48 PM
Thanks go to Floyd from the Triumph club who gave me a big wad of gas money, and you'all and Slim at Landracing.com for advice.  Also, Rose, Cascade MotoClassics, and ERC get big thanks.  We are off to the races.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: peterdallan on August 22, 2014, 02:58:47 PM
Best of luck Bo, sorry I won't see you this year, I came over to experience Speed Week this year rather than BUB I ran last year and the less said the better about that decision. Back in the UK still sulking.......
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on August 22, 2014, 03:01:49 PM
ROSE.......................have fun.

Go barefooted. It feels good.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 23, 2014, 11:49:37 PM
Peter, the bike meet and the USFRA meeting occur past the peak of the monsoon season and before the arrival of the winter frontal storms.  They are close together, time wise.  Probably, if I came from afar, I would attend both meets.  Chances are the weather will be good for one or both.

Barefoot? On the salt?

We got to the Malheur Field Station a few hours ago.  This camera I have is a Canon Rebel and it is smarter than me. The picture of the truck is at our luxury digs at the bottom of the hill.  It is getting dark.  It was even darker after I walked to the top of the hill and took this photo of the field station.  Note how it looks like day.  There is a dial on these cameras with hyroglyphic (Egyptian like) symbols.  The dial was turned all the way clockwise when the photo was taken.  The only doctoring I did to the photo was to do "auto correct" which gave it a richer color.  It did not make it brighter.  It was that way to start.

The sun's glare off the salt makes it hard to take daytime photos.  I will try some in the morning and evening photos with this setting when the sun is not yet up or after it is down.  They might turn out pretty good.     

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on August 24, 2014, 02:33:16 PM
In the picture of the truck You had too much sky in it. That told the camera there was more

light  than there was on the truck. Less sky, just a sliver, and the truck would have been fine

and the sky would have been washed out. The bright light of the sky fooled the camera as to what

You wanted exposed properly. Most cameras determine the exposure near the center of the image.

Some cameras that allow you to alter the area that is in focus chose the exposure from near the center of the image.

In the second foto the light was uniform and so the camera knew what to do.

Let Her tell you what bare feet on the salt feels like. You haven't read that chapter in the book.

Both Her feet and your tires benefit from the coolness of the salt.

FREUD

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: hotrod on August 24, 2014, 03:13:33 PM
Or you can have some magic electrons work on the image. ;)

I took the liberty of brightening up the dark areas
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on August 24, 2014, 03:26:32 PM
Thanks for the mods. All I wanted to do was help him next time.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 26, 2014, 10:35:30 AM
Thanks for the help with the photos.  These are things I will try next time.

Every trip we take to Utah has some near disaster.  Last year it was the trailer spring break.  That could easily have been real ugly.  This year it was the deer.  We were driving through Roaring Springs Ranch at the base of Catlow Rim when it jumped out of the sagebrush and ran across the road.  It was close.  Real close.  We saw its back muscles flexing as it passed within inches of the right headlight.  It is smooth sailing now.  The close call is behind us.

The pit is set up next to Dennis "Old Scrambler."  The bike wet through tech yesterday afternoon and everything is made ready.  They had the Legends show at the Wendover community hall that evening.  It was mostly a Harley gig and real lovey-dovey on S&S.  This is a part of our history I know nothing about so it was interesting.  Sort of.

We were up at 5 and near the front of the line to go out onto the salt.  Basically, you drive down off of the boat ramp into the lake and hope for the best.  It is real spooky in the morning when you cannot see the big holes near the ramp.  The pits were dry yesterday afternoon.  This morning they were under water.  About an inch to an inch and a half where we are.  The track is to wet for a 150+ mph run.  I will be lucky to get 140 or so.  We did not get out of the truck.  Just turned around and went back to camp.  Tomorrow we will try again. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 55chevr on August 26, 2014, 06:25:26 PM
Ugh ....  must be lots of wheel spin
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: joea on August 26, 2014, 06:35:38 PM
55 the reports from sanctioning body on FB are record speeds, over 221 mph,others ovr 200 including Andy Sills over 216, reports (also per the bmst FB )

""Andy Sills #1948 1000-MPS-AF says the International Course is "Excellent - smooth- feels quick" 216.015mph"

Eva just set world record record over 210


Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 26, 2014, 09:58:16 PM
We went exploring and found a glade full of tan colored mosquitos in an oasis south of town.  They swarmed in for the kill and we left quick.  The weather looked bad and especially south of town.  We went real quick back to the flats to make an afternoon run on the international track.

The bike steered different before I changed the streamlining and moved the pegs back.  I was drifting to the right and I could not figure out how to get back in the middle of the track.  Leaning my shoulder off the bike a little bit in the direction I want to go seems to work.  The run was 146 for the kilo and mile.  This beats my old mile time by 7 mph and my kilo time by 5 mph.  I forgot to tuck my feet in and my body tuck was pretty bad.  There is room for me to improve.

The 36 tooth sprocket was on the back and the engine was turning about 7,200 rpm.  The rev limiter is set for 8,400 rpm so I have some ability to wind it tighter.  The plan is to put the 38 tooth chainwheel on the back and make a Hail Mary run tomorrow.  There will be parts all over the salt or I will have a 150 mph medal.  Also, I plan to remember how to ride.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: joea on August 26, 2014, 11:38:14 PM
FANTASTIC.....major kudo's...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on August 27, 2014, 12:44:12 AM
Well done, Bo!   :cheers:

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: charlie101 on August 27, 2014, 01:02:00 AM
I'm chilling the 150mph beer's... :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on August 27, 2014, 05:20:18 AM
Me too.
You'll do it Bo.  :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 27, 2014, 08:30:20 PM
A t-storm came through last night and the track is too wet to use today.  It is on the high and dry ground.  The salt is thinner there so the surface is fragile.  It should dry tonight.  Tomorrow we race from early morning until 4:00.  This is bike racing at its best if you live in the area.  We are going for all the marbles.  It is the last day.

The trailer is used as a bike bench.  The front of the scoot is tied down and a bottle jack is used to lift up the back so it is up in the air.  Then, it is easier to change the sprocket.  This save  lot of bending over.

This is an international meet.  Today I heard German, Dutch, East London, Australian, and Japanese.  Tom (Koncretekid) set a time over 150 mph yesterday on his old BSA.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 27, 2014, 08:34:33 PM
It is rare to see a consist of passenger cars anymore except Amtrak.  These are on a siding down near the potash plant.  One view is from the front and the other from the rear.  All are Union Pacific.  No one is in them.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 27, 2014, 08:39:48 PM
Union Pacific bought our big west coast railroad, the Southern Pacific.  This is the locomotive.  The SP never ran these engines or locos in this color.  It is a tribute to their heritage.  The police officer assigned to watch these things came over and explained that they are for a celebration of Nevada's 150th birthday.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 29, 2014, 12:14:42 PM
And we think we have hard jobs...  This wasp is dragging this full size dead tarantula off of the road.  In the Leppy Hills just north of Wendover.

The first run on Thursday was with the 38 tooth rear.  It is two teeth bigger than the one I used on Tuesday to go 146.  Either the engine was on the rev limiter or it was out of breath.  The run was 141.  The motor is built to go over 9,000 rpm and the rev limiter is at 8,400.  This saved me big $ on this run.

The sprocket was changed to the 35 tooth one.  The last run was 143.  The knock light showed flickers of uncontrolled combustion.  The engine was turning lower rpm - closer to the torque peak - and chamber pressures were higher than on the other runs.  This oxygenated unleaded does not have enough octane to support a lot of compression.

My tail is between my legs and under my trembling and spanked puppy dog butt.  No 150 mph this year.  Motor work needs to be done.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on August 29, 2014, 05:21:25 PM
That's disappointing Bo.
Would changing the fuel make a difference?.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: SaltPeter on August 30, 2014, 04:27:15 PM
Bo

I know how you feel ... but you were out there having a red hot go .... onward and upward ....

Pete  :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 02, 2014, 12:01:27 AM
The fairing nose reshape got rid of the lift on the front at speed.  The chassis is sorted and now I can concentrate on the engine.  The bike is very stable.  A conversation with a couple of experts tells me that, to play in this league, I need to move peak power at least 1000 rpm higher, from 7,000 ish to around 8,000 rpm.  Also the all-purpose cams I am using are "sissy cams" for LSR.  I knew this.  The plan is to bump up the compression ratio and to install some beefier cams.

Some of you know Rose from meeting her at the NW Reunion.  She decided to swim across the Columbia River and she practiced in the little pool at our local YMCA.  The distance is over a mile so she did 100 laps at a time to get ready.

It is near dawn today and she is on this paddle wheel ship in the first picture.  It is leaving Hood River Oregon to go to the Washington side.  It will tie up at the dock there.  She will jump from the deck down into the river.  The swimmers head for the Oregon shore.  They are in the second photo.  It is 1.1 miles across.  The course is at a diagonal to the shore.  The current carries them downstream when they cross.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 02, 2014, 12:04:50 AM
Rose has not done this before.  She said the water deep under the ship was very cold when she dived in.  The currents and waves made it difficult to keep on-line and to be breathe.  Here she is on the Oregon side.  Tired and happy.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on September 02, 2014, 12:38:21 AM
Congratulations to Rose!  I get winded just swimming 50 yards, anymore.  And that water would be a lot colder than the lake at Bonneville! 

I hope to see you next year.  And BTW, Loring is a great place for test and tune - - and you don't even have to leave the Country.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on September 02, 2014, 01:03:04 AM
GREAT JOB, Rose.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on September 02, 2014, 01:08:06 AM
Bo, we have a local race called the Midmar Mile. Thousands turn up for the race. Well done Rose.

My buddy Richard showed up unexpectedly yesterday. He bought a new Trump. Hell, I didn't know he even rode
and it looks pretty neat. I found out that he also owns a Royal Enfield.

Richard told me that the carbs are bogus but are on there to give the bike a classic look.
All the while I was looking at the bike I was thinking of you. :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on September 02, 2014, 01:30:36 AM
Bravo, Rose!  I got my Boy Scout Mile Swim Badge at Camp Meriwether as a young, in shape teenager.  It was hard.  I might have been able to do it in my early twenties but as a thirty-something (or older!)  :-D  impossible!

Again,  BRAVO!

Mike

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 03, 2014, 01:42:33 AM
The freeway we were on coming home on from the swim meet was closed cause some nut was shooting at the cars.  We were caught in the mother of all traffic jams.  They routed all of the Interstate 84 traffic off of the freeway at one exit.  That is three lanes of traffic going down a one lane ramp.  Racing at Bonneville, Rose swimming across the river, and the traffic jam.  It is good to be home.

Mike, the injectors are inside those carbs.  There is a lot of room in them the that is not used.  They are perfect places to hide small things.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on September 03, 2014, 02:16:34 AM
Diamonds?. :-o
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 04, 2014, 12:50:57 AM
This is the time of year when I plan what to do for the next one.  The chassis including suspension and streamlining is about as good as I can get it.  The motor needs a few horsepower so I can go 150 mph.  Consultation with Matt Capri reveals I am 10 to 15 horsepower short of where I should be.  I need more compression, much bigger valves, and another set of cams.

The cylinder head flow data are below.  The intake flow is most critical and it is what I look at.  These figures represent the flow through the head with valves, manifold, carb, bellmouth, and air filter attached.

The cams in the bike now have 0.388 inches lift.  The new cams will have more than 0.425  Note the flow in CCFM is 209.5 at 0.375 lift and only a very small slightly better with 211.1 CCFM at 0.450 lift.  This shows me the higher lift cams will do me no good unless I put in bigger valves.

I cannot afford the valve work so the cams are not feasible.  The only option I have left is to raise the compression and to use the cams and valves I have now.  Matt says 12.5 to 1 will work and it is about as high as I want to go.  I will need to use race gas after this change.

     

   

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 05, 2014, 01:40:25 AM
The next step is to figure out how much more horsepower the added compression will give.  Two methods will be used.  One is to look at the handy chart on Page 69 in David Vizard's "How to Build Horsepower."  It says that increasing the compression ratio from 10.5 to 1 upward to 12.5 to 1 will give me 2.65% more horsepower.  This is 87.2 x 0.0265 = 2.31 HP.  Not much of an increase.  Tomorrow I will use PipeMax.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on September 05, 2014, 07:09:56 PM
Bo,
2.31 hp might not seem like much, but you've still got long pipes and mufflers - - which might be good for a wide torque curve, but not for maximum hp.  I think that if you shorten the pipes and possibly lengthen the intakes along with that increase in CR, you'll see a big difference.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 05, 2014, 09:38:39 PM
Tom, the Arrow 2 into 2 mufflers and headers I used a few years ago were long and exactly what you say was true.  The effective length of the pipes on it now ends right under the front of the engine where the cross-over pipe is.  It connects the two headers.  This short tuned length uses the third harmonic to make a big increase in power.  A bunch of dyno time went into the inlet tract length and shape.  They are right where they need to be for these cams.  They are a lot longer than it appears from the outside.  Tom, tell me what you know about ceramic coatings.  I can order the pistons with them.

The PipeMax printout for this year's motor is attached.  The 7,300 Peak HP RPM is from an average of three dyno runs with optimum spark advance curve and jetting.  The measured rear wheel HP was 87.2.  The engine HP is estimated to be 1.1 X 87.2 = 95.9 HP.  The volumetric efficiency entry in PipeMax was changed incrementally until the Peak Horsepower from an Average engine is close to this.  The VE is 108 percent.  This is typical of the most VE I am able to get from these motors.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 05, 2014, 10:12:26 PM
It is assumed the same 108 percent VE will happen with the higher compression motor.  The compression ratio entry in PipeMax is changed from 10.5 to 12.5.  The horsepower reading goes up to 99.4.  In terms of an increase in rear wheel HP:  (99.4 - 95.5) / 1.1 = 3.5 HP.  Not much of an increase and for all practical purposes a result similar to Vizard's prediction.

Look at octane requirements!  10.5 to 1 needs around 96 octane and 12.5 to 1 needs around 109.  A huge increase.

The flow this engine will need at 28 inches is 178.5 to 188 CCFM intake and 125.8 to 140.4 exhaust.  The head as it is now will provide plenty of flow as per the attachments to a recent post.

The goal is to exceed 150 mph with a NA motor and nothing more.  I will investigate use of ceramics with the compression increase.  This should give me what I want which is five or so more HP.

The next step is forced induction and the existing cams, displacement, and valve sizes are what I plan to use.  The ceramics will be a big help, too.  My goal is to get a 150 medal and go to blow without tossing out a lot of expensive parts.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Sporty Dan on September 06, 2014, 12:30:22 AM
Wobbly, ceramic coatings on pistons are a good thing. I have a heat barrier on the top and a slippery coating on the piston skirts. They seem to work well. Have you looked at ceramic bearings for your wheels? They are pricey, but from what I've heard they make a big difference. One other thing I just thought of, if this is going to end up as a race only bike you can get rid of the charging system. That would get rid of drag and rotating mass.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 06, 2014, 02:14:58 AM
Thanks for the advice, Dan.  Ceramic wheel bearings will go on this year along with a heat barrier.

This is a lot of work for a few HP using gasoline.  Why not raise the compression ratio much further and run on dope?  The FIM class I am in allows it and I have done a lot of mods to use fuel.  That engine is very strong, structurally. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Sporty Dan on September 06, 2014, 08:36:14 PM
Wobbly, are you talking about alcohol or tipping the can? (Nitromethane)  :evil:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 07, 2014, 04:58:34 PM
Thermal management will be a big issue with this air cooled engine and forced induction.  A few years ago I was helping Lars with his supercharged flat head Indian.  He used alcohol and this kept the combustion temps at a reasonable level.  This is when I learned about this concept.

VP makes an alcohol blend that is easier to deal with than straight methanol.  There is also E85.  Right now I am thinking of running high compression with NA and alky or a alky based blend so I can get familiarity with the fuel.  Basically, I am kinda cheap and lazy so this will influence the ultimate choice.  I do not know Jack about any of these fuels so my mind is open to good advice.

Nitromethane sure is tempting.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on September 07, 2014, 06:24:10 PM
Nitromethane sure is tempting.

Not if you're cheap!  :-D :-D :-D

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on September 07, 2014, 06:50:01 PM
Thermal management will be a big issue with this air cooled engine and forced induction.  A few years ago I was helping Lars with his supercharged flat head Indian.  He used alcohol and this kept the combustion temps at a reasonable level.  This is when I learned about this concept.

VP makes an alcohol blend that is easier to deal with than straight methanol.  There is also E85.  Right now I am thinking of running high compression with NA and alky or a alky based blend so I can get familiarity with the fuel.  Basically, I am kinda cheap and lazy so this will influence the ultimate choice.  I do not know Jack about any of these fuels so my mind is open to good advice.

Nitromethane sure is tempting.

I remember reading something to the effect that in air-cooled aircraft engines, the maximum power output is limited by its allowable cylinder head temperature.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 07, 2014, 11:30:30 PM
The bike would be a fuel tank with wheels if it carried enough nitromethane for a down and back run.

Neil, you are right.  On this engine the cylinder head can get hot enough so the aluminum between the valve seats or between the valve seats and the spark plugs permanently deforms.  The metal cracks when the cylinder head contracts as it cools.  There is a lot of money tied up in a cyl head on one of these bikes and this is a big concern.

The big Harley Valerie Thompson rode a few years ago ran on E85.  Maybe I can find out who built it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Sporty Dan on September 08, 2014, 12:09:42 AM
Wobbly, I am planning on running a turbo on my sporty next year on either E85 or a 50/50 mix of gas and alcohol for the same reasons you bring up. Head temperatures. From drag racing I know that I would lose power quickly when the motor got hot. That's one thing alcohol does is reduce temperatures.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 09, 2014, 01:54:13 AM
The dyno curves and cylinder head flow data was sent to a cam grinder to get a special set of bump sticks.  My goal is to get a few horses to go over 150 and I do not want a wild set of cams that wear out the valve train, I said.  A new set of pistons will be made with 12.5 to 1 compression and heat barrier coatings.  This is the highest ratio I can reliably run on gas.  Plans are to do dyno work with E85 and leaded gas to see which makes the best power.  The coolest running fuel will be used if they both make similar power.  E85 is chosen 'cause it is more user friendly and costs less than methanol.  VP and Sunoco both make the stuff so it should be easy to find.

Dan, RB Racing might be able to help you.  They have a lot of experience on the salt with blown Harleys.   
 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on September 09, 2014, 09:57:53 PM
Bo,
I've run with a ceramic coated piston for 3 years without any indication of overheating, although I did go with a new piston this year because the clearance was up to .007"  Bottom of the piston is a caramel color and the top is just the color of the ceramic with an even gray coating.  Head has even coloring with the valves (titanium) a lighter yellow tinge.  This year I had 14 to 1 CR with a 92mm piston, 250 psi cranking pressure, twin plugs, and ran 110K without a glitch.  And then a very knowledgeable friend told me I should be using a different gas that would burn faster and make more power!  I dunno, but the old thing just keeps running and getting faster!

I don't think you will have any problems with 12.5 to 1 and 110K, and I like the ceramic coating for the extra protection for the piston.

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 10, 2014, 01:13:03 AM
Tom, I'll give you a good deal on a half drum of highly oxygenated Australian stock car fuel...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on September 10, 2014, 10:45:11 PM
But Bo, I don't plan on running in Australia!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 10, 2014, 11:32:58 PM
The fuel was blended by ERC fo me when I was planning to go to AUS.  There is no reason it cannot be used here for FIM or the fuel classes in AMA or SCTA.  Rick at ERC makes the fuel and ships it to AUS.

Plans have changed a little bit.  I am tired of working on the bike.  A huge amount of hours was spent in the shed this year.  Plans are to change out the rod big end bearings, install 12.5 to 1 pistons with coatings, and to install some custom cams.  All will be tuned to run on Sunoco MO2X leaded.  This will be a light year for me, bikewise.

Plans are to race in Africa.  I will travel there alone.  I do not have that many years left when I can do this, so if I do it, it needs to be now.     

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 12, 2014, 01:22:26 AM
My original plan was to race at Delvene's meet, clean the bike up, and to ship it to AUS for the Lake Gairdner meet in Feb.  Gretchen could not get the time off from school.  The logistics of getting to AUS and then to the lake are too complicated for this homeboy.  Add to this the 50% chance of being rained out.  I might go to AUS after I get more experience with overseas travel.  My out-of-country travel is going through Mexico and to Alaska on a bike with Rose on the back.  Nothing exotic about that.

This is the African meet I sorta accidentally discovered while planning the AUS trip.  www.speedweeksa.com (http://www.speedweeksa.com)
It looks almost military with the little pup tents all in a row.  This is what I need.  All sorts of things are planned out so all I have to worry about is getting there with the bike and hauling A across the desert floor.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 14, 2014, 12:56:47 PM
Fuel for this air-cooled twin has been investigated by reading what I can find in books and on the i-net.  I am trying to predict the happenings in the combustion chamber and work outward from there.

Nitropropane additive and nitrous are oxidizers with low to no cooling effect from vaporization in the intake tracts.  Plenty of power is available but heat will be a problem.

Propylene oxide and nitromethane give off some very toxic fumes and are a serious health hazard to all around.  This disqualifies them.

Methanol is corrosive and the fumes are irritating.  It will take a lot of maintenance time and expense to use it.

Gasoline is the default fuel.  It can be used in leaded grades.  Some more minor health issues but feasible.

Ethanol provides better intake cooling from vaporization and BTU's per unit weight than methanol.  It is also less toxic and corrosive.  The lack of toxicity is a big issue 'cause the dyno room and my shed are not well ventilated, even with the doors open.  Plus, there are people around me on the salt when I am staging.  Right now I am looking hard at VP C85 and Sunoco E85.  Both are ethanol/unleaded fuel blends.

Is my reasoning on this reasonable?  Does anyone have experience with these 85% ethanol blends in air cooled bikes?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 16, 2014, 02:17:01 AM
An interesting article.  www.turbomagazine.com/tech/0406tur_knight_turbo_electric_supercharger (http://www.turbomagazine.com/tech/0406tur_knight_turbo_electric_supercharger)

Another one.  www.aeristech.co.uk/electric-supercharger (http://www.aeristech.co.uk/electric-supercharger)

Most of the electric supercharger work is done in the UK.  My feeling is the blower, like all engine components, will eventually go to electric drive so it can be controlled as an aspect of engine management.  Hopefully, in a few years when I get ready for the supercharger installation, folks will have figured this concept out.  It is attractive.  A total loss electric blower has no parasitic drag.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on September 16, 2014, 12:08:43 PM
Bo,
 I don't know about other sanctioning bodies but the SCTA requires the blower to be mechanically or exhaust driven by the primary engine. (4.FF) page 53, 2014 rule book.

You might want to check the rules for the events you are planning on.

Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 16, 2014, 11:23:18 PM
It is FIM so this horseplay is perfectly legit.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 18, 2014, 12:36:55 AM
The basic philosophy on air filtration is to identify the constriction point in the engine and this is usually the intake valves for a NA motor.  Flow going sonic in the curtain area is a limiting factor and this can be calculated.  Air flow can also be calculated by use of volumetric efficiency, displacement and rpm.  This data can be used with filter manufacturer's recommendations to determine a best filter size to provide adequate filtration.  That was done here, except I used Vizard's numbers.  The pistons and barrels are being sent to South Bay Triumph to get a set of high compression pistons fitted.  They are in great shape after years of use on the salt.  A light hone is all they will need.

The bottom of a piston.  No signs of overheating and this engine was run very hard.  Lots of attention was paid to getting cooling air to the motor, fuel selection, ignition timing, and mixture.

Work spent on meticulous setup pays off big time.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 18, 2014, 08:32:47 PM
The first set of cylinders were the original 790cc ones.  Open velocity stacks were used and the pistons and bores were done after ten runs.  The second set were the 865cc ones.  I am not sure what went wrong, but they were worn out pretty quick.  Salt wear had some effect.  The filters were some small ones and either oiled foam or gauze.  The last set of 995cc jugs cost a small fortune.  The biggest oiled foam filters are used that will fit.  It works.  I had to get the cylinder wear problem under control or I could not afford to race.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Sporty Dan on September 18, 2014, 10:59:56 PM
Wow, those pistons look great for the abuse that you have given them. I will definitely be running a large filter when I get there!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 19, 2014, 12:54:38 AM
Hi Dan.  Harley parts are probably like Triumph ones.  Not cheap.

It is time to renew the big end shells.  A dish towel is pulled through the crankcase under the rod.  The rod bolts are taken out.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 19, 2014, 01:02:07 AM
The rod is wiggled off.  The towel is pulled to turn the rod cap around to the top of the journal.  The cap is pulled out.

A gudgeon pin seized in a little end bore when I used standard OEM Triumph rods years ago.  The pin and the bore were both steel.  The little end has a phosophor bronze bushing on the Carillo rods.  These are dissimilar metals and I hoped it would cure the problem.  It does.  No galling or seizing is seen and no noticeable wear is observed on either the pin or the bush.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Sporty Dan on September 19, 2014, 08:37:09 PM
You got that right, they aren't cheap at all. Especially when you start talking about high performance parts. I'm jealous of you being able to change your rod bearings. To do that, I have to split the crank due to the knife and fork rods. That and the roller bearings.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on September 19, 2014, 09:50:51 PM
Yup, stripping a Sporty is a mission Dan.

Bo's got it easy if you compare. :wink:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 19, 2014, 10:50:33 PM
This rod bearing thing is not something I thunk up on my own.  Matt Capri showed it to me and sold me these specially made rods out of his personal parts stock.  They are not a catalog item.  He gets credit for this.  He runs a turbo Bonnie and the big end bearings are looked at often.

The big ends of the standard OEM rods were black colored with oxidized oil when they were pulled after ten runs.  The oil was like graphite.  It stained the hands.  Those big ends were getting hot.

The bearings looked great on these rods.  What I did was to champher the oil holes in the journals like this.  Also, Triumph says the standard big end clearance is 0.036 to 0.066 mm with the service limit at 0.1 mm.  I try to set the clearance as close to halfway between 0.066 and 0.10 mm as I can.  The "white" coded shells are used on the turbo Bonnie.  They are the biggest shells and provide more clearance than my settings.

A few years ago someone on the i-net tested a bunch of oil filters and said the new generation filter media do a better job than the old.  Puralotor Pure 1 and Mobil 1 filters were among the better ones according the guy on the net.  Mobil 1 M-108 filters are used on this dog and the oil does look cleaner after a change.  There is vastly less carp imbedded in the shell wearing faces.  These filters do work.

So far, so good.  Nothing funky has been found yet.  This is unlike the previous tear downs when all sorts of problems were seen. 

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on September 19, 2014, 11:26:52 PM
Bo, it all looks good.

I think oil needs to be looked into more carefully these days.
I saw something last week that really shocked me.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 20, 2014, 02:38:55 AM
Tomorrow the cams and lifters will be looked at.  That is a sort of oil performance indicator.  They are the first to go if the oil choice is wrong.  What did you see, Mike?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Sporty Dan on September 20, 2014, 12:35:04 PM
Those bearings look great after the runs you've put on them. It just goes to show what careful preparation can do for you. Way to go!  :-D From what you've shown so far, it looks like you shouldn't have any issues with your cams or lifters.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 21, 2014, 11:56:47 PM
The shells looked good until I examined them close.  A lower shell is on the left and an upper on the right.  Pressure on the rod bears on the middle of the shell on the right.  It is still good but impending failure is shown by the tear in the middle.  A piece of the inner surface broke away and made the groove.  The torn piece might be the imbedded flake that is visible.

The engine gets torn down every ten runs for inspection.  There are six on these inserts.  A bird on my shoulder chirped to me saying I had better take a look at these shells.  There was no indication anything was wrong, otherwise.  I am glad I acted on my intuition.

Care is taken to make sure all oxidized oil is removed from the inner surface of the rod big end before the shell is fitted.  This must be done to assure the clearance will be acceptable and not too tight.  JimL told me to make sure to do this.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 22, 2014, 11:18:59 PM
The used gasket collection is being shipped down to Fontana for annealing in a vacuum furnace.  This oxygen free environment prevents the embrittlement that occurs during open flame annealing.  My preference is for annealed used gaskets over new ones 'cause they are already seated in.  The word "TOP" is scratched on all of them so I will put them back in their original positions.

A fellow from AUS is reading this build diary.  He is running a Bonneville like mine in the Modified class at Lake G.  His engines turn much more rpm and make more power than mine.  The oil he recommends is Penrite Ten Tenths having Class 4 POR polymers blended with Class V esters and a 2200 ppm zinc content.  It can be used in bikes with wet clutches.  He has no problems with it.

The oil I use is Mobil 1 4T bike oil boosted to 1800 ppm zinc with an additive.  The oil was dropped and it is black.  This oil has 3 runs on it at B'ville and 25 dyno pulls.  It should not look this bad.  It is time for me to upgrade.  Penrite is available from Summit Racing and I will order four liters tonight.  It is made in AUS so no quarts.  Liters it is.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on September 23, 2014, 05:26:54 PM
WW;

Don't be too quick to blame the oil if it's black. It might be just doing its job-- usually the black color is due to fine carbon particles that are suspended in the oil. Maybe you have a ring-seating problem, etc.?

Maybe someone else can comment.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on September 23, 2014, 06:13:49 PM
If the oil is black it's probably not an oil problem. The oil is used to clean the engine. If it's black it's doing it's job. You need to find out what's causing the black. The oil may stay a lot cleaner after the first oil change. If the oil smells burned then you have a problem and it still isn't with the oil.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 23, 2014, 11:30:17 PM
Thanks, Pete and Neil.  Before I read your replies I ordered some of that oil from Summit Racing.  They pay shipping for orders over $100.  That, and buying about 5 years worth of oil, brought the cost down to $13.56 per quart.  Not bad.

The rings on my pistons are the thicker ones.  I never anticipated winding the engine up real tight when I ordered the slugs.  I was not worried about flutter.  Otherwise, I could have ordered the thinner rings.  I will do some calcs this evening and figure out the rpm I was turning.  Also, I will look at the oil under a microscope. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 24, 2014, 01:32:30 AM
The first run was with a 36 tooth rear sprocket at 7,000 rpm and 146 mph.  The second run was with a 38 tooth rear at 7,170 rpm and 142 mph.  The rev limiter is set at 8,400 rpm and it pulls right up to the limiter on the dyno.  It did not do that on the salt.  The sensation was like it had a rev limiter set for a much lower rpm.  Something was holding it back.  7,170 rpm was all it could do.

The average piston speed at 7,170 rpm is 3,120 fps, the maximum piston speed is 5,030 fps, and the maximum piston acceleration is 83,600 feet per second squared.  All too low to cause ring flutter under normal circumstances.

A problem I have is the mixture going rich at high rpm.  It is noticeable with non-oxygenated leaded and more of a problem with the heavily oxygenated unleaded.  Normally, a bigger air main jet would fix it.  I am already using the biggest air main jets for FCRs, a pair of #200s.  One project for this year is figuring out a cure for this.

Would the mixture going rich at high rpm cause the oil discoloration?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on September 24, 2014, 12:35:06 PM
WW;

A really rich mixture could tend to wash the oil off the cylinder walls.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 24, 2014, 11:55:17 PM
The oil arrived from Summit Racing.  They sure provide fast service!  The oil is Penrite 10 Tenths Racing 10.  It says it is compatible with wet motorcycle clutches.  It has a zinc content in excess of 2200 ppm.  It is really difficult to find a bike oil for use with wet clutches with this high zinc content.  The oil is compatible with racing grade E85 as well as other fuels.  It seems to be a good choice.  The plan is to use it and see what happens.  I will also figure out and cure the fuel mixture problem.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 25, 2014, 02:01:42 AM
The oil looks like I cooked it.  This is something I saw a lot when I raced Hondas.  The original equipment chrome side covers and an accessory chrome valve cover are not helping with heat dissipation.  There are finned aluminum ones on the aftermarket.  They will dissipate heat much better.  In addition, there are a few kits that relocate the radiator so it is not in front the engine blocking the air flow.  Another thing I should try.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: charlie101 on September 25, 2014, 02:22:48 AM
Quite cheap microscopic device or lens for the cell phone would allow you to photograph closeup wear on bearings, linings and rings. That may tell if you have a problem with oil wash or oil film breakdown elsewhere. An oil analys would be the ticket to tell how the oil stood the test. The metal content in the oil does consort with the mechanical wear and is comparable between tests whatever oil used. Then there is other units in the test that tell if the oil has deteriorated. But what would tell if the zink additive you put in is not the culprit for oxidizing that oil? Ahh...I have a strong aversion against extra additives...sorry.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: generatorshovel on September 25, 2014, 08:27:40 AM
Penrite oil have come onboard as a sponsor of the DLRA Speedwek Bo, and it's good stuff, Iv'e been using their HPR 50 in the old HD for years, and use HPR 5w40 in the 250, it puts up with methanol pollution rather well, after drowning the 250 with methanol for a mile at full throttle, I drained 300ml more oil out, than I put in !, I saved it in a 2 litre coke plastic bottle and watched it for signs of settling & separation, there is not any,after 3 months ?
No trouble with the wet clutch either, a lot of oils glue the plates together if the bike is let stand for a few days.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: joea on September 25, 2014, 02:56:02 PM
Wobbly, how do your clutch plates look?   its quite easy to turn the oil dark from
the clutch plates, with all your dyno pulls and such and synthetic oil that is known
for still allowing clutch slip (regardless of the claims contrary) it would be interesting
to know how they measure now compared to new
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 25, 2014, 09:22:45 PM
A break in oil will be used with the new pistons and cams.  Then, I will drain oil and put in the Penrite with no additives.    Also, the clutch will be checked.

This was a year with wet sticky salt and it got all over the oil radiator.  I tried to wash it out with limited success.  Decades ago I rode a Yamaha 80 or Honda 50 or maybe a Honda Dream that had a horizontal flat fin on the back of the front fender.  It kept the engine clean from junk thrown up by the front tire.  I took it off 'cause it looked dorky.  The engine got a lot dirtier much more quickly when it was gone.  A little fin will help keep the salt off of the engine so I will make one.

Some internet searching shows a few racing Triumphs like mine on the salt.  None have the standard oil radiator.  This is another thing I can investigate.

Thanks for the advice on this. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 27, 2014, 12:43:56 PM
Avoiding additives is a good idea.  This Penrite has a lot of phosphorous so there is no need to add zinc or it to the mix.  The The dyno runs were done in Beaverton which is near sea level.  The engine makes more power there than at Bonneville.  There are no signs of the clutch slipping on the dyno readouts.  It was a problem in the past and the clutch is beefed up with kevlar plated and herky springs.  Thanks for the advice on this.  I looked into the issues.

The Hondas I raced years ago ran hot by design.  They also routed the oil up to the top end in holes alongside the long studs that clamped the top end onto the block.  This passage went right by the cylinders and the oil got very hot when it did this.  It was and is a dumb idea.  We found no good cure for it other than changing the oil often and using the best quality lube we could find.  The ultimate cure was to sell the Hondas and buy a BSA.  Problem cured.

These Triumphs are air/oil cooled engines and the oil is deliberately pumped through passages in the cylinders to cool them.  This engine is generating a lot more power and consequently, heat.  The oil is getting hot as a result.  BSA is out of the bike business so I need to work on the issue. 

An e-mail conversation with South Bay Triumph indicates that the standard Triumph oil cooler is an efficient design.  No oil cooler will work with salt on it so making some shields to keep it off will be a task for this winter.  Also, I will look at the environment around the cooler and the front of the engine to make sure there is a lot of cool air going in.  Maybe mounting the cooler in front of the frame rails instead of behind where it is now?   Hopefully this will solve the problem.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on September 27, 2014, 01:00:17 PM
Bo:

Could you fabricate something like this http://www.ebay.com/itm/Mr-Gasket-1350-Cool-Can-Brushed-Aluminum-/271615585800?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item3f3d8cee08&vxp=mtr (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Mr-Gasket-1350-Cool-Can-Brushed-Aluminum-/271615585800?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item3f3d8cee08&vxp=mtr) and cool your oil with ice water rather than air?

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 27, 2014, 04:37:32 PM
The front fender hits the cooler when it is mounted in the front of the frame tubes.

Thanks fr the idea.  An advantage of moving the radiator it to another location is that it will not block air flow to the front of the engine.  It does this in its OEM location.  Right now I am looking at relocating it and putting the radiator in a water filled container.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on September 27, 2014, 08:50:48 PM
I see a lot of Triumphs with burnt out alternators. most common repair I do
The alternator cooks and gets hot enough to go a black colour and contaminates the oil.
Check the three yellow alternator wires for a short to earth
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 29, 2014, 12:35:58 AM
Thanks for the advice and the test was done a few minutes ago.  Figuring out how to undo the electrical connector was the hard part.  No grounding yet.  The alternator is still good.

This year I won't do anything except to use the Penrite.  Next winter I will send a sample into the oil analyst to be checked.  The annual oil change might be all I need to do unless the oxidation is compromising the oil's ability to do its job.

Today the Distinguished Gentleman's Ride happened in Portland.  It was not raining so I made a last minute donation and left for the big city early this morning on Clyde, the street Triumph.  There were well over a hundred riders there and maybe 200.  The local Triumph shop was doing a lot to help with the event this year.  European bikes are big here.  More Triumphs than anything else, with Ducatis, Moto Guzzis, BMWs, a Ural, a dozen or so Harleys, and assorted japanese bikes.    It was a lot of fun...until I crashed.  A bunch of us were riding in tight formation way too fast.  The street department fixed a pothole and left a patch of sand on the road right next to it.  I was looking at the bike in front of me and not at the road surface.  One second I was riding the T-100 and a split second later I was skidding on my donkey.  The bike has crash bars so It was rideable and I finished the event.  I sure am sore and stiff now.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on September 29, 2014, 04:31:53 AM
I also went to the DGR. In Melbourne Australia
There were about 300 bikes. It is always a slow affair because of the zero tolerance for traffic infringements here
I didn't go on the ride but met them at the destination. I'm not a fan of riding with others.
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: charlie101 on September 29, 2014, 04:45:45 AM
Glad to hear you got all joints aligned and limbs attached anyway. A spill is a shocking event. Hope the bike isn't too much damaged.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 29, 2014, 09:20:45 PM
The crash bar and end of the brake pedal are scratched.  Nothing major.  I was going to wear my suit.  I could not find the tie so I did not wear it.  Since black leather is appropriate attire for any occasion, I wore that.  That kept this minor problem from being a major and more painful one.

Three oil samples are going to ALS Tribology for testing.  Two are new and used Mobil 1 10W-40 with Redline break in additive.  The other is new Penrite Racing 10 for baseline values.  What are the typical tests you'all have done?

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 30, 2014, 07:53:10 PM
www.chevelles.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-443674.html (http://www.chevelles.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-443674.html)

An interesting article on oil.  Somewhere near oil # 70 in the rankings he says adding ZDDP to the oil can screw it up so it performs worse than it would otherwise.  This was the first time I added ZDDP to the oil and besides it being black there are more suspended metal particles than I usually see.  I will not add zddp or additives to the oil any more.

This article has a lot of statements that a big amounts of ZDDP in the oil does nothing for anti-wear properties.  An oil chemist also told me this, too.  Lots of racers the opposite.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 01, 2014, 12:20:19 AM
Originally I thought this was Al's Tribology and I was expecting it to be in a unit in the back of an industrial park.  It is AIS Tribology and it is an international company with offices all over the planet.

The tests were ordered through our local fuel supplier.  The guy I had to deal with acted like I was supposed to be born knowing all about this subject.  He was no help.  The best I could do was to order the two most popular tests, the C1 and the BOD.  Six samples were sent in.

A call was made to AIS.  It is in Portland.  The lady at the other end of the phone wire was nice and knew a little bit more about testing.  She is asked, through an e-mail, all sorts of questions about these samples.  The last question is "Do we really need all of this phosphorous?"  It will be interesting to see what an expert says.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 02, 2014, 10:51:14 PM
The intake system prepares the fuel/air mixture for combustion.  Not only do the fuel and air need to be supplied in adequate proportions, the mixture temperature and the degree of fuel atomization and vaporization are also critical.  EFI provides benefits.  Spray patterns can be changed.  Also, multiple injectors can be used, such as one near the butterfly and another one to be used at high speeds at the venturi opening.  Carbs like the flatslides on the Trimph can be adjusted to provide the correct mixture ratio and not much more.

The oxygenated fuel I used this year did not provide any more power than standard leaded race gas.  My best guess is it needed better atomization or to be introduced into the flow stream further back from the intake valves at high rpm.

The carbs provide limited ability to vary the mixture quality so the other option is to select a fuel that works with them.  The baseline fuel this year will be VP C12.  It is a high octane leaded with no added oxygenation.  It is an "idiot proof" fuel according to the locals.  They say it works well in almost anything that needs about 112 octane.  I can get it at Speedweek SA and this is important.  The oxygenated fuel to be tried is Sunoco leaded MO2X.  It is a good fuel to start with for this application, Sunoco says.  The Australian blend unleaded I used last year does not have enough octane for the new high compression motor.  It will be used in the dirt bikes.

     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 03, 2014, 10:44:58 PM
Some news...www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oj3F-n8Q1fQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oj3F-n8Q1fQ)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on October 04, 2014, 05:39:11 PM
Thanks Bo.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 05, 2014, 12:03:53 AM
Hi Mike.  Streamliners are the ultimate challenge.  It takes time to develop them.

Type "speedweeksa" into u-tube and see what I am preparing for.  The flick about Day 1 of the 2014 Kalahari week is really informative.  Look at the surface and listen to the racers.  This will be tough and getting ready mentally is a big challenge.  Preparing the bike is a lot easier.  The bike is being set up far differently than it is for B'ville.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Sporty Dan on October 05, 2014, 07:09:20 PM
Thanks for the Triumph video. I hope they took the outriggers off before they went 200! That Speedweeksa looks interesting. It looks a lot like Mohave, but I bet they are way further away from the nearest city.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 06, 2014, 12:24:37 AM
Dan, the pan is in the far northwest corner of SA near Namibia.  The nearest city is Uppington and it is not very big or close.  This place is out in the middle of nowhere.

Metzeler has switched the production of their dual sport tires to China.  In appreciation of this, it is time to switch to another brand.  The tires I am looking for need to have an aggressive tread pattern for dealing with sand.  They also need a high speed rating.  Look at these rascals.  They make them in exactly the sizes I need with a V speed rating.  That is plenty for this application.  www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLWu2_i66c (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLWu2_i66c)   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 06, 2014, 12:30:51 AM
Another try.  This link should work.  www.youtube.com/watch?v=cL7Wu2_i66c (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cL7Wu2_i66c)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Sporty Dan on October 06, 2014, 01:55:43 AM
Wow, that is an impressive tire. It sounded like it is a V rated tired, which is amazing for a duel sport tire. That will definitely give you a lot of traction.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 08, 2014, 12:46:32 AM
The purpose of this trip is to see SA, run on the pan, and to visit Mike.  Visiting the hospital or morgue would derail all of this.  This looks like a tricky track with loose dust over hard pan.  This is not bad if there are no ruts in the hard under layer.  Ruts in the pan can make a run a thrilling experience in a not so good way.

The bike will be run as a modified with no streamlining.  This will make it easier to handle on a bad track.  There is less weight to manage.  Also, it will also go slower which has its own safety benefits.

Mike warned me about this.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 10, 2014, 12:20:36 AM
The gasoline order arrived today.  Sunoco is big here so I can get the stuff within a day or two if it is not on the dealer shelf.  The gasoline I would normally use in this higher compression engine is Supreme.  It is non-oxygenated leaded with 112 octane and 0.717 specific gravity.  It is also really close to the VP C12 I can get in Africa.  Jetting and timing set for Supreme should be OK for C12.  It is the baseline gas.

I have not given up on oxygenated gas.  The other fuel is MO2X.  It has 112 octane, 2.7 percent oxygenation using ethanol, is leaded, and has a 0.724 SG.  It is approved for American Motorcyclist Association competition.  Some NASA level thinking tells me it should work good in bikes.  It will be the experimental gas.  The plan is, if the engine responds to this, we will know the form of oxygenation it likes.       

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fredvance on October 10, 2014, 06:24:50 PM
We run VP MR12 in our low compression motor, 13-1, :roll: Low octane but works good up to 13.5-1.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 11, 2014, 04:47:40 PM
Fred, I will see if I can get it in Africa.

The head and base gaskets came back from the annealer in Fontana.  Unlike furnace annealing there is no dark oxide coating.  The cost of doing this is the price these outfits charge to fire up the furnace.  It can be pretty costly.  A good point is they can do a bunch of them in one fire-up.  These little bike gaskets fit in the company's laboratory furnace so the price was lower.  These gaskets are custom made and cost $75 each.  Sending in five and getting them annealed for $175 was a deal.

The annealed gaskets are marked "up" and always installed the same way between the same head and cylinder block.  A new copper gasket is used if a different head or block is used.  It would be annealed and used again for that combination, only.  Use of annealed used gaskets in this manner is my preference.  They seal better is my feeling.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 11, 2014, 10:39:27 PM
The VP MR12 has 87 motor octane.  I am not sure if it would work in this application.  The Triumph needs 110 octane according to most everyone that races one.  None of them run full fairings like I do.  The higher 112 octane fuel so seems like a good choice.  The engine cooling behind that fairing is not as good as it is with a naked motor.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 12, 2014, 11:20:58 PM
This morning PipeMax printout was looked at for octane requirements.  It says the (R+M)/2 octane should be 108.2 to 108.8 for the new motor.  This is about right.  The 112 I will be using gives a bit of added safety for this air-cooled engine.  Plus, the pan is about 2,000 feet lower than Bonneville so the engine compression will be a little bit higher than what I am used to.

A couple of weeks ago I met a local fellow with a KTM adventure bike.  It had a 1,000cc liquid cooled Rotax two cylinder engine.  They put it on their dyno and it has over 100 hp, stock, at the rear wheel.  Yesterday I met another fellow with one of those bikes and I asked him what octane gas he uses.  He fills it up with regular.

These modern Japanese, Austrian, German, and Italian bikes seem to be governed by other principles than Harleys and Triumphs.  The world they live in is sweeter, for sure.  It rains beer, birds chirp, and the sun always shines.  There is absolutely no way a Triumph twin making over 100 horses is going to run on regular.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 15, 2014, 01:26:40 AM
A big part of this build is making a good looking modified bike.  Some unused fiberglas side covers were in the attic from Projekt Cafe Racer that never happened.  Some alterations are needed to make them fit.  Packaging is a problem for bike or car. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on October 16, 2014, 12:16:31 PM
Bo.............Looks like a very interesting and exciting trip :cheers:

Regarding the speed..............you may think your top speed will be slower..........but be prepared to go faster :-D

Cool tires.........but I would take your other set along........the V-rated dual-sports may likely have less traction at your anticipated top speed..........
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 18, 2014, 01:44:00 AM
Hi Dennis.  The speed ratings allow for bursts of speed over the rated velocity.  Also, the weight of the Triumph and me are far less than the fully loaded elephantine adventure bike they are designed for.  They should be OK speed and load wise.  Traction may be a different issue.  Continental makes really good tires and I am hoping they have that figured out.  Basically, I am trusting their engineers more than I trust myself to come up with something better.  The Contis on the bike will be it.  These tires are not available till the end of the month.  No one I know has used them.  This is a big exercise in faith in German engineering. 

This international travel stuff sure is confusing for the homeboy.  A transport company in Surrey is coordinating the bike shipping fiasco.  They have an agent in America to ship the bike to SA.  They have another agent in SA to send the bike back home.  The ladies handling all of this are friendly and one has a friend who runs at Speedweek SA.  I need to find a Carnet de Passage for the bike, whatever that is.  It seems to be some sort of mo'sickle passport.



 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 19, 2014, 11:48:28 PM
There is a race every year between the onset of winter and everything that needs to get done first.  A full woodshed, the north addition to it, and the southern annex.  The bike shed is painted.  Now it is time to settle into some serious bike building and trip planning.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on October 20, 2014, 01:12:58 AM
Bo, that bike shed turned out amazing. Have fun with it. I'm sure you will.  :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on October 20, 2014, 10:40:44 AM
Bo, I know it's a bit of a hijack, but - how much wood do you like having on hand going into the heating season?  Face cords/full cords/cubic feet.  I'd like to compare what it takes to heat your place and ours.

We use about 9 full cords to heat everything -- that's 27 face cords or 1152 cu. ft.

We're building an addition to the shed, which is now 12x16x8.  The completed shed will be 22x16x8, of which about maybe 2,500 ft. cu. - 19 1/2 cu. ft. will be useable.  Gotta leave room for access, you know.  Our shed is covered and completely sided and has a 4' walk door.

Rick, the guy down the road that does our firewood work, says he likes to have his customers store at least two winters' worth of wood.  Last year we had a very cold winter - to the point that most folks ran out of wood (or other heating fuel).  We stayed toasty warm through the entire winter, and we've still got plenty of wood to get us at least to Thanksgiving - and that's before the addition.  It costs less than $500/year all told to heat our house, garage, and hot tub.  Do you buy your wood or make it from your own property?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on October 20, 2014, 10:42:03 PM
SSS-----------this could get to be a FUEL or OCTANE discussion..............MY cords of wood are made up of Red Oak, Hickory, Hard Maple, Iron-Wood, and occasionally a small amount of Ash and Cherry for kindling.................and YES..........it sure was nice to have enough wood piled high for last winter.  We only burn about 3 cords to keep the 800 SF office/family room toasty..........but I cut and split it myself and get help from Carol to get it stacked.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 20, 2014, 10:56:35 PM
Peter, the little shop is great.  It sure is better than working on the bikes out in the weather.  It took Rose to get this figured out and done.  Building something like this is too much for me.  I did the painting, finished the electrical work, and made the burglar bars.

The climate here is warmer than in Michigan.  We burn 3 cords a year during the coldest part of the winter.  The house is not fully insulated.  Douglas fir, which is not a true fir but its own class of tree, is the major firewood 'cause it grows all around.  Sometimes we buy wood from the county juvenile delinquent rehab program.  It is stuff the city and county crews get and all sorts of trees are in it.  May years we cut up our own trees when they get damaged or diseased or die.  Land speed takes a lot of my time so I buy more wood than I did before.  In the old days I did it all from dropping the tree to tossing the ashes out of the stove.  No time for that now. 

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bones on October 23, 2014, 07:12:14 PM
Hey Bo
   The   'carnet' is a document recognised by governments to help with the shipping of your bike to save you paying import duty in the country you are shipping to
  It is a list of all the things that is in the shipping crate--   bike, tools, leathers, spares. Sometimes they like an itemised list sometimes a general idea.
  This list will be checked when leaving the US and entering SA and also on the way back.
 In Australia I paid a deposit of 50% which is refunded when the bike returns.

     cheers    Bones
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: maj on October 23, 2014, 09:17:38 PM
If your canet system is like ours you can get an indemnety which allows a small proportion of the deposit to be paid like an insurance , frees up the cash you may want to have available while your traveling
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 24, 2014, 10:39:42 PM
Here in the US we get the carnets from the Canadian Automobile Association.  It took awhile to figure out that one.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 24, 2014, 11:28:47 PM
Not a lot is happening on the build.  Lots of overtime lately and much of it is out in the wind and rain as construction engineer on some freeway repair I designed.  I come home tired and do not want to do anything.  Watching old Sponge Bob videos is the most intellectual thing I can handle.

The side covers are made from thin fiberglas at the factory.  It is a good idea to beef them up a little bit.  Masking tape is used to cover the outside of the part.  The tape is used to make a lip around the edge of the part 1/4 to 1/2 inch wide.

Some strips and patches are cut from the glass.  They are used to reinforce the outside edge of the part and around the holes.  It is not necessary to reinforce the whole thing.  Double layers are added at the tabs.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 24, 2014, 11:34:12 PM
The extra glass is trimmed from around the edges and the parts are ready to paint.  Some OEM Triumph side cover decals were found in a box of spare parts.  This side cover project has all been done at no cost with stuff laying around.  That will change.  The parts are being sent out to be professionally painted. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 26, 2014, 11:00:24 PM
None of my children can go with me to SA.  Two are in the Marines, two will be starting fall semester in college, and one is on the east coast looking for work.  It was time to ask my older traveling buddy, Rose, if she wanted to go.  Her reply "Are you nuts?  That is the last place I want to go.  Ebola.  I had enough of Africa while I was growing up in Oakland!"  Experience during thirty six years of marriage tells me argument is counter productive.  It will be the just the Triumph and me on this trip.

The shipping ladies tell me the crate needs to be wood.  I asked them if I could use the metal base from the Triumph one.  They said it is OK.  It is pretty beat up and I am straightening it out and repairing it.  The sides, ends, and top will be made from plywood from Roseburg, a city in western Oregon.  It is good quality 3/8-inch Douglas fir that should last a long time and handle lots of use and abuse.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on October 27, 2014, 12:04:58 AM
Take a lesson from Burt and remember to 'stuff' the crate with blankets :lol:................
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on October 27, 2014, 01:57:53 AM
Ebola Nay!! Sorry, got a cold. :-D :-D :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 28, 2014, 12:34:02 AM
Folks over here do not realize the US has had more Ebola cases than many countries in Africa.  We also have a porous borders and a permissive federal government so we have something to worry about right here.

The theme of this build is "modified" rather than "special construction."  The side covers are painted up and decalled just like the originals.  The paint shop charged me $105 and called me the next afternoon after I brought them in to tell me they were ready.  Good service. 

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: maj on October 28, 2014, 05:00:07 PM
Interesting they want wooden crates, stuff i send back and forward is in steel crates or they charge a fumigation fee, can be a couple of hundred $ at each end
our 750 uses a reinforced triumph pallet , just has some 30mm rhs welded to the bottom as extra structure , use the original light top frame and sheet it with light steel rather than the cardboard triumph used
has to be easily dissasembled for inspection if needed , and i still have idiots pry the panels off with a crow bar rather than remove 6 tech screws  that are clearly marked

They will want to check engine and frame numbers if they actually look at it , try not to cover them up with your gearbag or parts
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 28, 2014, 09:40:31 PM
This is good to know, Greg.  It will be a modified bike, for sure.  The frame # is almost impossible to see with the fairing on.  I was considering sending it over partially streamlined, but no chance of that now.  The crate is for the whale sized Triumph Rocket III tourer with windshield and saddlebags.  There is just enough room for the partially streamlined bike.  I will check about the fumigation fee.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 30, 2014, 12:37:25 AM
The fumigation requirement is "International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM) 15.  It is on www.ispm15.com/ISPM15_Revised_2009.pdf (http://www.ispm15.com/ISPM15_Revised_2009.pdf)."  Exempt materials are on Page 7 of 16.  Fortunately all of that plywood I bought and sawed up is exempt.  Otherwise, I would use it to build a doghouse for a really big mutt or a chicken coop.  The crate cannot have any parts made from normal wood.  Everything needs to be plywood or metal.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 31, 2014, 09:49:04 PM
Happy Halloween from the left coast
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on October 31, 2014, 10:51:27 PM
Nice one Bo. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 02, 2014, 12:58:38 AM
Gretchen and Heidi Rose, my daughters, made it.  The little kids showed up after I had one more beer than I should have.  Rose passed out the candy and I told the mothers with them those goofy Halloween jokes on the Friday humor thread.  Halloween is a fun holiday.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 02, 2014, 09:41:54 PM
There are two Triumph crate sizes, small and large.  This is the large size older style crate.  The holes where the forklift tines go are offset toward the far end of the crate.  This bike has been weighed and it has a rearward weight bias.  The bike needs to be backed onto the crate bottom so its center of gravity lines up better with the fork tine holes.

This is the Triumph rear wheel holder.  Its legs are shortened an inch so it fits lower down into the base.  This reduces the box height and saves shipping costs.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 02, 2014, 09:53:37 PM
The Triumph front wheel holder is shown.  The vertical legs are shortened 3/8 inches so the bike rides lower.  It is important to affix these wheel holders to the crate base.  They tend to flip up when the bike is rolled off of the base and they damage the undercarriage.  Electrical conduit clamps are used to do this.

The middle of the base is shown.  The base has threads for two eyes in the middle and Triumph does not use them.  These eyes were taken from another crate bottom and they are used so there are six tie down points.

It is awkward to roll a bike in reverse and I dropped it.  The dent on the base under the timing side cover shows where it hit.  The ramp between the two tine pockets is added so it is easier to roll the bike onto the base.  Another ramp will be made between the front wheel holder and the nearest tine pocket.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 02, 2014, 10:01:19 PM
The crate needs to be plywood and this construction type relies on dadoes to keep everything from collapsing.  This video is an example of a dadoed plywood crate.  www.quickcrate.com/assembly-video.php (http://www.quickcrate.com/assembly-video.php) Mine uses the same principle.  I use a different dado style.  Today the bike height was measured and the sides were trimmed to the proper height.  The dadoes were milled.  This style of plywood crate is very strong.  Promotional literature says they can be stacked three high.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on November 03, 2014, 10:57:41 AM
"dado"??  Isn't that misspelled?  :roll:

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 03, 2014, 07:51:23 PM
It is Neil.  It is "rabbet" when speled corekt.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on November 03, 2014, 07:54:40 PM
WW;

That wasn't what I was thinking of...  :evil: :evil:

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 10, 2014, 11:36:53 PM
What tool does this?  www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6rIJAO01XA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6rIJAO01XA)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on November 10, 2014, 11:53:33 PM
Fibre optic Bore scope?.

https://www.google.com/search?q=fibre+optic+bore+scope&es_sm=122&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=YpZhVLC2HOXd7Qb-o4GIDA&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAg&biw=1920&bih=912
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on November 10, 2014, 11:58:11 PM
Cheaper versions from Harbor Freight, Walmart, etc. go under the name inspection camera.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 11, 2014, 01:03:39 AM
i remember the bore scope from my mechanic days.  The video part is new to me.  That movie is going up a modern Triumph exhaust pipe.  The hole that goes sideways is for the cross-over tube to the pipe on the other side.  It is at the tuned length for the third harmonic with the cams I am using.  The flow expansion of a pressure wave into that hole sends a vacuum wave back to the exhaust valve at the perfect time for scavenging.  Dyno testing shows the standard headers make the most power when compared to the aftermarket stuff.

Note all of the metal around the exhaust valves.  A good port job and multi angle valve seats really help these motors.  Unlike hotter cams, the power from port work does not shorten engine life.  The valves are plenty big for standard displacement motors.

The mufflers are Triumph "off-road" accessory items.  They are fairly quiet and produce good power.  There are no baffles in them to produce undesirable reflective waves.  This is important when cams with substantial overlap are used.
 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on November 11, 2014, 09:58:44 PM
Awesome to see exactly what it looks like in there with the motor assembled.
You could learn a lot from that video. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 11, 2014, 11:28:55 PM
It will be real nice if the camera fits down a spark plug hole.  It is on the list of things to get when I get some spare money.  I see real advantages for a guy with an 8-cylinder car.  It is possible to pinpoint the problem and to reduce the amount of taking things apart.

The build is in the crateaceous period.  The forklift is rough on the holes for the tines.  They are beat back into shape and these wood liners are made.  Hopefully this will reduce damage.

Storage space is in short supply in this little shed.  The crate comes apart so I can stack it against a wall.       

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 11, 2014, 11:38:05 PM
Hinges are used to hold the rabbet joints together.  Some pins are made from galvanized spike nails.  Simply pull the pins and everything comes apart.  All new strap hinges of this style in this country are made in China.  There is a store in Portland called Hippo Hardware.  They have used stuff.  The hinges, all 28, match each other and came from some dusty box down low on a shelf in a dimly lit room.  They are made here.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on November 12, 2014, 08:14:49 PM
As with your other projects you really pay attention to detail.

The crate could become a standard item for other LSR bikers
who ship their machines far and wide.

Nice job Bo. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 14, 2014, 01:19:27 AM
My youngest girl, Gretchen, helps me when I race.  She has done this since she was a little girl.  SHe like to do it.  Originally we planned to go to AUS.  That would not work with her schedule.  Then we planned for Africa.  That would not work for her, either.  I sort of gave up on the idea of taking her and would go to SA alone.  Three weeks ago Rose found out that Gretchen was secretly saving money to visit London.  Rose saw how much it was.  Not enough.

E-mails, visits, and phone calls were made to important people.  It looks like team Go Dog, Go! will be at Pendine in May.  The three week vacation is basically doing what she wants, like a visit to the Dr. Who museum and all sorts of other things in London.  She is considering a career in finance.  London is definitely a hot spot for that.  It will be a good place for her to see.

My middle son wants to go to a land speed race.  He will be out of the Marines in time for Speedweek SA in 2015.  That is when we at re planning to go to Africa.  The crate will be getting some use. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 17, 2014, 10:12:11 PM
The only pictures I have of Pendine are in Sir Malcolm Campbell's "My Thirty Years of Speed."

This shows the deck on the base.  The bike fits in the holders.  The rear goes in first.  It is in the holder the farthest away.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 17, 2014, 10:15:57 PM
The sides of the Triumph crate base are very thin sheet steel.  They get beat up easily.  They were pounded back into shape.  Some parts of the Triumph crate that were used to hold up the cardboard sides are pounded flat.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 17, 2014, 10:22:57 PM
The strips are cut-and-beatulated to make these armor strips.  They are riveted on to the sides to make them stronger.

Next time I build a crate the plywood deck will not be grooved for the bike.  Instead, it will be the very bottom of the crate.  The Triumph base will be bolted down on top of it.  The plywood crate sides will cover the base.  Holes for the fork lift tines will be cut in the plywood sides to correspond to the slots in the base.  This simplifies crate construction. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 21, 2014, 01:03:14 AM
Motorcycle, Triumph, T-100 is tied down onto crate base.  The sides are attached using pins through the hinges.  I could do it by myself. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 21, 2014, 01:06:03 AM
The top is slid into place.  The only remaining crate type work is to put the hinge leaves on the lid and to coat it with water proofing.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on November 21, 2014, 07:40:39 AM
What a neat job.
Bo, you do great work.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on November 21, 2014, 04:50:22 PM
Make that container as small as possible. They charge by the cubic foot.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 21, 2014, 10:18:40 PM
Thanks, Mike.  The crate is going to go lots of places so it is plenty strong.

Freud, the bike will have the fairing on it and the tail fits over the back half of the bike.  The windshield will be taken off and on one side.  Add my leathers, boots, and helmet to the mix.  Plus, my rain boots, ran coat, umbrella, etc. and it will be filling up.  There is enough room some souvenirs, like a single cylinder Matchless.  Tomorrow I will be in your locale.  The Triumph club rented a party bus and we are going to the Seattle motorcycle show.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 25, 2014, 01:27:12 AM
Two of the new Indians.  The one with the radiator is the Scout.  The air cooled beauty is the Chief.  A lot of time, money, and care has been used on the Chief to pay respect to the original design.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 25, 2014, 01:31:15 AM
The other side of the Chief engine.  There was a lot of tooled leather on the bike.  I wish I had a photo showing the whole thing.  It is not a bike for the salt.  Its place is for the long ride to get there. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on November 25, 2014, 08:55:37 AM
Both nice looking bikes.
Thanks Bo. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 25, 2014, 09:51:14 PM
We went up to the show in a party bus.  There were more than 50 of us crammed in it with all of the beer we could drink and snacks.  There was a bathroom in the back.  The bus was equipped to show movies so we saw some about dogs and sidecars, the Isle of Man TT, and the movies "The Best Bar in America", and "Why We Ride."  It was a long trip.  The flix kept our attention so we stayed civilized, sort of.

The era of the extremely large bore to stroke ratio is ending, and not too soon.  Rationalization for normalcy in this area included sayings like "Bore size to stroke ratio reduced to increase combustion efficiency."  Fly by wire throttle control is being more common.  This really helps smooth out throttle response compared to the cable actuated butterfly.

Yamaha has done very well in putting this technology to work.  The FZ 09 triple and FZ 07 twins are especially nice.  One of these cutaways is the twin and the other the triple.  My vague recollection is the triple had more downdraft in the inlet tract than the twin.  The twin is the favorite of this crusty old engineer.  Simple yet technologically advanced.  Just enough but not too much.  The whole bike can be seen at www.yamahamotorsports.com/sport/products/modelhome/708/0/home.aspx (http://www.yamahamotorsports.com/sport/products/modelhome/708/0/home.aspx)     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on November 26, 2014, 12:07:08 AM
This is the foto from the reply 1936

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 26, 2014, 10:11:13 PM
Thanks, Freud.  That photo brings out the color and the chrome.  The manufacturer could have gone the easy way and rebranded something of their own and they simply would be milking the Indian name.  This Chief is doing it the hard way.  It is its own bike and a tribute to Indian's past.  The design and tooling costs must be horrendous.  Somebody somewhere has a lot of passion for Indians.

There were a couple of bikes with a landracing theme.  This is Yamaha's Bolt.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 26, 2014, 10:16:50 PM
This is Triumph's tribute to the Texas Ceegar that Johnny Allen rode.  The 214 on the side cover is his speed through the traps.

Are you in a situation where the gearing numerical ratio cannot be lowered?  Perhaps a smaller rear sprocket cannot be fit and the front one is as big as it can get?  What you need is one of these here 30-inch diameter wheels.  Problem solved.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 27, 2014, 01:24:18 PM
A Ducati scrambler.  There are a couple of versions of this.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 27, 2014, 01:26:53 PM
The Triumph Gary Nixon special.  Back end view.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 27, 2014, 01:31:01 PM
The special in two more views.  My riding buddies are in one.  This was the favorite of the show for us.  This is the last of the bike show pix.  Tell me if there is something you want to know about at the show.  There are a lot of pix that are not posted. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 28, 2014, 08:15:22 PM
The trip to SA was going to be in Sept.  The Pendine meet is in May.  This accelerates preparation.  The high compression pistons I ordered will not be here in time for me to break them in and to fuss over the tuning.  A set of Triumph pistons were ordered.  These are what Triumph calls "High Comp Anodized" in their parts book.  The clean piston is one of them and the carboned one is a standard one.  Triumph simply lowered the gudgeon pin hole to raise the compression.  The casting, gudgeon pin, and rings are the same as the standard piston.  They put more valve cutaway in the hi-comp slug, as shown.  These pistons have not been used with these cams and bigger intake valves.  A clearance check is in order.  The pistons are fitted onto the rods without rings or pin clips as shown in the second pix.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 28, 2014, 08:21:52 PM
The cylinder barrels are from Werner's wrecked scrambler.  They are in good shape and I will use them along with Werner's piston rings.  This will eliminate the break in period.  I do not have time for that.  The cylinders are fitted with clay on the valve pockets.  The outer valve springs are removed.  Only the inner ones remain.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 28, 2014, 08:29:24 PM
The valves and combustion chambers are greased,  The engine is assembled.  The objective of leaving out the rings and outer valve springs is to reduce internal friction.  It is very important that I feel when a valve contacts the piston before enough turning pressure is applied to bend the valve.  The crank is slowly and carefully turned over a few times.  Something is making contact but it is not enough to lock the engine and prevent the crank from turning.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 28, 2014, 08:38:29 PM
The head is removed and the valves dimpled the clay.  The pistons are removed so I can take them into the kitchen and look them over.  The literature that came with the cams say there should be 0.050 inches clearance between the intake valves and the crowns, minimum.  This distance is 0.080 for the exhaust valves.

There is plenty of clearance between the valve head faces and the crowns.  Oh Fook!  An intake valve edge hit the side of a valve pocket  Did this bend the valve?  These valves are custom made.  This could be trouble.  I do not have extras.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 28, 2014, 08:43:17 PM
The grease is wiped from the combustion chambers and they are cleaned using carb cleaner.  The head is set on its side and the ports are filled with carb cleaner.  No leaks.  The valves are OK.  This is a lucky day.  The valve pockets will be widened 0.050 and 0.080 on the intakes and exhausts, respectively.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 30, 2014, 12:37:26 AM
Figuring out how to machine the valve pockets was problematic.  Clamping down the pistons to a table or putting them in a vise was the problem.  There is a good chance they might be damaged.  Eventually it was a late night job of holding a piston in one hand, the angle grinder in the other, and eyeballing the cuts.  The results are ugly but useable.

There is about 0.045 between the piston deck and the bottom of the combustion chamber edges.  It should be over 0.040 for this engine with steel con rods so this is OK.

This is the first time I cc'ed an engine while it was in the frame.  It worked great.  There was plenty of room for all activities and equipment. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 30, 2014, 12:52:38 AM
The catalog compression ratio is 10.2 to 1 for these pistons.  The head has larger intake valves than OEM and some metal was removed from around the seats to get decent air flow.  This drops the compression ratio by one.  In other words, the 10.2 to 1 pistons as advertised are expected to be 9.2 to 1 in this engine.  The preceding assumes no work was done on the pistons to remove metal.  The actual static comp ratio is 8.93 to 1.  The relieving around the valve pockets accounts for this reduction.  The dish volumes in the two pistons measured out to within 0.4 cc of each other.  This is within the accuracy range of me with the oil filled burette measuring method.  They are OK.  Tomorrow the motor will be put together.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 30, 2014, 02:57:38 PM
Bo,
You probably know this oldtimer's trick, but it may help.  If you can find a larger valve than you have with the same stem diameter, you can cut some grooves in the outer edges of the larger valves and use them to cut the pockets in the pistons larger.  Assemble the motor with the larger valves (no cam required), rotate the motor until it is close but not hitting the valves, then rotate the valves with an electric drill as you lower the valve into the piston.  I've never tried it, but it sounds like it should work.  Of course, you'll have to deal with the aluminum filings; maybe just grease up the edges of the pistons to capture them.  I'm sure someone on here knows more about this procedure.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on November 30, 2014, 10:01:22 PM
+1 with Tom...............My CB750 pistons were fly-cut 1mm on a mill.........had to make a nylon piston holder to be clamped in place.  Others have welded a cutting blade across the face of a valve that is longer on one end to do the cutting. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 01, 2014, 01:19:44 AM
Thanks for the advice.  Those methods are better and more precise than the way I did it.  The pistons were ordered without rings.  They were packaged in a cardboard box and wrapped with wrinkled brown paper.  A couple of days ago I was tearing up some of that paper to light the fire in the stove.  Out dropped two packages of piston rings.  Originally I was going to use Werner's old rings.  I changed my mind and decided to use the new ones.  The insides of the cylinders were hand sanded using #600 grit emery paper followed by 320 grit and 400 grit.  It looks like a good surface to break in the rings.  The cylinders were put on today and the head was bolted down.  Dyno days are the 10th and 11th of Dec and it looks like this motor will be finished on time.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on December 01, 2014, 05:09:08 PM
Lookin' good!

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 05, 2014, 11:11:16 PM
The old girl was fired up today.  No drama like leaks, odd noises, or smoke.  It sounds like a nice and solid engine.  The fuel was ordered before I decided to go to Pendine.  It was intended to be used in Africa with the high compression pistons.  The benchmark fuel is Sunoco 112 octane leaded Supreme.  The jetting and timing will be set for it on Wednesday.  The experimental fuel is Sunoco 112 octane MO2X oxygenated leaded and it will be tried on Thursday.  Jetting and timing will be optimized for it.  A run will be made late Thurs with the Supreme.  Both fuels use Marvel Mystery Oil as a top end lube at a 2 oz to 5 gal ratio.

This lower compression engine will tell me if it responds to the type of oxygenation used in MO2X.  There are various ways to add oxygen to gasoline and the goal is to see which method helps this carbureted engine.  A trip to Triumph Road is in order for Sunday.  Some break-in miles are needed.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 06, 2014, 10:24:39 PM
Yeas ago one of the Amo brothers gave me advice.  It was that naturally aspirated horsepower becomes harder to get the further the engine is developed.  Also, he said the limit on NA motor power is relatively low compared to other ways to hot rod engines.  He recommended turbocharging and said this form of performance tuning was relatively easy on the motor and it can produce big gains.

That was a long time ago when he said this.  The advice has been kept in mind through the intervening seasons.  Nothing major is done to the bike that will need to be tossed when going to a blower.  Effort is focused on developing the NA engine using technologies that will be helpful when forced induction time comes.

Thermal management is an issue with air cooled engines.  The traditional way of dealing with this is to use alcohol based fuels.  The struggles of Tiny and other with blowers, alcohol, and carbs are noted.  Electronic fuel injection is a big part of the answer.

A budget limit is the kiss of death to a LSR program.  The tried and true method of getting around this is innovation, building things oneself, and scrounging.  The Triumph club met for breakfast this morning.  A fellow gave me this almost brand new EFI fuel tank.  The pump, fuel line, etc were pirated from Werner's wrecked scrambler.  Now I am looking for a throttle body/injector assembly and wiring harness.  Progress is being made.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 07, 2014, 11:57:57 PM
The engine was broke in today.  Triumph Road and some of the streets it connects to are in an isolated corner of the county.  The place is German Catholic with nice neat farms and hardly any crime, plus it is Sunday.  My figuring is all of this adds up to reduced chances of coming across a copper.  One big loop had the rings broken in.  It was so much fun I did another loop.  Then, the wet spots on the pavement started to get frosty in the hollows and it was time to quit.  The bike sputtered and died while coming in from the last loop.  Ran out of fuel.  It would not restart so something is wrong.   

The engine is smooth and it pulls hard.  It is 865cc with 8.9 to 1 compression and it is not as strong as the 995cc one with 10.5 to 1 slugs.  This race is at sea level and the gearing will be much higher (numerical ratio) for the short track.  This little engine should put down considerably more tractive force than the big motor does at Bonneville, for these reasons.  It is not the best engine I have had but it should do the job.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 08, 2014, 09:40:59 PM
The vehicle identification number on the frame headstock needs to be read during customs inspection, I am told.  That is a big project on my bike with the fairing.  It needs to be uncrated so someone can peer down behind the fairing to read the number.  Does anyone have any special procedures to make this easier?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 09, 2014, 10:48:01 PM
I am sot sure how to handle the VIN number inspection problem.  A sign on one side of the crate will say "Open other side to see vehicle identification number."  A sign on the other side will say "Remove this side to see vehicle identification number.  Pull hinge pins to remove panel."  This is the best idea I could come up with.  Hopefully it works.

The engine died during my break in run.  I was close enough to the truck to coast in and put the bike on the trailer.  It would not restart after it was refueled.  Sometimes an engine will have just enough compression to run but not enough to start.  Compression while cold with the throttle open is 190 psi on both cylinders.  That is great and the rings are seated.  The cylinders were getting fuel.  Voltage across the battery with the engine running is just that, the 12 volt battery voltage.  Normally it is between 13 and 14 volts.  The charging system is kaput.  This has happened before.  It was the regulator/rectifier unit.  My guess is the current put out by the engine while racing is too much for the unit to handle on a long term basis.  Tomorrow is dyno day so fixing the charging system will be done first.

Break in was to assemble the engine with automatic tranny fluid lubricating the bores and Yamalube 10W-40 in the sump.  The all-purpose mineral oil is chosen.  The engine is ran with lower rpm bursts of acceleration and deceleration.  Care is used to create as much cylinder pressure and vacuum as possible.  The bursts are gradually increased in rpm and duration.  Sustained hard running is avoided.  My guess is the rings need to be seated within 20 miles from new or the cylinders will lose their hone.  The oil is changed to racing synthetic before the dyno work.  This method gives me good results.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on December 10, 2014, 01:00:15 AM
Dentist's mirror or a variation thereof.

I'll speak to Willie and ask his advice.
He's dealt with VIN and stuff related to your problem for years.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on December 10, 2014, 03:17:22 AM
one of the most common jobs I get in at work is replacing Triumph alternator stators
unplug it from the regulator and check to see if any of the three yellow wires have continuity to earth
If they do , it's rooted (Australian slang for broken)
we use these guys http://www.electrexworld.co.uk/acatalog/Online_Catalogue_Generators_32.html
Yep , I know they call them generators
But they don't seem to fail
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 10, 2014, 10:05:47 AM
Graham,they do not list any for the Bonneville.  Which one do you use? 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: grumm441 on December 10, 2014, 03:45:33 PM
I'll have a look in the book at work.
Have you checked to see if it's cactus yet
G
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 11, 2014, 02:07:15 AM
The fellow that does the dyno work checked the electrics.  All was OK when he looked at it.  It might be an intermittent problem.  Plan is to put an ammeter on it and to ride it around the neighborhood and to see what happens.

The engine with the torque of the 995cc block with high compression pistons would be easy to ride fast on this sand track.  This little 865cc low compression job puts out around 80 HP at 7,900 rpm.  There is not much power or torque anywhere but high midrange and top end.  Riding it will be winding the poor thing out to redline in each gear and popping it into the higher one with a snap shift.  The gearing will be set for 7,900 rpm at 125 mph with 5% wheel slip.  Also, some streamlining is needed to compensate for the lack of power so the fairing will be used. 

No performance increase was seen with the oxygenated fuel.  Two versions of this produced by reputable suppliers have been tried with no success.  It is a waste of time and money.  Now the alcohol goes into me and straight gas into the bike.

Overall, this is a success.  I have a fresh motor that puts out enough power to get me down the track at a respectable speed.  It will not be an easy race.  Some talent needs to be exhibited by the rider to make all of this work.           
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 14, 2014, 01:09:40 PM
The bike will go to blighty and back by sea.  These are trips around the Horn of Africa or through the Panama Canal.  Ship travel time is 35 days.  There is the trip from Salem, Oregon to the port at Gardena, Calif, too, and customs, and a little bit extra in case something happens that requires a delay.  The shipping lady says to have the bike ready to go, in the crate, and picked up from here three months before we need it.  This is mid February.  The engine I hashed together to meet this schedule was described earlier, it is 865cc barrels from Werner's wrecked scrambler, new Triumph pistons from a T-100 relieved to provide valve clearance, and everything else is from the 995cc big bore motor.

The leaded 112 octane Sunoco Supreme is tried first.  It was purchased when I was planning on running 12.5 to 1 compression in the big bore.  This hash job has 8.9 to 1 comp so the gas has far more than enough octane.  Jetting is too rich to start with and it is leaned out until size increases bump up the power only a fraction of an HP.  Best power is made with 132's.  The 135's make only a fraction of an HP less and they are a safer choice.  The curves shown are for the 135's and they are what will be in the bike.

The advance curves are Triumph Twin Performance Stage III, IV, and V.  The Stage III is their standard curve modified to work without the throttle position sensor, and Stage IV and V are custom curves they made for me that are 2 and 4 degrees advance from the Stage III.  No significant peak torque increases are noted when switching to the more advanced curves.  The Stage III is used.  It is the safest choice and it is easier on the engine.  This curve is the most common one used by tuners on these motors.  It is the best curve during our testing using Sunoco Standard, Supreme, and MO2X as well as the special ERC oxygenated gas.

These curves tell me a lot.  The peak HP is right up near the red line.  This tells me the engine is breathing plenty well for its displacement, compression, and my chosen rpm limit.  More cam and bigger valves will hurt rather than help.  A compression increase will help boost power throughout the curve.  Maybe 5 HP with a boost up to 12.5 to 1.  Other than that, the 85 HP this would make is the maximum the motor will go on gasoline with a 8,400 rpm rev limit and carbs.  Port and intake tract architecture changes beyond simple porting, and fuel injection are needed to make more.  Also, removing the balance shafts and alternator stator.

This motor is using the standard Triumph cast pistons.  There ware a lot of dyno runs up past 8,000 rpm.  I am sorta taking some risk with these blowing apart at high rpm.  Two or three runs at Pendine will be it.  Maybe one run if I feel the first one is the best I can do. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Queeziryder on December 14, 2014, 01:41:34 PM
Bo,
Here in the UK you can get VP racing gas easily, from a number of race shops, Sunoco I'm not sure about  :?

If you need fuel here, drop me a PM or email and I'll see what we can get here for you. If you have an idea of itinerary then favours can be called in if needed  :cheers:

Neil
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 14, 2014, 08:04:48 PM
Neil, there is a Sunoco dealer on the south coast.  The fellow from Sunoco who helps me says there is a VP gas that is almost exactly equivalent to Supreme.  He sent me the info.  I will look for it and post it when I find it. - Bo
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 15, 2014, 09:50:46 PM
Neil, VP C-12 is real close to Sunoco Supreme.  I am not sure about the gasoline situation yet.  Sunoco tech support helps me a lot and the VP guys would not reply to any of my queries.  There is some brand loyalty on my part to the blue and yellow folks.

The bike shipper has a secure warehouse near Heathrow Airport.  My plan was to pick up the bike in a plain transit van and to keep it in the van or a bike shop while I was in London.  There would be some driving in the capitol city while I figure out how to motor on the left.  I would drive back and forth to Pendine.  I told Rose about my brilliant plan.  She knows what an excellent driver I am and how I have absolutely no problem with doing two things at once like navigating and driving.  She also is in awe of my cat like reflexes and speedy learning ability.  Her input was I would kill myself almost instantly in London.  She has been there so how can I argue?

It was time to consider that two of my loved ones will be with me, namely my race bike and youngest daughter.  Also, I need to think about the welfare of the poor slobs that I plow into.  Rose recommends shipping the bike to somewhere close to Pendine like Cardiff or better yet, Swansea.  That way, my chances of actually getting to the race and back are much greater.  This is what the shipping lady and I are looking into now. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on December 15, 2014, 09:58:44 PM
WW, Driving on the wrong side is easy.... until you make your first turn  :roll:
Good luck, get a vehicle with a GPS or buy a European map for yours...  worth the cost.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on December 15, 2014, 10:07:55 PM
Bo,
  Good on you for taking your daughter.   :cheers:

That's what raising kids is all about.  :wink:

Using them to guide you around.   :-D

I do the same thing, Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: aussievetteracer on December 16, 2014, 05:37:37 AM
Mate- I strongly #1 Taking your daughter & # 2 Getting a GPS/ Sat. nav to help. #3 Following the advice of your Lady. I speak from unpleasent experience, gained by not following the instructions of my navigator (my wife) and mis-hearing other instructions from her (we are still together!)  I finished up on the outskirts of London on New Years Eve, trying to negotiate .enormous roundabouts, with a squillion lanes and lots of
stop lights, when I really wanted to be in Folkstone {near Dover) a couple of motorways away. And our roadmap did not give us the detail we needed to escape. Good luck with the journey- you will have a lot of us there with you in spirit!
                                                                                                                   Best Regards, Denis
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Speed Limit 1000 on December 16, 2014, 08:53:18 PM
The roundabouts on large roads can be a problem. Look at the GPS before you enter them and know the exit you want to take. I had an issue when I entered the roundabouts the GPS would say recalculating route,  quite annoying.

John
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on December 16, 2014, 11:07:07 PM
Bo, England will be a great learning experience so you should be very well prepared by the time you get to South Africa. :-D :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on December 16, 2014, 11:49:51 PM
Bo, come up to Portland with a couple friends at 0:dark:30 on, say, Sunday.  Your friends can watch for traffic and police while you make some practice runs clockwise around the roundabout at 39th & Glisan.   :lol:

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 18, 2014, 11:58:15 PM
The Pendine LRC uses SCTA rules.  The only ones I could find on the net are 2014 DLRA  The bike is legal except I need to make a metal battery tie down.  The first runs will be as 1000cc APS-G on Sunoco Supreme.  The second set will be 1000cc APS-F.  This will be using the W. Walrus special blend.  That is plan A.  This bike might handle like a pig on the sand with all of that sheet metal.  If so, Plan B is to strip all the streamlining off and run 1000cc M-F.

Lately I am getting soundly thrashed by guys and gals bringing the latest factory fresh bikes to the track and running them with almost no modification.  This is getting tiresome.  Hopefully I will be up against nutty home builders like me in APS-F.

Some treadier tires than the battleaxes are needed for sand.  These tires are being released now.  I could get the front so I put it on.  The rears are not available for a week or two.  They are rated to 150 mph with a load much heavier than me and the race bike.  It looks Like the bike will be ready by the end of the month.

Now I need to find out the course length and the record speeds.
 

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on December 19, 2014, 05:55:30 PM
Some may think your competing with a TRIUMPH SCRAMBLER  :-D :cheers: :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 20, 2014, 01:49:26 AM
Some high pipes and a skid plate are next.  This race will be in Wales so one made from an old coal shovel will be best.

Just got off the phone after a long discussion about this with one of our most veteran racers.  Beaches get windy, especially in the afternoon.  Winds at sea level have more force than at the salt flats.  These are bad conditions for racing an APS bike with full sheet metal.  It will be raced as MPS with only the half moon front fender, fairing, and wheel discs.  Taking the tail off will give it more stability in the wind.  Care will be used to make sure I am in the pub and out of harm's way during the windy afternoons.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 21, 2014, 01:33:29 AM
The bike will go by sea from America to Wales and back.  The time on the ship is estimated to be 35 days.  There is customs to deal with, and local shipping from here to the docks in LA, from the docks in London to Wales, form Wales to the London docks, and from the LA docks to Oregon.  The shipping company recommends that three months be available to them for each way.  What it distills down to for the receiver in Wales is, the arrival time is hard to predict, the bike will come in a big crate and it will need to be moved off and on the shipping truck, and it needs to be kept in a safe and secure location.

A few folks in Britain offered me the use of their workshops of businesses.  That is nice of them.  They are not near Pendine and it is unlikely they have a forklift to move the crate and storage room for it.  E-mails were written to bike shops in the Pendine area.  Most did not reply and the one that did said they have no room for the crate.

The next step is to contact moving and storage companies in the Swansea/Carmarthan area.  A forklift and storage room should be a natural part of their business.  It took awhile to figure out that "removals" is the British term for what Americans call "moving and storage."  Now that I know this, it is easier to look things up on the i-net.  This evening I e-mailed a Swansea removals company.

This travel stuff sure takes some thinking and fumbling around.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on December 21, 2014, 12:04:29 PM
WW;

Is shipping the crate by air completely out of the question?

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 21, 2014, 04:27:55 PM
Air shipment is possible and done by many.  It costs maybe 20 to 25% more.  Right now I am low on pounds so I am shaving costs where I can.  The bike will be ready to go in two weeks so there it is no problem to accommodate the three month shipping duration.  The big planes that carry these items leave Portland and land near London so the only benefit is reducing the stateside and trans ocean portions of the trips.  The issues of shipping the bike from London to Wales and back remain along with its logistics problems.

The decision about what class to enter is a difficult one.  Caution vs ego.  The safe route is to run the bike naked.  It should handle the course although a sundial or calendar is needed to record the speed.  The problem with this is the course might be a lot better than I think and I will be at the knife fight with a ripe banana.

Full APS streamlining will give a lot of speed although it is hard to ride in any significant side winds.  The MPS route is a compromise.  It is a lot less trouble having only the fairing in side winds.  Top speed will be a bit lower but not abysmal.  The critical thing with the middle route is rider self control.  I need to take the time to figure out exactly how fast I can go with some degree of safety.  Partial throttle runs may be needed.  The bike will be set up for MPS.

I was going to toss the tail into the crate.  The plan was to enter the APS class after running MPS and to wait until conditions are just right, a nice track and no wind, and make a run.  There is a rule that a bike cannot run MPS and APS in the same season.  The tail will stay at home. 

         

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Hoody on December 22, 2014, 07:15:21 AM
Being nosey are they charging you a fortune to transport the bike from the docks to Wales? If so may be worth transporting it yourself from the docks or from someone who i believe you stated has offered to look after it for you? London to West Wales is only something like a 5/6 hour drive even if you take it easy? (Straight down the M4 Motorway) Also if you are renting a van for transportation make sure they don't put any silly mileage limits on the contract, some companies do this and charge a fortune for any extra miles.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 26, 2014, 01:59:40 AM
That new emoticon that Slim put up applies to this build.  Doing what it takes to get the old warhorse to next race.

The plan is to have it shipped to Swansea at this time.  I have not found anyone to accept shipment there, yet.  Driving around Swansea and Wales west of Cardiff is about all I want to do.  That might change if the shipping costs from London are too high.  Right now I am trying to be as independent as I can so I will ask for favors only if things get weird.

The back tire is on.  It has an aggressive tread pattern.  The discs are on the back wheel.  This prevents sand buildup on the inside of the rim.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year from Team Go Dog Go!

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 29, 2014, 12:05:36 AM
The tire on a sand racing bike tosses the stuff all around.  It gets onto the drive chain and it creates premature wear.  There is also a power loss associated with it being crunched between the moving chain and rotating sprockets.  The standard Triumph chain guard is widened and a shield is fit alongside the tire.  This will reduce the amount of sand falling onto the chain.  The guard is brushed with preservative and it is ready to be bolted on.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 31, 2014, 08:34:45 PM
Is it normal in Wales for businesses to suspend operations during the holidays?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Hoody on January 01, 2015, 03:05:31 AM
On Bank Holidays the retail stores (equivalent of walmart etc) open, but most other types of business close.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 01, 2015, 08:57:34 PM
...Ducks...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on January 01, 2015, 09:45:35 PM
...Ducks...

Yep  :cheers:
reminded me of the new emoticon at about the half....
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 02, 2015, 01:00:17 PM
Yes, Stainless, it was a pretty lopsided game toward the end.  Oregon has been known to build up a respectable big lead, suddenly forget how to play football, and lose the game.  A lot of us here were still a bit worried about this at the beginning of the second half.

Thanks, Hoody, for telling me about this.  Lots of folks at re lot giving me any replies.  Finding a place to accept a big crate with an uncertain arrival time and a request to keep it safe and secure is problematic.  Yesterday a removals company in Swansea replied.  It looks like this might work.  My driving can be confined to "B" roads during the visit.  There are plenty of them between Swansea and the beach and it is not a very long distance.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 04, 2015, 05:15:00 PM
This is a short sand course  The traps somewhere around 1 to 1.5 miles from the start, is my best guess.  A conversation with an experienced racer tells me to pay attention to the fuel vaporization curve.  There are two gasolines I tested.  One is Sunoco Supreme, with 10% evap at 169 degrees, 50% at 217, and 90% at 231.

The other is Sunoco MO2X leaded, with 10% evap at 124 degrees, 50% at 207, and 90% at 226.

Another gas is Sunoco SR18.  It has almost identical stoichometric ratio to Supreme.  I should be able to use it with the timing curve and jetting for Supreme.  Its evap curve is 10% at 166 degrees, 50% at 209, and 90% at 213.

All of these fuels have plenty of octane.  My engine will be on the cool side during most of these runs.  It will not have time to get real hot.  My feeling is the SR18 should be what I use since more of it vaporizes at lower temps.  What do you'all think about this?  I also asked Sunoco and they have not had the time to reply.  It does not hurt to have more than one opinion.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 05, 2015, 08:35:23 PM
Evaporated fuel is in its gaseous state and it takes up more space than partially evaporated fuel.  A fuel that completes its vaporization in the combustion chamber is denser going in so more of it gets inside to make the big boom.  A fuel that vaporizes to readily provides a less dense charge and it is not always best for making power.

The MO2X is designed to evaporate faster and this provides the quick throttle response needed for motocross and supercross.  Possibly the reason I did not see more power from it was 'cause it vaporizing faster and providing a less dense charge than the Supreme.  The less dense charge canceled out the benefits of oxygenation.  I should not worry about the distillation curve as long as the throttle response is acceptable.

This is what Sunoco told me today as best as I can say in my own words.  I will stay with the Supreme.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on January 05, 2015, 08:54:36 PM
WW;

Do a Google search on "zip fuels".

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 05, 2015, 09:35:49 PM
Some quick speed reeding shows that stuff is self igniting, highly toxic, and so problematic that the govt gave up on it.  However, there is no mention of mixing it with gasoline and running it through a Triumph.  Thanks for the great idea.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on January 05, 2015, 09:43:08 PM
Yes, it sure fits the term "exotic fuel" and I doubt that it will ever be used in racing but it looks like it has lots of energy.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 11, 2015, 11:20:31 PM
A self storage place in Swansea will accept the bike.  It will be there when I arrive.  It will be shipped out the first week in February so I have been a busy beaver.

A lady from MotoFreight in England is coordinating all of this.  She is working out the details with Schumacher Transport in California for transport across the ocean.  She needs copies of the bike title and my passport. Sending her a copy of the title was no problem.  I was going to get the passport after I shipped the bike.  Now, I need it fast.  Last Friday I went to the post office and applied for one.  I also paid extra for it to be done quick.  This was not bribing the guy.  It is legit.  There is an official fee for getting the paperwork done fast.

A metal tie down is made for the battery as required by the rules.  An experienced racer on this forum advised me against using my half moon style land speed front fender.  He said it might pack with sand and cause me big problems.  I took it off.  The Triumph shop, Cascade MotoClassics, gave me a used front fender off of a black Bonneville.  I trimmed it and made a sand flap for the back.  Also, I made some fender stays to mount it to the forks.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 13, 2015, 11:58:14 PM
The race organizers are very nice and they are letting me run with the AMA/FIM number I have been using for years.  Some brackets are made and a pair of old number plates bolted on.  They were last used years ago and the paint is yellowing.  A set of nice new plates would look better.  These ones bring back memories.

My thinking is having my but high and back level is better aerodynamically.  The OEM Triumph seat will be kept on so I can do this.

The fuel is drained and the engine is oiled down.  A few small jobs remain to be done.  It goes into the crate this weekend.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on January 14, 2015, 08:23:29 PM
Way to go Bo!!. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 15, 2015, 01:11:00 AM
Hi Mike.  Sorta nervous, I am.  This is the first time I have done anything like this. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Kiwi Paul on January 16, 2015, 01:16:38 AM
The Best of Luck, Bo....You will remember this trip for the rest of your life...and so will your Daughter!!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 17, 2015, 09:15:35 PM
Hi Paul.  Folks are telling me places to visit.  Sammy Miller's museum is one.  It is near there.

The bike needs to be out on the driveway where it can be loaded onto the truck.  Moving it out there is problematic.  Where is King Kong when I need him?  This dolly was fabbed up so I can push the crated bike where it needs to be.

The crate bottom is put onto the dolly.  The eyes on the Triumph crate bottom are unscrewed.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 17, 2015, 09:23:03 PM
A 16' x 20' piece of 16 mil construction plastic is laid over the crate bottom.  The eyes are screwed down into place through the plastic.  The plastic is furled around the crate bottom and held in place with string.  The bike is rolled onto the crate bottom.  It is tied down to the screw eyes.

The plastic will be wrapped up and over the bike and it will be tied up with packing tape.  This seals the bike in a protective coccoon. 

One of out experienced racers warned me about the damp salty air inside the shipping container and its corrosive effects.  This is how Triumph wraps the bikes they send to us from England.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 18, 2015, 03:22:23 PM
Rats can be an issue on ships, at ports, and in warehouses.  This is not advertised so advance preparation should assume they will be waiting.  The leathers, boots, my old skanky rabbit's foot, and a back protector are crammed into a metal container.  Writing on this box might not be optimal for quick passage through customs...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 18, 2015, 03:24:00 PM
A liberal application of stickies solves the problem.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on January 19, 2015, 11:43:56 AM
Rats can be an issue on ships, at ports, and in warehouses.  This is not advertised so advance preparation should assume they will be waiting.  The leathers, boots, my old skanky rabbit's foot, and a back protector are crammed into a metal container.  Writing on this box might not be optimal for quick passage through customs...

WW, your last sentence sure could be true.

Long ago the National Radio Astronomy Observatory set up a long-baseline interferometer experiment between two radio telescopes, the 140 foot in Green Bank, WV and the Pulkova Observatory in the Crimea. Since this was back in the Sixties, Crimea was part of the USSR. When shipping tons of equipment to Crimea, someone made the mistake of entering an "Atomic Clock" on the customs paperwork. The experiment required precise timekeeping between the two telescopes so each one used a Cesium- beam time standard. The unfortunate wording caused problems with every country the shipment travelled through. Arrrgggghhhh.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 21, 2015, 12:56:41 AM
Neil, "Atomic Clock" is better wording than "Nuclear Clock."

My wallet is 400 pounds lighter thanks to a few keystrokes on paypal.  Where I am going iswww.facebook.com/pages/Pendine-Landspeed-Racing-Club/166621133481919 (http://www.facebook.com/pages/Pendine-Landspeed-Racing-Club/166621133481919)

The bike is done after months of work.  It is legal for SCTA, mostly, as best as I can get it.  Hopefully no one notices where it isn't.  It is in the crate while I figure out the remainder of the junk I need to take with me.

Each side is held on by six hinges.  Removing any four hinge pins allows that side to be opened like a door.  I never considered this when I made the crate.  It is handy. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on January 21, 2015, 10:48:20 AM
WW;

I'm wishing you all the best. Have a successful and safe trip. Take pictures!

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 22, 2015, 09:34:25 PM
The bike left about 45 minutes ago.  I will be here until early May.  There are labor troubles at our ports and it will take awhile to get the bike there.  Originally I was told to have it ready three months in advance.  This week the shippers called and asked for me to get it ready quicker.  A bunch of late night work ensued and it is done.

The door to door shipping from my house to Swansea is not cheap.  The only way I can make it work financially is to take advantage of sea travel.  An experienced racer told me to seal the bike and trailer contents up real good to prevent corrosion.  I did this.  They will open the wrapping at customs to check the VIN serial numbers.  I asked my shipping agent to make sure they reseal it up nice and tight.

The inside of this trailer was dark when I took the picture using a slow shutter speed.  Rose is wondering what I am doing.  The guy moving around who is tying up the bike is invisible.  He looks like electrical current.  The dolly was needed to get the bike on the trailer and it is needed to get it off.  The shipper is bringing it back in a couple of weeks.  The dolly sure is handy.  I am glad big heavy duty wheels are used.

The rule infraction I was hoping no one would catch is using tubes in radial tires.  Triumph does this as OEM fitment.  These bikes come with radial tires having tubes on the back.  The race bike has a radial tire on the back with a new Bridgestone tube made for radial tire applications.  The front tube is a new double thick IRC tube in a radial tire.  This setup has worked for me for years.  I asked the Pendine organizers about it and they have no problem with me doing this.  Now it is time to catch up on my sleep and to plan the trip.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: peterdallan on January 23, 2015, 06:04:12 PM
Bo, I have booked a holiday caravan for the week from Monday 18th to Monday 25th May. It is right next to the beach. It's a 3 bedroom 8 berth (living area sofa bed) so you are welcome to join us. One less thing for you to worry about.  Look forward to seeing you there. Gretchen too?  Peter
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 24, 2015, 10:38:42 PM
Hi Peter.  A caravan in this country is a small Dodge van or a string of pack camels crossing the dez.  What is it in Wales?

Yesterday at around 4:00 I was having a hard time focusing on the computer at work.  Rose and me went to the jazz club for dinner.  I barely made it home.  Fatigue set in.  A good night's sleep was all it took to make me better again.  It sure is nice to have that bike outta here.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: peterdallan on January 25, 2015, 07:55:41 AM
http://www.parkdeanholidays.co.uk/quality-accommodation/caravan-holiday-accommodation.htm

Static caravans a la trailer park but they are not lived in year round, rented to holiday makers in the summer months.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 25, 2015, 11:57:08 PM
That caravan looks nice.  I will show Gretchen.

Hunting around for rules, etc in the British websites brings up some interesting stuff, like this talented and brave lady www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1126205/Becci-Ellis-achieves-incredible-motorbike-record-264mph-html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1126205/Becci-Ellis-achieves-incredible-motorbike-record-264mph-html)

That speed puts her among the fastest of all time on the airport mile.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on January 26, 2015, 12:06:09 AM
Bo, now that the bike is gone what are you going to do with all the time you have?. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 26, 2015, 01:04:52 AM
All sorts of projects.  Rose has a big list.  An addition to the shed is my current one.  The building code gives a maximum size for a shed without a permit.  That has been built.  Nothing in the building code prohibits an addition.

Getting lots of sleep is the other big goal.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on January 26, 2015, 08:45:49 AM
Enjoy the rest.
You definitely deserve it. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 26, 2015, 11:39:28 PM
Look close to the first part of the Beci Ellis link, see the guy on the right who rides around inside his wheel.

The Pendine rules got here today.  They are SCTA based so I built the bike using DLRA 2105 rules and the motorcycle rule changes listed on the SCTA website.  The tire classaifcation was the hard part.  I could not find and records and they are probably over 200 mph for the modern bike 1000 cc class.  The v-rated ones I have on are good for 150 mph.  That surely is lower than the class record but faster than the bike can go.  Hopefully it is OK.

Care has been taken to build the bike to be eligible in as many classes as possible.  It is legal for all sorts of modified partial streamliner classes and with the tail, many special construction partial streamliner ones, too.  The LSR rules for the various organizations are not very different from each other. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 08, 2015, 09:59:52 PM
The shed Rose and her friends built is great.  It gives me a place to work on the bikes.  The problem is the lack of room for the salt flats bike, the street bike, Gretchen's bike, my modern dirt bike,and the vintage desert bike.  It is time to make an annex for storage.  The boat and its trailer will go in there along with a few of the bikes.  Part of the footings are done.  I do a little bit of work on on it every day.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on February 15, 2015, 08:01:23 PM
Bo, did you go to The One Motorcycle Show this year?

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2015/02/the_one_motorcycle_show_in_por.html#incart_river (http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2015/02/the_one_motorcycle_show_in_por.html#incart_river)

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 01, 2015, 11:26:12 PM
Mike, I have been out of the state for a few weeks and I missed the show.  Some folks say it is one of the best shows on the west coast.  There was talk about having me enter the Triumph in the show.  It certainly fits the weird home built bike theme.  The bike is always apart during the show and it never gets entered.

The trip I was on was fairly complex with lots of places I had to be at certain times.  Concerns about climate change made me try to do it all by feets and public transportation with no driving.  It worked OK except for the 6.5 hour trip on a Honolulu city bus to get where I was not planning to go.  It would have been a 30 minute ride I woulda drove.  About eight days were aboard a navy ship and they let me take pictures of the engine room, etc.  Some pictures will be posted in a few days after I get rested and organized.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on March 01, 2015, 11:41:34 PM
Oh!  "Haze gray & underway."  Been there, done that, got all of the uniforms.   :mrgreen:

Looking forward to your story.   :cheers:

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RidgeRunner on March 02, 2015, 08:01:56 AM
     +1 on looking forward to your story and pics when you get the chance Bo. It's been 47 years since I last stopped by Pearl.

     Do the uniforms still fit Mike?  :evil:  Over 30 years ago I tried to get into my jumper and got stuck 1/2 way, had to holler for the kids to pull it back off.  :oops:  Hat still fits  :-D

              Ed       

              W381, EN3 in B2, '67

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 07, 2015, 10:04:56 PM
An ocilloscope in my experience was a big instrument in a cabinet on rollers.  My middle son sent me this picture.  The scope is hooked up to his Bonneville and it is displaying secondary waveforms.  Now the scopes are small enough to hold in the hand.  He is doing well in the automotive technology class at Saddleback.  Already he knows more than I ever will about lots of things. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on March 07, 2015, 10:15:21 PM
WW;

 That looks like the same display that I used to see on an old Bendix ignition analyzer that I bought in an aircraft salvage yard 50 years ago. No comparison on size & weight, though.  :-D

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 07, 2015, 11:14:02 PM
The bike got hung up in shipping somewhere near Panama.  Fortunately it was shipped early and it probably might hopefully make it to Pendine on time.  A video from a meet a couple of years ago.www.youtube.com/watch?v=buJLKh26W9M (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buJLKh26W9M)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 11, 2015, 03:15:10 PM
Greetings from atop the Eiffel Tower.  Team Go Dog Go is heavily involved in prerace training and conditioning.  It is tough but sacrifices must be made.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 11, 2015, 03:17:27 PM
Oops, I forgot the picture.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on May 11, 2015, 04:00:26 PM
Tres bien!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on May 11, 2015, 09:11:07 PM
Chapeau Bo and daughter. Have a blast and if you have time go to the Louvre. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 15, 2015, 05:06:34 PM
Did some driving in the Loire Valley in a little Renault so I will get used to European road signs and driving before I haul the bike around in Wales.  We stayed overnight at the Abbye de Fontrevaud.  Some of my ancestor's bones are scattered around there.  It is a huge monastic complex of buildings dating from the 1100's.

There were a couple of gardeners working on hedge trimming and a few tourists walking around.  Gretchen was busy doing something with her hair so I took a walk.  It was late in the afternoon.  There are all sorts of rooms, doors, passages, etc.  Heck, I figured, the unlocked doors with no "keep out" signs invite opening and Walrus exploration.  It got to be early evening and I found some passage ways and rooms deep down inside of this complex.

It sure puts life in perspective to see this stuff.  It is getting dark and the rooms are lit by little shafts of dim light coming through tiny ports in the ceiling and walls.  The floors and steps are worn by almost a thousand years of use.  Some doorways are real small 'cause folks were back then.  People like us lived in these walled places for most of their lives without knowing much of what was happening beyond the gates and they were happy they were safe and secure within.  We sure have it good these days.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on May 16, 2015, 12:37:43 AM
Thanks Bo. Awesome picture ad description. :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 16, 2015, 04:51:19 AM
The car was rented in Tours, a city laid out over 1000 years ago.  The place is a maze and I could not figure out how to get out in the direction I wanted to go.  I had a map.  The problem was there was nowhere to park and to look a it.  It was a bad situation.

Gretchen says "Pa, EVERYONE except you and ma use GPS.  I will turn it on and tell you which way to go."  It works great.  We got around with no problems after this.

The car is some sort of Renault econobox.  It handles extremely well, has great brakes, and it steers more accurately than any car I have driven.  That is needed here.  The roads are narrow and there are rock walls, bicyclists, etc to deal with.  The engine is a tiny diesel.  It does not have that distinct diesel stink and rattle.  Somehow they figured out how to get rid of it.  The engine turns off when the car is stopped in traffic and it restarts when it is time to go.  At first I thought something was wrong with the car.  It is designed to work this way.  The little thing is fairly quick and it gets fuel mileage better than a lot of motorcycles.  It would be nice if these rascals are sold in the US.  They are better for basic transportation than what we can buy now.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Hoody on May 16, 2015, 05:45:32 AM
The car was rented in Tours, a city laid out over 1000 years ago.  The place is a maze and I could not figure out how to get out in the direction I wanted to go.  I had a map.  The problem was there was nowhere to park and to look a it.  It was a bad situation.

Gretchen says "Pa, EVERYONE except you and ma use GPS.  I will turn it on and tell you which way to go."  It works great.  We got around with no problems after this.

The car is some sort of Renault econobox.  It handles extremely well, has great brakes, and it steers more accurately than any car I have driven.  That is needed here.  The roads are narrow and there are rock walls, bicyclists, etc to deal with.  The engine is a tiny diesel.  It does not have that distinct diesel stink and rattle.  Somehow they figured out how to get rid of it.  The engine turns off when the car is stopped in traffic and it restarts when it is time to go.  At first I thought something was wrong with the car.  It is designed to work this way.  The little thing is fairly quick and it gets fuel mileage better than a lot of motorcycles.  It would be nice if these rascals are sold in the US.  They are better for basic transportation than what we can buy now.


1.5DCi engine? if so then it's the same as used in a Nissan Micra that i had. Capable of ~100MPH and over 80 mpg if you take it steady. Part of this is down to the Common Rail injection they use on modern diesels now?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Andy Cooke on May 16, 2015, 11:57:05 AM
Have a good run at Pendine, I'd love to pop down, but I don't think I'll have the time this year.

I'm not sure how driving in France will prepare you for driving in the UK, aside from the obvious driving on the other side of the road, and the car being a mirror image (apart from the pedals which remain the same) the main gotcha is priority at round abouts/traffic islands, or whatever you want to call them, in France the driver entering the round about has priority, in the UK the driver on the round about has it.  You might still come across priority to the right junctions in France where the farmer pulls right out in front of you on a main road, we have none of that nonsense in the UK (well, not legally anyway).

You'll be back to mph in the UK, fuel is still in Litres, which is probably easier for you as our gallons are bigger than yours, so MPG can be confusing.

No idea where else in the UK you might be heading, but transport museum wise, National Motor Museum Beaulieu (pronounced bew-lee), and the National Motorcycle Museum nr Birmingham are probably the main ones, The Heritage Motor Museum isn't that far from the motorcycle museum and is all British cars. 

Andy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 16, 2015, 04:17:59 PM
The rental policy I had gave me two options to pay for fuel.  One was to fill up the tank before I returned and get no fuel charge.  The other was to pay for a full tank as part of the rental and that would be the fuel charge.  The distance was pretty far so I took the second option.  Cripes, I had no idea the little car would give me far better fuel mileage than my motorcycle.  The silly thing only used a couple of gallons for the entire trip.  A guy learns a lot the first time he does anything.

The lighting in my shed and my eyes are not the best.  I have a hard time reading the torque wrenches with the numbers stamped into the metal unless the light is real good.  Also, everything I work on is metric and the primary measurement reading on American torque wrenches is imperial.  It takes some mental addition to figure out the correct metric torque setting.  Lately I am trying to minimize extraneous thinking.  This way, I can concentrate my declining mental powers on the important stuff, like racing, eating, drinking, and sex.

It is vitally important that I get a torque wrench that is easy to read and the primary unit of measurement is metric.  My son, Josef, mentioned the French brand Facom.  One of my last acts in France was to visit the Facom dealer.  I had to take the metro (the subway) to get there.  It is in a shopping mall right in the middle of Paris under the Hotel De Ville, an old style building.  The Parisians did not want to tear down a nice looking old structure to build an ugly modern shopping mall, so they built it under the old building.  The wrench I was looking for was there.  It was not cheap, as Facom tools are high quality and made in France.  It is exactly what I need so it is worth the money.

We crossed La Manche and cleared Dover customs the day before yesterday.  Now we are in Bilghty.


   

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 17, 2015, 04:58:35 PM
The food is real good in London.  Fish and chips, Cornish pasties, etc. Despite my best intentions, "adding ballast" is what is happening.  Hopefully I can still fit in the leathers when it is time to race.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Sporty Dan on May 17, 2015, 09:22:13 PM
Glad to hear you and your daughter are having a great time! What an awesome experience for the two of you to share!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on May 17, 2015, 11:30:18 PM
I second what Dan said. :cheers:
Nice wrench Bo, now don't go loaning it out hey?. :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 18, 2015, 05:20:34 PM
The FIM record I was aiming for last year was in the mid 150's and it was set by an Aprilia Tuono.  The team with the Aprilia was not real serious that year so I figured I had a chance.  It would take me a couple of years, but 160 mph was doable.  The Aprilia team returned to BUB last year.  They were teaching a young lady how to ride.  She pushed the record up to the mid 160's.  Carp, I said.  These folks are still not real serious.  The Aprilia is getting these speeds with basically an OEM bike, an inexperienced rider, and with no or nominal added streamlining.  The bike can go in the 180's if they get serious.

A serious look at my options tells me that the Team Go Dog, Go! bike, rider, and chief mechanic are hopelessly obsolete.  This happens to us all at some point.  No hard feelings about it. The only thing I can do to stay competitive is to get a new bike.  New bikes are OK, but they are homogenized and pasteurized to the degree they are like appliances.  Riding them is like having sex using an inner tube rubber.

The other option is to have fun and forget about setting any more records.  That is what is happening now.  It was a real hard decision to let the record chasing be something in my past.  Now it is just a crazy old bastid on a warhorse of a Triumph.  Life is good.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on May 18, 2015, 08:41:31 PM
Bo,
You're talking like an OLD has been!  I know if you went back to an obsolete old push rod motor, you would be competitive again.  You're trying to set a record with an OHC motor that was designed basically as a retro bike for nostalgia seekers, which will never be competitive with modern racing bikes.  Never give up!
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on May 19, 2015, 11:14:37 AM
Bo.............I whole-heartily agree with Tom :wink:  There are dozens of open records available in the Classic era............and your a lot younger than we are :lol:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 20, 2015, 10:43:51 AM
That last post is what I feel.  It is hard to write about that kind of thing.  We have a solid program.  Eight years of with speeds higher than the year before and four records.  Technology is moving ahead so fast in the 1000cc class it is hard to keep up.

The plan is to race this year at Pendine, put the high compression pistons and the big cylinders on for 2016 BMST and try to go over 150 mph, then to look at other options.  I am not sure if anyone has set a land speed record on a Matchless.  That sounds like something I could do with a bit of work. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 21, 2015, 02:33:07 PM
This place is beautiful and the people are nice.  Bonnie the bike is in a rented transit van right next to a beach cottage we are staying in.  The truck has a stick shift on the right side of the wheel.  Driving here was a real thrill for us and many of the other drivers.  The hard and dangerous part is done.  Now it is time for tame stuff like racing.

Right now I am typing this in a dive smelling like spilled chip vinegar, stale beer, with disco lights and oliva newton john blaring on the speakers.  A more descriptive post with pictures will come when I find a better place to post it.  - Team Go Dog Go from Pendine Village on Pendine Sands.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: joea on May 21, 2015, 03:06:47 PM
freaking awesome..!!!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on May 21, 2015, 03:43:28 PM
YES!!!  :cheers:

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on May 21, 2015, 04:12:42 PM
GO DO IT BO!!!   :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: lsrjunkie on May 21, 2015, 06:18:51 PM
Excellent sir!  :cheers: GO MAN GO!!  :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 22, 2015, 06:06:05 AM
Thanks for the encouragement and advice.  Last night I walked a mile on the west end of the beach and talked to a local fisherman.  He said the Ministry of Defense has a complex of buildings on the bluff above the beach.  The waste water outfall dumps onto the beach and makes it real soft in one spot.  Otherwise, he says the beach should be hard and firm if we do not tear it up.  He pointed out to me the place and said with a heavy Welsh accent "identify and avoid."

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Hoody on May 22, 2015, 07:52:26 AM
This should be nearby if you have time to kill as well? http://www.carmarthenshire-pages.co.uk/attractions/museum_of_speed.html (http://www.carmarthenshire-pages.co.uk/attractions/museum_of_speed.html) Acording to wiki it sometimes displays this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babs_%28land_speed_record_car%29 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babs_%28land_speed_record_car%29)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 22, 2015, 09:15:45 AM
Thanks, Hoody.  The pits are right next to the museum and Babs will make a visit tomorrow.  Two members of landracing.com are here.  PJ and Peter D. Allen.

The course is behind the big and little signs.  We thought the Ministry of Defense was kind enough to be closing the area for the race.  The guy in the guard tower explained it differently.  "Stay back.  Read the signs."  The course is a firing range this afternoon.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on May 22, 2015, 11:57:36 AM
Welch must be one of the most difficult languages in the world!

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stan Back on May 22, 2015, 12:31:22 PM
Been hitting the grape juice, Neil?

Welsh is even more difficulter.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: krusty on May 23, 2015, 06:19:53 AM
^^^Excellent, Stan, excellent ^^^ :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on May 23, 2015, 12:16:51 PM
Sour grapes, Stan?   :-D

That made me LOL!

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bones on May 23, 2015, 07:12:13 PM
Hey Bo

    DO NOT GIVE UP   (sorry for shouting)
    The matchless is a good idea-- g12 650?
    There is a bloke in New Zealand wit a classic sidecar which smashes all the Triumph and BSA's
    They have a center bearing and with a bunch of Yamaha xs650 parts they are fast and reliable.

   All the best for the race meeting
    See you at BMST

        Bones
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 24, 2015, 07:00:14 AM
Hi Bones.  I am staying with the bike.  It takes a lot of beach to slow the warhorse down and get turned.  Hitting mushy wet sand and at 80+ and patches of deep dry sand on the decel is tough.  The Trusty Triumph carried me through.

All runs standing kilo sand.  Only one track was running.

Run 1 at 56 mph while I cruised through and figured out the track layout and marking.

Run 2 at 99 mph.  A weave is limiting my speed.  I back off on the throttle when it starts.

Run 3 at 101mph.  I try powering through the weave and this does not work.  It just gets worse.  I run over a huge jellyfish on the shutdown.

Run 4 at 110.984.  British National record run, 1000cc Modified Partial Streamliner, Modified Engine, Gasoline.  My arse is back in the saddle to get traction on the loose sand for runs 1 through 3.  My CG is too far back in comparison the the CP.  That causes the weave, I figure.  This run I sit far forward where I am humping the back of the tank.  It works.  No weave.   The only thing limiting speed is wheel spin.

Run 5 at 107 mph.  The course has a big wallow in it about 2/3 way down that kicks the back of the bike up in the air.  The sand is getting loose and traction is dropping.  That's all for yesterday.

Today the tide will be going out and racing will start in the afternoon on the long course.  I will not be down on the beach.  This afternoon the carbs will be pulled off and the main jets switched and needles reset for fuel.  The fuel blend needs to be used within a few hours after it is blended.  The plan for tomorrow is to have the bike rejetted and ready to go in the morning, then to pour the nitropropane and toluene mix into the gas, shake it up, and race.

The fiasco will be shown on Canada's discovery channel.  They are interviewing me and taking all sorts of movie shots.

Cheers from Pendine - WW 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on May 24, 2015, 09:42:21 AM
 :cheers:  :cheers:

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on May 24, 2015, 10:10:23 AM
One of the few times I wish I had cable Bo! Well done. Keep up the great work.  :-D :-D :-D :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Hoody on May 24, 2015, 10:22:23 AM
If possible can you find out the name of the programme? And maybe roughly when it will be broadcast? may be available through other sources?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Sporty Dan on May 24, 2015, 01:59:52 PM
Way to go!  :cheers: Now that you're a movie star, what will you do next?  :-D Seriously, way to go on the record run! That is fantastic! Best of luck for the fuel runs.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 25, 2015, 04:43:33 AM
The TV fellows wanted me to run yesterday for an action footage.  I sez, "look fellows, I am 61 yeas old, and I need a break to do the laundry, redo the bike for fuel, relax, get a good night's sleep, etc."  They left yesterday evening so I am not sure if they will include me.  They did not get everything they wanted.

The short course we used for the kilo was between the public beach and the MOD drain outfall mentioned previously.  The long course will not fit there.  It is down further on the beach and the start is past the soft sand near the outfall.  They ran yesterday and John Renwick totalled the Althomethious sidecar streamliner.  He is banged up a little bit but no broken bones or anything serious.

The flying mile will be run again today.  I need to get a new wristband and put the bike through tech again.  Nervous about this one, I am.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 26, 2015, 05:21:12 AM
Thermal management is a big issue.  The races are short sprints from a standing start and the compression ratio is low at 8.9 to 1 in the 865cc block.  Not much performance can be generated with gasoline so some can tipping is done.  The premise is that in this situation the combustion temps can be raised a bit without increasing them too much.  The gasoline to fuel conversion needs to be simple enough to be done in a day in a remote location without a lot of tools or supplies.

Nitropropane is added at 2oz per gallon with toluene at 1 oz per gallon and another 1 oz per gallon of secret ingredients.  A light dose, for sure.  The bike is using standard Triumph pistons so discretion is best.  Two runs were made on the 25th and we set two British national records.

1000cc modified partial streamliner, modified engine, fuel, flying start quarter mile on sand, 129.252 mph

1000cc modified partial streamliner, modified engine, fuel, standing start mile on sand, 130.130.914 mph

The nitroprop did the trick.  The race is over and we are coming home, tired and happy. 

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on May 26, 2015, 07:44:42 AM
Congratulations Bo! A most successful trip. Well done!  :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

Your thorough approach has rewarded you big time.  :-D :-D :-D :-D

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: octane on May 26, 2015, 08:29:37 AM
Bo, I am so happy for you.

Congratulations !!! ... you deserve it

(http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x214/octane98/Landracing/a.gif)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on May 26, 2015, 10:00:40 AM
Bo, You did us Webfoots proud.   :cheers:
  
   Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on May 26, 2015, 07:33:15 PM
YAH HOO........YIPPEE......... :-D :-D :-D :-D

A modern TRIUMPH twin doing 130mph on the sand :-o :-o :-o

Bo.........Have a great time while you can..............when you get home that motor will need all you've got planned for it .........and maybe a little more for your ultimate test on the salt :-) :-) :-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 27, 2015, 04:38:24 PM
Thanks, all.  It is the inaugural meet for the Pendine sands race under Auto Cycle Union rules so we all got records.  The Straightliners and Pendine Landspeed clubs sponsored it so there were a lot of British 1/4 and 1 mile sprint bikes in the altered classes.  I was alone in my class with a modified partial streamliner.

The kilo track was set within a short distance on the Ministry of Defense part of the beach between the public access at Pendine village and the soft sand near the MOD building water treatment system outfall mentioned previously.  It was maybe a mile and a half long or a bit less.  The sand near the MOD outfall is soft and the racers call it "porridge."

The Triumph was doing between 100 and 110 mph through the traps at the kilo and I used considerable distance to gently drop the nose before doing the serious slow down.  Somewhere between 80 and 90 mph I hit the porridge.  As you can imagine, things got interesting in a jiffy.  The bike snaked all over the place and the huge decel caused by the narrow front tire digging down into the sand tried to throw me over the bars.  I learned to not panic and to keep my weight as far to the rear as far as possible.

Lesson learned.  Use a light road race fairing like the ones that Gene Romero, Dick Mann, and others used at Daytona.  Use as wide and large diameter front tire as practical.  As seen in the pix, that was not how I was set up.

As a side note, the bike was put in the crate today and in the photo they are getting ready to slip it back into the storage container at Enterprise Self Storage on Kemys Way in Swansea, Wales.  The folks that work there are real nice and they helped me to recrate the bike.  The shipper will take it from them in a week or so.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 27, 2015, 05:06:14 PM
These photos, courtesy of Gretchen, show the beach and kilo track.  The first foto faces west and it shows the rock bluff and point that is a fixture in so many of the race photos from the 20's and 30's.  It also shows why there is no racing during high tide.  The second pix is from the bluff facing east showing the public beach and village at Pendine.  Note the start of the kilo in the distance.  The third picture shows the kilo track. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: comet on May 28, 2015, 04:35:23 AM
Great stuff. Well done. Really well done. Congratulations.
It was a shame to John Renwick had a spill though.

It sounds like the weather was on your side for the event.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 28, 2015, 05:45:34 AM
The weather was great.  It was not warm enough to get the local lasses into their bikinis, but it was not raining during the meet.

This silver bike and the red one behind it race at Bonneville.  They are BSA bantams.  If that is not enough of a handicap, they are the littlest ones, the 125's.  This silver one went the fastest.  The results say John Meredith, 125cc Modified Partial Streamlining, Vintage Gas, 87.536 mph standing start mile, 87.105 flying quarter mile, and 56.785 standing start kilo.

The mile time is the speed through the traps at the end of the mile.  The flying quarter time is the average speed between 3/4 and 1 mile.  Similar mile and quarter speeds indicate the bike has topped out before the 3/4 mile mark. 

The mile track was moved down the beach with the start line west of the porridge,  The entire track and run out area was on firm sand and easy to ride.  One pix shows the little bantam being pushed off of the line on the long track.  That silver Bantam made one kilo run and six mile runs.  That is very impressive for the little BSA. 

Two runs were all I did on the long track.  It seems 130 mph is all it can do.  The pistons are those standard cast Triumph ones with the crows reworked with an angle grinder.  Common sense says all I could do with more runs is to wear out or break expensive stuff.  I was a spectator after long track run 2.   

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 28, 2015, 11:58:12 AM
Right now I am on the train between Swansea and London.  It is sad to leave Wales.  The family across the isle has a Jack Russell terrier.  He is well behaved and sitting in his seat just like a regular passenger.

A few of the people racing here had done it before.  Most had not.  There was a run watcha brung (RWB) class for people to try out their bikes, just like at the Bonneville Motorcycle Speed Trials.  Note the plate on this drag bike to keep the head from blowing off.  It used a drag slick.  These guys were having all sorts of fun.  The entry is Chris Emmens, 1960 Triumph 750cc, Standing Start Kilo at 103.984.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 29, 2015, 05:26:43 AM
The prewar brit bike is rare in the US.  There are a few racing here, the Triumph 350cc single shown in an earlier post, a new Imperial, an AJS, and this Rudge Ulster.  The first pix shows Chris Illman, the bike's owner.  Rudge parts are hard to find and he made the piston out of billet aluminum.  The second photo shows the front end.  Note how the girder forks are much more rigid than the typical tubular variety.

Note the pussy pad on the rear fender.  This was typical of race bikes in the old days.  The rider slides back on that pad so they can tuck down.  The little windshield is what they used back then, too. 

The bike was started with rollers.  One one us would hold his place in starting queue ahead of our bike.  Then when we got close to the starter, he would fire up the Rudge and get in front of us in the queue. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 29, 2015, 05:39:37 AM
I got mixed up.  The tiny windshield was on another old bike.

The bike is called an Ulster 'cause the prototype won the Ulster Gran Prix, a prestigious race.  The engine is a single cylinder with four valves and two exhaust pipes.  The valve springs are air cooled.  Spring steel was not what it is now and the springs needed to be out in the air to stay cool.  Otherwise, they would get too hot and lose their temper.

The old girl, built as a 1930 model, runs hard.  Chris is a good builder, tuner,and rider.  It is in Modified Vintage Engine Gas, 500cc class.  Standing Start Kilo at 104.967, Flying Start Quarter Mile at 103.375, and Standing Start Mile at 108.89 mph. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 29, 2015, 05:16:22 PM
One side effect of this trip to Britain is weight gain.  Lots of good food and beer is making me fat.  Corrective measures are taken.  Dinner is eating something remotely healthy with a pint.  Then, I walk five miles, more or less, through London and have another pint somewhere along the way.  Last night I strolled around Fitzrovia where we are staying and then I walked through Mayfair.  Tonight I pottered down through this place called Soho.  Nice looking women would say to me "A lady, sir?"  It took some Einstein type figuring to deduce I was in the red light district.  It is Friday night here.  There are millions living in this place and at least a third are out on the streets having fun and socializing.
       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 30, 2015, 06:37:44 AM
There were some bikes at the meet with history.  The long Triumph is Simon Rees' Dangermouse.  It is typical of an old style British drag bike.  The nose fairing was not unusual for sprint bikes when this bike was new.  It ran 112.43 in the standing mile.  The second bike was Al Gunther's Gold Star.  It won or placed at Daytona when the race was run on the beach.  It was raced by John Preston and did 90.378 in the mile.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 02, 2015, 09:59:02 AM
Sprinting what the British call drag racing where two bikes race side by side for short distances.  It also includes the longer races where a single bike is timed.  Airport runways have been used for standing and flying start kilo and mile records.  Pendine Sands offers an opportunity set these types of records in a course with longer run up and shut down distances than a runway.

The looser sand surface will not allow the application of power or provide traction like pavement.  The records set during this event reflect this.  They are sand records.

A flying mile course was considered at this event.  The track layout crew spotted an unexploded bomb partially exposed on the beach where the flying mile course would be.  The MoD disposed of it.  The flying mile course was not set up for our event.

Two typical British sprint bikes are shown.  The Kawasaki belongs to Barry Curtis, it is 1000cc Special Construction Blown Gas class, and it went 131.688 in the standing kilo, 147.192 in the flying quarter, and 148.85 in the standing mile.  The similar flying quarter and standing mile speeds indicate it was running out of power or traction and could not get much acceleration during the last 3/4 of a mile.  Barry and his bike are plenty fast.

The one with the green wheels belongs to PJ Ofurey, a member of this forum and a key organizer from the Pendine LRC club.  He gave me a lot of helpful advice and made my life much easier.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 04, 2015, 09:55:41 AM
This handsome fellow in the first picture is Terry Smith and he set the fastest speeds of the meet at 176.33 in the standing start mile, 172.123 in the flying quarter, and 158.327 in the standing start kilometer.  He owns a small family garage in the English midlands and is not part of any fancy race team.  His bike is a Hayabusa with an engine he and his friends hopped up.  It is naturally aspirated.  The chassis is basically standard.  He ran in the 1650cc Production Modified Engine Gas class.  The 'busa is a very forgiving bike and it is well suited for this, according to Terry.  Both wheels were skating around side to side on the sand, as Terry tells it. 

Looking at mile times, the next fastest were Zef Eisenberg's Production 1650cc Kawasaki ZX14 at 161.390, Mark Griffith's Productuion 1000cc Suzuki GSXR at 159.769, Phil Harris on a Production Modified Engine 1000cc Aprilia SL at 148.008, and Barry Curtis on a Special Construction Blown Gas 1000cc Kawasaki GPZ  at 147.192 mph.  The hot ticket to speed seems to be a slightly modified Jap bike.

The second photo shows a Turbine Wheel Powered jet bike.  It is Zef Eisenberg's entry and it ran 141.892 in the mile.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on June 04, 2015, 11:24:16 PM
Hope you've had a great time?.
I think I'll call you Mr. Ambassador from now on.
Thanks for the pics and all the info.
You're a special guy IMO. :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 05, 2015, 09:59:07 AM
Hi Mike.  It was a nice three weeks and my first venture outside of North America or Hawaii.  I never could afford to travel.  Actually, I could not afford this trip.  The race budget will be sorta small for a couple of years.

The first photo shows me leaving the line on the first run.  The second shows the fourth or fifth.  Note how the track softens up.  It is important to be in line and ready to go before the first racers leave.  There is a short time, an hour at most, during the day when the track is hard and tight and at its best.  A guy or gal needs to be prepared and aggressive in getting their act together pronto.  Unlike at Bonneville, there is no time to goof around in the pits after the racing starts.

The second and third runs were made with me sitting back in the center of the seat and gripping the bike loosely with my knees.  This is a classic desert race posture for sand riding.  The bike wobbled and this limited my speeds to around 100 mph.  Sit like this on your bike and have a friend grab the steering head and pull it from side to side.  It is easy to move the steering head.

The center of pressure is ahead of the center of gravity on this faired bike at speed.  The air pressure tries to twist the bike around.  The front wheel tries to go in a straight line and the steering stem wags from side to side.  This is how you can recognize the problem.  It does not happen on unfaired desert racers cause the CP is closer to the CG and speeds are slower.

The cure is to slide forward on the seat and to grip the tank tight with your upper thighs.  Do this and have the friend push and pull on the steering stem.  It is harder to wag the bike.  This seating position increases the polar moment of inertia and it moves the CG closer to the CP.  This is how I was able to go faster than the ton.           
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on June 06, 2015, 04:26:05 AM
My feeling is that your experience there just sharpened your skills for Speed Week. I hope you'
re going?.

Not many guys have done the trip you have so my hat's off to you. :cheers:

Nothing's cheap anymore but you did it and that's what counts.
How many guys do you know that took their daughter and the bike on an adventure like that?. :cheers: :wink:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: BDR on June 06, 2015, 10:03:19 AM
Hi Mike.  It was a nice three weeks and my first venture outside of North America or Hawaii.  I never could afford to travel.  Actually, I could not afford this trip.  The race budget will be sorta small for a couple of years.

The first photo shows me leaving the line on the first run.  The second shows the fourth or fifth.  Note how the track softens up.  It is important to be in line and ready to go before the first racers leave.  There is a short time, an hour at most, during the day when the track is hard and tight and at its best.  A guy or gal needs to be prepared and aggressive in getting their act together pronto.  Unlike at Bonneville, there is no time to goof around in the pits after the racing starts.

The second and third runs were made with me sitting back in the center of the seat and gripping the bike loosely with my knees.  This is a classic desert race posture for sand riding.  The bike wobbled and this limited my speeds to around 100 mph.  Sit like this on your bike and have a friend grab the steering head and pull it from side to side.  It is easy to move the steering head.

The center of pressure is ahead of the center of gravity on this faired bike at speed.  The air pressure tries to twist the bike around.  The front wheel tries to go in a straight line and the steering stem wags from side to side.  This is how you can recognize the problem.  It does not happen on unfaired desert racers cause the CP is closer to the CG and speeds are slower.

The cure is to slide forward on the seat and to grip the tank tight with your upper thighs.  Do this and have the friend push and pull on the steering stem.  It is harder to wag the bike.  This seating position increases the polar moment of inertia and it moves the CG closer to the CP.  This is how I was able to go faster than the ton.           

Aup Bo, Becci says hi and she has loads of pic for you. I think she has been inspired and is now looking for a bike for next year (joy) another to build.
As yet we have been pretty stable but its good to be prepared for a little wobble. When I built the bike I made sure everything fitted inside Mr Suzukis std. fairing. I am sending some pics of her bike for you to have a look at as well as a load of you and Gretchin (?) Terry and others.

 Be good....   Mike.

P.S.  So using a pussy seat could help get yer head down ,but induce a wobble ??
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 07, 2015, 02:02:05 AM
Hi Mike (Tauruck).  The trip cost a lot more than I had saved for it and I borrowed a bunch of money to pay for everything.  No more racing for me this year.  The goal is to run at the Bonneville Motorcycle Speed Trials in 2016 with a full race motor.  The one I ran at Pendine had 865cc with 8.9 to 1 compression.  The new pistons sitting in my parts bin are for the 995cc block with 13.5 to 1 compression.  Those, and some more experimenting with gasoline/nitropropane/toluene should give big speeds for 2016 with minimal financial outlay.

Mike (BDR) This is the setup for the salt as per one of Scooter Grubb's excellent photos www.scootershoots.com/BUBMotorcycleSpeedTrials/2014-Bonneville-Motorcycle-Spe/i-xPgVn9/A (http://www.scootershoots.com/BUBMotorcycleSpeedTrials/2014-Bonneville-Motorcycle-Spe/i-xPgVn9/A)

The fairing makes for a center of pressure that is farther forward than a typical unfaired bike.  It is important for me to keep the CG as close at the CP as I can, thus the far forward riding position.  That bike won't be stable with me resting back toward the rear, on the salt as well as on the the sand.

Other bikes might be different.  I do not know.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 07, 2015, 02:13:58 AM
The link does not go directly to the pictures.  It is Bike #7497 on Page 42.

The bike is at full speed on the salt for a considerable length of time.  It is possible to move the CP ahead by lowering oneself down behind the fairing and to move it toward the back by sitting up.  Some experimenting with this tells a lot about how to setup the bike.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 08, 2015, 09:45:07 AM
Improvements to Hayabusa aero was discussed after the Triumph club breakfast last Saturday.  The consensus is they are so awesome that the areo they have is better than anything we could design.  Recommendations are to clean up the exterior by removing mirrors, blinkers, styling baubles, etc and to leave it alone.

A fellow who did a lot of wind tunnel work told me the surface roughness on a fairing is a handicap up to around 160 mph.  Beyond those speeds it helps.  He had some stick-on roughness dots on the front part of his fairing to create turbulence on the surface.

The air pressure tends to tip a bike towards the rear at speed.  Sitting forward puts some weight on the front end.  A pussy pad on a 'busa might make the weight distribution too far to the rear at speed and cause big trouble.  Also, tucking in moves the CP toward the front a little bit.  Again, those Suzukis are so fast that I cannot give much help.  My bike is slow in comparison.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 09, 2015, 01:04:59 AM
The next few posts will be about the logistics of the trip.  This was my first overseas journey so there is a lot I will do different next time.  First, insurance.

The Auto Cycle Union (ACU) was the sponsoring organization.  They issued me a clubman's license for the event so I could run for records.  It was upgraded at the event to a national license so I was eligible for British National records.  Otherwise, I would be in the run-watcha-brung class with no records.

An insurance policy was needed so I could get the ACU license.  As per the ACU, it had to have no deductible and cover the expenses of repatriation of my injured or dead body and include basic British medical coverage.  The claims had to be paid by the insurance company.  The ACU did not want to be billed by the doctors or mortician and have to apply for reimbursement by the insurer.  The ACU was extremely fussy about this coverage.  So picky, that the only folks that could write a policy they were happy with was Lockton, their insurers.  I bought their policy so I could race for records.

The ACU/Lockton policy was real porous.  There were all sorts of things it would not pay for like dislocations, long term care, etc.  I needed a second and robust policy to cover Rose and my family from serious losses if I crashed and got hurt or killed.  The policy had to be from an American insurer.  I wanted to keep things simple for Rose and to be covered by our domestic insurance laws.  The policy I bought was written by Peterson Underwriters and I got a lot of valuable help from one of our American insurance agents.  The deductible was sorta high, $2,500.  Ouch.  All included, the cost of insurance for the event was over $2,000 USD.

The ACU was awful to deal with.  What they wanted was reasonable.  They seem OK, personality wise.  Their business skills were non existent.  The event is also sanctioned by the UK Timing Association.  The British racers say they are much easier to work with.  Next time I will use them for insurance.  Also, I set aside about five weeks to figure out the insurance.  Next time, it will be ten weeks before the event, so I can shop around and find a better price.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 11, 2015, 01:27:57 AM
Pendine is a small town, a village to be more exact.  Unlike Wendover, there are no casino hotels.  Various accommodations exist.  What we call the "pits" the British say is a paddock.  This latter description fits.  Note the fence, wooden gate, and pasture.   Some racers and their families camp in the paddock in tents, vans, or trailers.  There is a water spigot and toilr ets nearby.

There are also inns with the pubs.  The one in the photo is the Spring Well.  Never stayed there although a few pints of ale disappeared when I was around.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 11, 2015, 01:35:30 AM
The Beach is another pub/inn with some land speed racing history.  In the evenings there was all sorts of loud singing coming from within.  One quiet afternoon I went in and asked "Is this a typical Welsh pub with all this carrying-on?"  The bar lady said "No, those blokes are from England.  Its Bank Holiday.  We are sort of quiet here, mostly."  The sign is on the side of the pub.  This was another pub on my nightly route.  Gretchen liked these pubs, too.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 11, 2015, 01:47:49 AM
A caravan park is like an American trailer park.  This one is well kept up.  The caravans are similar to a single-wide in America.  The owners rent them out by the day when they are not using them.  This one we stayed in was very clean and quiet.  A lot of racers stay in these.

I did not know what to expect here as for services and supplies.  Everything I needed was packed in the crate including fuel.  The tire pump was powered by the van cigarette lighter socket.  A US to UK power adapter and two extension cords were used to connect the battery charger to an outlet in the caravan.  I was smart to bring all of this stuff.  There is not much in this town for mechanics supplies and there is no petrol (gas) station.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 13, 2015, 02:24:25 AM
It is worth it to spend a few days in Pendine before and after the race.  The Welsh coast is worth a visit.  It is easy to walk around the the bluff at beach's end when the tide is out.  Lots of sea caves there and majestic cliffs.  A public trail starts at the bottom of the bluff and goes along the top of the sea cliffs to the cove to the west.  Lots of nice views.  A road goes to the top of the ridge to the north of town where the cows are in the photo.  It is possible to look across the Bristol Channel and see the coasts of Devon and Cornwall in England.

The thing to remember when sand riding is to shift one's weight to the rear when riding over loose and powdery sand.  Also, expect the bike to move around a lot and do not tense up or panic.  Relax and let the bike find its way.  Use tires with tread and good large air filters.

This is the last Pendine post.  Hopefully someone reading this will go there.  It is a good race in a pretty place with nice people.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on June 13, 2015, 10:55:46 AM
Thanks Bo.

You gave us a virtual tour and it was cool.

Have a safe trip home brother. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Rasmussen on July 10, 2015, 09:36:51 AM
Bo at Pendine
https://youtu.be/LOs496RU0Y4
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on July 10, 2015, 02:10:10 PM
Sounded great!   :cheers:

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: SaltPeter on July 10, 2015, 05:21:21 PM
Great Adventure .... thanks for sharing it Bo  :cheers:

Pete  :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 12, 2015, 03:16:10 PM
Wow, Ivan.  That flick shows one thing about the sand.  A gentle start is needed so as not to break the tire loose.  Although that was an exit at low throttle, the bike was sorta squirrely.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 14, 2015, 12:36:40 AM
The bike made it as far as Portland.  Now it is hung up in customs.  The issues are some paperwork problems I cannot begin to understand.

This does not deter me from the big challenge.  That is how to go a lot faster and to get my old FIM record back at 2016 BMST.  It got raised last year to over 160 mph.  I am scared to look it up and see the actual number.  Pistons are on hand to raise the static compression ratio into the twelves.  It was 10.5 to 1 before.  They will be sent out for ceramic coating next week.  This will add a few mph to the 146 the bike runs now.

There is a sale on race cams at Triumph Performance.  A pair of race knockers will set me back about $600 which includes the sale reduction and racer discount.  Not a bad price so two are on order.  I sent in the OEM cams for my street Bonneville to be used as blanks.  Right now I am using a pair of midrange cams in the LSR bike that are great for hill climbing, scrambling, and motocross.  It will be nice to get the Mae West grinds.

A spec card will come with the cams.  Standard equations will be used with this data to calculate the air flow past the valves.  I am almost certain that sonic choke will be a problem.  The figuring will tell me the valve sizes I need.

The advance curve will be reprogrammed for a 9,400 rpm cutoff with a new curve.  It cuts out at 8,400 rpm now.

That's it.  About 100 hp is what I expect.  Not enough.  Cherubs will fly down behind me and blow me through the mile faster than I will normally go.  I saw these little rascals on church ceilings throughout Europe so I know they are there.  Devine Wind, that is what I am counting on.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on August 15, 2015, 12:20:46 PM
I use the Saints. They're good for any speed I ask. :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 19, 2015, 01:25:23 AM
The 2016 build will use the aggressive cams and the new pistons.  The pistons say 13:1 on the box.  The head has standard size exhaust valves and 2mm larger intakes.  The combustion chamber was enlarged around the intake valves to reduce shrouding and to promote air flow.  This lowers the static compression ratio to 12:1.  All my engines have bear names.  Baby bear, mama bear and papa bear are built.  This new one will be grizzly bear.

The engine for 2017 will be the same with a few differences.  I might try to build a 2 into 1 header with megga designed using software.  Also, the intake ports will be reworked do they are downdraft rather than side draft.  The critical measurement on a standard cylinder head is the distance between the bottom of the intake valve spring pocket and the top of the intake port.  The distance is about 10mm on this almost new cylinder head from the scrap pile.  This distance will be reduced to 5mm when the ports are straightened.  There is room for the modification.  It will take me over a year to get this engine together.  It is the part of the 2017 build.  This hot mama will be "Kodiak" bear.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on August 19, 2015, 09:09:30 AM
I can't bear this build anymore. :-D :-D :-D

Way to go Bo. :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: JimL on August 19, 2015, 12:32:22 PM
Bo, my heads use shorter springs and thick aluminum spacers under the spring seat washer.  This allows moving the top of the port a little higher (thinner) with the spring still supported.  The lower radius of the intake port gets shaped where the corner-turn area occurs, but the bottom of the port face is NOT opened up...only the top, upwards (and sideways).  You can actually use JB weld if you fall through into the thick spacer (we had lots of heads to mess with and never got that far).

This requires those fabricated heavy steel manifolds I use, to fit the new higher inlet port position in the head.  The goal is a higher and better angled intake port....not just the size.  A small improvement in angle will move that 0.5 Mach problem a little higher in the rev range than you might think.

Boy....what a bunch of confusing sentences I just wrote.  :|

Anyway....its the best you can do if the aluminum is crappy like mine and cant be welded up to move the port upward.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 20, 2015, 12:26:28 AM
The Triumph head was originally developed for a 790cc engine and it is now a 995 one with the same stroke.  The intake valve centers are too close together and the exhausts, too, for this size bore.  Up to 6mm larger valves can be used.  Shrouding becomes an issue with valves this size unless a lot of metal is removed all around them.  Moderate size valves are needed so they will be unshrouded without adding a lot of combustion chamber volume.  Straightening the inlet tract, like Jim says, helps to avoid sonic choke problems.  It means that smaller, better breathing, valves can be used.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 28, 2015, 09:13:37 PM
The cylinder head flow test results are plotted.  The exhaust cam that has been in the engine for a few years has 0.388 lift and the exhaust valves are standard size.  The flow curve shows the valves and ports certainly are not oversized for the in the bike now.  It will be a good idea to enlarge them before installing the higher lift cam.

The intake cam also has 0.388 lift and the intake valves are 2mm larger than standard.  The flow curve flattens out at lifts above 0.300.  A higher lift knocker will not do any good until the valves and ports are enlarged to handle the flow.

Horsepower is directly proportional to intake flow at 28 inches according to some commonly used equations.  The flow limitation in the cyl head limits horsepower.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on August 29, 2015, 06:20:22 AM
The cylinder head flow test results are plotted.  The exhaust cam that has been in the engine for a few years has 0.388 lift and the exhaust valves are standard size.  The flow curve shows the valves and ports certainly are not oversized for the in the bike now.  It will be a good idea to enlarge them before installing the higher lift cam.

The intake cam also has 0.388 lift and the intake valves are 2mm larger than standard.  The flow curve flattens out at lifts above 0.300.  A higher lift knocker will not do any good until the valves and ports are enlarged to handle the flow.

Horsepower is directly proportional to intake flow at 28 inches according to some commonly used equations.  The flow limitation in the cyl head limits horsepower.

Wobbly,

If you are willing to share, PM me the raw flow data so I can enter it into my flow program for analysis.   Engine is a 2 valve hemi, right?

Send me also:

A)   Cam duration @ .050"
2)   Valve angle from vertical, referenced from cylinder C/L, both valves.
d)   Distance from valve edge to valve edge, valves seated.
z)   Refresh my memory on desired peak bhp rpm & peak torque rpm.

 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 29, 2015, 11:15:50 PM
Hi Mark.  Right now I am waiting for the cams to be ground and the bike to be cleared from US Customs in Portland.  I will measure everything up when I get something to work with.  That is real nice of you to offer to do this.  The combustion chamber is a Cosworth design with four valves, a pent roof, and a sorta flat piston.  The goal is 100 rear wheel horsepower at 8,400 rpm on gasoline.

A question about fuels for all of you experts.  Straight non-oxygenated leaded gasoline was compared to two different brands of oxygenated gasoline using dyno tests during a two year period.  The oxygenated fuels used ethanol to supply the oxygen at around 8% and 2% added O2.  No power increase was noted with these oxygenated fuels.

Straight leaded race gas was used during the first day at Pendine.  The bike did just over 110 mph in the standing start kilo and it felt like it was topped out at 110 and not much more speed could be had if the track was longer.

During the second day I raised the needles one notch and increased the main jets four sizes.

The third day straight leaded race gas was used with 1.6 percent nitropropane, 0.8 percent toluene, and 0.8 percent other ingredients added.  Percentages are by volume.  It was like adding another cylinder to the engine.  The bike did over 130 in the standing start mile.

The nitropropane could have not added enough O2 at that low percentage to achieve such dramatic results.  Something else is happening.  This is I think it is.  The ethanol oxygenated gasolines and to some extent, the straight race gas is vaporizing before it gets past the intake valves.  The expansion associated with this change from liquid to gaseous form is lowering the charge density.  That is a big deal on this engine 'cause the flow restriction of the smallish intake valves.

Something in the nitropropane/toluene/other ingredient mix is inhibiting the vaporization of both the gasoline and the nitropropane until both are past the intake valves.  This unvaporized charge is more dense.  This is important 'cause the intake valves are small and not much gets past them.  This mix vaporizes after it gets into the chamber and voila, lots more power.

I do not know much about this and this is my theory.  Am I full of carp or might I me on to something?     

 

   



   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on August 30, 2015, 09:54:34 AM
Based on the results, you have to conclude that extra output is being developed.    What, exactly, is going on, is more difficult to determine without a cylinder pressure measurement and records to compare.

Something to keep in mind is that air cooled engines (is this air cooled?) typically run hotter chamber temps, and this assists in fuel vaporization.   BUT, some engines (and some fuels) do NOT like vaporized fuel.    Yeah, I know that in theory, complete vaporization SHOULD produce more bhp, BUT, some engines (and fuels) simply produce more bhp when the fuel "rains in" in larger "droplets".    How do you know what works better for you?    Testing and documentation is the only way.    Race tracks can substitute for dynamometers if you can data log . . . . . .  although the changing conditions of the track or the weather can drive a person batty.

Most "Cosworth" designs function very well with .41"/.44" gross cam lift, and you are not very far from that.    The Cosworth cam designs, do however, run "lots" of duration, usually not a fitment problem with 4 valve engines.   BUT, yours may be "unique" depending on the Build Geometry.    A "high" rod length/stroke ratio may hamper flow demand and room for valve clearance @ overlap.    At least you should be rid of the 2 valve hemi valve to valve clearance problem.

The compression ratios can be "modest" with "flat-top" style pistons, depending on displacement per cylinder.    You might want to do a very accurate measurement and calculation of your actual C/R, you might be surprised.    If you do the measurements, I'll run it through my copy of Compression Ratio Calculator Pro.   Be prepared to measure a few things not normally checked.    Modest "intruder" style pistons can gain some output via higher C/R, at the cost of increased component stress . . . . . .

Keep in mind that there are ALWAYS compromises for fitment, or to utilize existing bits, etc, etc, etc.

The "trick" is to make the best choices out of the options available.    Informed decision making ALWAYS works out better in the long run.     There is never a short run, because measurement and analysis takes time, adding to the length of the build.     AND, analysis can make you regretful of parts choices that were guesses.

 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 30, 2015, 11:14:49 AM
The Pendine engine was a mongrel with a mixture of standard Triumph and racing parts.  Fortunately I have lots of data on the motor.  Today it is raining and I am stuck at home.  This is a great time to look up the info and I will post it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 30, 2015, 12:15:24 PM
The cam timing is considered to be proprietary and it will be sent by PM.  The flow data printouts will be scanned and posted.  Pendine engine data is, displacement = 865cc, bore = 90mm, stroke = 68mm, rod/stroke ratio = 1.787, measured static compression ratio = 8.9 to 1, intake valve head dia = 33mm, exhaust valve head dia = 26mm, intakes and exhausts inclines 15 degrees from vertical, distance between intakes = 0.166 inches, distance between exhausts = 0.490 inches, distance between intakes and exhausts = 0.362 inches, rear wheel horsepower =81 at 7,800 rpm, torque = 60 foot pounds at 6,200 rpm, based on curves from three pulls using Sunoco Supreme and Dynojet "std" correction.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 30, 2015, 01:20:51 PM
Flow data in tabular form.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 01, 2015, 12:24:25 AM
Today I worked on my theory during lunch at work.  Dyno comparisons a couple of years ago between Sunoco Standard non oxygenated leaded and a highly oxygenated Australian blend showed no power increase.  The year before last another dyno comparison was made between leaded Sunoco Supreme and leaded Sunoco MO2X.  The supreme is non oxygenated.  The MO2X has 6.8 percent ethanol by volume.  The distillation data for Supreme are 10% evap at 169 degrees, 50% evap at 217 degrees, and 90 % evap at 231 degrees.  The same data for MO2X are 10% evap at 124 degrees, 50% evap at 207 degrees, and 90% evap at 226 degrees.  The ethanol gas tends to vaporize at lower temps.  I saw this trend with ethanol mixes from other brands.

Next, I looked at toluene.  It is an oxygen bearing molecule.  I like the stuff 'cause of its relatively non-toxic combustion by products - in comparison to other additives.  The stuff is a bit hard to ignite and is the opposite of ethanol in that respect.  I ran out of lunch time and did not look at nitropropane.

The engine on the Triumph is big and complex and the inlet tract is long by bike standards.  Also, it is air cooled.  My feelings are premature vaporization might be a problem.  It will not hurt to put thermal coatings on the inlet tract and inlet valves, as well as the piston tops.  This will help to keep the incoming charge cooler.  Vizard says, in his port and flow test book "If you have to pick one single element of the induction/exhaust of the head, coat the valves...The biggest power influence is the face of the intake valve because it cuts heat going into the intake charge."

Comments sure are welcome on this.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on September 01, 2015, 11:58:00 AM
Bo..............I appreciate the gas/fuel tech. The only thing I know is experience........fumes explode.........liquid burns. I was an A-student in HIGH SCHOOL physics. No classes since.  Question: If the heat causes evaporation, and the air-density is low, would this not make for improved 'explosion' characteristics in the sealed chamber?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 02, 2015, 12:56:00 AM
My thoughts are there is a volume increase when the fuel goes from droplets and gases to mostly gases and this is best if it happens after the mix gets past the intake valve.  This engine seems to mix up the charge pretty good before ignition so I am not worried about that.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 02, 2015, 02:40:20 AM
Shrouding, or the blockage of flow out of the valve curtain, is discussed at length in Vizard's 2012 book on porting and flow testing.  Interruption of flow by the edge of the valve pocket in the piston crown is a topic he addresses.  These new high compression pistons have deep valve pockets and the potential to shroud.

Washers are placed in the pockets to get their dimensions.  The intake pocket is 38mm dia and the exhaust 32mm.  Also note that 38mm dia washers touch each other when placed in the pockets.

Intake valve dia is 31mm on a standard OEM bike.  Mine has 33 mm dia valves and they are too small.  35 mm dia intakes are a commonly used oversize.  The clearance between the valve margin and piston pocket wall is approximately (38 - 35) / 2 = 1.5 mm.  This is sort of marginal from a shrouding viewpoint.  Big 36 mm dia intakes are also used by a successful builder on a bored and stroked Bonneville that displaces over well over 1000cc.  These will give only 1mm of clearance.  This is a tight fit.  There is a shrouding issue with this size.  Vizard gives some advice about radiusing the pocket edge to reduce shrouding.  The downside of this is a consequent drop in compression ratio.

It looks like there are two choices, one is to use the 35mm valves with no pocket relieving or the 36mm ones with relieved pockets.  This is a topic I will discuss with the fellow who does my valve work.

Exhaust valves are 26mm dia on a production bike and mine has the same size.  A common modification is to install 28mm, 30mm, or 31mm oversize valves.  Valve pocket shrouding can be an issue here, too.  The 28mm valves have 2mm clearance which is enough.  The 30mm ones have 1mm clearance which is not enough, and the 31mm valves have only 0.5mm clearance, which is way too tight.  This is another topic to discuss with the machinist. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on September 03, 2015, 12:45:35 AM
Calculate the ex flow as a % of intake flow.    If you are normally aspirated, AND, at 85% or better, you probably do not need bigger ex valves.

 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on September 03, 2015, 12:52:19 AM

The engine on the Triumph is big and complex and the inlet tract is long by bike standards.  Also, it is air cooled.  My feelings are premature vaporization might be a problem.  It will not hurt to put thermal coatings on the inlet tract and inlet valves, as well as the piston tops.  This will help to keep the incoming charge cooler.  Vizard says, in his port and flow test book "If you have to pick one single element of the induction/exhaust of the head, coat the valves...The biggest power influence is the face of the intake valve because it cuts heat going into the intake charge."

Comments sure are welcome on this.    

Yes.    Do it.    Keep in mind though, that this will gain low single digit % improvement, like 1 or 2% typically.    You still have all the latent heat of an air cooled cylinder head to get rid of.    And, as you speculated, the latent heat of the head does not help charge density.

 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on September 03, 2015, 01:18:33 AM
Shrouding, or the blockage of flow out of the valve curtain, is discussed at length in Vizard's 2012 book on porting and flow testing.  Interruption of flow by the edge of the valve pocket in the piston crown is a topic he addresses.  These new high compression pistons have deep valve pockets and the potential to shroud.

Washers are placed in the pockets to get their dimensions.  The intake pocket is 38mm dia and the exhaust 32mm.  Also note that 38mm dia washers touch each other when placed in the pockets.

Intake valve dia is 31mm on a standard OEM bike.  Mine has 33 mm dia valves and they are too small.  35 mm dia intakes are a commonly used oversize.  The clearance between the valve margin and piston pocket wall is approximately (38 - 35) / 2 = 1.5 mm.  This is sort of marginal from a shrouding viewpoint.  Big 36 mm dia intakes are also used by a successful builder on a bored and stroked Bonneville that displaces over well over 1000cc.  These will give only 1mm of clearance.  This is a tight fit.  There is a shrouding issue with this size.  Vizard gives some advice about radiusing the pocket edge to reduce shrouding.  The downside of this is a consequent drop in compression ratio.

It looks like there are two choices, one is to use the 35mm valves with no pocket relieving or the 36mm ones with relieved pockets.  This is a topic I will discuss with the fellow who does my valve work.

Exhaust valves are 26mm dia on a production bike and mine has the same size.  A common modification is to install 28mm, 30mm, or 31mm oversize valves.  Valve pocket shrouding can be an issue here, too.  The 28mm valves have 2mm clearance which is enough.  The 30mm ones have 1mm clearance which is not enough, and the 31mm valves have only 0.5mm clearance, which is way too tight.  This is another topic to discuss with the machinist. 

.75mm (.030") is enough, IF, that is at the closest point, (probably TDC, but check if your pins are offset) with "tight" piston clearances.   "Loose" piston clearances, like most air cooled guys need to run, require more radial clearance, because there is more "piston rocking" at TDC.    Pick your poison by checking how much "rock" you have cold and add that to the suggested clr.    There will be less "rock" at operating temperature, giving you a margin of error in your favor.

Yes, shrouding is always bad, BUT, if you are going to push the compression ratio, what other choice do you have?

The gain in expansion ratio from increased static C/R, outweighs the slight shrouding during the overlap period.    The shrouding occurs only from about 18/15 degrees BTDC to 15/18 ATDC, and maybe less, depending on your build geometry.   This is a point in the cycle where the int flow demand is LOW, and the exhaust blow down is dropping.

I want to get all the "gravy" from my plate, so to speak.   I concentrate on the big puddles and I don't worry about the molecules I miss . . . . . . . . .    I would push the compression ratio hard, and remember that the engine will be very sensitive to state of "tune".    You will need to keep track of A/F and ignition, or risk melting parts.    Sorry, that's just the way it is when you punch up the power.

 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 04, 2015, 01:50:34 AM
The pistons are wide in relation to their height and they have 0.004 skirt clearance to start and the wear wider from there.  The gudgeon pins are offset 1mm.  The pistons do rock.  It is not unusual to see wear marks from the side of the cylinder on the piston above the top ring. 

Bigger seats are needed for larger valves.  The distance between the outer edges of the intake valve seats is only 3 mm on a stock head with standard OEM 31 mm dia valves.

Does this add up to it being a good idea to use 4 mm oversize intake valves, rather than the 5 or 6 mm oversize ones? Again, comments are welcome.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on September 04, 2015, 09:19:47 AM
The pistons are wide in relation to their height and they have 0.004 skirt clearance   Where?  At the pin C/L?  Or at the bottom of the skirt?   How much taper is ground in to the skirt from the pin C/L to the bottom of the skirt?   How much clearance does the piston mfg. recommend?   to start and the wear wider from there.

The gudgeon pins are offset 1mm.  The pistons do rock.  Is offset necessary to prevent the piston from "leaning" on one side of the cylinder?   Or is it just to prevent the noise from "slap"?

It is not unusual to see wear marks from the side of the cylinder on the piston above the top ring.  You don't want this to be happening, as it can wear/distort the bore.   This can be an indication of too much clearance, OR, top land dia too large.   Top land should be about .030"/.035" less than the bore dia max.   The top ring land can also be tapered toward the top to prevent this. 

Bigger seats are needed for larger valves.  The distance between the outer edges of the intake valve seats is only 3 mm on a stock head with standard OEM 31 mm dia valves.   Does the benefit in potential increased airflow, justify the cost to enlarge the valve size?   See my comment below.

Does this add up to it being a good idea to use 4 mm oversize intake valves, rather than the 5 or 6 mm oversize ones?   What is the port cross sectional area going to be?   What % of valve area for the various valve sizes being considered?    Increases in valve area alone typically favor low/mid lift flow.    It takes an increase in min CSA to gain flow on top end.    No increase in flow is "bad", you just might not see much power increase if it is all low lift.      Again, comments are welcome.

Bo,

See my comments in your text.

Off for a few days.   Will check in when I get back.

 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 04, 2015, 01:45:10 PM
The bike got here a half hour ago and it is undergoing house cat inspection.

The big motorcycle show by Progressive Insurance is in Portland this year rather than Seattle.  I was asked to bring the bike for exhibit.  Can't miss that.  The plan is to pull the cyl head this weekend and put on one of the spare heads for the show.  Then, I will take all of the measurements.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on September 06, 2015, 07:52:22 AM
Flow data in tabular form.

OK, question:

Are these flow numbers for the valves/ports in their stock form without any modifications?   Or?

 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 07, 2015, 01:35:57 AM
The head is ported with standard size 26mm exhaust valves and 2mm oversize intake valves that are 33mm diameter.  The pistons I intend to use give 12 to 1 static compression and 995cc displacement.  The 865cc setup I ran at Pendine was for that race, only.

Saturday I got the rubber for making some port castings.  I will slice them and measure the segments to get the port cross-sectional area.  It will take a week or two.  Right now I am real busy getting ready for the rains and winter.  Firewood, chimney cleaning, rain gutter cleaning, putting a roof on the new shed, etc.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 08, 2015, 12:04:12 AM
The bike is safe in the shed and there is no corrosion damage after being at sea for months at a time.  Many thanks to you'all, like Maj, who gave me info about their crates and shipping problems.

Damage from customs inspectors opening the crate was mentioned.  I tried to make it easy to open the thing so hopefully they would refrain from using tools of destruction.  It worked.  They pulled out the wires and pins to open the box.  I can tell 'cause the way the wires in the pin ends were bent.  It was different than the way I do it.

Sealing the bike from corrosive air was another issue.  Plastic sheets are used by construction contractors to keep the moisture in fresh concrete while it hydrates.  This sheeting is tough and people can walk on it.  A big square of it was put over the crate base.  The eyes for the tie downs were pushed through this sheeting and screwed tight into the crate base.  The bike was rolled over the sheet and onto the base.  It was tightened down with straps and all of the other junk I packed was piled around the bike.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 08, 2015, 12:21:00 AM
The sheeting was pulled up over the bike and the overlapping sheets were rolled together and taped down with packing tape.  A dehumidifier was put in a cardboard box in the crate.  It was some white powder that was poured into the bottom of this plastic container. Dri-z-air is what I think it was.  The container was full of liquid when I opened the crate  This is moisture in the air that the dehumidifier caught and retained.

The crate was 91 inches long.  It just fit into shipping containers and trucks with inches of clearance on each end between the crate end and the truck or container side.  Do not make your crate longer than this or it will not fit unless they pick it up by the end.  A lot of loading equipment, like pallet jacks, can only pick up the crate from the side and not from the end.

This caveman type simple shipping method worked real well.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on September 08, 2015, 01:20:58 AM
But, but, but...what was the hold-up in releasing your bike at local customs?   :?

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on September 08, 2015, 07:28:32 AM
The head is ported with standard size 26mm exhaust valves and 2mm oversize intake valves that are 33mm diameter.  The pistons I intend to use give 12 to 1 static compression and 995cc displacement.  The 865cc setup I ran at Pendine was for that race, only.

Saturday I got the rubber for making some port castings.  I will slice them and measure the segments to get the port cross-sectional area.  It will take a week or two.  Right now I am real busy getting ready for the rains and winter.  Firewood, chimney cleaning, rain gutter cleaning, putting a roof on the new shed, etc.   

Nominal valve stem diameter please.   6/7mm?   Or?

Thanks in advance.
 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 09, 2015, 01:55:19 AM
In reference to reply 2114, the pins are offset to reduce piston slap and the clearance measurement is at the bottom of the skirt.  I will measure the piston dimensions tomorrow.

Pictures show a piston I consider healthy and worthy of another year of use.  It is 10.5 to 1 compression.  Note some wear on the top land.  I thought this was a problem and was told that it is normal.

Stem diameter is 5.463 mm.

Thanks for the help.  I will try to pull the head off and measure the port area within a few weeks.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 09, 2015, 01:57:06 AM
I forgot the pictures.  Here they are.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 12, 2015, 11:09:30 AM
Enough concrete is poured for the floor of the shed annex to support the boat and trailer.  They got rolled there and I parked the truck, jacked it up, and took off the wheels.  Eight years of going to Bonneville have taken their toll.  Last year was the worst 'cause of all the water we had to drive through to get to the pits.  The entire front suspension needs to be taken apart and repainted, new hub assemblies, calipers, etc.  The rear needs to be done, too.  It takes lots of penetrating oil and propane heat to do simple disassembly jobs.  The Triumph build is on hold for a while.  I will be busy here. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 13, 2015, 12:56:27 AM
The 2016 engine is modeled in PipeMax except for cam and horsepower data.  I had to guess at those.  The recommended header pipe OD is 1.519 to 1.644 inches for a 8,300 rpm power peak.  The OD is 1.488 for the original 2003 Triumph header pipes I used in Wales.  I need larger diameter headers for the Kodiak motor.

The OD is 1.580 plus or minus for this Arrow 2 into 1 header system.  Cascade Moto Classics sold it to me at their cost.  It was nice of them to do that.  It is on the street bike now and it will be tried on the dyno to see if it makes good power.  The plan is to make a megaphone to replace the Arrow muffler.

The OD is 1.680 for the original 2013 Triumph header pipe that came on the street bike.  These headers will be modified as needed and used with the Predator mufflers to make an "H" system for dyno tests.  The dyno tests will compare the 2 into 1 system against the H system.

The race bike is on the bench and I will take the head off to measure it before I fix the truck.  Pleasure before work.  Always a good philosophy.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 15, 2015, 12:53:40 AM
The advance curves I use are the ones recommended by the person who sells me the cams.  Then, I advance or retard a bit to suit my particular engine and fuel.  The recommended high performance curve was a Stage 3 when these were programmed.  The Stage 4 is the Stage 3 plus 2 degrees and the Stage 4 is the Stage 3 plus 4 degrees.  I have a Stage 2 curve that is retarded from the Stage 3 one.  The additional curves with more advance were suitable when I was monkeying around with gasahols.  The ignition cutoff is 8,400 rpm with these modules.

The racing gasoline/nitropropane/toluene mix is a completely different animal, and especially so in a high compression air cooled engine.  In this case I want to retard from the gas curve.  I am ordering a Stage 4 curve as recommended by the outfit that developed the cams.  One more curve will be ordered that is Stage 4 minus 2 degrees, and another curve that is Stage 4 minus 4 degrees.  The ignition cutoff will be raised to 9,000 rpm with these modules.

We look at the dyno curves and I choose the most retarded module that gives good power.  The knock light is on the bike on the dyno and at Bonneville.  A red flickering light says it is time to back off on the throttle and go back to the pits to fit up a more retarded module.

Mike, I forgot to answer your question.  There were some problems and the shipper asked me to do some paperwork.  It was in English but it might as well been written in Rumanian.  I e-mailed my shipping agent who was paid to handle customs tasks and hinted that I am a dumb-as-a box-of-rocks motorcycle racer.  I suggested they figure this out.  A customs broker in Portland who was working for my shipping agent asked me to give him power of attorney.  I did.  About a week later the bike showed up at the house.  I do not have a clue as to what the problem was.  It is nice to have the bike back.

     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 20, 2015, 11:29:26 PM
The flaw in my bike design is the work I need to do to remove the cylinder head.  This is how far things need to be stripped to start to take the head off.  This is one reason why I like the BMST.  they have a thingy that sticks down into the spark plug hole and measures the displacement.  There is no need to take the head off in impound.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on September 21, 2015, 11:27:52 AM
The flaw in my bike design is the work I need to do to remove the cylinder head.  This is how far things need to be stripped to start to take the head off.  This is one reason why I like the BMST.  they have a thingy that sticks down into the spark plug hole and measures the displacement.  There is no need to take the head off in impound.



Yea, they've been using that thingy at SpeedWeek and WoS since it was invented about 15 years ago....  :-o
 :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on September 21, 2015, 12:22:36 PM
The flaw in my bike design is the work I need to do to remove the cylinder head.  This is how far things need to be stripped to start to take the head off.  This is one reason why I like the BMST.  they have a thingy that sticks down into the spark plug hole and measures the displacement.  There is no need to take the head off in impound.



Yea, they've been using that thingy at SpeedWeek and WoS since it was invented about 15 years ago....  :-o
 :cheers:



Not if your engine is a 2-stroke.   :cry:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stan Back on September 21, 2015, 07:44:44 PM
No (I guess) -- but for what his is.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 21, 2015, 11:12:55 PM
The Triumph is a four stroke most of the time.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RidgeRunner on September 22, 2015, 07:10:18 AM
It's my understanding that the plug hole has to be near vertically centered over the piston for the thingy to be used

                Ed
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 23, 2015, 01:13:54 AM
Ed, that is correct.  In the old days we checked the displacement by filling the cylinder with automatic transmission fluid from a graduated cylinder.  It worked pretty well on four strokes.  Two stroke displacement can be measured by taking off the expansion chamber, moving the piston up so a few millimeters is exposed in the exhaust port, and using the depth gage probe from a dial caliper.  The probe touches the back cylinder wall and the body of the caliper touches the front of the piston.  That measures the bore.  The stroke can be measured by the same probe through the spark plug hole.  That method works if the spark plug hole is in the middle of the cyl head and there is no intake port opposite the exhaust port.

Tonight the head and jugs were pulled off of the Triumph.  The experiment with nitropropane and toluene has officially ended.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on September 23, 2015, 09:54:41 AM
Bo, there must be a University over in the States that will make you an Honorary Graduate in the not too distant future!. :wink:

You research and work that Trump like no one I've ever seen or heard of.
I sit here reading but there's a disconnect between the eyes and the brain.

You amaze and inspire me.

Imagine if you were 5'7" and weighed 150???.

You'd need Rose to build you a trophy room. Seriously. :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

I'm calling you "TEACH" from now on.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Speed Limit 1000 on September 23, 2015, 03:34:09 PM
CH3NO2. Construction of an all-carbon quaternary stereocenter by the peptide-catalyzed asymmetric Michael addition of nitromethane to β-disubstituted α,β-unsaturated aldehydes.
Much better for race motors :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 23, 2015, 08:34:11 PM
Mike, if I was smart I would be going a lot faster.  The speed increases at this stage of development take a lot of figuring and work.  Money, too.  The goal is to make as good a naturally aspirated motor as I can and not toss out a lot of parts when the blower goes on the bike in a couple of years.

CH3NO2 added by an assymetric Michael?  Looks like it might be the hot setup.

The next step is to measure the port areas and piston dimensions.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 26, 2015, 01:07:28 AM
This morning I was going to leave to go to the Alvord. There is a 5000 foot pass I need to cross just east of here and it was raining hard.  Basically, leaving meant getting wet and cold and riding for a long day.  Maybe it would work when I was younger.  It might put me in the hospital with pneumonia now.  I worked on the bike and did chores instead of leaving.

There is a flow constriction in the intake and it is valves too small or inadequate port size, or both.  A casting will be made of the inlet port and manifold so they can be measured.  Oils or other hydrocarbons can soak into the casting rubber and inhibit curing.  I clean the head as best as I can with hot soapy water and then I put it in the family dishwasher.  Rose comes home and gets ready to load the washer with dirty dishes.  I sneak in and swiftly remove the cylinder head while her back is turned.  A near death experience is narrowly averted.

Mold release agent is sprayed onto the part, allowed to sit for half an hour, it is reapplied, and allowed to sit another half hour.  Now the rubber can be poured in.  Always use the proper release agent.  Grease, silicone spray, Pam, and other stuff creates a lot of trouble.  I know this from experience.

I use RTV sealant with Shore 30 hardness for making rubber parts.  It is too stiff for this application and it takes 24 hours to cure.  This is too long.  FiberLay in Clackamas sells this SharkThane polyurethane with much softer Shore 20 hardness and a 5-minute cure time.  That is what I use.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 26, 2015, 01:12:39 AM
The manifold is filled and the port, too.  There is some tugging and pulling involved with removing the castings.  Both parts cure overnight while bathed in the warmth of a chicken incubator light.  This extra curing helps to make them strong.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 26, 2015, 11:53:55 AM
One of our forum members e-mailed me about the NAE problems and it saved me making the trip out there for nothing.  I would be leaving this morning.  The weather cleared up.  That must be hard for Ed and his team.  Hopefully the bad luck is behind them and they can be successful in the future.

The plugs cured overnight.  The valves kept the rubber in the port when it was poured.  The area around the valves is really critical for flow and it is good to have a casting showing the valve head in the port.  Removing the rascals can be tricky.  My method is to gently pry the rubber away from the port wall and to drop some lubricant down alongside the rubber in the crack.  Then, I push the rubber in different directions to get the lube everywhere between the rubber and the port wall.

Removal lube choice is critical.  Some lubes are absorbed by the rubber and they make the casting swell.  My lube is spittle.  It does a great job and does not degrade or influence the casting shape and size.

     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 26, 2015, 11:59:58 AM
The casting is gently pushed out.  Rubber with Shore hardness 20 is critical for this port.  Any rubber with higher Shore number would not push out.  The castings show things it are hard to see otherwise.  The next step is to measure their cross-sectional area.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on September 26, 2015, 12:48:12 PM
WW;

I was thinking about how to remove the cured plug and it occurred to me that pushing it out would cause the plug to expand against the walls and make it difficult to pull out. How about casting in an old valve and using the stem to pull the plug out? Pulling should cause the plug to contract as it stretches and that should make removal easier.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on September 26, 2015, 05:01:47 PM
Nice :-) Your teaching me something .............I'm just not sure what it is :-D

It looks as if the valve-throat at the seat is smaller than the port diameter. A larger valve with a steep seat-angle would allow you to 'bore' the throats. If you are using slightly larger pistons, the valve shrouding will open up.

Did you remove the valve-guides?   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 30, 2015, 01:22:05 AM
Dennis, the valve guides are in.  They do not project into the port.

Ed was packing to return from the Alvord when I was ready to leave.  Going to see him run would not happen.  I had Monday set aside as a vacation day from work.  The bike was packed, so I tied on the cooler, crab boiling pot, and crab trap, and left town.  Where I went was Fort Stevens and it is the farthest north part of Oregon.  An area I had not crabbed and I had I to learn about new methods and crabbing spots.  It worked out well.  Caught two big juicy Dungeness crabs on Sunday and another one on Monday.  The sun was out most of the time, the lunar eclipse was visible, and it did not rain.  It does not get better than this.

The casting is cut apart and the areas are measured.  All areas are for one port in square inches.

1.7 upstream end intake manifold,
1.7 at 0.7 inches toward intake valve in intake manifold,
1.9 at 1.4 inches toward intake valve in intake manifold,
2.4 at 2.2 inches toward intake valve at downstream end intake manifold and upstream edge cylinder head,
2.2 at 3.3 inches toward intake valve just upstream from bifurcation in cylinder head,
1.9 at 4.3 inches toward intake valve just upstream from guide recess in cylinder head,
1.7 at 5.0 inches toward intake valve just downstream from guide recess with valve stem cross-sectional area removed,
2.3 at 5.8 inches toward intake valve at face of closed intake valve with valve stem cross-sectional area removed (at leech mouth)

Cross-sectional area of steel valve seat rings with cross-sectional area of valves removed = 2.4

Valve stem thickness intake and exhaust = 0.19 inches
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 30, 2015, 01:41:41 AM
I made a mistake.  The openings in the valve seat rings are 1.125 inches wide so the cross-sectional area with valve stem areas removed is 1.93 square inches for both rings.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on September 30, 2015, 12:18:00 PM
Your diggin clams............but the pic shows sliced lobster-tail :-D

Quite a bit of pinching throughout the intake stream :-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 30, 2015, 09:09:17 PM
Neil, next time I will pull the plug out.  That is a good idea.

In his book about porting, Vizard recommends a port area equal to 85% of the valve head area as a good starting point.  The intake valve heads are 33mm dia.  Their combined areas are 2.65 square inches.  0.85 x 2.65 = 2.25 square inches.

The mean flow velocity through a well ported standard head is 300 to 360 feet per second according to Vizard.  He says the peak power rpm = (mean port velocity x port area x 360) / cubic inch cylinder displacement

Using 300 feet per second, a 30.3 cubic inch displacement, and a 2.25 square inch port area:

rpm = 300 x 2.25 x 360 / 30.3 = 8,020 rpm

Using 360 feet per second:  360 x 2.25 x 360 / 30.3 = 9,629 rpm

A port enlarged to 2.25 square inches should do what I need, rpm wise.  The only area that will not meet that criteria are the valve seat rings.  They have an area of only 1.99 square inches.

I do no know if the valves and seat rings are big enough.  This is where I need some help. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 04, 2015, 12:52:39 AM
Lots of figuring tells me I need the lift vs degree information for my new cams before I can determine if the valves are the right size.  The came are being ground so I do not have that info.

The Triumph Performance Stage 4 advance curve is developed for these cams.  The igniter boxes I had were programmed for an 8,400 rpm redline with the Stage 3 curve, Stage 3 plus 2 degrees, and Stage 3 plus 4 degrees.  These are reprogrammed for a 9,000 rpm redline with the Stage 4 curve, Stage 4 plus 2 degrees, and Stage 4 plus 4 degrees.  Two new boxes are programmed for the 9,000 rpm redline with the Stage 4 curve minus 2 degrees and Stage 4 minus 4 degrees.

In the past I looked at the dyno data from three advance curves to select the optimum one.  This is Mickey Mouse.  The data from five advance curves should give me a more accurate idea of the best one.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 04, 2015, 11:59:25 PM
The original equipment carbs and some aftermarket ones have throttle position sensors (TPS).  There are partial throttle ignition advance curves and the TPS tell the module when to use those curves.  There is a full throttle advance curve and the TPS tells the module when it is appropriate.  The full throttle curve is the default one if the TPS is disconnected.  The TPS is one more thing to break or see goofus and provide the wrong input data so I run with it disconnected.  This default curve business is good to know.  It means there is no problem using carbs with no TPS for land speed racing.

We had the Triumph club breakfast yesterday.  Two fellows know about the Progressive Insurance motorcycle show and they say Cascade Moto Classics will do the entire Triumph display.  Cascade is our local dealer and they help me in many ways.  Only three Triumphs will be allowed to go on display.  One will be the fancy Triumph streamliner.  The other ones will be my bike, Bonnie, and the third is a new Rocket III.

This is a big deal and I am worried about how to present the bike.  There are lots of custom bikes there with all sorts of polished alloy, glitter, nice paint, etc.  There is no way the bike would be outstanding if I tried to set it up like that.  It is an active race bike and it will be presented as one.  It will have the sand racing tires and the salt flats streamlining.  It also will have an Arrow 2 into 1 pipe.  Normally I do not use one.  Cascade sells those and it will be good advertising for them.  Also, it is on the bike and I am too lazy to take it off.  Otherwise, it will be cleaned up and look like when it was raced it in Wales in 2015 and at B'ville in 2014.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 05, 2015, 10:52:45 PM
The Arrow headers on the race bike.  The nearside header crosses to the offside just in front of the cylinder head.  It is blue from getting hot.  There is not much cooling air in that sheltered location.  Also, it blocks cooling air from getting to critical locations on the engine.  Unfortunately, I did not look at these thermal issues before I bought the pipes.  They are great for the street and give the best power curve of any exhaust I have tried so they get use on the road bike.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on October 06, 2015, 06:01:29 AM
Bo, it is what it is, a race bike!.

I think you'll surprise a lot of people.

Have a great show. :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 07, 2015, 01:01:55 AM
Hi Mike.  It is time to pay back the folks that help me with some good publicity and exposure.  Last night the dents got banged out of the fairing and it got wiped down with a rag soaked in machine gun lube after work today.  The bike will look good after a couple of weeks of preening and pampering.  There are no rods, pistons, cams, etc in that engine. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on October 08, 2015, 11:11:51 PM
Cool. I like that you want to give back to the sponsors.

Talking about bikes with empty motors. :-D

In 93 this rich dude here in SA (daddy's money) saw an ad in an American Magazine.
There was this show winning bike for sale. It was painted to look like a WW11 fighter plane.
Rich dude calls, sends money and a while later the crate arrives on a plane.

It arrived at the shop where I was building my first custom gas tank and fenders for a client.

Long story short, rich dude wanted to take a 120 mile ride to the casino and it wouldn't run.
Expert after expert arrived and no luck so the old dude who owned the establishment suggested
they pull one of the heads and check.

Off came the tank and the "experts" got to work. No Pistons, no rods. Rich guy was furious so he calls
the seller. The reply was that the ad said "Show winning Harley Davidson custom". Nowhere did it say running!!!!.

I laughed hard and still do every time I think of that bike. It took a new motor and gearbox to get the thing going.
I think the rich guy rode two or three times before he sold it.

Those were the days. The local "builders" didn't use Loctite either. :-D :-D :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 09, 2015, 12:13:21 AM
There are only a few people making Triumph goodies with enough quality for land speed racing.  Some are in UK and AUS.  So far, I've been lucky.  They all give me good prompt service at a fair price.

My youngest daughter, Gretchen, went to England, France, and Wales with me when we raced.  She hung back and let me do the talking, etc. on arrival in the UK.  Then we went to Europe and she did a bit more, like ordering food and buying drinks.  She had more confidence in Wales.  She was off on her own during the last few days in London traveling on the underground and busses.  She went to Canada on her own for a week before school started using money she saved up.  Now she is taking a break between semesters and spending a year in Australia.  She has some sort of work visa and a job waiting for her when she gets there.  She turned from a kid to a confident young lady in six months.  Her flight from America lands in Tasmania.

She went with me to B'ville for many years, too, where she watched me deal with all sorts of weird issues, problems, successes, and failures with tools at hand and stuff I scrounged.  Maybe seeing someone do this is what she needed to get the inspiration and confidence to go out on her own.   

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WhizzbangK.C. on October 09, 2015, 09:49:31 AM
It's a wonderful thing to watch young folks grow into themselves and step out into the world to grab onto their part. I enjoyed watching Gretchen grow from a shy child into a wonderful young lady over the course of several seasons on the salt. It was always a joy to meet her again and see the person she was growing into. I can only imagine what she will become! I know that you're very proud of her, and you and Rose should take personal pride in the job you've done raising her to this point.

Tell her I said "go get 'em!" I'm proud to know her.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bones on October 09, 2015, 05:22:34 PM
Hey Wobbly
 That's a funny way to get to Australia but Tassy is  very pretty.
When will she get to Sydney?
If I am around she is welcome to stay at my place- give me a call when time gets closer.
I'm 10 miles from the city and the train is walking distance from the house.

Bones
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 13, 2015, 12:00:11 AM
The front of the bike is all put together, shined up, and ready for the bike show.  It is time to put on the tail.  Fap!  The exhaust cutout on one side does not match the header megaphone and no cutout is needed on the other side.  There is no muffler.

First impulse is to leave the tail alone and to put on the old pipes.  The main fairing bracket crosses in front of the frame and this means taking off the front wheel, front fender, and forks to remove the fairing so the pipes can be changed.  It is not worth the trouble.

Lesson One.  Design the fairing and brackets so the fairing or sections of it can be easily removed for service work.

Skirted tails can cause aerodynamic unstability if not properly designed.  I was worried about this and the tail was originally run with short skirts.  It was stable so I tacked on extra panels to make full skirts to use the next year.  It is relatively easy to remove these skirts and make new ones to accommodate the Arrow pipes.  This is something I did that was handy although I did not consider it at the time.

Lesson Two.  Make areas of the fairing and tail removable and easily replaced in locations where modifications are expected.

We live and learn.  At age 100 I will have this game figured out.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on October 13, 2015, 02:51:50 AM
It's called R&D Bo!. :-D :-D :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on October 13, 2015, 11:58:07 AM
Was that a prized sponsor you just removed :lol:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: MattGuzzetta on October 13, 2015, 01:06:43 PM
The best explanation of R&D I heard was a fabricator who said "R&D? You mean Re-Do!  :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on October 13, 2015, 01:24:16 PM
String Em up, Matt.

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 13, 2015, 11:29:14 PM
That sticker that is being removed is from our local dirt bike club.  They cut me down to size on a regular basis.  That is their valuable contribution to the race effort.

The current project is putting a trailer hitch on Rose's truck so I can haul the bike to the bike show.  The new hitch pin is a stainless steel bolt from the junk box.  I use that instead of the usual bent rod pin.  My thinking I do not need to buy anything and it works better.  The clown that wants to steal my trailer needs to have a couple of wrenches and a way to break the lock.  That will defeat the usual fellow who carries a crowbar, only.

A hole needed to be drilled through the bolt for a lock.  These bolts are tough and they quickly dull the common drills.  Years ago a guy gave me a bunch of short high speed drills.  These work great.  They cut through stainless and titanium just like they are mild steel.  Unfortunately, I do not know who makes them.  It will be nice to buy some more.  The symbol on the drill shank is shown.  The pointy end of the drill is facing up.  Do you know who makes these?

The drill index box that came with the drills says HUOT in St Paul.  There are all sorts of drill brands in the box so there is a good chance it is made by someone else.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on October 13, 2015, 11:46:57 PM
I hardly have any good drills left after my encounter with stainless steel.
Drilling bolts is no joke either. I hope it works out for you Bo and you get to keep your trailer. :cheers:

A guy I knew had this little business with these rolling billboards that he'd set up in non zoned areas
so the cops started towing them away at first.
He made a removable hitch system with an odd size tube and fitted a lock that went through the tube.
That put and end to his "Illegal" trailers being towed.

I see it's common practice now with all the trailer billboard guys. :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 14, 2015, 08:47:29 PM
Discovery Channel Canada at 7:00 PM eastern standard time has a show featuring a few of us at Pendine Sands.

They had to do some serious coaching to make me appear to have an attitude.  In real life I am a normal guy.  I am afraid to watch this thing so tell me how it goes.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 21, 2015, 01:43:00 AM
The bike is ready for the show.  It was a lot of work to prepare it.  It was dirty, dented up, some minor corrosion, and wear and tear.  Now it is clean and all the dents knocked out and the corrosion taken care of.  A lot of this is also preparation for 2016 BMST.

Rose was doing the finances a few days ago.  Our neighborhood is "gentrifying."  Property values and taxes are going up, the cost of everything is inflating fast, and we are on sort of a fixed income.  Rose is retired and my employer is a tightwad.  It looks like the racing budget is reduced and I will actually need to pay attention to it.  The build will be progressing mighty slow.

The target I had was 165 mph and that would get me back the FIM record I had.  The bike ran 146 in 2015.  Plans are revised to do something more realistic.  It will be a solid run or two above the magic 150 mph.  The new pistons will raise compression ratio from 10.5 to 12 to one.  The new cams will help, too.  The bike is ported but the rubber castings show there is room for improvement.  The intake ports will be enlarged so their minimum cross sectional area is 85 percent of the valve area.  The tops of the pistons will be ceramic coated, the intake valves polymer coated, and maybe the combustion chamber.  The head needs bigger intake and exhaust valves and I was going to develop a custom race header.  That will wait till 2017.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on October 21, 2015, 12:29:01 PM
WW, I think you may have as many rivets in that fairing as I have in my car.  :lol:

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 22, 2015, 11:58:01 PM
Neil, it is a Titanic project to build and repair.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on October 23, 2015, 01:08:44 AM
Neil, it is a Titanic project to build and repair.   

And built in occupied Belfast, Ireland.  Probably just a coincidence that it split its seams when it bumped an iceberg.   :mrgreen:

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 23, 2015, 02:05:43 AM
The only iceberg I need to worry about is the floating mountain.

A $500 USD a month race budget means I develop new skills or go slow.  Now I will do my port work.  Rereading Vizard's chapters on porting tell me that for a four valve cylinder the intake cross-sectional area should be 85% of the intake valve area.  The valves are 33mm wide.  Using basic math, the intake port area is {[(33/25.4) /2] **2} x pi x 2 x 0.85 = 2.25 square inches.

The iron valve seat rings have a 1.130 inch inner diameter.  Their area is {(1.130/2)**2} x pi x 2 = 2.00 square inches without subtracting the valve stem area.  The valve stem area is (0.192 /2) **2 x pi x 2 = 0.06 square inches.  The intake port at the seat ring area is 2.00 - 0.06 = 1.94 square inches.  The port has more area than the valve seat rings.  The intake flow contracts and speeds up when it goes out of the port and across the valve seat rings.  It also appears that the ports have more area than the seat rings and I should see and feel a contraction as the port meets the ring.

Intake valve seats with 2mm larger diameter were installed a few years ago.  I did not match the ports to the seats very well.  Note the plastic curve behind the rubber plug.  It shows the port roof shape I will try to make when I enlarge the intake valve bowls.

It will be a few days before I pick up the port grinder and make chips.  Does what I am thinking of doing make sense?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on October 24, 2015, 02:30:26 PM
Wobbly,
When Vizard refers to “valve area” is he referring to the valve head area, as you have calculated, or the valve “curtain” area, the flow area available when the valve is open?  Seems like that would be more related to port area. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 26, 2015, 01:10:26 AM
I am not sure of exactly what intake valve area Vizard is referring to.  I decided to send the head out to get it professionally done with a flow test before and after.  The head was ported once before with the standard OEM valve seat rings.  Larger intake seat rings were installed a few years ago and the ports were not fully matched to the rings.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on October 26, 2015, 10:57:45 AM
Bo, do you think ports are ports and flow is flow?.

Maybe I've phrased it wrong but Grumpy Jenkins did a lot in that area
and in his book "The Chevrolet Racing Engine" he covered the above subject extensively.

I guess most of the answers you need are right there. Maybe worth a read. He got the best out of some
stuff that wasn't great to begin with. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 27, 2015, 10:51:39 PM
Mike, I am ham fisted with bad depth perception.  Those ports are tiny and complex.

Today I e-mailed the fellow that made the valves and guides and installed bigger valve seat rings and the shim under bucket setup with heavy duty springs.  He works in research and development for a valve train company.  He has some ideas based on what he saw when he was working on it.  I will send him the head.

My trailer is some sort of kit I bought at K-mart about 30 years ago.  There is no weather protection on it other than two dinky fenders.  Last night and today are the only times that clear weather was certain before the bike show.  Hauling the bike to Portland in the rain will get it dirty so I had to move fast.  After work I finished the wiring on Rose's truck so it could pull a trailer.  About 9:00 last night I put the trailer on and checked the lights.  Everything worked the first time.  That happens only a few times in the history of the world.  I am very lucky.  Rose and I pushed the bike on the trailer and I tied it down and went to bed at midnight.  At 3:00 AM I got up and hauled it to Beaverton and and left it in front of the Triumph shop. Heidi Rose uses Roses truck to go to Portland State during the day so I had the truck back home by 6:30 AM.  Rose went to the dry cleaner and picked up the seat cover.  After a few hours sleep I left on the bike with the seat cover and rode back up to Beaverton, put the seat cover on, polished the bike up with a baby diaper, and rode back home.  The bike is at the Triumph shop.  Professional bike movers will take it from Beaverton to the convention center in Portland for the show.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on October 28, 2015, 10:10:08 AM
My 1982 WELLS CARGO enclosed trailer just keeps on rollin'...............but the fenders look like swiss-cheese :lol:

Bo...........do you have a SAVE THE SALT sign for the show?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on October 28, 2015, 01:16:01 PM
Bo, that's a lot of work for a guy your age.
Staying awake like that takes it out of you.
I guess you just do what comes natural.

Have a blast at the show brother. God Bless. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 29, 2015, 01:17:48 AM
Dennis, the signs and decor are all decided upon and made by professionals.  A "Save the Salt" sticker on the tail section with the web address is what I need.  Please post the web address and I will try to make up some stickers.

Mike, this morning I woke up with that "lack-of-sleep" headache.  Drinking half a pot of coffee did not help.  There is no way I could stay awake in the office.  There is an emergency culvert replacement I am designing near Astoria.  It is a three or four hour drive north.  We had to visit it today to take pictures and make some measurements, was my sudden tactical decision.  The junior engineer I am teaching went with me.  We took turns driving and I slept when he was at the wheel.  Now I am rested up and like new.  The young engineers learn a lot from us old guys. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on October 29, 2015, 02:49:02 AM
So, I've got you figured???.

When I was a kid I just wanted to hang with the older guys!.

I guess I had some wisdom. :-D :-D :-D :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on October 29, 2015, 10:26:39 AM
Read all about the STS signs     http://www.landracing.com/forum/index.php/topic,15426.105.html
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 31, 2015, 08:25:45 PM
Greetings from the show. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on October 31, 2015, 08:54:15 PM
The crowd has their eyes on YOUR bike 8-) 8-) 8-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 01, 2015, 11:51:36 PM
The shop made a sign for the bike.  It is in Wales in the picture.  It was a nice show.  Rose went up with me, a bunch of my riding buddies were there, and we looked at all of the new stuff.  There were a lot of old bikes there, too. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 01, 2015, 11:59:02 PM
These are two land speed bikes that run at Speedweek.  One is a blown fuel 125cc altered partial streamliner.  An interesting combination.  The other is a blown gas 650cc altered partial streamliner.  Both look like they were developed by people that knew what they were doing and had some experience doing it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: sofadriver on November 02, 2015, 12:02:23 AM
Kept going over your way but never did run into you.  :?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 03, 2015, 12:55:11 AM
Hopefully we will see each other at the NW reunion.

Last year I sent the head in with the header pipe to be flow tested.  The head and pipe would not fit on the flow bench.  A short 2-inch long stub was used to simulate the header pipe.  A stub is shown on the head and it will be in the box that goes down to California for the port work and flow tests.

The intake valves are 2mm larger than standard with larger seat rings.  Guidance on valve shrouding and countermeasures are given in Vizard's porting book.  The brass part is cut at a 38 degree from vertical angle.  This template will be used to detect shrouding and to guide me in removing the offending material.

Removing metal from the combustion chamber will lower the compression ratio.  It is 12 to 1 and the removal might bring it down as far as 11 to 1.  This will lower peak horsepower 1.3 percent according to one of Vizard's charts.  Removing the shrouding and raising the sonic choke threshold will give me more power than I lose with the 1.3 percent loss, is my guess.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 03, 2015, 01:02:09 AM
An exhaust valve is put into the intake port to help to position the template.  There is some shrouding around a portion of the intake valve perimeter.  It is carefully removed.  The head gasket shows me that I have enough room for this removal.  The engine is bored out from 790cc to 995 cc.  There is plenty of room to make the cut.  I would not have room if this was a 790cc engine.  The cut would go into the head gasket.  The cut is shown.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 03, 2015, 01:13:32 AM
The first picture shows before the cut and the second is after.  Note that the combustion chamber wall does not shroud the flow path.

One thing I notice is the combustion chamber does not have enough room for bigger inlet valves.  A lot of metal will need to be removed to prevent shrouding.  Also, the inlet valve margins will be very close together - almost touching.  The valves will shroud each other.  These valves are 2mm oversize.  It is a popular modification to install 4mm or 5mm bigger valves.  I am not sure if it is a good idea.



Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on November 03, 2015, 09:39:28 AM
Compression...........you know you need compression :-(    I'd be real cautious about removing anything more than a 'buff' of the edges near the valves............Higher lift cam...........and or more duration........wider lobe angle..........flat-faced valves..........thinner gasket or no base-gasket........retard the cam a few degrees...........making sure your air supply is ample at max rpm...........ALL of that before flow mods :-) :-) :-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 04, 2015, 01:44:32 AM
Dennis, there are flow tests for the head before the deshrouding.  The head will be tested again.  A comparison can be made.  Head flow is related to horsepower by an equation.  We'll see what happens.

A flow bench was made.  The hose on the Susie Sucker was moved over the the exhaust side.  Now the vacuum cleaner blows rather than sucks.  The hose is hooked up to the intake manifold on the head. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 04, 2015, 02:00:58 AM
The intake valves are installed and the Suzie Sucker is turned on.  All sorts of leaves, dog hair, etc blows out the hose and out past the valves.  Eventually everything gets cleaned up and the tests begin.

The little piece of yarn held by the needlenose pliers tells the story.  The flow through the shrouded area tends to go up and curl back over the valve head.  The yarn blows up and out and away from the valve after it is deshrouded.

The air flow needs to go out of the intake port and quickly spread across that big and wide piston.  What I am attempting to do is improve the quality of the flow through the valve curtain.  One goal is to get it distributed as evenly as possible the throughout the curtain.  The other goal is too make the flow spread outward after it passes through the curtain. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on November 04, 2015, 10:54:18 AM
Could you glue the yarn in place..........then attach the jugs and cover the cylinders with plexi-glass to watch the yarn?

Its just me and not an engineering guru.............but I would not give up compression to gain some very small increase in flow for a mili-second event............maybe 66 sparks per second.

Could you add a second spark-plug? Maybe a smaller diameter.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 07, 2015, 01:33:20 AM
Dennis, you have valid concerns.  Here is what and why I did what I did.  This might be useful for others to see.

There is a formula for the intake flow in cubic feet per minute that is needed at 28 inches H2O test pressure to produce a given horsepower as follows:  Q = intake flow at 28 inches in cubic feet per minute, HP = engine horsepower, n = number of cylinders, and Q= HP / (.26 x n)

I need at least 110 HP out of a 2 cylinder engine.  Q = 110 / (.26 x 2) = 211 cubic feet per minute

The intake flow test curve is shown.  Note at lifts up to 0.25 inches the curve is a sorta straight line.  The straight line, if extended, will give me well over 211 CFM at the over 0.40 inch lifts my new cams will have.  This indicates the valve curtain areas are OK and I do not need bigger valves.  Note how the curve flattens out.  This shows I am getting choke at lifts over 0.25 inches.  The valve curtains are getting larger and the port is not able to supply the curtains with enough flow.

Examination of the combustion chamber shows areas where the walls curve in toward the intake valve head margins at lifts over 0.25 inches.  This certainly does not help flow.  One of these areas is shown by green fingernail polish near an intake valve.  A similar situation occurs near the exhaust valves.

The metal removal is only a small amount.  Installing larger valves and seats will require cutting the chamber walls one millimeter deeper in the green areas.  This will be quite a bit more metal removed and it will drastically lower the compression ratio.  It seems to make sense to do what I did and to stay with the valve sizes I have.  The head will be sent to Kibblewhite who made the valve train.  They will put it on their flow bench and try to reshape the ports to give more flow.  They will also check to verify that the new cams and valve train are compatible and they will renew or replace worn parts.

The intake flow test graph shows that I do not need much more flow.  These little changes should get me what I require with out undesirable consequences or great expense.  The exhaust flows look OK.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 07, 2015, 01:33:20 AM
Dennis, you have valid concerns.  Here is what and why I did what I did.  This might be useful for others to see.

There is a formula for the intake flow in cubic feet per minute that is needed at 28 inches H2O test pressure to produce a given horsepower as follows:  Q = intake flow at 28 inches in cubic feet per minute, HP = engine horsepower, n = number of cylinders, and Q= HP / (.26 x n)

I need at least 110 HP out of a 2 cylinder engine.  Q = 110 / (.26 x 2) = 211 cubic feet per minute

The intake flow test curve is shown.  Note at lifts up to 0.25 inches the curve is a sorta straight line.  The straight line, if extended, will give me well over 211 CFM at the over 0.40 inch lifts my new cams will have.  This indicates the valve curtain areas are OK and I do not need bigger valves.  Note how the curve flattens out.  This shows I am getting choke at lifts over 0.25 inches.  The valve curtains are getting larger and the port is not able to supply the curtains with enough flow.

Examination of the combustion chamber shows areas where the walls curve in toward the intake valve head margins at lifts over 0.25 inches.  This certainly does not help flow.  One of these areas is shown by green fingernail polish near an intake valve.  A similar situation occurs near the exhaust valves.

The metal removal is only a small amount.  Installing larger valves and seats will require cutting the chamber walls one millimeter deeper in the green areas.  This will be quite a bit more metal removed and it will drastically lower the compression ratio.  It seems to make sense to do what I did and to stay with the valve sizes I have.  The head will be sent to Kibblewhite who made the valve train.  They will put it on their flow bench and try to reshape the ports to give more flow.  They will also check to verify that the new cams and valve train are compatible and they will renew or replace worn parts.

The intake flow test graph shows that I do not need much more flow.  These little changes should get me what I require with out undesirable consequences or great expense.  The exhaust flows look OK.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on November 07, 2015, 01:05:31 PM
Thanks for lesson...........I need to start a file on some of this 'stuff' :-D

I'm guessing that Kibblewhite will remove some serious metal in the roof of the ports and possibly 'D'-shape the floor at the curve.

Tom Mellor has stated that his triple has 100-HP and he has gone 200-MPH :-o  Besides obvious power in his motor, I think the 180-200 mph gap is helped by his ram-air system and his streamlining........his chin is almost touching his low-profile tank :-) :-) :-)

I'm trying to get past 150-MPH with about 80-HP at the rear wheel.........and no streamlining.............I must be dreaming :lol:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 07, 2015, 11:00:25 PM
This post will be in three parts.  I am having a hard time connecting to landracing.com.  It is an issue here 'cause it happens on other websites, too.

Dennis, the fellow at Kibblewhite said it is hard to promise anything definite about a head the at has been ported before.  He said with some work he usually finds a way to improve things.

Mr Mellor isn't the biggest guy on the salt, has a good tuck, and is a skilled rider.  That combined with a bike having a good shape and a small frontal area gives him speeds the rest of us dream about.

The British author and racer, Alan Cathcart, set an FIM record on a Hinckley Thruxton at over 150 mph.  It was a naked modified bike.  His ass was about 3 or 4 inches off of the seat, his head down, and his back level.  The engine is like mine and it likely made 100 HP and not a lot more.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 07, 2015, 11:31:13 PM
Static compression ratio is calculated by the formula Ratio = (Vcc + DISP) / Vcc  where Vcc = combustion chamber volume and DISP = displacement based on bore and stroke.  The pistons come in a box that says 13:1 compression.  This is based on a standard cylinder head.  Mine has 2mm larger intake valves that were installed a few years ago.  The machining to install the seats removed enough metal to drop the compression 1 point.  The 13:1 pistons are expected to be 12:1.  This is before the metal was removed to prevent shrouding.

The compression ratio formula can be rearranged to give the combustion chamber volume as follows:  Vcc = DISP / (Ratio - 1)  Using a cylinder with DISP = 497.5cc and Ratio = 12, Vcc = 497.5 / (12 - 1) = 45.2 cc

No more than 1cc was removed from each chamber to eliminate the shrouding.  The new Vcc = 45.2 + 1.0 = 46.2 cc.  The new static compression ratio is (46.2 + 497.5) / 46.2 = 11.77:1  This makes it clear why I do not want bigger valves.  A small amount of metal removal makes a substantial drop in compression.  The much larger amount removed to put in bigger valves and seats will drop the compression ratio too much.

Vizard's chart says there is a 1.3 percent power difference between 11:1 and 12:1 static compression.  Using bonehead algebra, the power loss for a 110 engine HP motor running 11.77:1 compression is:  110 x .013 (12 - 11.77) = .33 horsepower.

The power loss due to the drop in compression from removing the shrouding is .33 engine horsepower.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 07, 2015, 11:47:50 PM
The shrouding removal combined with reshaping the ports is estimated to give 15 CFM, more or less.  The new flow is estimated to be 225 CFM at 28 inches of water.  Using the formula presented a few posts prior, the 210 CFM flow supports .26 x 210 x 2 = 109 HP

A flow of 225 CFM supports .26 x 225 x 2 = 117 HP  This is 8 more horsepower.  It appears I am giving up .33 of compression horsepower to gain eight potential flow horsepower.

It is doubtful the motor will have a full 117 engine horsepower.  The flow will be available to do this and it will not be a limiting factor.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: revolutionary on November 08, 2015, 01:18:15 PM
As someone who ported heads for a living for many years, I would like to drop a few hints, though your results may vary:

1. When you are flow testing you MUST place a cylinder where the engine bore is. I have seen the flow numbers by 10% just by shifting the location of that bore by .100". How close the valve is to the cylinder wall makes a big difference and you are not reading this part of the story

2. Don't go withany bigger valves than you have now. Using flat face valves as sugged earlier is a great way to pick up some compression

3. It is very important to bull nose the divider on the intake side and you can knife edge the divider on the exhaust side.  Make both sides of the divider as identical as possible

4. knocking down the guide boss can make a huge difference in flow on those heads. Get ready to be swapping out guides pretty regularly though as they will wear out quicker with less lateral support of the valves.

5. your chamber work looks good and there is not a whole lot more you can do other than smoothing all edges

6. figure out a way to add more compression back. it is not just about squeezing it tighter, when you are on the intake stroke, the pressure differential is greater with higher compression and it wants to pull more air through. At Bonneville you need all the air you can get.  I'd be happy with 15:1 but I know it is really tough with small 4v heads to get there.  The best way to get there is to dyno the engine, move the cams where they make the best power, then go back and make a chamber mold of the head and get custom pistons made with the valve notches cut for minimal clearance.

7. drink a beer, it always helps.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fredvance on November 08, 2015, 07:21:31 PM
I have wondered why you do not go with much more compression. In our 1350 we run 16-1. Since it is a 4 cylinder that is 337cc per cylinder. I am not a math guy but I have been told that you lose 1/2 point of compression for every 1000ft of altitude. So at Bonneville you will lose a little more than 2 points. So my 16-1 becomes 14-1.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 09, 2015, 11:34:19 PM
This post will be made in two parts.  I have a hard time maintaining an internet connection for any length of time or to send large posts.

The 995cc engine has big bores in comparison to the combustion chamber.  They are over 10mm wider than the standard 790cc bores.  I am not worried about cylinder wall shrouding.  Flat faced intake valves are used and the deck to head and piston crown to head clearances are at minimum. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 10, 2015, 01:26:45 AM
This piston is 13:1 with a standard combustion chamber and 11.8:1, estimated, with the ones on my head.  Note the tall crown.  I did not want to go any higher so as to not interrupt the flame front during combustion.  This limited the CR.

The valve pockets are cut for 5mm larger intake and exhaust valves.  That is the typical design for these.  The compression ratio could be raised higher than I have now if I would have ordered them with standard size exhaust valve cutouts and 2mm larger intake valve pockets.  Unfortunately, I ordered a lifetime supply of pistons and have four of them and all are setup for big valves.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on November 10, 2015, 02:04:03 AM
The flat-faced valves will help..............can you reduce or eliminate the base gasket?  I found that advancing the ignition timing helps to overcome piston-crown blockage of the flame. You could also play with cam-timing.  With that amount of over-bore are you sure your getting enough air through the carbs at peak rpms?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 10, 2015, 08:16:57 PM
The Keihin 39mm FCR carbs are marginal, sizewise.  A custom Triumph Bonneville built in Germany has a pair of 41 mm FCR's on it.  I am trying to contact the owner and get details.  The purchase is justified if I can adapt the 41mm mixers to blow-through mode for the turbo motor.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 11, 2015, 12:01:48 AM
On the subject of valves, there are some other calculations I did to decide to stay with the smaller valves.  There is a mach index calculator at www.rbracing-rsr.com/machcalc.html (http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/machcalc.html)

The data for the 2mm oversize intake valves I have was entered along with an 8,400 rpm engine speed.  The mach index is .454.  That is low enough.  The valves I have are OK as per mach.

RB racing and others recommend an exhaust flow of 65 to 80 percent of the intake flow.  The exhaust valve flow is 186.6 cfm at .45 lift.  (186.6 / 80) x 100 = 233 cfm  (186.6 / 65) x 100 = 287 cfs  The exhaust valves will support 233 to 287 cfm of intake flow.

The intake flow is 210 cfm now and I might get 220 to 230 with the port work.  The exhaust valves flow plenty good.  No changes needed there. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 13, 2015, 01:20:04 AM
More calculations.  These are to figger out the target horsepower for the engine.  The first step is to estimate the engine RPM for the three 2104 runs.  A few glances at the tach during the timed mile tell me the engine rpm is around 7300 during the first run.  That works out to 5% wheelspin.  The pits were covered with standing water that year and the track was not very dry.  The 5% spin seems to be reasonable given the conditions.  The speeds and rpm's are listed on the chart, as follows: Run 1 is 146.45 mph at 7,300 rpm, Run 2 is 141.95 mph at 6,880 rpm, and Run 3 is 143.82 mph at 7,580 rpm.  All assume 5% wheelspin.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 13, 2015, 11:59:18 AM
Bo,
I really appreciate the attention to detail and the sharing of your build with us. I think you and I are on the same page when it comes to improving our bikes - - one step at a time and hope for best results.  I recently read two books about Burt Munro (should be required reading for those of us building special bikes) and I found out that if you compared his speed year after year, from about 1950 when he decided to dedicate the rest of his life to the "Gods of Speed" to 1972, you find that his average annual speed increase was only something like 5 mph per year.  There appears to be no magic pill to make it happen sooner.

If I can follow in his footsteps, I should be able to hit 200 mph by the time I'm 78!

As for horsepower to speed relationship, I used my existing results to program a spreadsheet based upon the rule of cubes - - that  with a known bike (coefficient of friction), you will need to cube the hp requirement for a linear increase in speed.  That is to double your speed for example, you will need 8 times as much hp.  It has proved very accurate so far.

I can probably email my spreadsheet (MS Excel) if you like.

As for solving the blow thru issue with carbs, If you figure it out, please let me know.  Not only do you have to deal with equalizing pressure in the bowl and at the vents, you have to increase fuel pressure equal to your boost.  And float valves seem to be very sensitive.

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 14, 2015, 01:10:35 AM
Tom, the carbs are well sealed and should work OK.  The plan is to use them with low boost until I get the blowers installed and sorted, then to replace them with EFI.

The friction drag is calculated for all three of the 2014 runs and my target speed of 165 mph.  Cooper's second equation is used.  The tire pressure was increased from 37 to 42 psi for 2014 and the bike with rider continued to weigh 740 pounds.  The fiction drag horsepower is 17.9 for 146.45 mph, 16.5 hp for 141.95 mph, 17.1 hp for 143.82 mph, and 25.1 hp for 165 mph.

The rear wheel horsepower at Bonneville is 86 percent of the rear wheel horsepower on the dyno at Beaverton.  I did some calculations a few years ago to determine this.  The rhp was 75.1 for the 7,300 rpm run at 146.45 mph, 74.3 rhp for the 6,880 rpm run at 141.95 mph, and 74.0 rhp for the 7,580 rpm run at 143.82 mph.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 14, 2015, 12:14:03 PM
Tom, last night I remembered how the turbos were set up back in the days when we had carbs.  There was also mechanical fuel injection and no one I knew used it on a bike.  The trick was to fool the fuel system to thinking the blower was not there.  The carb needed to be a sealed unit with only the venturi and that breather hoses open to the atmosphere when in NA use.  The fuel system was set up so the tank vent, carb breather hoses, and venturi inlet were all plugged into the plenum between the turbo and the engine.  One guy had his carb in the plenum box.

The friction drag horsepower is subtracted from the rear wheel horsepower to get the aero drag horsepower.  The simple equation at the bottom of the attached is used to calculate the aero drag coefficient.  The equation is corrected to the typical air density at the bike speed trials on the lake.  Wind direction and velocity as well as tuck all influence this calculated factor.  That is why you want to calculate it for each run.  The average is the best indicator of overall aerodynamic performance.

The average drag coefficient is (.43 + .47 + .45) / 3 = .45

This method is detailed.  The advantage is it can be used to look at the effects on speed from these variables:  frontal area, aero drag coefficient, tire pressure, bike and rider weight, and horsepower.  The effects of air density can be used by altering the constant in the aero drag equation.

     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 14, 2015, 02:47:55 PM
The rolling drag horsepower was calculated for 165 mph a few posts previous.  The aero drag horsepower is calculated and added to this to get the rear wheel horsepower.  This is multiplied by a factor to give me engine horsepower.  The flow I need to have at 28 inches water is calculated from the engine horsepower and a coefficient.  It is 235 cfm at 28 inches water.

The dashed red line on the flow curve is the expected limit imposed by the diameter and geometry of the valve curtain.  No amount of port work is expected to give flows above this line.  In theory, fully opening the ports can give 235 cfm flow at .39 inches lift.  The cams will have over .4 inches lift.  This port work might do the trick, in theory at least.   

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 14, 2015, 06:57:37 PM
Well Bo, that looks like the work of an engineer :-D  But if that formula for rolling resistance works, you'll save about 12 HP just by doubling your air pressure!

Now just cut your weight in half and halve it again! :cheers:

P.S.  I went back to Bradley's book to the page where these formula are posted to see that I had actually done these calculations to find out that if Mr. Cooper had increased his tire pressures from 28 psi to 60, he would have freed up 5.07 hp. I suspect he did!  I subsequently increased my tire pressures to 60 to help increase my speeds.  The proof is in the pudding!

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 16, 2015, 02:31:08 AM
It says on the tire that 42 psi is the maximum cold pressure.  Do you run your tires at more pressure than the maximum recommended?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fredvance on November 16, 2015, 10:31:48 AM
I dont. I run 42 on both ends of my 1350, Bonneville and pavement. The big motor bike,1657, I run 37-38m in the back and 42 front, on pavement, 42/42 at Bonneville
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on November 16, 2015, 10:32:58 AM
Bo...................I run BTX and Avons on my bikes..........at 50-psi front and rear.  I'm thinking of following Tom's lead to go a little higher. My Cub has tubes..........the Honda is tubeless.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fredvance on November 16, 2015, 10:49:16 AM
Bo, you should look on Carpenter Racing's website. They have a  90HP kit for your bike for 2400 bucks.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 16, 2015, 04:42:48 PM
It says on the tire that 42 psi is the maximum cold pressure.  Do you run your tires at more pressure than the maximum recommended?

Bo,
The short answer is that it has been done and it was recommended to me by a team member whose bikes were heavier and faster than mine.

The long answer is that as a professional engineer, I cannot recommend that anyone use equipment at any other conditions than those specified by the manufacturer as it would be a breach of my professional code of ethics.

My point is that Kevin Cooper's equations were derived from empiracle data from his experience, trying to determine a formula for drag due to rolling friction for his 125cc CanAm salt flat race bike and he was very successful.  Therefore it may be applicable to our bikes and it does imply that rolling friction drag is inversely proportional to tire pressure and proportional to weight.  If these formula are accurate (and I have no reason to believe they are not), then we should be looking at reducing weight and possibly using higher air pressure in our tires to free up some horsepower.  How important is this?  At the speeds I am going, my calculations indicate that I can gain about 1 mph for each 1 hp I can gain (as I increase my speed, the hp to speed ratio get steeper), so saving a few hp on rolling friction should result in proportional gains. Every little bit counts.  And how often have you heard the weight is not important?

Incidentally, Mr. Cooper's detailed studies of air flow drag in the wind tunnel on the CanAm are phenomenal and should be required reading for land speed racers.

Keep up the good work!

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: joea on November 16, 2015, 08:15:50 PM
a pushrod Triumph 650 "without" streamlining ran 175 this past weekend
at EM.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 16, 2015, 08:26:43 PM
Thanks for pointing this out, Joe.  Now, back to the problem at hand.  I'll use the maximum stamped on the tire, which is 42 psi.  This is a big and heavy bike running tubes so it is best not to take chances.

Carpenter's engine build looks nice.  Some day I will describe the best street setup for these engines.  It is not a lot different than his.

The target is 111 rear wheel horsepower so I need to reach deep.  This has been my goal from the beginning and I have been working toward it year by year.  All of the parts are bought.  All I need to do is verify the cylinders will accept the new pistons without needing to be replated, send the pistons, etc out for ceramic coating, have the port shapes optimized, break in the engine, and set the jetting.  Also, maybe blend up another batch of jungle juice with a bit less nitropopane and a tad more toluene.    
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 18, 2015, 08:09:46 AM
Bo,
In your post # 2206 above, you show a formula to determine drag coefficient of friction that uses a constant of 175,281.    I know that you have been using Bradley's Technical Guide for Constructors but his formula on page 198 uses the same formula with the constant 146,806.  Are you using a different constant to allow for different air density at Bonneville?
Tom

Edit: I need to go back to your earlier formula for rolling resistance above in post #2205.  Once again, you have introduced another number of 1.467 into Kevin Cooper's formula to arrive at your figures. What does this additional factor represent?



Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 18, 2015, 08:28:02 PM
Time slip data from many runs at BUB was used to figure out the air density for each run.  Those were averaged to arrive at a typical expected air density for the speed trials.  That average value was used to calculate the constant in my equation.

The 1.467 factor is under investigation.  I did lots of figuring on the subject and I have it written down somewhere.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 19, 2015, 12:27:13 AM
The friction drag equation combines the rolling resistance equation on page 172 with the rolling power equation on page 173.  Velocity in the rolling resistance equation is in feet per second and it is in miles per hour in the rolling power equation.  The 1.467 factor converts miles per hour to feet per second.  You would be entering velocities described by two different units in my combined equation if I did not have the factor.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 19, 2015, 09:30:10 AM
Bo,
I have combined both equations that you used, including your revised constant of 175,281 in place of Cooper's 146,806, and used your most recent weight (740 lbs.), tire pressure(42 psi), coefficient of friction (.45) and area (7.46) assuming that these will remain constant, at least in the near future and I came up with the following formula for total horsepower required:

Horsepower required for speed V (mph)=.012V + (.00002425) V cubed. (note this only applies to Bo's conditions)

I derived the general formula, but typing it out on the keyboard is a bit cumbersome when you can't use math symbols. I could write it out and photograph it and post it as a jpeg if anyone is interested.

For 165 mph, I get an answer of 110.9 hp at the rear wheel.  I think you got 111 with your methods which is probably just rounding differences.  With this equation, you should be able to determine hp for any speed.  The interesting thing is that except for the first term which only adds 2 hp, the total equation can be boiled down to the following, ignoring that 2 hp:

Horsepower required for speed V (mph) =  .00002425 V cubed = 109 hp for a speed of 165 mph

Although I used Bo's drag area, tire pressure, and weight for this calculation so the constant only applies to his bike, this formula allows us to see that basically horsepower required increases at the cube of the increase in speed.  For anyone who has a rear wheel horsepower number which can be directly associated with a speed at Bonneville, new horsepower requirements can be calculated without knowing any other info, as long as weight, tire pressure, and shape (drag area coefficient) remains constant.

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 19, 2015, 11:28:11 PM
Most of the formulae we use and PipeMax are based on engine horsepower.  The power I use in those calculations is 111X 1.1 = 122 hp.  Getting 111 rear wheel horsepower with naturally aspirated gas outta that pig will be just as nice an accomplishment as going 165 mph.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 20, 2015, 11:16:49 PM
The big boxy brown truck made a visit.  The cams are here.  They are the personal grinds developed by Carlos at Triumph Performance for his street bike.  The cams I have been using are all-purpose grinds and are best for hillclimbing, scrambles, flat track, etc.  That is deliberate.  Bumpy cams are hard on the expensive valve train and I wanted to get everything sorted before they went into the motor.  Sorta like all of those nuclear warheads.  The military saves them for the big day.

The first step is to check the clearance between the lobe tips and the cylinder head.  Not much but enough.  Tonight the cam data will be entered into PipeMax.   

     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 21, 2015, 01:29:28 AM
The cam specs are the missing link in the engine analysis and I did not have them until the cams arrived.  The cams combined with the existing valves have plenty of flow capacity up until the highest lifts, like I suspected.  The flow at high lifts needs to be improved.  The primary tuned length for the third harmonic needs to be a couple of inches shorter.  No problem there.  Wrapping the pipes will give me what I need.

The best volumetric efficiency I have gotten from one of these engines is 109%.  The peak power rpm is assumed to be 8,400.  That is all one can expect from one of these motors.  Peak engine horsepower is calculated to be around 120 if everything is working at its best.  120 / 1.1 = 109 rear wheel horsepower.   At Bonneville, this is 109 x .86 = 94 horsepower.  I need 111.  It looks like I am running for time only...unless I tip the can. 

 
 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 21, 2015, 09:59:26 PM
There are a few things I did with this build that are not obvious.  They might help a novice.  Its the slow season on this forum, so here it is.

1)  There is not a lot of readily available guidance on how to build these engines.  The first thing I did, in 2008, was to find out who knew how to build them for land speed and had a proven performance record.  This was, and continues to be, a big deal.  They developed and have the specialized parts I need.  Also, there was someone to give me advice when I got into problems.

2)  Any successful engine is a combination of parts.  This is especially true of the cams.  The Victory Library has some of the best info explaining the relationships between the cams and the rest of the engine.  Early on, I started buying parts that would eventually coalesce into the winning COMBINATION.  One year I bought the rods.  Another year the mufflers, then the big bore barrels and pistons, then the carbs, etc.  This started in 2008.

3)  I do not know much to begin with and am not the smartest guy.  Knowing this is a big help.  A lot of work was done with small displacement and low compression combinations so I could learn some of the finer points of building and tuning this specific engine.  It is nine years after I started with this Triumph and only now do I feel confident enough to reach out for the big bumpy cams and high (for me) compression.

4)  Trust professionals.  The cylinder head, valve gear, and cams  got sent down to Kibblewhite this afternoon with a letter listing what I think needs to be done along with the rubber port casting and the PipeMax data.  A sentence in the letter says this is my opinion and I am receptive to other and better ideas.  They built the valve train so they are in a good position to give me advice.

5)  Periodic teardowns were, and are, done to identify problems before they become terminal.  Things like cracks forming in piston skirts, small end seizures, big end bearing flaking, were found and rectified before the motor was run the next year.  One reason the air cooled Triumph Bonneville was chosen for this racing is the ease of disassembly and assembly.

6)  Quality parts were bought to handle increased engine stresses before I needed them.  A lot of money was spent on items like Carillo rods, forged pistons, and titanium valve train parts.  The way I figure it, I will be buying the high grade parts anyhow, so it pays to put them in early so the motor stays together.

7)  Use math and intellectual type thinking to identify exactly where the problem is and the solution.  As an example, I knew a few years ago that the intake flow was not enough to give me the power I need.  A flow test on the cylinder head along with lots of head scratching and figgering told me to not increase valve size and to look at opening the ports.  This saved me big $$.

8)  Sort out the chassis and handling and learn how to ride the danged thing before building the big and fast motor.  It took me a lifetime to unlearn from doing it the other way and I am lucky to be around to talk about it.

9)  Run your own race.  Basically, I don't give a @#%! about what those )*6&heads in places like so cal do.  I work with what I got and understand and hope to live long enough to win the big race.  Doing it my way.

Anyway, here is some humble advice from a slow old guy in the back woods.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on November 22, 2015, 01:51:39 PM
You say you are slow, but your faster than most!
You claim to be old, but your younger than most!
We all are cheering for you and want you to boast,
before you do the unthinkable and turn that motor into burned toast :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 23, 2015, 02:24:53 AM
Thanks Tom.  That 9) problem has been bothering me.  I like to read and Cycle World and Motorcyclist rave about these new bikes in the 1000cc class.  That new Yamaha R1 is smart enough that a chimp could ride it.  Those new bikes have so much more power than I can ever get.  There seem to be some overt and subliminal messages in these mags that the new stuff is the only way to go.  There are a few times I was going to park the bike.

We get some British magazines here like Classic Racer, Classic Bike Guide, and a few others.  They are the opposite philosophy to those two so cal mags.  I feel pretty good about reading them.  One had an article about my bike a number of years ago.  There is much less commercialisation.   Also, that magazine The Horse is out of Detroit and they seem to be well grounded and realistic about things.  Cycle World and Motorcyclist stay on the news stand.  I do not buy them any more.

It has been difficult.  Now I am trying to focus on my own program and forget about the latest superduperbikes. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fredvance on November 23, 2015, 10:56:25 AM
Bo, not being up on anything Triumph newer than 1970, is your motor pushrod or overhead cam?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: stay`tee on November 23, 2015, 03:45:35 PM
Bo dont lose heart on the latest so called superdooper bikes (claimed HP by over zellos jurnos :roll:). Pentroof by its very design is superior to Hemi,, add in the wizzbang eletronics a 'ole skool design is never going to be in the ball park. You cant change physics, only incoraprate it where possible  :wink:, :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 23, 2015, 10:05:01 PM
Fred, it is a double overhead cam engine.

Stay-Tee, not thinking about things comes naturally to me.  Rose can tell you about this.  I will stay focused.

The 995 cc big bore cylinders are billet aluminum with some sort of hard plating on the bores.  Use on them is a 600 mile break in on the street, three days of dyno work, and five runs on the salt flats.  There are no grooves in them from contaminants being dragged ups and down with the pistons.  There are slight shiny spots in the hone marks where the rings are when the pistons reverse directions.  The machinist measured them today to the nearest 0.0001 inches.  He had the build clearance sheet from 2013, when they were new, when he did this.  He said they are unworn for all practical purposes and they measure out just like when they were new.  The old pistons have slight wear.  They could be used for another year or two.  The old rings are barely worn.

The new pistons were measured and there is 0.004 inches of clearance in each bore at the bottom of the skirts.  This is where Arias wants the clearance to be measured.  It is exactly what Arias recommends.  The new and old pistons are the same as best as I can tell, except for the crown.  The new ones have higher domes.

It seems like a good idea to put the old rings on the new pistons, very lightly hone the bores, and to put the bike together.  This will save all of the metal removal associated with a new hone for the new rings.  Is this a good idea?

In the past I had a 1974 two stroke Yamaha SC500 dirt bike.  The pistons cracked unless they were periodically replaced.  Usually, a bore job, piston rings, and the piston pin would last an entire season.  The pistons were replaced two or three times.  I reused the rings and did not rehone.  This is where I get the idea.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 24, 2015, 12:09:46 AM
One reason I am worried is the new top ring is gas nitrided stainless steel.  It does not have that green coating on the outer edge that helps with break in.  It might require a really aggressive hone to provide sufficient roughness for break in and this might enlarge the bores too much.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 24, 2015, 06:20:38 AM
Bo,
The only time I reused pistons and rings in a motor (CB350F Honda) and re-honed the cylinders, the rings never sealed again and I had compression readings as low as 100psi (in Colorado, so I wasn't expecting it to be very high.)  I think I'd re-use the old rings and leave the cylinders alone.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fredvance on November 24, 2015, 09:01:09 AM
I imagine the cylinders are nikasil coated. They will not take much honing. All the jap manuf. use it. Millennium Technologies is the place that everybody I know use for plating and advice on what you can do. Check them out.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on November 24, 2015, 11:01:29 AM
Good Nikasil article here by our member ggl205: http://www.engineprofessional.com/ep4.html
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on November 24, 2015, 06:51:16 PM
Bo........If you need to, Milennium Tech is located about 6 miles from my home. My builder, Dave Murre, has an account with them at a sizable discount to their list prices. My time and handling is worthless :lol:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 24, 2015, 10:19:41 PM
That phone number for Millenium is written in my phone book.  Thanks for telling me about it.  I was reading that article about nakasil and alumasil when I remembered something.  New pistons and rings in a slightly used barrel was the situation I had when building the middle sized motor for Pendine.  What I did was to hand sand the barrel with 600 grit followed by 320 grit and finally by 400 grit.  It is a nakasil or similar bore and the rings seated.  The Pendine bore, pistons, and rings look great.  Heck, there is the answer.  Do what I did before that worked.

Years ago I was a service manager at Bakersfield Yamaha and I did all of the cylinder boring and honing, too.  The coarse hone puts deep grooves at wider spaced intervals in the bore.  They retain lubricant on the cylinder walls during break in.  The fine hone puts a lot more shallower grooves on the bore that do the work of seating the rings.  The middle grit does a bit of both.  That is what I was taught.

It is embarrassing to not remember stuff.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 26, 2015, 12:22:37 AM
The old engine that did 146 mph had pistons which were labeled 11.5 to 1 on the box based on the OEM combustion chamber. Two millimeter larger intake valves were installed.  The metal removed when this was done lowered the static compression ratio to 10.5 to 1.  The inlet valves were closed by the old cam at 49 degrees ABDC.  The dynamic compression ratio adjusted to Bonneville salt flat elevation was 8.43 to 1.

The new engine has pistons that are labeled 13 to 1 on the box based on the OEM chamber.  The two millimeter larger intake valves and the unshrouding I did lowers the static compression ratio to 11.8 to 1, estimated.  The new cam shuts the intake valves at 65 degrees ABDC.  The dynamic compression ratio adjusted to salt flat elevation is 8.47 to 1.

The hot cams need compression to make them work.  Both Vizard in his books and the Victory Library papers mention this.  I would have an awfully slow bike with very low dynamic compression if I did not bump up the static compression ratio.

The changes I am making are about the best I can do with a 995cc engine using an overbore to give the added displacement.  The fast guys install 4 or 5 mm larger intake and exhaust valves, open up the combustion chamber so the valves are not shrouded, and increase the engine stroke.  The stroker motor crams more displacement into the larger chamber and a radically domed piston is not needed.  A flat top one will do.  Their engines are far to big to race in the 1000cc class.

This build diary is good reading for someone who is building one of these engines.

     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 26, 2015, 08:21:33 AM
quote:"The new cam shuts the intake valves at 65 degrees ABDC"

At what lift is your cam spec?  I'm curious because Megacycle uses .040" for the BSA but .020" for early triumphs, so hard to compare.

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 28, 2015, 09:57:09 PM
The cam specs are proprietary and I cannot give details.  The calculator is "Harley Advanced Dynamic Compression Calculator" at www.rbracing-rsr.com/calculations.htm (http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/calculations.htm)  It is handy.  It tells me I need between 1 to 2 pounds of boost to make the bike preform on the salt flats like it does down in the Willamette Valley where we live.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 28, 2015, 10:03:50 PM
It is hard to compare cam specs between 2 valve per cylinder BSAs and older Triumphs and the four valve heads on these new Triumphs.  Four valve heads require different cam characteristics.  Vizard discusses this in his books.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 29, 2015, 03:21:02 PM
Crankshaft modification to reduce windage is a current topic among a few of us bike builders on this forum.  The crank shown is unmodified and it is used in the scrambler.  It will be the crank in the turbo motor.  The one I am modifying is similar except the crankpins are at 360 degrees rather than the 270 degrees for the scrambler.

The thicker counterweight will be chamfered like the ones on the Wolfenden crank.  The thinner counterweight will have its leading edges radiused like on the other crank.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 29, 2015, 05:11:40 PM
Bo,
Will balancing be a problem on your 360º crankshaft if you knife edge the counter weights to that extent?  Is your motor wet or dry sump?
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 29, 2015, 06:42:03 PM
It is wet sump.  These engine have broken cranks under extreme use.  The option of radiusing the counterweight edges seems a safe bet.  There is plenty of counterweight remaining for balancing and the crank strength is not compromised.

There are two counterbalancer shafts in these motors.  Can they be removed?  I asked Triumph Performance for their opinion on this and on the method of reducing windage.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on November 30, 2015, 03:16:10 PM
Would 'sump-vacuum' help?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: mc2032 on November 30, 2015, 07:16:36 PM
bo, do cranks like this balance similar to/same as odd fire harley cranks?  i had the sportster's balanced at 60% ( total reciprocating weight x 60% plus total rotating weight equals total bob weight for spin balancing) to move the "balance" up the rpm range. i could have opted for a lower percentage moving balance higher into the rpm range but stayed w/ the tried and true 60% and am good to 8000 rpm w/ the motor.  we talked about windage trays and/or and smoothing/fairing the 360 degree flywheels but opted to just use the factory scrapers and called it good.  in lieu of modifying  the crank, can you look at a windage tray or scrapers?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 30, 2015, 10:07:58 PM
The 270 degree crank makes these Triumphs run really smooth and they get better traction.  It is not in the bike now.  The old style 360 degree crank is in it.  The guy at Revco Precision in California balanced the crank when I put in the heavier pistons.  The balance factor was over 50 percent.  I do not remember the exact number.  It seemed to be too low.  The bike runs real smooth.  He knows what he is doing.

The oil is in a sump below the crank and the crankcase casting has a windage tray built in.  The counterweights just dip into the oil on the windage tray about a quarter inch when the motor is not running.  The oil pump sucks that up when the engine runs so the crank is spinning above the oil level.  The balancer shafts are about five inches above the oil level.  The engine is like a dry sump motor when running.  The crank and the balancers spin in the air.  I looked at using an oil scraper.  The pork chop crank lobes are away from the scraper more than half of the time.  I am not sure if it will work.

There is a fellow in Australia that races one of these and of course, there are the folks at Triumph Performance in Lomita.  I e-mailed both of them and asked if the counter balance shafts can be removed to get more power without creating a lot of vibes.  That, and radiusing the leading and trailing edges of the crankshaft lobes, might give me more horses without weakening the crank.

There is an extra breather on the crankcase to reduce internal pressure.  A slight vacuum in the crankcase might help.  I could hook the extra breather up to a suction pump.  Is anyone familiar with one of these setups for a bike?     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on December 01, 2015, 07:22:42 AM
Counterweights dip 1/4" into the oil when the motor is not running, but not when the motor is running?  Where does it go in a wet sump motor? It surely doesn't drain that much oil from closed passages within the crank, etc. or your motor would be starting without oil where it's needed. If the counterweights are above the oil, I can't see how trimming them can have much effect unless they can be made to sling off the surface oil more effectively.

Additional breather on your motor? So you've got almost 1000cc of air pumping back and forth thru your breathers like an air compressor.  Connect all your breathers up to a reed valve breather and stop the pumping losses!

Remove the counter balance shafts?  You'll have to have the motor rebalanced, I would think.  From a conservation of energy principal, there would be no hp lost at steady state as those shafts aren't doing any work.  There would be some mechanical loss from the chain or gear drive and bearings.  From an acceleration standpoint, I would think they would be the same as a heavier flywheel so from a drag racing and road racing point of view, they could be detrimental.  On a long track like Bonneville, I don't think a lighter rotating mass would make much difference.  But now we have to look at 1 mile tracks; so maybe an advantage to take them out to gain that last bit of acceleration.

Tom  
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on December 01, 2015, 06:51:59 PM
The balance shaft it to quite the motor harmonics around idle... look at the book for the adjustment... we pull them from suzuki bike motors all the time.  The gear drive and drag of the balancer uses HP just like transmission gear drag.  
It's a race bike, who cares if it buzzes the bars a little at low rpm.

added...
Tom, if your motor has a sight glass, look at it while the bike is running... oh no... all the oil disappears with the motor running.... wonder where it goes...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 01, 2015, 10:09:44 PM
The new Bonnevilles are air/oil cooled and the oil level drops when the engine is running.  The lube is all around the engine doing various tasks.  There is a sight glass on the side of the motor to observe the level drop.

The expert opinions I got cross the entire spectrum of experience and recommendation on crank and balancer mods, from "shape the counterweights like airfoils and remove the balancers" to "leave the balancers in and do not change the crank lobe shape for a 995cc engine."  These are condensed recommendations and not exact quotes.  All are from successful racers using these motors.

Yesterday I was dodging frost patches on the road in the predawn dark while I rode to work on the other Triumph.  Logic says I had better fix the salt damage on my truck so I can stay alive until spring and be able to tow the bike to Bonneville in the summer.  A couple of extra horsepower won't do me much good if I am dead or cannot drive to Utah.  I will leave the crank alone, the balancer shafts will remain in place, and I will concentrate on fixing my truck.  It was an easy decision.  All of my engines have names.  This low budget special will be the Ghetto Blaster.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on December 02, 2015, 06:18:40 AM
Stainless,
I have a dry sump motor and no sight glass.  I just thought it interesting that Triumph would design a motor in which the oil level at start-up would be high enough to ensure that the counterweights would spread all the excess oil around leaving no chance to completely eliminate the windage problem. Briggs and Stratton did that for years and the motors didn't last too long in my lawn mowers!  Controlled oiling would seem better than a splash system.  A deeper sump might be a good idea.

I've never had a bike with balance shafts and I agree that we don't need to worry about the out-of-balance buzzing for 5 miles at a time.  I would remove them, but Bo has already had his motor re-balanced with them in place, so removing them would require a another re-balance wouldn't it?

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 02, 2015, 09:24:35 PM
Today I got opinion from a couple of more experts in this.  The counterbalancers in these engines provide secondary balance.  Fiddling around with counterweights only affects primary balance.  The secondary imbalance that comes with removing the counterweights might be a problem or not, depending on how the engine is mounted in the frame and the vibrational harmonics of the various parts of the bikes.  Removing the counterbalancers has caused problems.

The primary balance is the counterweights.  Their weight can be adjusted to provide good primary balance at high rpm.  A problem with shaving the balancer weights is to provide primary balance.  The counterweights can be drilled and heavy metal plugs interference fit into the holes.  The crank could be lightened by drilling around the web near where the big end is.  The pistons and rods could be lightened to get primary balance.

I looked at doing these things after work today.  The heavy metal inserts will require drilling the counterweights.  There is not a lot of room for this.  It will be hard to get significant added weight from heavy metal plugs to compensate for metal removal from the counterweights.  Drilling balance holes on the crankpin side of the crank weights will weaken them in a critical area.  I am not sure how to lighten the rods and pistons.

The bike is raced in FIM and the return run needs to be made within an hour.  Once I make the down run I wait for the FIM escort to accompany me back to the impound.  Then I go to impound.  Adding fuel or fixing things is done there.  Any adjustments in impound require me to walk down pit row to the truck, dig out what I need, walk back to impound, fix or adjust, walk back to the truck to put stuff away, and walk back to impound.  Then I find the escort, tell him to hurry up, and then we ride down to the other end of the course.  Next, I convince the flagger of the urgency of the situation.   Almost always, a few minutes before the hour is gone, they flag me off.  A smooth running bike that does not vibrate stuff loose is a real asset for an FIM racer.  Although I do not have time to monkey with the crank, I would not fiddle with it if I did have the time.  It is sort of like a sprint tuned engine vs a motor set up for endurance.  A person needs to finish to win.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 07, 2015, 01:57:29 AM
Many years ago I went by Grandis Titanium in Rancho Margarita and bought hundred dollars of structural titanium alloy round stock in various diameters.  The carbon steel bolts on the race bike are being replaced with stainless steel bolts.  I get the stainless bolts from the street Triumph.

The street bike bolts are replaced with titanium ones that I make.  This is an upper engine mounting bolt.  The nut is stainless steel.  Titanium male and female threads will gall together just like stainless steel.  Use of a stainless nut on a ti bolt solves this problem.  Ti is difficult to machine quickly.  It took most of all day to make this bolt.  The head was machined using a milling cutter in the drill press and an indexing head.  It took lots of practice and now the setup is giving me good results.

Titanium has a much lower modulus of elasticity than steel.  They are stretchier and not as rigid as the stainless steel bolts.  I use them on the street bike rather than the race bike for this reason.  The race bike needs the extra rigidity that stainless steel offers.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on December 08, 2015, 04:45:57 PM
WW;

While I'm impressed by the effort to make your own titanium bolt, I have to ask why? Unless weight is an important factor, going from a good AN/MS/NAS bolt to titanium would be a step backward as far as strength is concerned, especially if you cut the threads on your bolt. Rolled threads are far better. I must have missed something about your application.  :?

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on December 09, 2015, 11:56:29 AM
Bo,

You might want to review the information in this last post as it is 4 valve specific.

http://www.landracing.com/forum/index.php/topic,14175.msg284882.html#new

Happy Holidays!!

 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 09, 2015, 10:47:59 PM
Neil, making bolts on the lathe is something I can do with one hand.  I am recovering from a carpal tunnel operation on my left hand.  Besides, I have all sorts of titanium round stock to use up.  The race bike has carbon steel bolts and I repaint them every five years or so.  The street bike has nice stainless steel bolts.  They are moved over to the race bike and I put titanium bolts on the street bike.

A set of titanium 2 into 1 headers were bought for the race bike and they are not the best setup so I moved them to the street bike.  This reduced the bike weight by 32 pounds.  The battery died and I put in a lithium one.  This saved three pounds.  All of the ti bits I make add up to something.  The street bike handles noticeably better due to this weight loss.

Mark, the cylinder head flows plenty good except at the higher cam lifts so I did these four things.  The combustion chamber walls were shrouding the valves.  I took care of that.  The header pipes are a bit small in diameter so I replaced them with the larger diameter headers from the street bike.  An old titanium race header is used on the street machine.  There was a nice pair of unused larger diameter race manifolds in my junk box that I rediscovered.  They will be used.  The head,carbs, manifolds, cams, etc were sent to the fellow that built my valve train.  He has a flow bench and knows how to use it.  Hopefully he can get a little bit more flow and better flow distribution around the valve periphery.  The intake ports had funky shapes and it seemed to concentrate flow on the valve seat adjacent to the long side.  Hopefully he can reshape the bowls to improve flow distribution.  Thanks for posting that info.  It is a big help.  Not all of us are experts and we need all of the assistance we can get.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 15, 2015, 08:53:16 PM
My kids often said they could not wait to get out of here where we live and go as far away as possible.  It is Gretchen's turn.  She is the girl that went with me to the races for many years including the one in Wales.  She got her passport, work permit, and life savings, and left this afternoon for a city with a name that starts with "L"... in Tasmania.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WhizzbangK.C. on December 16, 2015, 09:16:13 AM
Go gitcha a big ol piece of the world, Gretchen.  :cheers:

Bo, I know you must feel a little nervous over her taking off on such an adventure. I know I was with my little girl. She's 28 now, and she joined the Air Force to see the world at 18. In 3 years she got to see Texas, Arkansas, and South Dakota.  :roll:

Since she got out, she's earned a degree in International Business, traveled, studied and worked in Japan, Taiwan, China, Singapore, Greece, Italy, Germany, Poland, Hungary, Qatar, Turkey, Oman, Bahrain, UAE, etc. Every time she leaves for another oversees trip I still get very nervous about it, but she loves it.

I'm incredibly proud of the person that she's become as a result, and I'm sure that Gretchen will make you proud too (even prouder than I know that you rightly already are).   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on December 16, 2015, 03:11:00 PM
+1 with Ed :-) :-) :-) :-)

Our girls left Wisconsin for California and NY............They have been across a few oceans now that we have a little time.............they invite us to join them on some of their vacation-adventures.  Now you have to take care of your Mrs..............more than ever :-D :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 16, 2015, 09:51:52 PM
Thanks for the advice.  Rose and I have been a bit closer to each after she left. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 31, 2015, 11:39:11 PM
My middle son is looking for a small bench top lathe.  It is his holiday and he is doing a heroic effort to get my truck back on the road.  Buying him a lathe, or helping him to do this, might be a decent move on my part.  All of the new ones seem to be made in China.  Do any of you know an exception to this?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on January 01, 2016, 07:38:28 AM
My middle son is looking for a small bench top lathe.  It is his holiday and he is doing a heroic effort to get my truck back on the road.  Buying him a lathe, or helping him to do this, might be a decent move on my part.  All of the new ones seem to be made in China.  Do any of you know an exception to this?

I don't know of any.

You might want to consider looking on Craig's list or ebay for an older Clausing, South Bend, Atlas, or Craftsman.   The Craftsmans were private label by Atlas.    Of course, not new, but I've seen some good value from time to time.   Even new stuff, unused, at reduced prices.   Be prepared to go and pick it up as opposed to shipping it.

Failing that, Grizzly Industrial or perhaps Enco might have a new offering that suits his needs.    I'm sure you will advise him to buy bigger than what he thinks he needs . . . .

Happy New Year!!

 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 03, 2016, 09:07:13 PM
Not sure if he has the time and patience for the older lathes that are made here.  He has a full life with a wife, job, and kids.  He likes Grizzly stuff and this lathe might do the job.  It has a milling attachment and most do not.  He is concerned about weight 'cause the marine Corps has him move every few years.  This machine weighs 293# as shipped.  The lathe should weigh around 200# with the tailstock, chuck, and accessories removed.  Two marines should have no problem moving that.  www.grizzly.com/products/G4000 (http://www.grizzly.com/products/G4000)  Has anyone used one of these?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 04, 2016, 09:23:47 PM
It was the bike speed trials in 2014.  We drove a few miles to the pits in standing water, there was water in the pits, and the H20 near the boat ramp was deep enough to be caught by the fan and sprayed all over the engine compartment.  I made several trips back and forth through this.  Everything under the hood that could corrode did.  Lesson learned.  A few inches of water near the boat ramp is OK.  A person really needs to ask themselves if it is worth it to drive through deeper water.

I got home, did the sprinkler under the truck routine, and parked it.  Greenhouse gas emission concerns make me walk, take my bicycle, or ride the street bike.  The brakes locked up from rust.  Lesson learned.  A week after coming back from Bonneville, jack the truck up, take off the wheels, use Salt Away to wash the brakes, do the sprinkler routine, pull out the caliper pins and relube them, and oil, grease, and inspect as needed.  Drive the truck somewhere at least once a week.

Use quality made American made replacement parts with grease fittings.  My middle son did this.  Most everything was American made.  He used Moog fittings with grease nipples so I can lube the chassis.  The Toyota parts did not have grease fittings.  The truck is together and running.

The younger boy, Werner, got his bike running.  He last used it at Bonneville to set a record.  We took the motor out of the frame, I rebuilt it for LSR, put it back into the frame, and did nothing more.  It sat on his workbench for a bunch of years.  He put it together as a trail bike.  The land speed engine in the little dirt bike chassis is an interesting combination.  It is like miniature Mach III Kawasaki with knobbies.  A lot of fun.

The race bike is back on the bench.  We had a good holiday.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 08, 2016, 10:52:29 PM
There is a paint store down near the old Southern Pacific tracks that I go to.  They sell to professionals.  I asked them about chassis paint for the truck and I described the third world conditions that I operate in.  They recommended this paint.  It takes two coats to do the job and there is no primer.  It says on the can that the only solvent that will work with the paint is the one they make.  I guess they never tried acetone.  It works great.  The paint lacks resistance to UV light.  The paint store folks sold me a clear topcoat that is UV resistant and I used it where parts will be exposed to the sun.

The paint dries quickly to a very hard finish and it is not fussy about temperature, humidity, etc.  A good aspect is the lack of fumes during drying.  I was able to dry some parts over the wood stove without everyone complaining about the smell.  Another good point is the part does not need to be absolutely rust free.  The paint will cover and neutralize light rust.  The stuff is not cheap.  That is one drawback.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on January 08, 2016, 11:24:03 PM
Jeez Bo,
     I doubt even the British heat their beer on the stove before drinking it.
This Pendine Sands thing has affected you.   :-P
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on January 09, 2016, 08:24:07 AM
Don, I thought he was trying to radiate extra heat from the stove. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: handyguy on January 09, 2016, 10:22:27 AM
   I  have used  Pour 15 ($50+ qt.) on car project.. The process is 2 parts , degreasing  with their cleaner than painting with Pour 15.   Wearing respirator recommended even outdoors .  Could affect brain , nervous and kidney systems.  My brain is already affected with cars and what you want to do with them,  nerves only appear when I think about driving this project  :evil: , and drinking plenty of fluids  :cheers:  doesn't give kidneys time to absorb stuff like   ISOCYANATES  !!   Magnifier AND glasses helps to read the LABEL..  Good stuff if you don't want anything to affect the metal underneath,   it's like a tattoo..  [img]
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 10, 2016, 12:29:27 AM
Oh no!  The writing on that label was so small that I did not read much more than the directions.  Fortunately I was drinking lots of beer throughout the job.  That might have saved my kidneys.  The project is done, I am still alive, and I will be more careful next time. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Polyhead on January 12, 2016, 09:37:19 AM
Hotrodding at it's finest. :cheers:

For aluminum gauling on blades, I like beeswax or other solid wax sticks.  Less mess, works better than liquids.



Yep yep yep... Parafin has always been a superior cutting lubricant for aluminium.  It should be noted that both solid and liquid parafin work well, meaning candles work alright, and so does kerosene (for us americans).  In a pinch, #2 diesel and solvent aren't half bad.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 15, 2016, 11:50:24 PM
Thanks for the advice, Polyhead.  Your identification says you are from Portland.  Make sure you come to the Northwest Reunion next month.  I will be there.  Look for an older slightly overweight balding guy with glasses.  That's me.

This is the left cylinder upper rod shell.  Note the chunk of surface coating that went AWOL.  These are Mahle shells and one of the technical experts in the North American office offered to examine and give me advice.  That is good support for this racer.  The shell goes out in the mail tomorrow.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on January 16, 2016, 06:18:47 AM

This is the left cylinder upper rod shell.  Note the chunk of surface coating that went AWOL.  These are Mahle shells and one of the technical experts in the North American office offered to examine and give me advice.  That is good support for this racer.  The shell goes out in the mail tomorrow.


Bo,

Are you referring to the defect on the left side of the photo, about halfway up from the bottom?   (The top, normally installed?)

If so, carefully check the back of the bearing shell for a small bit of "foreign material".   If there is a telltale "dent" in the back of the bearing shell at that location, a bit of dirt/grit/whatever is the culprit.   If that is not the case, the bearing guy is your best bet.

 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on January 16, 2016, 10:18:56 AM
Thanks for the advice, Polyhead.  Your identification says you are from Portland.  Make sure you come to the Northwest Reunion next month.  I will be there.  Look for an older slightly overweight balding guy with glasses.  That's me.

Bo... you and half the other guys that will be there...  :roll:
See y'all there :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 17, 2016, 01:27:04 AM
The micrometers, standards, and the bile were put in the shed overnight with the heater on.  The goal was to get everything to 20 degrees C or 68 degrees F.  The crank was turned forward as far as possible for measuring.  The journal diameters were measured on the right side, left side, and in the middle.  The crank was turned backwards as far as it would go and be measured.  The journals were measured on both sides and in the middle.

The sets of measurements were at 90 degrees to each other.  The measurements show the journals are round and not worn with one exception.  The right journal, where the rod pushes on it with maximum force during combustion, is worn 0.0001 inches more than elsewhere on the journal.  This is not a big deal.  The left rod journal is 0.0003 inches bigger than the right journal.  It appears to have been made that way.  This might be a big part of my problem.

This is a problem I did not detect during years of Plastigage measurements.  Monday I will take the rods to the machinist and ask him to measure the big end internal diameters without the shells, with the used shells, with new "White" coded shells, and with new "Red" coded shells.  The white ones are a little bit larger than the red ones.

This micrometer set was thrown into the recycle dumpster when my brother's company closed their R & D machine shop.  The guy that tossed them was following orders and he felt bad about it so he told my brother who is a mechanical engineer.  My brother swooped in and fished the mikes out along with a bunch of other stuff before the recycle guys came.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on January 17, 2016, 06:30:51 AM
Bo,

That was a nice save!!   Hope you paid him back somehow.

 :cheers:
F/B
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Polyhead on January 17, 2016, 09:11:50 PM
Thanks for the advice, Polyhead.  Your identification says you are from Portland.  Make sure you come to the Northwest Reunion next month.  I will be there.  Look for an older slightly overweight balding guy with glasses.  That's me.

This is the left cylinder upper rod shell.  Note the chunk of surface coating that went AWOL.  These are Mahle shells and one of the technical experts in the North American office offered to examine and give me advice.  That is good support for this racer.  The shell goes out in the mail tomorrow.

pnw reunion?  Never heard of it.  You'll have to tell me more, feel free to pm it to me so we don't spam the thread up too much... or do.. you're thread :D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Polyhead on January 17, 2016, 09:15:01 PM

This micrometer set was thrown into the recycle dumpster when my brother's company closed their R & D machine shop.  The guy that tossed them was following orders and he felt bad about it so he told my brother who is a mechanical engineer.  My brother swooped in and fished the mikes out along with a bunch of other stuff before the recycle guys came.   

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT... oh god the machinist in me just died a little inside!  I mean.. not only are they the .0001 reading mitutoyo set, its the carbide tipped set at that!  My desire to murder.... right now...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on January 17, 2016, 09:30:57 PM

pnw reunion?  Never heard of it.  You'll have to tell me more, feel free to pm it to me so we don't spam the thread up too much... or do.. you're thread :D

http://www.landracing.com/forum/index.php/topic,15440.0.html

Bonneville NW Reunion draws racers from all over the country
Be there or be square  :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Polyhead on January 17, 2016, 10:12:37 PM

pnw reunion?  Never heard of it.  You'll have to tell me more, feel free to pm it to me so we don't spam the thread up too much... or do.. you're thread :D

http://www.landracing.com/forum/index.php/topic,15440.0.html

Bonneville NW Reunion draws racers from all over the country
Be there or be square  :cheers:

Well... if I have any money left over!  Or i'm not stuck over at the shop...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on January 18, 2016, 07:02:22 AM
"This micrometer set was thrown into the recycle dumpster when my brother's company closed their R & D machine shop."

Dumpster diving at its best! I used to like to take scrap metal to our local dump and I used to come home with more scrap metal than I went with.  When we were kids, the local dumps were our parts source.  Bed frame angles and lawn mower wheels were diamonds in the rough. Bicycle handlebars would serve as a steering wheel on a go-kart and brake levers would work as a throttle.  I found an R.E.O. 2 hp horizontal shaft motor that powered my first "motorcycle". Now they won't let you take anything or even get near the scrap metal pile.  Last time I went there were two complete full suspension bikes under some misc. other metal and I asked the attendant about them.  He said that not even the employees were allowed to take anything home with them.  The true throw-away society we live in today.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 18, 2016, 07:58:48 PM
We had a dump near the house where I grew up.  One evening when I was a boy I snuck in to toss a bunch of scrap iron on their metal pile.  This box on the refuse heap moved and wiggled.  It was full of puppies.  I took them home and our family fell in love with them.  All of them lived happy lives.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on January 18, 2016, 08:18:55 PM

Well... if I have any money left over!  Or i'm not stuck over at the shop...

You can invite folks to visit your project... if you have good beer  :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Polyhead on January 18, 2016, 09:26:11 PM
eh, I don't even have a shop at home right now, i'm barrowing space from friends at the moment.  So... inviting people over to you buddies place, while he's off in cali trying to get his stuff sorted.... officially not cool.  The car is still street legal though, so it'll be out there in the parking lot.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 21, 2016, 10:54:57 PM
Portland, Bend, and other trendy places are expensive to live in.  A modest house with a workshop is affordable in the woodsier parts of the state.  Lots of folks call their shops "pole barns" and this leads to confusion if you do not know this and are shopping around for a place to live.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 21, 2016, 11:06:11 PM
The conversion from Windows 7 to Windows 8 seemed like big step backwards so I bought an Apple computer.  It is a lot easier to work with and I use it a lot.  Scanning, printing, and all sorts of other stuff was done on my PC 'cause it still works, sort of.  Now I will try to post something I scanned.  It might take a few posts for me to get it figured out. Be patient.  My natural abilities are to be a handsome, suave, and debonaire party animal.  This nerdy stuff is very difficult and I have no natural talent for it. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on January 22, 2016, 05:33:18 AM
Biggest club in the world brother. :-D :-D :-D

Good luck. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Polyhead on January 22, 2016, 11:30:19 AM
Portland, Bend, and other trendy places are expensive to live in.  A modest house with a workshop is affordable in the woodsier parts of the state.  Lots of folks call their shops "pole barns" and this leads to confusion if you do not know this and are shopping around for a place to live.

True, but my nice decently paying job is in St. Johns, and I like to be able to bicycle commute. So, I rent shop space here and there.  It still works out being cheaper than a house with shop space, in the short term anyway.  Owning out here is a fools game, and no bank on the planet would be dumb enough to loan me money anyway.

On windows.... yeah... screw all that noise.  Apple and microsoft both have a crap product.  Been a linux user since 2000.  It's still superior. :D  Actually more superior right now than it ever has been.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 23, 2016, 12:09:57 AM
Here are the rod journal to shell clearances.  White coded shells, they give the loosest fit, are recommended for racing.  It seems I installed red coded shells based on measurement.  The damaged shell was on the left journal which had the tightest clearances.  I always install white shells and my records say this.  Maybe the shells I installed were mislabeled.

The machinist showed me a special micrometer for measuring shells.  It has a flat and a round anvil.  This is what I need so I can check the rascals to make sure they are the correct size before I install them.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Polyhead on January 23, 2016, 01:27:47 AM
Here are the rod journal to shell clearances.  White coded shells, they give the loosest fit, are recommended for racing.  It seems I installed red coded shells based on measurement.  The damaged shell was on the left journal which had the tightest clearances.  I always install white shells and my records say this.  Maybe the shells I installed were mislabeled.

The machinist showed me a special micrometer for measuring shells.  It has a flat and a round anvil.  This is what I need so I can check the rascals to make sure they are the correct size before I install them.

 

You don't need a special mic to measure inside of a radius.  You can get balls to attach to your existing od mic so that it can measure on a radius.  You then only need subtract the diameter of the ball.  In a pinch, a ball bearing and some tape gets the job done.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on January 23, 2016, 07:03:40 AM
Here are the rod journal to shell clearances.  White coded shells, they give the loosest fit, are recommended for racing.  It seems I installed red coded shells based on measurement.  The damaged shell was on the left journal which had the tightest clearances.  I always install white shells and my records say this.  Maybe the shells I installed were mislabeled.

The machinist showed me a special micrometer for measuring shells.  It has a flat and a round anvil.  This is what I need so I can check the rascals to make sure they are the correct size before I install them.
 

You don't need a special mic to measure inside of a radius.  You can get balls to attach to your existing od mic so that it can measure on a radius.  You then only need subtract the diameter of the ball.  In a pinch, a ball bearing and some tape gets the job done.


You need to be very careful when measuring the thickness of "tri-metal" bearing surfaces.   The plated, overlay, lead/indium layer on Vandervell/Mahle Motorsport bearings is easily dented and can give an erroneous reading.   The bearing manufacturer calls this: embedability.   It is to trap foreign particles in this layer.   On the other hand, bearings made from Clevite 77 material have a much higher surface hardness.

The best method I have used to measure bearing thickness is to use a special micrometer with a flat anvil and a ground rod.   In a pinch, a regular micrometer and a hardened and ground dowel pin can be substituted.    I tend to use a .250" or a .500" dowel pin to make the subtraction math simple.   Industrial supply houses occasionally list them as "die pins", for stamping dies.  They are typically available in std size, +.0005" o/s, and +.001" o/s and various undersizes, just to keep it complicated.   I have a buddy who does centerless grinding of gages, for tool and die machinists.   I get any size I need from him.

 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on January 23, 2016, 07:15:41 AM
Here is a tech bulletin from Clevite that explains why bearings are eccentrically shaped, and how and where to measure them.

http://www.stealth316.com/misc/clevite-eng-bearing-fund-p4.pdf

 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on January 23, 2016, 08:29:52 AM
Thanks Mark.
I saved the PDF. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Polyhead on January 23, 2016, 08:19:50 PM
Here are the rod journal to shell clearances.  White coded shells, they give the loosest fit, are recommended for racing.  It seems I installed red coded shells based on measurement.  The damaged shell was on the left journal which had the tightest clearances.  I always install white shells and my records say this.  Maybe the shells I installed were mislabeled.

The machinist showed me a special micrometer for measuring shells.  It has a flat and a round anvil.  This is what I need so I can check the rascals to make sure they are the correct size before I install them.
 

You don't need a special mic to measure inside of a radius.  You can get balls to attach to your existing od mic so that it can measure on a radius.  You then only need subtract the diameter of the ball.  In a pinch, a ball bearing and some tape gets the job done.


You need to be very careful when measuring the thickness of "tri-metal" bearing surfaces.   The plated, overlay, lead/indium layer on Vandervell/Mahle Motorsport bearings is easily dented and can give an erroneous reading.   The bearing manufacturer calls this: embedability.   It is to trap foreign particles in this layer.   On the other hand, bearings made from Clevite 77 material have a much higher surface hardness.

The best method I have used to measure bearing thickness is to use a special micrometer with a flat anvil and a ground rod.   In a pinch, a regular micrometer and a hardened and ground dowel pin can be substituted.    I tend to use a .250" or a .500" dowel pin to make the subtraction math simple.   Industrial supply houses occasionally list them as "die pins", for stamping dies.  They are typically available in std size, +.0005" o/s, and +.001" o/s and various undersizes, just to keep it complicated.   I have a buddy who does centerless grinding of gages, for tool and die machinists.   I get any size I need from him.

 :cheers:
Fordboy

I would think so long as you used the clutch on the mic you would be good.  We do babbit friction bearing repair at the shop, and while you do have to be careful it's not THAT fragile.  Then again.. when you're doing it every day it always seems more simple.  The issue I have with using roll pins is that they are a BASTARD to hold in place while your trying to find the high spot and get a good reading.  That said spreading the force over a wider area is always superior.

At work I have a calculator in my pocket at ALL times.  I've found one I really, really like for doing machine work for both their durability and just the right selection of functions, multiple memory positions (so you can say, store the pin diameter in a memory slot and recall it to the tenth with a button push, makes it hard to get it wrong) and a scroll back function so you can scroll back and double check the numbers you punched in as a second check of your math.   TI-30XIIS.  They are only like $25, and I get a year out of them between stupid incidents.  Generally they get smashed, droped in a bucket of oil, set fire too or some otherwise mangled or maimed before the batteries go dead. :P  The plastic holds up well to hot chips, oil and coolant though so that's a big plus!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: jdincau on January 23, 2016, 09:59:05 PM
Look for a tube micrometer on ebay, you can get one as cheap as $30
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 24, 2016, 01:17:05 AM
The shell inner faces are soft and we did enough measuring to damage them.  The machinist said something about Smokey Yunick figuring out the variable inside diameter trick.  I did not fully understand the story, being a bike guy.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 24, 2016, 01:58:45 AM
This digital Mitutoyo height gage reads to tenths.  It was fished out of the recycle bin by my brother along with the box of micrometers.  It is zeroed against the top of the ball bearing.  The tip is raised, a shell put on the ball, the tip lowered, and the shell thickness is displayed.  Totally hillbilly and it works just fine.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Polyhead on January 24, 2016, 02:20:41 AM
This digital Mitutoyo height gage reads to tenths.  It was fished out of the recycle bin by my brother along with the box of micrometers.  It is zeroed against the top of the ball bearing.  The tip is raised, a shell put on the ball, the tip lowered, and the shell thickness is displayed.  Totally hillbilly and it works just fine.   

Using just the foot to measure height actually isn't very reliable.  What is normally done if you need a measurement tighter than +/-.010 is that you put a finger type indicator in place of the hard tip foot.  Some finger indicator kits even come with the arm to put in place of the hard tip foot of the height gauge.  Anyway the procedure from there is to crank down the height gauge until you hit a position that's good for you on your test indicator then note the number on the height gauge.  touch the test indicator to the next point and be sure to roll the test indicator up to the same number.  The difference between the numbers on the height gauge is your measurement.  That's the only way you can really make a height gauge accurate.  They are just too easily influenced by measurement force otherwise.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 24, 2016, 04:15:12 PM
Thanks for the info.  I will get one of those. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 30, 2016, 10:28:46 PM
Right now I am on the road with my little truck, the open trailer, and two bikes on it.  Security is a big issue.  One of my bikes was stolen years ago and I do not like to leave bikes on a trailer in a parking lot at night.  There was a big chance the truck, bikes, and trailer would be stolen in the city where I grew up so I am doubly sensitive to this issue.

In the summer I sleep in the truck with the trailer attached and the bikes on it.  Right now I am far too close to this big mama of a volcano and it is dang cold outside.  These KOA cabins are a good deal.  The campground is sorta secure and the bikes, trailer, etc are just outside the window.  There is a heater in here and it is warm and cozy.  Some of these cabins have kitchens, showers, and indoor plumbing.  This one does not and the can and shower are about two stones throw to the west.

Tomorrow night I am in another KOA in Ramona, or Panoma, or some town with a name like that near LA.  These cabins are a good setup for the guy that travels light with the race vehicle on a trailer.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on January 31, 2016, 02:53:24 PM
Bo..............I like my enclosed trailer and my conversion van for traveling with bikes......................NO ONE KNOWS what is inside :wink: :wink: :wink:...............I have some familiarity with Smith & Weston.......but more so with Sturm-Ruger :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 01, 2016, 01:19:45 AM
An enclosed trailer was something I considered.  Towing it would require a six cylinder truck as well as a new trailer.  It all gets to be expensive.

The city is Pomona were I am camping.  There was snow on Grapevine Hill and Tejon Pass.  In the song they race up the hill on their hot rods.  Not today.  It was stop-and-go traffic on the steepest part of the hill.  In Oregon we would have snow plows, de-icer sprayers, and sanding trucks clearing the road and prepping it to resist the night freeze.  There were no CalTrans people seen anywhere on the pass.  We would be in the boss's office getting our butt's chewed if we were that casual about snow removal.  Someone might get fired or reassigned.  The truck and car drivers did a good job in those snowy and almost blizzard conditions.  There was only one idiot that I saw.  All the rest drove smoothly like they did it on a regular basis.  They normally do not drive in winter weather.           
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on February 01, 2016, 04:35:45 AM
Take the hitch off the trailer and chain the bikes through the frames with the lock under the trailer.
My take is that the guys are opportunists. :cheers:

You figure the rest and Old Scrambler is right. Sending some lead down range is a deterrent.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 08, 2016, 10:55:29 PM
Our Oregon handgun permits do not work in California and the judicial system there has a tendency to protects the criminal.  I would probably loose everything I own in litigation if I shot someone.  The pistol was left at home.  My only protection from theft was being vigilant.  Those little cabins are not insulated.  It gets cold at night in them.  Fortunately all had some sort of heater.

The big end shells from 2014 and 2015 all had more wear on the shell edges than in the centers.  The 2015's had more wear than the 2014's.  The crank pins are not barrel shaped.  I measured them on both sides and in the middle.  The expert says rod distortion is likely the culprit. The Carillo rods are H-beam style with the beam flanges on the sides.  This transmits greater power loads to the shell edges than to the centers.

The 2014 engine had 995cc with 10.5 to 1 compression.  It had 75 horsepower adjusted for Bonneville salt flat altitude.  The 2015 engine had 856cc with 8.9 to 1 compression and 80 horsepower at sea level where I raced.  These are gasoline fuel figures.  The 865 engine put out much more power when I used the jungle juice.  The greater power of the 2015 engine made the shell distress problem worse, is my guess.

This fall two ignition modules were programmed with curves retarded 2 and 4 degrees.  I will try them both and use the box that gives the most retarded timing without sacrificing peak torque.  The crankpins will be further past TDC when the power pulses hit.  It will be easier for the connecting rods to push the crank around when the push happens further from TDC.  The highest numerical gear ratio will be used that will not hurt top speed.  This will spread the engine's work over more rpm and reduce bearing loads.  These two ideas are ones I thunk up.

The expert said I can not go wrong by using Mobil 1 and he uses it in his vehicles.  He also said the Joe Gibbs "Driven" oils will work and he gave me a reference to call for advice.  The engine will be broken in on Joe Gibbs break in oil.  I probably will switch to another of their products for race use.

The next post will be on shell to journal clearances. 

 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on February 08, 2016, 11:14:47 PM
Maybe you should switch to Crower Rods if they make them for Trumps!. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 09, 2016, 10:30:19 PM
Thanks for the suggestion.  The rods might be OK and my tuning may need improving.  Other folks using these rods have no issues.  I might have less of a problem than I thought.  Advice from the expert is "Finally, as race bearings go, yours actually look pretty good!  My old mentor, who knew far more about bearings than me, used to say: 'expect some distress on racing bearings.  It comes with the territory.'"

Advice from the expert.  "Bearing clearance:  Our bearing clearance recommendations are:  .0017" min to .0022" max.  As the bearing clearance gets larger, the bearing to crank contact area gets smaller.  Your measured .0027" is a bit more than I'd like to see.  As the contact patch gets smaller, the load gets higher, not what we want to see in a racing engine."

"Your suggestions for 2016:  Have your white shells coated by a reputable bearing coater.  The coating is about .0003" thick per shell and that would get the White Shell clearance down to around .002".  The coating will also slow down the edge wear on the bearings, too.  I have personal experience with three and can recommend any of the three.

1) HM Elliott in Mooresville, NC
2) CALICO Coatings in Denver, NC
3) POLYDYNE in Houston, TX

Beyond these three, you are on your own."

"All your shells are the same part number , so switch them around from location to location until you get the clearance as close to the same as you can.  Measure with Plastigage.  It is oil soluble so don't try scraping it off.  Finally, use a prelube and oil brand and stick with it."

"Recommended bearing clearance calculations:  .00075" to .001" clearance per 1" of shaft diameter plus add .0005" to final calculations for racing engines.  Coatings are better than non-coated bearings.  All 1/2 shell bearings taper from the center of the shell to within about 3/8" of the parting line by .0003" to .0005" each side.  From 3/8 " of the parting line to the parting line, they fall off .001" or more in a process called parting line relief.  All clearances are calculated at the center of the shell."

The basic advice I get on the internet and from conversations with a lot of late model Triumph tuners is "use white shells."  The expert's advice goes beyond that simple statement.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 15, 2016, 11:31:17 AM
The machinist mentioned that the facing on these shells is soft and the tips of the bore gage plowed furrows in them during the measurement.  The measured readings were much higher than when I plastigaged the big end clearances during assembly.  The big end diameter measurements with the bore gage are suspect.

The shells are measured with the tubing micrometer.  The used shells from 2015 first, the new red coded shells second, and the new white coded shells third.  They are positioned on the rods the same way they were when the bore gage was used.  The first sheet follows.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 15, 2016, 11:36:37 AM
The second page.  Note that the third new white shell is significantly thinner than the other new white shells.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 15, 2016, 11:59:53 AM
The third page.  The difference between bore gage and tubing mic is less with the used shells.  The surfaces were compacted and polished from use and the scratches in them from the bore gage did not appear to be as deep as with the new shells.

The clearances measured by the tubing mic seem reasonable.  I have not found the "smoking gun" that caused the shell pitting.  The main bearings have three years of use and this includes maybe thirty dyno runs, six passes at Pendine, and at least six more at Bonneville.  They might be worn and oil bleeding by loose mains will reduce the oil pressure at the rods.

Six white shells and the pistons are going out by UPS to Polydyne in Houston.  Bearing coating for the shells, ceramic HS coatings for the crowns, and RP coatings for the skirts are ordered.  It is unlikely that I can meet minimum clearance requirements with two coated white shells on each rod.  The clearance might be too tight.  A coated shell on the rod side and an uncoated shell on the cap side might give me the clearances I need.  I asked the expert about this and he said it should work OK.

The engine is coming apart today, too.  New main shells will be installed.  The 2015 white, new red, and new white shell clearances will be checked with plastigage.  A comparison will tell me about the usefulness of the bore gage and tubing mic for figuring the clearances.


 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on February 15, 2016, 12:35:31 PM
Bo,

Just looked at your numbers very quickly and it seemed to me that there was a "sizing correlation" consistent with the size differential of the crank journals.   .0003"  If that crank is at standard size and within the factory "tolerance" for sizing, there is not much you can do about it, except check the clearance with various "graded" thickness shell halves.    If you ever need to "resize" the crank, make sure you use a quality crank shop that can hold the size within .0001" per pair of journals.   This is not as difficult as it sounds for specialty crank shops.   You could try having a crank shop "polish" the larger diameter journal down to the smaller size, but this needs to be done so that the journal(s) remain "round".   If you can get the equal clearance you want by changing around the shells, I would not bother with polishing.  Having said all this, polishing off .0002"/.0003" ought to be reasonably simple, unless the crank is really hard on the surface.   If you do not have a local source of "good" crankshaft work, I would inquire at Marine Crankshaft.    Others on the board might have other recommendations for a crank service.

I've found that "Sunnen type" dial bore gages with small diameter balls on the measuring fingers, can leave dents or tracks in the plated surface layer of various bearings.   Harder bearings, ala Clevite 77 material, seem to be less susceptible to "denting".

 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 16, 2016, 12:45:55 AM
There is some variance in the shell thickness due to variation in manufacturing.  Some careful shell selection might be enough to get the clearances spot-on.  It will be easier to do with the crank out of the bike and laying on the kitchen table.

The choice of "coat" or "do not coat" the piston top and combustion chamber is based on quite a bit of research.  These coatings are thin and they reflect heat as well as act as insulation.  They are proven to do this.  Enough thermal transmission is needed to heat the piston so it expands into the warming and expanding cylinder bore.  A person does not want too much insulation.

The coating makes sense when one looks at rate of heat transfer.  The heat buildup in the engine castings, etc is reduced when the rate of heat transmission into the engine more closely matches its ability to shed heat.  The coatings do not need to be hugely effective at insulating to do this. 

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on February 16, 2016, 10:15:09 AM
Bo,

I hope you (or your cylinder head guy) find the additional data interesting.

http://www.landracing.com/forum/index.php/topic,14175.msg287690.html#msg287690

 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on February 16, 2016, 11:58:26 AM
“These coatings are thin and they reflect heat as well as act as insulation. They are proven to do this.”

What coatings?
Where is the technical data on them?

Yes, they do reflect (to some degree, like anything else) and they conduct heat (to some degree, like anything else) but do they have anything more than an insignificant effect on the heat transfer rate in this application?  Where is this “proven”?  Just because the guy selling it can SAY it is so, isn’t “proof”.  Some people selling engine coatings state that it is not an effective insulation method.

The reduced conduction argument can be easily discounted analytically, and the reflection argument is almost nonsense, since thermal radiation just reflects back and forth in the combustion chamber successively being absorbed through the walls.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 16, 2016, 09:28:39 PM
The Hot Rod magazine did a comparison test and showed the thermal barrier coatings to help horse power.  The other coatings had mixed results.  Most of the info I read was from aerospace applications.  The development of these thin coatings solved all sorts of problems and allowed rockets and jets to do things they could not do before.  Vizard recommends them for some uses and he has some numbers in his books.  I have the Hot Rod article around here somewhere and I have Vizard's books.  I can dig that info up if needed and when I get some spare time.  I never bothered to save the links to the aerospace stuff.  One big selling point is one of my racing buddies who is smarter than me and goes really fast uses the thermal barrier on his piston.  Monkey see, monkey do, is my rocket science type strategy.   

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 17, 2016, 12:14:12 AM
Mark, I read this carefully before I sent the head away.  The head was ported when I used standard size inlet valves.  Two millimeter bigger inlet valves and seats were installed.  The ports were not matched well to the bigger seats.  I did a tuft test and flow was very biased to the long side.  My worry was the velocities were getting too close to sonic in that area of concentrated flow at peak horsepower rpm.

"Get some better flow if you can, and pay attention to improving the velocity distribution around the margin.  Improving that will be a big help."  This is what I asked him to do.  He uses a flow bench when he does the work so I figure it will be better than when I do it using my imagination and no bench. 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on February 17, 2016, 07:18:28 AM
Mark, I read this carefully before I sent the head away.  The head was ported when I used standard size inlet valves.  Two millimeter bigger inlet valves and seats were installed.  The ports were not matched well to the bigger seats.  I did a tuft test and flow was very biased to the long side.  My worry was the velocities were getting too close to sonic in that area of concentrated flow at peak horsepower rpm.

"Get some better flow if you can, and pay attention to improving the velocity distribution around the margin.  Improving that will be a big help."  This is what I asked him to do.  He uses a flow bench when he does the work so I figure it will be better than when I do it using my imagination and no bench. 
 

Bo,

Using a flow bench in conjunction with tufts, "flow balls" and pitot tubes is definitely the way to go.    I can't tell you how many times I have flow tested a head "ported" by some "seat of the pants" flow genius, only to find the measured cylinder head flow is below the "average" for that type of casting.   Your guy is a pro, I'm sure it will turn out well.

Having said all that, the engines themselves, DO NOT care about the numbers.    Be sure to read that twice to get my meaning.    :-D

What IS important, is to know some hard data regarding these "relationships".    Having that information gives me some "direction", if required, when performing the final dyno tune.    That information also helps to define the selection of "other important parts" in the engine's "Comprehensive Build Specification" ©   And when your "Build Spec" might be compromised by some factor, say small cam grind selection, sometimes you can "band aid" it somewhere else.

The end focus is to produce horsepower, as opposed to information.    But the information based approach works better.   Ask guys like Mike LeFevers, Ken Duttweiler or Jon Kaase.

 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 18, 2016, 09:29:23 AM
The class I race in allows fuel and my blend has some oxygen bearing chemicals.  More fuel is used and the main jets are four sizes bigger.  Does this require larger exhaust valves?  Right now this is the limiting factor in the build.  The intake valves sonic choke at about 9,000 rpm and the exhausts at 8,400 rpm based on a PipeMax analysis.

One reason I am not using bigger exhaust valves is the target rpm for going through the mile is 8,300 and there is a 0.5 to 1.0 point drop in static compression due to the combustion chamber being opened up for the larger poppets.  The aspects of using oxygenated fuel might make me think different.  Each cylinder has a pair of 33mm intakes and 26 mm exhausts.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 21, 2016, 11:57:10 AM
The engines weigh over 200 pounds and I am too weak and old to lift them out of the frame, carry them down the stairs, and put them on the work bench.  The last time I did it we had two old guys doing the job and it was a bit much for both of us.

This year the engine is stripped in the frame, lowered down to the bike bench using ratchet straps, and carried downstairs to the cellar.  It is the size of an, er, large turkey.  It is light enough to carry around.

The last pix shows the open crankcase mouths.  It is hard to hold the rod steady when the cap bolts are tightened for plastigage measurement.  I am always afraid that rod movement is smearing the gage plastic and making the indicated clearance larger than it really is.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 21, 2016, 12:14:48 PM
The oil is pumped up through these holes in the main shell, it goes into the crank journal, and then it passes out through the big end journal.  There is significant wear on the lower load bearing shell.  Oil bleeding through a sloppy main bearing can starve the rod bearing.  This is a common problem with the rod journal furthest from the oil pump on BSA twins.  Tuning those rascals was when I learned about this.

The second pix shows all of the lower journals.  The outer journal on the left also shows wear.  The eight large bolts clamping the crankcase together around the crank are tightened to 40 pounds-foot torque.  Typically they are hard to loosen when the engine is pulled apart.  The inner bolts were like this.  The outer four bolts took 5 or 10 pounds-foot to loosen.  They were almost finger tight.  I cannot explain this.  I tighten up these bolts, make a second pass through to make sure they are tight, and put dots of fingernail polish on the heads when I am done.  All of these bolts were marked.  I know they were tight upon assembly.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WhizzbangK.C. on February 21, 2016, 12:40:24 PM
Have you seen this, Bo?

http://www.boltscience.com/pages/junkertestvideo.htm
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on February 21, 2016, 02:29:09 PM
That's a good video illustrating how fasteners come loose under vibration. The Junkers machine is a good test but it only applies a sinusoidal shear force to the joint. It gets worse when they are subjected to different forces.
 
I watched a shake table test of an instrumentation package that was designed to be launched on a high-altitude sounding rocket at White Sands, NM-- by using a swept-frequency excitation to the table, all the tight screws and nuts twirled around and literally fell off! Random frequency drive also produced the same results. Sinusoidal excitation is not as severe as it gets in actual practice.

I think that at one time SPS also had a presentation on vibration testing of fasteners.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 21, 2016, 11:56:45 PM
I am pretty sure the cases were moving in relation to each other and that loosened the fasteners.  The tightening torque for the eight 10 mm x 1.25 mm bolts around the crankshaft was 40 Nm in my old 2003 tech manual.  The newest manual says to tighten them to 10 Nm and then to add 75 degrees more turn to that.  Another 20 to 30 8 mm x 1.25 mm bolts hold the crankcase top to bottom halves together.  The old manual says to tighten them to 28 Nm.  The new manual says to tighten them to 32 Nm.  It appears that Triumph has recognized that some additional clamping force is needed.

Some parts of the crankcase are sealing oil in the engine and Yamabond #4, the grey stuff, is applied there.  Most of the mating surfaces are metal to metal with no sealer.  Is there a sealer or bonding agent that is designed to keep surfaces from sliding on each other and allow the engine to be taken apart?  Epoxy would work great for preventing the movement but I could not split the cases apart later.  I am looking for something not as extreme. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on February 22, 2016, 12:43:09 AM
Maybe machining some of the bolt holes for hollow dowels?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on February 22, 2016, 11:03:14 AM
WW;

Loctite used to make a case sealer that was designed to prevent fretting. It had high shear strength but you could still peel the case halves apart. I don't remember what it was called; it was sort of a yellow gel that came in a tube. I used it to seal a Corvair race engine case.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bones on February 23, 2016, 01:44:51 AM
Hi Wobbly

   I've been using Locktite  515 for sealing my crank cases for a long time.
  Hayabusa  -   4 cylinder kawasakis  -   tz 750 yamaha  -   350 tz yamaha.
 
  Never had any sealing issues.

    cheers   Bones
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 23, 2016, 10:31:03 PM
Bones, that Loctite sealer is designed to flex when the joint moves.  The opposite is what I want.  I am trying to stop the movement.  Loctite probably makes what I want.  I will e-mail them.

This plastigage is available from Triumph and it works great.  The usual plastigage sold here is very thin and it is a challenge to read the thickness of the squashed thread.  The British stuff is much thicker and it is easier to read the clearance as shown by the cards.

The engine needs to be flipped a few times to tighten all of the bolts.  The crank can spin during this and smear the plastigage.  It is wired down so this will not happen.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 23, 2016, 11:10:42 PM
The shells had typical wear patterns for one of these engines.  There is a very heavy flywheel on the right side and the lower portion of the lower shell showed the most wear.  The flywheel pulls the crank end down.  The other mains showed the most wear on the rear halves of the lower shells.  Street engines show the wear more toward the bottoms of the shells.  Race motors show wear higher up on the backs of the lower shells.  The most wear was very high up and just below the parting line relief.  This is consistent with the wear pattern for an engine raced hard.

The clearance was measured at the top of the journal as shown and it was .015 for all four.  The clearances according to the expert's formula should be .0016 to .0020.  The clearances are on the tight side.  I was using blue coded shells.  I will try the next looser size, the red shells, and if it is still too tight, the loosest ones, the white shells.

All of this investigation is showing nothing drastically wrong.  I see no signs of detonation or erratic combustion after careful examination.  An 865 cc engine with 8.9 to 1 compression is no powerhouse on gasoline.  It put out only 80 horsepower on the dyno.  Brute power from jungle juice is pushing this engine to near its structural limits is my best guess.  The plan is to build the engine as carefully as I can, make one pass on gasoline to loosen up the engine, dump the gas and put in the juice, make the runs for the record, and hopefully the dang thing will hold together.  Two things I will NOT do are to make more runs than absolutely needed or to up the nitro content.     

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 25, 2016, 08:33:28 PM
Has anyone measured the oil temperature in their motorcycle engine?  How hot does it get?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on February 25, 2016, 09:49:49 PM
Bo, we try to start a run with the oil in the 120-130 range and it finishes below 185, no oil cooler, but water cooled engine with piston squirters. Water ends around 200, sometimes a little warmer depending on what engine and induction we are using.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 25, 2016, 10:48:52 PM
Thanks, Stainless.  My best guess is if the oil is this cool it never gets above 300 degrees F at the case mating face right next to the main bearings.  The Loctite engineering rep asked me about this.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on February 26, 2016, 07:01:14 AM
Thanks, Stainless.  My best guess is if the oil is this cool it never gets above 300 degrees F at the case mating face right next to the main bearings.  The Loctite engineering rep asked me about this.   

Bo,

I have used a product called Tempilaq to analyze temperature related issues.   It could be used on the outside of the case/head/whatever, to give some indication of the metal's temperature.   This presumes that the metal's temp is uniform throughout the thickness.   I'm not sure if the product is "oil resistant", but if so, it could be used inside the case.  I included the link to the manufacturer:

http://www.tempil.com/tempilaq-indicating-liquids/

BTW Bob, those oil temps are pretty cool for the lowest oil drag.    Do you need to be that cool for reliability or another issue?

 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on February 26, 2016, 07:53:13 PM
Youroilshouldbewarmerboy,
We work with a balance... water temps and oil temps, and an hour or less to be ready for a record run.  Once our 5 gallons of water goes above 200 it seems to heat way faster... no more cooler water behind the 180 thermostat. The blown motors really pushed the envelope for water temps.
I guess we could get one of those magnetic oil pan heaters to get the oil warmer... seen any of those aluminum magnets around  :roll:

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on February 26, 2016, 07:56:42 PM
As I'm sure you know, Bob: http://www.summitracing.com/parts/MOR-23996 (http://www.summitracing.com/parts/MOR-23996)

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on February 26, 2016, 08:43:35 PM

Youroilshouldbewarmerboy,
We work with a balance... water temps and oil temps, and an hour or less to be ready for a record run.  Once our 5 gallons of water goes above 200 it seems to heat way faster... no more cooler water behind the 180 thermostat. The blown motors really pushed the envelope for water temps.
I guess we could get one of those magnetic oil pan heaters to get the oil warmer... seen any of those aluminum magnets around  :roll:


Yeah, I figured it was something like that.   Chris is going to have the same problem now with an aluminum sump.    Might fit a 110v oil heating element into the sump pan.   Is this a possibility for you?

 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on February 26, 2016, 08:57:01 PM
No room inside.  Would have to be removable... sump in the wind, saw the one Mike pointed out had a possibility of hook and spring attachment, stick on would slow us down a lot more than thick oil...
seems to be working so far... no oil failures with the lakester motors
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 28, 2016, 12:43:33 PM
The entire engine is apart and available to inspection.  The bore /stroke ratio is 1.41.  This means there is quite a bit of force on that big piston area when the mixture lights off.  The stroke is relatively short so the crank pins are not far from the crank centerline.  This means the pressure exerted by the rods on the crank does not have a lot of leverage to turn the crank.  This all adds up to some big pressures on the rod big and little ends.

One option I am looking at is having some titanium rods made.  This material is more elastic than steel and it can absorb some shock to reduce bearing loads, like aluminum rods.  Ti has good fatigue resistance properties.  Aluminum does not.

The rod/stroke ratio is 1.79 and this is low.  What this means is the rod is sorta vertical and in a position to produce a lot of downward force, with less sideways force, when the crank pin is close to TDC.  Unfortunately, the crankpin is in a less than optimum position to turn the crank at this point.  The rod is at a relatively large angle when the crankpin is at better position to turn the crank.  All of this adds up to an engine that produces a lot of side loading on the pistons, wears the main journals on the sides, and is a bad actor under the demands of fuel combustion.

The plan is to have longer ti rods made and to install a plate between the engine and the cylinders to move the head up.  The plate thickness is a multiple of the cam chain pitch so the valve timing is not made goofy.  The cams, valves, and everything else need to be modeled in a much more powerful program than PipeMax to verify it will work.  A rod/stroke ratio around or a bit more than 2.0 is what I need.  The piston will linger a bit more at TDC to allow for better cylinder filling, too, and this is another big help.  This is a long term plan and it hopefully will be in the 2017 motor.  I cannot up the nitro content unless I address these structural issues.

As per the 2016 engine, the main journal clearances are .0016 to .0021 using the formula the expert gave me.  The sloppiest shells I have are the white ones and they are a bit tight.  The shells I am using are microbead blasted white shells.  The bead impacts compress the soft coating on the inner faces and this increases the running clearance a smidgen.  The blasted surface has texture and it holds oil better.  The clearances are .0015 on all four journals.  A bit tight, but the best I can do.  This is not the first time I have done this little trick and it worked in the past.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on February 28, 2016, 03:58:28 PM
The entire engine is apart and available to inspection.  The bore /stroke ratio is 1.41.  This means there is quite a bit of force on that big piston area when the mixture lights off.  The stroke is relatively short so the crank pins are not far from the crank centerline.  This means the pressure exerted by the rods on the crank does not have a lot of leverage to turn the crank.  This all adds up to some big pressures on the rod big and little ends.

One option I am looking at is having some titanium rods made.  This material is more elastic than steel and it can absorb some shock to reduce bearing loads, like aluminum rods.  Ti has good fatigue resistance properties.  Aluminum does not.

The rod/stroke ratio is 1.79 and this is low.  What this means is the rod is sorta vertical and in a position to produce a lot of downward force, with less sideways force, when the crank pin is close to TDC.  Unfortunately, the crankpin is in a less than optimum position to turn the crank at this point.  The rod is at a relatively large angle when the crankpin is at better position to turn the crank.  All of this adds up to an engine that produces a lot of side loading on the pistons, wears the main journals on the sides, and is a bad actor under the demands of fuel combustion.

The plan is to have longer ti rods made and to install a plate between the engine and the cylinders to move the head up.  The plate thickness is a multiple of the cam chain pitch so the valve timing is not made goofy.  The cams, valves, and everything else need to be modeled in a much more powerful program than PipeMax to verify it will work.  A rod/stroke ratio around or a bit more than 2.0 is what I need.  The piston will linger a bit more at TDC to allow for better cylinder filling, too, and this is another big help.  This is a long term plan and it hopefully will be in the 2017 motor.  I cannot up the nitro content unless I address these structural issues.

As per the 2016 engine, the main journal clearances are .0016 to .0021 using the formula the expert gave me.  The sloppiest shells I have are the white ones and they are a bit tight.  The shells I am using are microbead blasted white shells.  The bead impacts compress the soft coating on the inner faces and this increases the running clearance a smidgen.  The blasted surface has texture and it holds oil better.  The clearances are .0015 on all four journals.  A bit tight, but the best I can do.  This is not the first time I have done this little trick and it worked in the past.

Bo,

Are these numbers for the 4 valve?

F/B
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 29, 2016, 10:46:00 PM
Yes, it is one of the newer Bonnevilles.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 01, 2016, 09:33:46 PM
This fellow knows how to explain stuff.

gmcws.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/jim-rowe-fastener-presentation.pdf (http://gmcws.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/jim-rowe-fastener-presentation.pdf)


 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 01, 2016, 09:47:30 PM
All of my home made ti fasteners and other goofy bolts, nuts from various sources are taken off of the critical parts of the engine and chassis.  I ordered carbon steel OEM bolts and nuts to replace them.  Triumph use good quality metric grade 10.9 for most fasteners.  All existing bolts were held up to a light next to a new bolt to look for any traces of fretting or distortion.  Any that showed this were tossed and replaced by new OEM ones.  The torque readings vs clamping force relationships are sensitive to bolt material and head type, i.e. flange or no flange.  I made sure to use ones that matched the ones the specs applied to.  All nuts were assumed to be distorted and were replaced by OEM ones.  I need to make sure the clamping force vs torque relationship is what I need.  Nuts are OEM and intended to be used on the bolt where they will be applied so the hardness relationship between the two is correct.  The previous presentation sorta explains why I went to such drastic and expensive measures.   
Title: Re:
Post by: Frank06 on March 02, 2016, 04:13:27 AM
Excellent article - thank you for posting the link.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on March 02, 2016, 08:19:41 AM
Bo, your attention to detail is always a pleasure.

When you said you were replacing the bolts with OEM only
you made me think about my 1977 125 Suzuki RMA.
The factory used Phillips head screws on all the covers and
we youngsters always wrecked them by using the wrong screw driver.
I used to take 3 screws at a time to my bolt supplier and get Allen bolt
replacements. Why 3 at a time?. Didn't want to get the lengths mixed up. :-D :-D :-D

These days "we" are sharper. We make a cardboard template. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Speed Limit 1000 on March 02, 2016, 08:53:21 AM
Interesting reading :-D

http://www.vesseltools.com/hand-tools/screwdrivers/jis-japanese-industrial-standard/view-all-products.html
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on March 02, 2016, 09:16:25 AM
Good one John.
 :cheers: No hijack intended Bo but it took me 40 years to find out
the Japanese use a different pattern. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on March 02, 2016, 01:36:33 PM
Interesting- I didn't know that the Japanese standard was not a Philips head. It looks more like a Reed & Prince to me.

Other self-centering designs are found in aerospace stuff: Tridair developed a tri-wing design and someone else developed a four-wing design. Both types grip the fastener tightly when being driven.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Ron Gibson on March 02, 2016, 01:54:13 PM
I'm with Neil on that but don't forget the pozi drive, just to confuse things. :-D :-D


Ron
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 02, 2016, 08:41:24 PM
Most of us who worked on bikes in the 60's and 70's had one of these.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Speed Limit 1000 on March 02, 2016, 09:10:17 PM
I have one like that and a smaller one. They work great. My Blue Point 3/8 impact also works wonders :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on March 02, 2016, 10:31:14 PM
Bo, you just reminded me.

Someone borrowed my impact driver and I can't remember who. :evil:

These days I don't use one but that was the only way to get the screws out
after I'd butchered them. :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: aussievetteracer on March 03, 2016, 05:51:06 AM
Mate- we even have them in Oz. And even tho' I'm not really into bikes (but I still hold an open bike licence) they work well on race cars.
Denis
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 04, 2016, 10:43:24 PM
My son, Josef, sent me this movie.  It does a good job of explaining the old grindomesh gear cluster vs a newer synchromesh.  All of this is new learning for me.  Bikes use constant mesh gearboxes and there is no reverse gear.www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQWejyx0gi8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQWejyx0gi8)

The movie also shows some eccentric gears. It is not often that a person can see them in action.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 06, 2016, 09:56:57 PM
A good thing about being alive now is being able to rewind the film real easy.  There are a few things in that flick I had to look at three or four times to figure out.  Going back and looking at things a few times was hard to do in the old days.

The crank is out of the bike and I made a stand for measuring the rod bearing clearances.  The caps with lower shells are put in the notches on the stand.  The crank is put on over the caps and gently tightened down with ratchet straps.  This holds the caps and crank solidly on position when I bolt and unbolt the rods.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 06, 2016, 10:17:06 PM
The card that comes with the plastigage shows the squashed plastic thicknesses to the nearest 0.0005 inches.  Sometimes the crushed plastic was halfway between these increments, so I report the clearances to the nearer 0.00025 inches.

The crank journals appeared to be two different sizes when I measured them a few weeks ago with the crank in the bike.  The journals measured out to be 0.0005 inches different dia.  I did not see this difference when I measured the clearances with plastigage.  So, I remeasured the journals with the micrometer.  They are real close to being the same size.

It seems that when measurements are needed to the nearest 0.0001 inches it is best to have the crank out of the engine and on the workbench so the mike is held the same way for all measurements.  I could not get this consistent feel with the crank in the bike and me holding the mike at weird angles.   



Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 06, 2016, 11:07:33 PM
The chart posted a few weeks ago is reposted with a column in the middle showing the plastigage measurements.  They are mostly between the bore gage and tube micrometer methods.  I was looking for a way to check big end clearances with the crank in the bike.  Plastigage never worked for this 'cause I could not keel the rod from wiggling when the big end bolts were tightened and loosened.  The only practical method to determine the clearances is to take the engine apart and to use the plastigage.  This motor is making far more power than it was designed to produce so annual tear downs are a good idea.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on March 07, 2016, 04:27:10 AM
Nice stand Bo.
You've given me an idea now!. :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 08, 2016, 11:14:23 PM
The crankcases split horizontally.  The ends are clamped together with sealer.  Most of the middle of the case including the surfaces around the main bearings are clamped down with bolts and have metal to metal contact.  I can see where the fretting occurred.  The oxidation is partially worn off and the higher parts of the mating surface are shiny.

Is there an oil resistant dye like Dykem that I can put on these surfaces upon reassembly?  It would be nice to see if I cured the fretting problem when I do the next teardown.  The dye would make this easy to see, I figure.

Gretchen sends lots of pictures of Tasmania to Rose and she shows them to me.  That sure is an interesting place.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 11, 2016, 09:09:35 PM
The Triumph has wide pistons.  This means the flame front has a long distance to travel.  The rods are short in comparison to the stroke.  This causes the piston to quickly move away from TDC.  A fast burning gasoline is needed to make the flame front move the needed distance in the very short time that is available.  This is something I knew about and I run a flashy and light specific gravity leaded gasoline.  It works very well.  The combustion peak pressure is likely to occur in the desired 14 to 18 degree ATDC range.

The jungle juice is mainly this gasoline with some other goodies.  One is a highly volatile compound containing nitrogen, hydrogen, and some oxygen.  My suspicion is this is flashing off early and peak pressure is happening before 14 degrees.  This puts large stresses on the engine like the ones I am seeing.

This year seven ignition modules will be used in the dyno work with 8, 6, 4, 2, and no retard, and two more with 2 and 4 degrees advance.  The objective is to get a better idea of the peak torque vs spark advance relationship with the juice.  The engine will tell me the curves it likes best by the dyno results.  Then, I just need to pick the most retarded curve that provides decent power.  This is something I always did, although I never had enough modules to give me a good curve.  This curve analysis might be especially critical with the juice.

I was going to do all sorts of expensive strengthening of the lower end.  That might be treating a symptom rather than fixing the causative problem.     








Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on March 11, 2016, 10:21:44 PM
Bo, I get a Dykem type product in a rattle can. Oil doesn't seem to have much effect on it.

 That might work for you.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 12, 2016, 08:51:39 PM
Thanks, Mike.  I have a can of the spray and I will use it.

Lately I have been working overtime at the job.  That, and the election and having a son in Korea is a big distraction.  I am in no mood after work to do anything mental like assemble land speed racing motors.  It is something I need to do so i woke up early this morning, had a couple of cups of coffee and breakfast, and went down into the cellar.  Some relaxing tunes were playing on the ghetto blaster and I was ready to go.  "I am at my best.  There is no way I can screw anything up this morning.  This engine will be my best build."  I had a warm and fuzzy feeling of total satisfaction when I thunk this.

The crankcase halves were cleaned.  It was time to put in the main bearing shells.  Just to make sure everything was sanitary, I squirted carb cleaner down the oil feed holes for all four journals.  Then, after the compressor built up full pressure, I deftly inserted the rubber tip from the blow gun into an oil feed hole for a main journal...and pulled the trigger.  All of that carb cleaner in the passages blasted out the other three feed holes and right into my face.  I thought I was alert a few minutes before.  Now I was really awake.

Fortunately I was wearing glasses.  I shut my eyes and waited a few minutes and most of it evaporated away.  Then, I washed my eyes out and am back to as close to normal as i get.  Now I am staying with my normal routine of having a pint or two with dinner and working on the bike till midnight.  That early bird eager beaver carp is hazardous to the health.   

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on March 13, 2016, 04:25:42 PM
You had me inspired.................for 10-seconds :dhorse:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on March 14, 2016, 01:03:00 AM
Sounds like we live parallel lives?. Also got a ghetto blaster and lots of stuff distracts me too.
Nothing like getting blasted in the face with carb cleaner first thing in the morning hey Bo!!!
Bummer man. :-(
I've got goggles that you can use while wearing glasses. I use them now. BTW, did that Subaru
end up in your coffee as well?.

You always come good in the end so I have faith in you and thanks for the cool info and other stuff
on your build. :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 15, 2016, 12:24:28 AM
Hi Mike.  I wuz drinking something stiffer than coffee after that mess.  It might have been a good thing to make that big screw-up.  I slowed down and am double checking my work.

The book "The Horsepower Chain" came in today's mail.  The instructions say "Read the entire book." and "Read multiple times."  This is going to be tough.  My oldest daughter says that chocolate stimulates the brain and increases learning power.  So I have a great big chocolate bar and am getting ready to tackle the first page.       

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 19, 2016, 04:42:04 PM
The rod bearing shells came back from PolyDyn.  The back sides are not coated.  The front sides are.  The shell thickness is increased .0004 to .0005 each.

A .0017 to .0022 shell to journal clearance is recommended by the formula the expert gave.  The plastigage shows clearance at .0017 with two coated shells.  My thinking is this is tight but the coatings will compact and bed in and a .0020 clearance or close to it will be what I get after break in.  I am tempted to use two coated shells.

Normally, with uncoated shells I would not do this and I would set the clearance for .0020 and not give an allowance for compaction or wear.

Does anyone have experience with this?   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 21, 2016, 01:14:28 AM
That video about Nish and his views on 2016 is pretty good.  He has an optimistic attitude.  The clean shop, liner ready to go, and engines lined up like bullets is pretty inspiring.  I need to clean up my rathole and get my one bike and engine ready to go.

The shells were installed with the minimum clearance under the assumption the coatings will compact and wear and I will have the clearance midway between too tight and too loose after break in.  This is a guesstimate on my part.  I have no advice about it.

I did all sorts of reading about coatings.  One reference said to use a skirt friction coating if a thermal barrier is used on the crown.  This was done on almost all examples I saw.  So, I did it, too.  Monkey see, monkey do.

The skirts and ring lands rub the cylinder walls with these pistons.  This is normal based on conversations with folks familiar with them.  The ring lands and skirts had the anti-friction coating.  Normally this is done on the skirts, only.

I did not want the ceramic coating on the crown to touch the bore and I asked them to keep the coating back away from the edges.  They used tape to do this.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: generatorshovel on March 21, 2016, 02:08:29 AM
I hope you don't have this problem Bo,,,
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on March 21, 2016, 08:26:23 AM
The rod bearing shells came back from PolyDyn.  The back sides are not coated.  The front sides are.  The shell thickness is increased .0004 to .0005 each.

A .0017 to .0022 shell to journal clearance is recommended by the formula the expert gave.  The plastigage shows clearance at .0017 with two coated shells.  My thinking is this is tight but the coatings will compact and bed in and a .0020 clearance or close to it will be what I get after break in.  I am tempted to use two coated shells.

Normally, with uncoated shells I would not do this and I would set the clearance for .0020 and not give an allowance for compaction or wear.

Does anyone have experience with this?   

Bo,

There is always wear on heavily loaded parts.    I do not know if the coating will "compact" or just wear.    I've seen lots of coated parts upon disassembly.    Most often the coatings (except for ceramics) are worn.

My thoughts are that rod bearing clearance never gets "smaller", it only increases.   I would take it a little "easy" on the engine during the run in period.

 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on March 21, 2016, 09:04:29 AM
That video about Nish and his views on 2016 is pretty good.  He has an optimistic attitude.  The clean shop, liner ready to go, and engines lined up like bullets is pretty inspiring.  I need to clean up my rathole and get my one bike and engine ready to go.

The shells were installed with the minimum clearance under the assumption the coatings will compact and wear and I will have the clearance midway between too tight and too loose after break in.  This is a guesstimate on my part.  I have no advice about it.

I did all sorts of reading about coatings.  One reference said to use a skirt friction coating if a thermal barrier is used on the crown.  This was done on almost all examples I saw.  So, I did it, too.  Monkey see, monkey do.

The skirts and ring lands rub the cylinder walls with these pistons.  This is normal based on conversations with folks familiar with them.  The ring lands and skirts had the anti-friction coating.  Normally this is done on the skirts, only.

I did not want the ceramic coating on the crown to touch the bore and I asked them to keep the coating back away from the edges.  They used tape to do this.

I really do not want the piston land areas to "lean" on the bores.    Is this happening during the warm-up?    Or all the time?    I would want the piston skirt and lands designed/sized to be stable in the bore once everything is up to temperature.    If a lot of rpm is used right after a cold start, land contact with the cylinder wall could occur.    I would try to keep rpm as low as possible until the engine is fully up to temp.    If the bores are really "hard", piston lean can occur without any wear.    But if you are seeing heavy vertical marks/scratches on the bore, that situation is not the best for ring to bore sealing.    Needless to say, compromised dynamic ring seal costs bhp, although blow-by has to be pretty high to start costing a lot of hp.

The best way to evaluate dynamic ring seal is by measuring dynamic "blow-by" through the crankcase vent(s).    Most "clued-in" dyno facilities can measure "blow-by".    For a one liter engine, I would want to see a max of .5/.6 cfm of dynamic blow-by in the rpm range used, and I would prefer to see less.

Performance Trends has add-on and stand alone blowby sensors.   There is also some info on blow-by levels on their Blow-by sensor page:

http://performancetrends.com/Blowby_CFM_Flow_Sensor_Meter.htm

This is something I pay attention to.     Other engine builders do not always share my concern about it.    And it is also important to note that how low you can go on "ring tension" is a direct function of absolute crankcase pressure.    This is why engines running very low tension rings are usually running some sort of crankcase evacuation.

 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 22, 2016, 12:57:14 AM
Thanks for the advice.  I will monitor blow by.

Two valve engines get good charge mixing by swirling the mixture above the piston crown.  Four valve motors tumble the charge over the top of the piston.  The high crown needed to get optimal compression gets in the way of the tumbling mixture and this can cause problems with developing lots of power.  Vizard says this is a reason he developed the polyquad system.  It gets some swirling action and this helps get good mixing with high compression pistons.

The piston crown shown in the previous photo is 13:1 static compression based on the standard combustion chamber and valve sizes.  That is as high as I wanted to go with the dome.  This is a very over square engine and that big piston does not get very far down in the bore.  I did not want to block the flow tumble.  The static compression ratio will be in the low 11's with my cylinder head.  I have bigger valves and some metal removal is done to accommodate them.

The real fast guys put in the biggest valves that will fit and relieve the combustion chamber sides to get good flow into and out of the ports.  The static compression ratio is lower than a catterpillar's belly after they are done...except they install flat topped pistons and stroke the motor to get the compression ratio back up.  They have displacements well over 1,100 cc's.

Running with over 1,000 cc's puts me in the mix with Hayabusa's.  Not a good situation, for sure, so I keep the engine displacement at 995cc's.  This is why I am monkeying around with fuel.  I am trying to get horsepower out of an engine that can breathe well or have decent compression, but not both.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on March 22, 2016, 06:42:08 AM

 I am trying to get horsepower out of an engine that can breathe well or have decent compression, but not both.
 

I was feeling sorry for you for a moment there.    :cry:

Then I remembered that the one liter BMC's are very difficult to get decent compression and they do not breathe well . . . . . .    :cry:    :dhorse:  :cry:

BUT, none of that stopped persistent dunderheads from setting a new record . . . . . .    :-D   :cheers:   :-D


Just keep the story of the Little Red Hen Uhhh, the Harley KR, in mind:

Reduced compression ratio combined with increased flow netted an ~ 20/25% bhp increase.    Thank you Mr. Axtell.

3 things are going to be key to your engine, as I see it:

A/    Maximizing effective compression ratio with the precise cam timing required,
2/    Maximizing inlet "ramming effect" with the best inlet tuned length,
d/    Maximizing exhaust pipe tuning over the designed rpm range.

For your engine, I would make sure that all three of these "tuning effects" are set for the same rpm range, ie, the range you intend to utilize.   That way, all the benefits of the tuning will "accentuate" each other, raising the power peak higher than any one effect might have by itself.

That's the good news.

The bad news is:
If you need a power band wider or flatter than say, 1500 rpm.     If so, then you will have to "spread" the tuning effects, to get the wider power band you may require.    This is what was done with MM's BMC "Grenade".    It was the only way to get the engine to "pull through" the required rpm range with the gearbox he had.

Needless to say, some math and modeling are required to get things to turn out the way you want.   You start by defining some things like top speed, potential gearing and engine rpm range.    And just keep pluggin' away at it.

You have already made a good decision by staying away from the rice grinders.

 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 25, 2016, 12:27:42 AM
Thanks for the advice.  I was fortunate to get guidance from Matt Capri before he retired and the folks at Triumph Performance about the intake and exhaust systems that work with their cams.  I was "all ears" as the saying goes and listened carefully.  The system they recommend is on the bike.  The only modification I made is to wrap the header pipes so they do not cool down and increase their tuned length when the bike is slicing through the air.  Matt ceramic coats his headers to do the same thing.  The "baseline" I have before I start any math based fine tuning should be pretty good.

Cam timing is a problem.  There is no way I can adjust it.

We raced on the beach right near Pendine village.  Lots of British men rode or ride Triumphs.  There were many stories and much encouragement.  It is like that here in America, too.  People identify with the bike and it means something to them to see one out there racing.  My middle son has a Bonneville.  The feeling is that there is a big legacy from earlier times that comes with the bike, I make my tiny contribution, and it is passed on to future generations.  It is bigger than me, really.  The Japanese bikes might be better engineered.  There is not the history, though.  It might not be just me feeling this.  The Bonneville series are the slowest of the Hinckley Triumphs and there are more of them in competition than the others combined.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on March 25, 2016, 08:45:16 AM
But - if it weren't for the sounds I heard when Bobby Dixon, back in 10th grade, would give me rides on the back of his dad's Bonneville, I wonder what I'd do for fun?

Bone stock, it was -- but the sound of the pipes and the whole thing -- got me hooked for life.  Thanks, Triumph! :cheers: :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 26, 2016, 11:00:50 AM
Slim, Bobby's dad was a trusting sort.  There was no way one of my boys woulda rode my Bonneville in the 10th grade.  You were lucky to experience that.

There are four groups of Bonnevilles and each has their own personalities and looks.  The first group was made in Meriden and they had separate engines and trannys.  These are pre-unit with model years 1959 through 1962.  The 1959 model had the more extensive and graceful sheet metal that was typical of the 1950's.  The tinwork was dropped for the next year due to popular demand.  Now the '59 model is the most valuable.  Times and tastes change.

The motor and trans shared spaces in a common housing starting in 1963.  These are the unit construction twins.  These were in a frame with a separate oil tank through 1970.  The handling improved and various other refinements make the 1970 model the "best Bonneville" according to many.

The unit motor was put in a frame which carried the oil in its spine in 1971 until 1988.  The earlier ones were funky in the looks.  They were made better looking and performing until the last ones were made in 1988.  Production was transferred to Devon and they were made by L. F. Harris under a patent agreement.  The 1988 Harris Bonneville is my favorite.  He did a massive amount of work to improve them.

The first Bonnevilles made in Hinckley were 2001 models.  They started out with 790cc and dual carbs and the last had EFI and 865 cc displacement.  They were made until 2015 with the exception of a few 2016 scramblers.  All are air/oil cooled.

The water cooled ones are being made now. 

This is the time to go to the dealer if you want a Bonneville.  New and previous versions can be compared side by side.  They are quite different and this is the last chance to buy a new earlier one.
   

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on March 26, 2016, 10:04:48 PM
I'll stay with my '67 T100C..........one carb............one kick............high-pipes..........and soon back together with new Pacific Blue over Alaska White paint on the tank :-) :-) :-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 26, 2016, 10:07:00 PM
The bearing expert reviewed my history for choosing oils and recommended that I stick with one brand.  My feeling is this is a good recommendation.  The previous oil is never completely drained from an engine and it might not be compatible with the new stuff that is poured in.  I mentioned I was using Joe Gibbs assembly lube as well as Yamalube four stroke oil for break in and Mobil 1 or Penrite for racing.  He used Mobil 1 and recommended it.  He gave me a gave me a contact number at Joe Gibbs.

The bike lubes the transmission and clutch with the engine oil and it is a flat tappet engine.  10W-40 is recommended by the manufacturer.  It is difficult to find assembly lube, break in oil, and race oil all made by the same manufacturer and also bike compatible.  This is the oil system I chose.

The machinist recommended special made-for-purpose lube for the bearing shells.  He said the lube needs to stay in the bearings for days or weeks before the engine is started.  It also needs do dissolve quickly in oil when the motor is started.  He used some stuff made by Clevite.  The lube he sold me was made for Federal Mogul.  He said it will do the job.

The assembly lube is Joe Gibbs.  The break in oil is 10W-40 Joe Gibbs conventional BR40.  It is made for break in, is suitable for flat tappet bike engines, and it can be used for the initial dyno work.

The race oil recommended by Joe Gibbs XP-4 15W-50.  It is suitable for bike engines.  They also said it will handle the fuel dilution from the nitropropane and toluene as well as provide protection during long full throttle runs.

Use of the same bike compatible brand lube for all major purposes was pretty difficult.  This is the system I will use this year.  One big factor in the choice of Joe Gibbs is the local speed shop stocks it so it is easy for me to get.  
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 26, 2016, 10:12:48 PM
Dennis, that year and model is considered by many experts to be better than a Bonneville.  Make sure to post a picture when it is finished.  In the old days I rode and raced BSA A-65's and the single carb Thunderbolt was a lot smoother than the twin carb lightning...unless the special trick was when the bike was put together.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on March 27, 2016, 11:21:46 AM
The bearing expert reviewed my history for choosing oils and recommended that I stick with one brand.  My feeling is this is a good recommendation.  The previous oil is never completely drained from an engine and it might not be compatible with the new stuff that is poured in.  I mentioned I was using Joe Gibbs assembly lube as well as Yamalube four stroke oil for break in and Mobil 1 or Penrite for racing.  He used Mobil 1 and recommended it.  He gave me a gave me a contact number at Joe Gibbs.

The bike lubes the transmission and clutch with the engine oil and it is a flat tappet engine.  10W-40 is recommended by the manufacturer.  It is difficult to find assembly lube, break in oil, and race oil all made by the same manufacturer and also bike compatible.  This is the oil system I chose.

The machinist recommended special made-for-purpose lube for the bearing shells.  He said the lube needs to stay in the bearings for days or weeks before the engine is started.  It also needs do dissolve quickly in oil when the motor is started.  He used some stuff made by Clevite.  The lube he sold me was made for Federal Mogul.  He said it will do the job.

The assembly lube is Joe Gibbs.  The break in oil is 10W-40 Joe Gibbs conventional BR40.  It is made for break in, is suitable for flat tappet bike engines, and it can be used for the initial dyno work.

The race oil recommended by Joe Gibbs XP-4 15W-50.  It is suitable for bike engines.  They also said it will handle the fuel dilution from the nitropropane and toluene as well as provide protection during long full throttle runs.

Use of the same bike compatible brand lube for all major purposes was pretty difficult.  This is the system I will use this year.  One big factor in the choice of Joe Gibbs is the local speed shop stocks it so it is easy for me to get.  

Bo,

Good choices.    Compatibility is a much larger factor than most guys realize.   And, as you understand, bikes have different issues than V-8s, regarding oiling and break-in.

I also am currently using and recommending Joe Gibbs products.   They work, and are generally available.   

 :cheers:
Happy Easter!!
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 29, 2016, 12:50:06 AM
The reprogrammed ignition modules came in the mail.  The base curve is developed by Triumph Performance for the engine setup I am using.  It is a "Stage 4" curve programmed for a 9,000 rpm rev limit.  Two Stage 3 modules were programmed with modified curves and on hand during the dyno work and at the speed trials when I was monkeying around with gasohol.  They had +2 and +4 degrees added advance and might help with the corn liquor/gasoline mix, I had hoped.  They are reprogrammed to be +2 and +4 for the Stage 4 curve.

The ceramic coatings can speed up combustion.  The fuel mixes I am using tend to burn faster than gasoline.  Prudence says to have some retarded modules on hand so the spark can be backed off.  She is probably correct, so four more were made with Stage 4 curves at -2, -4, -6, and -8 degrees.   All are lined up.  The gap is for the +0 Stage 4 module.  It is on the bike.

The standard Triumph carbs and the Keihin FCR flatslides have throttle position sensors (TPS).  These work with the modules to advance the spark during some conditions at partial throttle.  My TPS are disconnected.  I do not like to run with any more electronics than the bare minimum.  This is not a problem.  No TPS sensor input trips the modules into the full throttle settings.  That is where I should be.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 29, 2016, 03:48:59 PM
The Engine Pro software wants "throttle flow at 1.5 inches Hg"  My carbs are in Pacifica with the cylinder head and the machinist is trying to optimize flow.  I asked him to measure flow through the carb.  My question is, is this flow with the carb alone or with the intake runner and bell mouth attached.

This link shows that this make a big difference in flow. neverworld.net/socialnetscum/files/tech/CarbShoot.pdf (http://neverworld.net/socialnetscum/files/tech/CarbShoot.pdf) 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 29, 2016, 03:51:36 PM
That link does not work.  Maybe this will.http://neverworld.net/socialnetscum/files/tech/CarbShoot.pdf (http://neverworld.net/socialnetscum/files/tech/CarbShoot.pdf)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 29, 2016, 03:55:20 PM
It is "socalnetscum" and not "socialnetscum"  http://neverworld.net/socalnetscum/files/tech/CarbShoot.pdf (http://neverworld.net/socalnetscum/files/tech/CarbShoot.pdf) 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on March 29, 2016, 04:25:50 PM
The Engine Pro software wants "throttle flow at 1.5 inches Hg"  My carbs are in Pacifica with the cylinder head and the machinist is trying to optimize flow.  I asked him to measure flow through the carb.  My question is, is this flow with the carb alone or with the intake runner and bell mouth attached.

This link shows that this make a big difference in flow. neverworld.net/socialnetscum/files/tech/CarbShoot.pdf (http://neverworld.net/socialnetscum/files/tech/CarbShoot.pdf) 

Bo,

The conversion factor for Inches h2o to inches hg is 13.6087, so have your guy test at 20.4" h2o.

I'll look at the program for specifics, but I would use the complete inlet tract, carb bell to inlet valve.

 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on March 29, 2016, 04:37:31 PM
I also have a lot of carb flow testing info on both the MM's thread and my thread, How do I make my Engine Better.    The info is Weber centric, but the principles are the same.   There are also photos of the adaptors I fabricate and use.

You might want to ask your guy to measure carb "signal" at the main jet or main jet well.   Should be photos of this as well.  Some "modified" carbs have a very poor "signal to flow ratio".    It's no fun to try to ride or drive those types of carbs.    Well modified carbs should have a similar signal to flow ratio as the unmodified units, although a "small" signal loss is acceptable for large flow increases.    If you don't need or can't use the extra flow though, poor signal ratio makes the carb perform poorly, and gives the rider/driver fits.

 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 30, 2016, 12:35:40 AM
I will ask him to do that.

My first attempt at Engine Pro is giving me 57 horsepower for the 995 cc race motor.  I got more than that with the original 790 cc bone stock engine and a set of loud mufflers.  A lot of the input is being kicked out because it is "out of range."  Clearly this is a program for car motors.  Fortunately PipeMax came with the package and it works just great.  That is what I am using for this build.  This summer when I have more time I will input data from my old engine builds and monkey around with EnginePro until the results it says I will get are the same as the old dyno printouts.  Then, I can start to use it to make decisions.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on March 30, 2016, 05:28:03 AM
I will ask him to do that.

My first attempt at Engine Pro is giving me 57 horsepower for the 995 cc race motor.  I got more than that with the original 790 cc bone stock engine and a set of loud mufflers.  A lot of the input is being kicked out because it is "out of range."  Clearly this is a program for car motors.  Fortunately PipeMax came with the package and it works just great.  That is what I am using for this build.  This summer when I have more time I will input data from my old engine builds and monkey around with EnginePro until the results it says I will get are the same as the old dyno printouts.  Then, I can start to use it to make decisions.

Yes, that is how you do it.

Just be careful with PipeMax, as it is very V/E centric.    Again, the best way to get a handle on using it, is to model "backwards" from known, accurate dyno data.    When those agree, closely, you can then go forward with other "permutations".   Focus on getting the "cam/valve/head/total flow to "feed" the "flow demand" adequately.   This is usually more challenging than it sounds.

Best wishes on your learning curve!!    The key to a healthy mind is continued learning, at ANY age . . . . . . .

 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 02, 2016, 12:39:22 AM
Like you say, I worked into the VE backwards.  The peak horsepower rpm is 8,400 as an educated guess.  The intake flow is 212 CFM at maximum cam lift and 28 inches.  The engine BHP with this is 115.5 in the "Average" category.  That is about 104 rear wheel BHP which is realistic, with a 110.25% VE.

The intake valves go into curtain choke at 8,964 rpm and the exhaust valves at 8,374 rpm.  The rev limiter is at 9,000 so I want a bit more flow through the exhaust valve curtains. 

The program was run again with 2mm larger exhaust valves.  The exhaust valves curtain choke rpm went up to 9,011 rpm.  Now the curtain choke rpm's for both intake and exhaust valves are near the rev limit.

The program says I need a minimum intake flow of 228 CFM at maximum cam lift.  The 212 I have now is not enough.  The program says I need 172 cfm exhaust flow at max cam lift.  I have 183 now.

The bowls around the intake valves are poorly shaped.  I asked the machinist to clean them up.  I am pretty confident that will bring the intake port flow up to what I need.  The curtain choke rpm seems OK so I will stay with the 2mm larger intake valves I have now.

The exhaust valves have me confused.  They seem to work OK now based on flow test results.  The curtain area is a bit small based on calculations, so I asked him to put in some that are 2mm oversize.  They are standard size now.

I used PipeMax for this, not EnginePro.  PipeMax seems to work best for giving me realistic results although there are hundreds of numbers on these printouts and I only know what half of them mean.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 03, 2016, 08:55:36 PM
Carb cleaner and race gas dissolves civilian grade the engine paint.  The hippies made the government ban the ingredients that make the paint stick according to the paint shop guys.  A couple of auto paint shops recommended the paint shown.  The engine paint comes in brush form.  I like to spray mine and to make sure it gets in the nooks and crannies and seals the bolt heads from salt water intrusion.

We discussed the availability and application of spray paint for about ten minutes and I made the wrong conclusion.  I bought two can of hi temp aluminum colored paint.  Close reading of the label says I need to cure the parts at 400 degrees and I cannot do this with the engine.  Unfortunately the engine was painted when I discovered this minor detail.  The detail paint shown is what I shoulda used.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 03, 2016, 09:02:34 PM
This paint contains isocyanates.  I was warned about this on the forum and I discussed it with the fellows in the paint shop.  They do not used those cheesy little masks like shown in the kit on the previous post.  They use a full respirator with a dual filters for organics.  I bought one and used it and am alive now.  The paint laid down pretty good.  I am being careful not to scratch it.  It probably will harden up from the heat of the dyno sessions.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on April 03, 2016, 10:03:27 PM
WW;

I painted my chassis with a 2- part polyurethane isocyanate that sounds similar. It's tough stuff; I applied it over a 2- part zinc chromate epoxy primer.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 10, 2016, 09:27:02 PM
Neil, like you say, it seems to hold up to wear and use better than any modern "hardware store" paint.  Another good thing is that it does not peel up the prior applied undercoat or older paint.  This is much different than the modern xylene based paints.

Not much appears to be happening on this build.  In reality, a lot is being done.  It is the "basic hard work" type of stuff and nothing is notable or glamorous enough to post.  The machinist that designed and built the valve train is taking my PipeMax data and is entering it into EnginePro.  This way, he can analyze what needs to be done with consideration for altitude.  He is using 6,000 feet as an estimate.  He is the head guy in the research and development department at a performance parts company.  The best thing I can do now is to be quiet and let him do what he thinks best.   











 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 20, 2016, 01:00:50 AM
The static compression ratio is 11.9 to 1 and I cannot increase it and keep the piston dome height at a reasonable level.  These four valve engines depend on mixture tumble rather than swirl as used in a two valve chamber.  Tumble does not work with a piston dome in the way.  So... compression ratio is optimized.

Bigger valves require excavation of the combustion chamber to fit them and to clear around the peripheries to prevent shrouding.  This will drastically lower the compression ratio.  The head flows just great at low to medium cam lifts, and much better than PipeMax requires, according to the expert at Kibblewhite.  There is nothing to be gained by making them bigger.  Valve size is optimal as it is.

There might be some room for flow improvement at high lifts in the intake ports upstream from the valves.  Maybe bigger carbs.  They will be 42mm flat slides that are scrounged off of dirt bikes, if I need to do this.

The new cams, evidently, seem to be ground for a stroker engine.  These are 1088 cc monsters that cram the mixture into a combustion chamber that was originally designed for a 790cc twin.  The have extraordinarily long durations, 266 intake and 258 exhaust, at .050.  There is lots of spread with lobe centers at 112 and 111.

This combination makes for a very low compression duration, power duration, and dynamic compression.  The dynamic is in the low 8's at B'ville.  My thoughts are, backed up by some calculations, that the need to have a reasonable street able compression ratio on the stroker requires the inlet valve to be hung open a bit longer than normally required.

Regardless of the excellent logic used to develop these bump sticks for a stroker motor, they aren't what I need for a 995 cc engine.  Calculations from the Horsepower Chain book say a 234 intake duration is optimum with a 104 lobe separation angle.  This is a whole lot less than what these cams give.  The peak power rpm will be 1.04 times higher and the peak torque 90 percent of what it would be with optimal cams.

Johnson Cams up in Washington does some work with these engines and have developed adjustable cam gears so I can fine tune the timing, just like on the old Meriden Triumphs.  The expert at Kibblewhite told me about this.  Johnson also grinds cams.  This should not slow the build down.  The cams can be made at the same time the ceramics are applied to the head.

Basically, lots and lots of hours the last few weeks are going into calculations and other high powered figgering.  I wire down a few inches on my pencil and had to buy a new pad of graff paper! 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 23, 2016, 11:58:46 AM
The cams I was shipped are a pattern used to set a land speed record on a 995 cc engine, I learned recently.  Some figuring shows the long durations require a lot of rpm to work with some sacrifices in peak torque and volumetric efficiency.  This can be a winning combination.  It allows the engine to use numerically higher gear ratios and this gives more tractive force.  This can more than compensate for reduced peak torque and VE.  A few builders are taking the high rpm approach both here in the US and in AUS.

The downside if the high rpm method is a reduction in component life and good skills are needed to build the motor.  In my case, I do not have enough money to replace a lot of parts.  Also, the stuff is custom made and it takes a long time to get.  Too, there seems to be a history of catastrophic component failure with these highly tuned engines.  The lessons learned from this, as per engine setup, I will never know.  I am pretty far removed from the "inner circle."

The original engine as shipped from Triumph had the rev limiter set at 7,300 rpm.  The limit is raised to 9,000 rpm this year on my engine.  Stresses on engine parts are often the square and sometimes cube of rpm increase.  The 1,700 rpm increase increases stresses 1.5 to 1.9 times based on these ratios.  The cutting edge builders are revving these things over 10,000 rpm.  This increases the stresses 1.9 to 2.6 times over those at 7,300 rpm based on square and cube ratios.  As seen by this, ultra high rpm puts bigger stresses on an engine.  Did the Triumph engineers include enough factor of safety in their design and material selection to address this?

The 9,000 rpm limit requires some cams with shorter durations than the ones I have.  The pattern development costs for custom cams make them real expensive.  There is a cam shop that has been selling and working on bumpsticks for these motors and they have been doing it for years.  The expert that is helping me is figuring out the cam characteristics I need with consideration for the measured flow in the cylinder head, the measured compression ratio, air density at Bonneville, and the desired peak power rpm that is in the mid 8,000's.  Hopefully the cam shop has something close to what I need.

The approach is to use some serious thinking and work to develop a motor that will beat the big rats on a tiny mouse budget.   

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 05, 2016, 12:45:01 AM
A few minutes ago I sent in the entry for FIM 1000 cc partial streamliner, 1000cc, 2 cyl, naturally aspirated.  The 2014 rules are on the  BMST website so I printed a copy.  First, I read 2.81.18.  These are the partial streamliner rules.  Then I read the rest of 2.81.  These are the other specifications for Bonneville bikes.

Now comes the tricky part.  2.14 and 2.15 are sound regulations.  The section 2.14 say these will be enforced when required by supplementary rules or at specific locations.  So far, the speed trials have not required sound control.  I will read the noise control section when the 2015 rules are distributed, to make sure "no mufflers" continues to be allowed.

The rules from 2.12 down to 2.1.1 also apply unless said otherwise in the 2.80's section.  It helps to understand, when reading these sections, that many FIM world records are set on road race tracks with road race type bikes, and they make no sense for an LSR bike.  Requirements for helmets, etc are in 2.13.

The BMST also has requirements and in some cases they are more stringent than the FIM.  So, I read the BMST regs and make sure I comply with the strictest of the two, BMST or FIM.

The AMA requirements are different than the FIM.  It is not unusual for an inspector to forget the subtle differences.  Just in case, I always have a set of the FIM rules handy.

All of this makes the most sense if the rules are read from back to front.


     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 16, 2016, 11:33:47 PM
The ports were done by South Bay Triumph many years ago.  The standard valve sizes were retained and they did a good job.  The intake valve sizes were increased 2 mm a few years ago.  They were not matched to the ports as wells they could be.  I was sorta low on $$ at the time.  Then, I did a little deshrouding in the combustion chamber and matched up a pair of racing inlet manifolds this fall.

This year the head was sent to Kibblewhite so they could check the valve train and verify that it would work with the higher lift cams.  Also, they could renew any parts.  They built the valve train so they are the best choice for that.  The valves were not enlarged.  The intakes will stay at 2mm larger than standard and the exhausts are standard size.  All sorts of calculating says this is the best choice.

The big task was to put it on the flow bench and try for perfection in the ports.  There were two goals.  One was to get better flow at high lifts.  The low lift flow was great.  The other was to get a better flow distribution around the valve periphery.  This is hard to do with this side draft head.  The pictures show the finished job.  Two will be on this post and one on the following.  Note the pits on the combustion chamber surface.  This bike has been raced every year since 2007 and it shows.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 16, 2016, 11:35:09 PM
Another photo.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 17, 2016, 10:44:48 PM
Preliminary flow results at 28 inches came in today.  To keep things in perspective, the max flow during the last flow test a couple of years ago was 211 cfm with exhaust stub, manifold, carb boot, carbs, and oiled foam filter.

Max flow with bare head with clay radius around intake is 249 cfm
Max flow with manifold, and rubber carb boot with clay radius around boot end is the same.  The manifold and rubber boot don't hurt anything, flow wise.
Max flow with all of the above and carb and velocity stack = 227 cfm.  The carb and stack are costing me 22 cfm.
Max flow with all of the above and the oiled foam filter is 211 cfm.  A problem is identified.  The filter appeared to be over oiled and dirty.  He will clean it and test it again tomorrow.

Now I know what to do.  Bigger carbs are a project for next winter.  Some 42mm flat slide dirt bike carbs should be the ticket.  There are 39mm ones on the bike now.  I can figure out the filtration then, too.  "The Horsepower Chain" book gives me a lot of guidance on this.

 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 18, 2016, 08:30:10 PM
The oiled foam filters are costing me a lot of power.  Pleated oiled gauze filters do not filter good.  The filters are on the carb bell mouths and the pulsing intake flow pulls grit and salt through the gauze.

What I am looking for is a paper type clamp-on filter that will give good filtration.  I can toss it when it gets dirty.  Any recommendations?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on May 18, 2016, 10:08:48 PM
Bo,
We have had very good luck with "pleated oiled gauze filters" in the sand and on the salt.
I do use the largest filters I can reasonably fit.

  Don

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 24, 2016, 11:21:34 PM
A few hours ago I got home from watching the Sacramento mile.  It is a two day ride south of here.  One of my riding buddies went down too on his Thruxton, I rode the Bonneville, and my middle son came up from camp pendleton on his Bonneville.  We had a mini-motorcycle gang.  There was a triumph rider, Jake Shoemaker, on a Bonneville.  He placed second in his heat race and did not do very well in the final.

There were a bunch of Harleys there from factory and private teams.  They were expected to win on their 750 twins.  Some other folks were racing other brands and mostly 650 Kawasaki Ninja powered bikes.  These have 650 cc engines and much smaller displacement than the Harleys.  A fellow riding one, Bryan Smith, led the race for almost all of its length on a 650 ninja.  The second ranked rider, nationally, shadowed him on his harley.  He drafted him till the very end and then made his move to pass at the last seconds.  The kawasaki rider held him off and won by a wheel length on his 650.

In the old days the guy drafting the leader had an advantage.  His engine was cooler 'cause it was not working as hard and it had reserve power for the final dash for the finish.  The 750 Harley is air cooled and that drafting probably helped it.  The ninja engine is water cooled and it produced consistent power even though it was the lead bike and it was working hard.  That is my theory.  It seems that water cooling might be a big advantage during long races.

The spectators were allowed into the pits before the race.  My problem with filtration was discussed with other tuners.  Most of them use pleated and oiled filters.  Their filters were much bigger than the oiled gauze ones I used.  This might be important.  The sucking force is decreased in proportion to filter size.  Sock style covers were used by one experienced tuner.  They covered the gauze filters and kept the bigger particles out.  He said the flow reduction from the filter and sock was minimal.

In the past I used the sock and gauze filter system and was not very impressed.  It might work a lot better with bigger filters.  I think I can increase the surface area three times over what I used before.
 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on May 24, 2016, 11:29:24 PM
Bo, often the problem with the oiled gauze filters is that people tend to over oil them. That definitely increases the restriction.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 26, 2016, 09:51:57 PM
How do you know if they are over oiled?

The data sheet is attached.  I was going to refine the cam profiles and leave the filters and carbs alone.  Now I will enlarge the filters and carbs.  This testing saved my butt.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on May 27, 2016, 12:48:49 AM
Bo, if you go to the K & N website they have a complete article on cleaning and reoiling your air filters. They're very specific on not over oiling the filters.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 27, 2016, 01:12:59 AM
Thanks, Pete.  The original equipment battery is a big lead/acid 12 volt one.  It sits crossways across the frame between the air filters.  Tonight I ordered an equivalent lithium ion one.  It is much smaller and I will make a new battery box so it will fit lengthwise.  This will provide a lot more room for large air filters.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 28, 2016, 01:27:00 AM
This is a picture from the cylinder head in the Kibblewhite R and D lab.  It is looking into the cyl head.  The tube width is the "reference bore diameter" and it is recorded for use in future calculations.

Note the corrosion.  I sprayed Marvel Mystery Oil into the combustion chambers before the bike was packed in Wales for shipment home.  Is there a better corrosion protection oil than this?   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 28, 2016, 01:28:49 AM
Second of three photos.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 28, 2016, 01:29:41 AM
Third of three photos.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on May 28, 2016, 08:14:27 AM
Looking good Bo.

You made a wise choice going with Kibblewhite.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 29, 2016, 01:47:38 AM
Mark, it works out pretty good.  They make the guides, intake valve seats, valves, titanium keepers, and sell the custom springs.  Also, they sell the cam follower buckets with the shims between the valve tips and the bottoms of the buckets.  I sent them the cylinder head, cams, a manifold, carb, exhaust pipe stub, and an air filter.  Also, lots of money.  The head comes back ready to be bolted on with flow test results.

The head manifold, and carbs are at Kibblewhite.  Fortunately there are enough parts in the junk pile to bolt up a simulation of the race motor.  The carbs are parallel to each other and close together.  There is this big square frame tube near them and it prevents the installation of large filters.  Some adapters are needed so the filters can be located where there is room for them.  Also, there needs to be enough space left over for the battery, starter solenoid, fuse box, blinker relay, and some other relay that I do not know what it is for.

A few hours were spent with the K and N on-line catalog.  A pair of RV1090 cylindrical filters, 3.5 inches wide and 6 inches long, with 2.25 inch spigots cocked at a 10 degree angle will fit in the gaps between the things that I cannot move.  I ordered a pair with the socks that go over them to keep the salt away from the elements.  The plan is to position them on the bike in the only places they logically fit and then to figure out how to connect them to the carbs and where to put all of the other carp that belongs on that part of the bike.

The "Horsepower Chain" book gives some good info on single runner intake systems.  A plenum helps to dampen out the intake pulses.  This lessens the intensity of the big gulp through the filter when the intake valve opens.  This reduces deltaP factor and promotes volumetric efficiency.  The plan is to build plenums into the connections between the filters and the carbs and to connect the plenums to each other.  This project will keep the ol' walrus busy and out of trouble for a week or two.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 01, 2016, 07:56:18 PM
The job now is to make some adapters with plenums to connect the carbs to the air filters.  These need to look nice so they will be professionally welded.  The metal is .125 inches thick throughout.  Experience tells me the welding is easier and looks better if the sheets are the same thickness.  6061 alloy is used for all pieces.  It is easier to weld like alloys together and this alloy is one of the more corrosion resistant.

The online cut-to-order metal vendors make this quick, easy, and reasonably priced.  Long gone are the days when a guy has to buy 10 or 20 foot lengths to get a small piece, or has to scrounge through the loose ends at some fabrication shop and get metals of unknown alloy.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 02, 2016, 11:41:11 PM
The head is ported, the valve springs have been verified to provide enough tension, and the valve train has enough travel to handle the cams without binding.  The intake valve velocity onto the seats is 4 feet per second with the recommended .008 bucket top to cam clearance.  Reducing the clearance to .005 lowers the valve seat velocity to just over 3 feet per second.  Kibblewhite prefers no more than 2.9 feet per second.  This is a problem I might need to live with.

The intake cam lobes are tall enough to run off the sides of the buckets.  Wider buckets might be the answer.  Maybe some more parabola in the cam lobes?  Possibly the cam lobes are taller than they need to be based on what the head can flow.  All are things I am looking at for a solution.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 02, 2016, 11:42:31 PM
The previous is the intake.  This is the exhaust.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 02, 2016, 11:49:06 PM
The head flow data is in Reply 2396.  The flow does not increase appreciably at lifts over .400  The lift is .445.  Some milder cams might be the answer.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RidgeRunner on June 04, 2016, 05:11:20 PM
Bo

     Some interesting comments by Jon Kasse on cylinder head design and air flow based on his experiences in the article "Hemi vs Wedge Shootout", latest [Aug '16] issue of Car Craft magazine.  They might be well worth your read and consideration as you work out the compromises needed for your build.

               Ed
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Sporty Dan on June 05, 2016, 05:15:44 PM
Bo, if you go with a lower lift will you be able to keep the current ramps on the cam lobes? I guess I mean, will you be able to find a lobe shape with a lower lift that won't compromise the current airflow numbers?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 06, 2016, 01:20:59 AM
Ed, I am looking for that magazine.

Dan, the expert at Kibblewhite said the cam is giving me a lot of duration at maximum flow.  He says they do not make square lobes so the cam needs to lift the valves further than needed to give the desired duration.  I cannot fine other cams so these will do.  We are looking at installing bigger cam follower buckets.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: ggl205 on June 06, 2016, 10:28:06 AM
While you are still searching for cam answers, it may be worth calling Dema Elgin at Super Lobes. He has been at this cam game for decades and has a wealth of information and experience with all types of engines. But he will ask you for a great deal of data from your flow numbers and measurements for the engine itself. He will cam your engine to obtain all it can deliver if that is what you are after. Dema is a Bonneville guy too and imparts his knowledge freely. His shop is in Redwood City, California, I think.

John
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 07, 2016, 01:17:51 AM
John, thanks for telling me about Dema.  He will get a call if these cams do not do the job.

This morning I did the obvious.  A call went out to the ladies at WebCam who ground them.  They had the order sheet with my name on it and all sorts of notes about followers.  Bigger 30mm followers out of a Yamaha FZR1800 boat motor will do the trick.  Supertech Performance sells the things.  The tops are a little bit thicker than the followers I am using now.  Some length needs to be ground off the intake valve stems, or maybe new shorter intake valves are needed.  Kibblewhite is figuring this out.

Tall cams, big carbs, and mongo air filters are the big project.  I am going to retire from LSR in 2018 so I only have a few years left to kill myself.  I had better get to work and make this motor a runner.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: ggl205 on June 07, 2016, 09:49:57 AM
I am going to retire from LSR in 2018 so I only have a few years left to kill myself.  I had better get to work and make this motor a runner.   

HAH! I understand completely.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 07, 2016, 08:49:35 PM
This year these are optimized, air filtration, valve sizes, porting, combustion chamber shape, compression ratio, and header and exhaust.  The bigger cam followers, tall cams, and big carbs will be done next year.  This will be another "R and D" year.  Hopefully the record will not be bumped any higher.  I ran out of time and money.  It is time to get the last ceramics done, put the engine together, break it in, dyno it, and go to the races.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 10, 2016, 01:35:02 AM
The Triumph flat track team was at the Sacramento Mile.  They run a Bonneville based bike like mine.  Their tuner is Bill Gately and I asked him some questions.  Last night he sent me the dyno run for the mile bike.  It is very similar to my engine when I use the milder #813 all-purpose grind cams.  The engine has an extremely flat torque curve and puts out over 100 horsepower for a wide range of rpm.

The expert at Kibblewhite told me the carbs and filters I am using are costing me about 15 horsepower.  I had 87 HP so 87 + 15 = 102 and that is not much lower than the mile bike.

I was going to do the filters this year and the carbs the next.  The FIM entry fee is over $1,000 this year so it would be an expensive R and D session.  So, using a complete lack of brains or logic, I decided since I can barely afford the entry I will spend even more for carbs so I have a chance at a record.  I ordered them. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on June 10, 2016, 01:51:03 AM
Sounds absolutely logical to me Bo.  :-D :-D :-D  :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 12, 2016, 01:15:51 AM
Near month's end Rose will get the mail, open up the monthly bank statement, and say "What the ... ?"

Most racers at the Sacramento mile used K and N filters and this included the Triumphs.  They used socks over theirs.  This is what I am doing.  The picture shows the filter, sock, and sock on filter. 

The filters never worked for me in the past.  Grit got through them.  They were small pod filters that fit on the carb ends.  These filters are at least two times bigger and hopefully that will reduce the suction force and promote good filtration.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 12, 2016, 01:22:52 AM
The filters go where there is the battery, fuse box, starter solenoid, and a couple of relays.  The battery is moved up and back and I am making a new battery box.  This is complicated.  I use tabs and clips to hold it together while I am designing it while I make it.  They will also hold it together for the welder.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 12, 2016, 01:25:46 AM
The back of the filter box.  It helps to be able to take it apart and put it back together while I am fiddling with it to make everything fit.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on June 12, 2016, 07:07:45 AM
Bo, it's too bad you're so far away and across an imaginary line that causes nothing but issues. If you brought me a welding job that well put together and that clean I will assure you the charges would be light and the welds pretty.  :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 15, 2016, 08:09:27 PM
Hi Peter.  In the past I thought borders were sort of a troublesome formality.  These days things are different.

Everything is temporary some philosophers say.  Parts on my bike except for the frame and engine cases are all "short timers."  Things are changed around when I learn about or can afford more better stuff.  So, the air box was brought to the welder today.  I said "these tabs are where I want the welds.  Pull off the clips, grind down the tabs, and weld over the slots and remaining tabs.  The end product should be ten welds about an inch long.  The box will strong enough and be be easier for me to take apart and modify with this minimal welding.  This is the "tab" system.

This Triumph was built in the factory at Hinckley.  My youngest son, Werner, sent me this.  It explains a lot about why the bike acts like it does.https.youtu.be/HKEuzxC4eGc (http://https.youtu.be/HKEuzxC4eGc)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 15, 2016, 08:12:04 PM
Strange.  That was the link he sent.  Another try www.youtu.be/HKEuzxC4eGc (http://www.youtu.be/HKEuzxC4eGc) 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on June 15, 2016, 08:16:55 PM
 :-D :-D :-D  :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on June 16, 2016, 07:06:33 AM
Did an unemployed, ex Monty Python producer find his way into the Triumph advertising department?

 :-D :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: jacksoni on June 16, 2016, 07:43:30 AM
That's great! Reminiscent of: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=turboencabulator&view=detail&mid=20FF25DFA9B4CC3B53D220FF25DFA9B4CC3B53D2&FORM=VIRE
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 19, 2016, 01:58:52 AM
They do some crazy things at Triumph. 

The box is done and it has the required metal battery hold down strap.  The brackets on the side are for the turn signal relay, some other relay of unknown purpose, and the starter solenoid.  The other side has a bracket for the rear brake fluid reservoir.  The back side of the box is the front side of the rear fender.

The box moves a lot of components back so there is a clutter free tunnel on each side of the frame for big air filters.  Lots of filter area is important and for both lowering restriction and promoting filtration.  This is an improvement I shoulda done years ago.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RidgeRunner on June 19, 2016, 11:49:07 AM
Nothing is of unknown purpose - we just haven't the need or time to figure it out yet :-D

Neat engineering and workmanship to organize space needed into space available.  Great job :cheers:



      Ed
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 21, 2016, 12:45:24 AM
Thanks, Ed.  A few more pictures are shown.  Anyone who wants over 100 horsepower from one of these will probably need to do something similar.  Hopefully this info be useful.

The anti-gravity battery is lithium ion based and it is made here in the US.  They are rated by cell number with 4 cells being the smallest and 24 cells the biggest.  A 12 cell one is used in this 1000cc bike.  It is rated up to 1200cc for street/dirt and up to 1500cc for race use.  The batteries come in small and large case versions.  The small case one is shown here and it is tinier than the OEM lead acid battery.  The large case version is the same size as the conventional one.  All are much, much lighter than the lead acid ones.  A large case model is what I use in the street bike and this small case one is for the race scoot.

These batteries operate with a 13.2 volt normal charge.  The charging system and the rest of the electrics need to be able to deal with this weirdness.  The street Bonneville is fuel injected and it has no problems using a lithium battery in spite of the vast amount of complex electronics on it.  Not all bikes can do this and it is a good idea to do some research before installing one.  I do not expect any problems with use on the much simpler race bike.

Our drills, sawzalls, and other tools that use lithium batteries can discharge them and we recharge them with no problem.  These cells are different and discharged to below 10.5 volts can damage them.  Care is needed with total loss systems to avoid this.  These batteries are not made for deep cycle use.  Also, a special battery charger is needed.   

The last picture shows the little battery in the frame.  The back side of the battery case is the back fender so there is no way I can move it any closer to the rear.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: JimL on June 22, 2016, 09:29:30 PM
What size carbs do you need?  I have a pair of ProSeries 39s if that would help.  All my bikes and engines are gone, and so you can have these free if they will help.

Let me know.  I think I have the manifolds and I know I have the great Branch velocity stacks for them.

JimL
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 23, 2016, 01:24:24 AM
Thanks for the offer, Jim.  The bike has 39mm flat slides now.  The venturi is 39mm and the choke is 36mm.  Big 45mm flat slides are recommended by the fellow that tunes the mile bikes.  He sells some that come with manifolds and everything else that is needed to put them on.

There is a little program in PipeMax that uses venturi diameter, choke diameter, and needle or butterfly data to figure out carb loss.  The output of the program and some advice from Kibblewhite says that is a reasonable size for a carb so I ordered a pair and they should be here on Friday.

The part of the power curve I am working on now is what happens during higher revs beyond peak torque rpm.  The plan is to provide plenty of breathing so the engine can fill its cylinders better while the volumetric efficiency decays as the revs rise.  Basically, I am trying to make the engine breathe so it does not go suddenly flat at higher R's. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bones on June 23, 2016, 03:35:47 AM
Hey Wobbly
  Have you looked into  'Lectron' carbs.

They come in 2mm incroments up to 50mm.
Pro Stock drag bikes use 50mm on around a 450cc cylinder.
If you check the drag racing sites there are usually some for sale.

cheers   Bones
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 23, 2016, 09:47:46 PM
Hi Bones.  It is too late for Lectrons.  The 45mm Mikuni carbs are paid for and ordered.  These are the best size based on advice from the tuner for the triumph flat track team.  He says they run 44 mm carbs due to a restriction in the rules.  He says the 45's are best.  I seed with my own eyes their Bonneville coming in at second place in their heat race against all sorts of fancy Harleys and Kawasakis.  It had 44 mm Mikunis and the air filter and manifold system I am using.  Monkey see, monkey do.

I need some expert advice.  The object is to go fast at the speed trials this year.  The intake ports and valves flow better and better up to .400 lift.  Beyond that lift the flow does not increase.  A pair of all purpose cams have been in the bike for years.  They have .380 intake lift after tappet clearance is subtracted.  They cannot take full advantage of the good flow characteristics.  I also have a pair of new cams.  The intake is real tall and I cannot use it this year.  Wider tappet buckets are needed and this is a project for 2017.  A new exhaust cam came with the intake cam.  It has .445 lift and it can be used with the buckets I have now.

The help I need is to tell me the best lobe center angles for the combination of the new exhaust cam used as an intake cam with the old exhaust cam being the exhaust cam.  Possibly, I can juggle the cams and timing gears to get close to this optimum setting.

This all needs to be done with PM's.  The cam grinds are proprietary and I should not post them on the i-net.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 24, 2016, 09:22:43 PM
The all-purpose grind intake cam opens the valves to .050 lift at 15 degrees BTDC.  Some gear juggling can get the high lift exhaust cam to open the intake valves to .050 lift at the same 15 degrees.  The overlap is a reasonable 32 degrees.  The higher lift cam has more duration, so naturally, the lobe center angles are different.  The intake is 109.5 and the exhaust is 105 at .050.

The intake openings with the other closest gear combos are at TDC and 30 degrees BTDC and are are 15 degrees advanced and are obviously unworkable.  The help I need is to virtually model this 15 IO cam combo and to compare it to using two all-purpose grind cams.  This is beyond my capabilities and budget.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 26, 2016, 04:02:09 PM
The big carbs arrived from Bonneville Performance.  They are liked together by a common throttle shaft and an aluminum bracket that mounts them to the back of the engine.  This work OK, although rubber mounted carbs are my preference.  The mixture is more accurate if they are not excessively jiggled.  The way I like to mount them is as follows.

First, the two carbs are tied together by a couple of aluminum plates as shown in the first photo.  A bracket is attached to tie the plates together and to mount the rod.  Chopsticks are used to point out the new parts.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 26, 2016, 04:08:22 PM
A rod is inserted through the hole in the bracket.  Pieces of rubber fuel line are put on the rod.  The little brass end nubbins keep the rod from sliding out.  The rod looks to be pretty skinny considering the weight of the carbs.  It is titanium so it is plenty herky despite its diminutive appearance.  A hook shaped bracket is made, too.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 26, 2016, 04:16:08 PM
The carbs are on.  The hook bracket extends down from the frame.  The rubber hose on the rod at the back of the carbs is captured in the hook end.  The carbs are restrained by the rubber manifold boots and they are held up by the rod that fits in the fuel line hose and is captured by the hook.  The carbs are rubber mounted and isolated from vibration.

Right now I am having some issues with the intake manifolds and throttle cables.  The carbs will be positioned better after those are sorted.  Note that the throttle rod hits the hook bracket.  That should not happen and it will be addressed later. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 01, 2016, 12:56:02 AM
The 45mm Mikunis have nice big fuel passages.  They are used as single carbs on Harleys and they are designed to pass the petrol.  This was a problem on the 39mm Keihin flat slides I was using.  They are not designed to move the volumes of gas and liquid I am using.

The gas tank fuel cock was one of the Pingel guzzlers with a side feed.  It fed both carbs from a single fuel line with a 'T" fitting on it. 
A nice thing about guzzlers is they can be taken apart and modified.  The bottom of this one was drilled and tapped.  Then I made a fuel line nipple and threaded it in with JB weld as a thread sealer.  There will be two fuel lines and no flow issues at this part of the system.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 02, 2016, 12:05:10 AM
Tomorrow is the Triumph club meeting in the month when I do the dyno work.  The testing plan is given to the service department after the meeting and they reserve me a day or two on the dyno.  This happens every year.  So, I went to work an hour early and got off an hour early.  Then, I walked home, got Vizard's books and all sorts of calculations and rode the 250 down to the local.  Always I stand at the bar, order a pint, disengage the brain, and engage the mouth.  Today I quietly sat at a table and set to work.  Basically, after a pint of serious thought and lots of head scratching, I come the conclusion that there are three viable cam options and who knows which is best.  The plan is to do:

Session 1:  Sunoco Supreme with high lift exhaust cam used as intake cam, 9 teeth retarded, producing 15 BTDC intake opening, 114 intake centerline,  105 exhaust centerline, 109.5 lobe separation angle, with 32 overlap, all at .050, then switch to:

high lift exhaust cam used as intake cam, 10 teeth retarded, producing 30 BTDC intake opening, 99 intake centerline, 105 exhaust centerline, 102 lobe separation angle, with 47 overlap, then switch to:

medium lift intake cam used as intake cam, 0 teeth retarded, with 15 BTDC intake opening, 112 intake centerline, 111 exhaust centerline, 112.5 lobe separation angle, 32 overlap.

Session 2:  use Sunoco Supreme with best cam combination from Session 1.  Optimize ignition timing and jetting.  Install 4 sizes larger main jets and retard timing 2 degrees.  Use Pendine blend jungle juice.  Optimize jetting and timing if this shows potential for more HP.

That's the plan.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on July 03, 2016, 09:53:28 AM
Bo............I like all of your BREATHING exercises but I don't know about tuning with gas and expecting to be close for fuel!!!!

What is the burn-rate differential?   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 03, 2016, 01:59:45 PM
The mix is mostly gasoline.  This is what I did for Pendine.  It was to optimize the timing and jetting for the base gasoline and to knock the timing back 2 degrees, increase the main jets 4 sizes, and raise the needles 1 notch for the fuel mix.  My buddies and I did all of the figuring at some tavern near the Museum of Speed in Wilsonville.  We never did any dyno testing although the mix worked real good in Wales.

Any help with this is welcome.  Basically, I have four cam combination and neither of them is optimum.  Any advice is welcome.  It is too late to make new cams.  Are any of the first three options obviously unworkable?

This first post is from PipeMax for the all purpose cams I have used for years.  The intake has .380 lift and the cylinder head flows real well up to .400 lift.  There is a lot of potential intake flow into the cylinders that is not used with these cams.  The rev limiter is set for 9,000 rpm.  The cams are used at the recommended timing with 1 degree retard.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 03, 2016, 02:09:05 PM
This is the second combination.  It uses the high lift exhaust cam as an intake cam.  It has .410 lift.  This will have a lot more opening during the intake cycle in both lift and degrees.  It will be a big help if the timing is not too goofy.  The intake valve with combo 1 opens at 15 degrees BTDC.  The valve opens at the same time with this setup.  The intake lobe centerline is retarded quite a bit to do this.  This is an unusual amount of retard.  The exhaust cam is unchanged from combo 1.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 03, 2016, 02:13:57 PM
This is the third option.  The high lift exhaust cam is used again and it is 15 degrees advanced from the setting used in combo 2.  The exhaust cam and its timing are the same as in combos 1 and 2.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 03, 2016, 02:18:20 PM
This is the fourth option.  It uses the high lift cams at recommended timing for intake and exhaust.  Unfortunately some tappet buckets from a Yamaha boat engine need to be installed in the head to accomodate the bumpy intake cam.  This is a project for next year.  I cannot use this combo and it is for reference, only.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on July 04, 2016, 04:01:24 PM
#3 looks to me to be the closest you have to the the optimum #4..................Be prepared to keep the revs up to max for the last gear-change :wink:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 05, 2016, 12:49:54 AM
Option 4 is for next year after the Yamaha marine engine buckets are installed.  The big reason I wanted to eliminate the turkey options beforehand was health.  The dyno room is not ventilated as well as it should be and I run leaded gas.  Some more thinking says we can do the cam comparo and rough-in the jetting and timing with unleaded non-ethanol premium pump gas.  The leaded would be used for the final tuning, only.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on July 05, 2016, 08:43:15 AM
Jeeze Louise!  All this PipeMax stuff is making my head hurt!  But you are familiar with that software and believe in it, so I'll be very interested to see if it can beat the old seat-of-the-pants tuning that I do.  Bo, I just go bigger, more duration, and more overlap and hope the motor runs better than last time.  I'm up to 300º duration with about 80º overlap (at .040" lift instead of .050"), but I haven't run this combination yet. Sure hope we both get to BMST to compare results. 
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 07, 2016, 10:49:37 PM
Today was too mental!  All of this came after working all day.  Engine Pro was loaded on the old PC and I figured out why I got goofy results.  There are subroutines for calculating input variables.  The calculators do not update the input to the original program.  That has to be done manually.  The program works great once I figures that out.

The first option I tried was the all-purpose cams I used for years.  This is by far the best setup according to the program and none of the cam timing input variables are "out of range."  The exhaust duration, intake centerline, and lobe center angle are all within 4 degrees of recommended.  The intake lift is the limp area.  The cam gives .380 and Engine Pro recommends .440  That is a big difference.

The other two options with the exhaust cam used as an intake cam produce "out of range" input results.  Also, the predicted power is quite a bit less than with the all-purpose cams.  Interestingly, the full race cams produce much less predicted power than the all-purpose cams.

The plan is to install the all purpose cams and go for the record.  Next year I will work on installing the bumpy cams.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 08, 2016, 08:41:36 PM
There are four valves per cylinder and they have waisted stems.  They are delicate and I am afraid I might bend one while doing a clearance check using clay.  This is the much safer light spring method.  A soft spring is used in place of the valve springs.  I can push the valve down with my finger like in the first foto.  A valve head to piston crown collision usually happens within 10 degrees of TDC during the overlap period.  The valve is pushed down while the crank is rotated through TDC.  The distance between the cam follower and the cam is the same as the clearance between the valve and the piston when the valve head is resting on the piston crown.  Luckily, I have plenty of clearance for both the intake and exhaust valves.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 09, 2016, 08:52:25 PM
Combo 1 are the all purpose intake and exhaust cams with at recommended timing.  The intake ports flow curve flatten out above .400  This intake cam has .380 lift so it is not taking advantage of the port flow.  Dynamic compression is 10.4

Combo 2 has the all purpose exhaust cam with the high lift intake cam.  The intake opening of the high lift cam is at the same degree as the intake opening of the all purpose cam.  Dynamic compression is 9.5

Combo 3 is the all purpose exhaust cam with the high lift intake cam.  The intake closing of the high lift cam is the same as the intake closing of the all purpose cam.  Dynamic compression is 10.5

I read Horsepower Chain and they say intake closing is the most critical valve event.  It looks like Combo 3 does not change this and it preserves the dynamic comp ratio.  Any advice is appreciated.  What I think I see is Option 3 is best.  I have not given up on this cam idea, yet. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 10, 2016, 11:38:46 AM
These three charts are not accurate.  i could not figure out how to enter the seat and port geometric data.  The data I have is flow vs lift and piston demand at 28 inches.  Is there a way in engine pro or pipe max to  plot these two on the y axis versus crank angle on the x axis? 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 11, 2016, 10:36:38 PM
This engine has the cam and lifter style shown a few posts previous.  Is there a formula for maximum inches lift vs degrees duration at .050 with reliable operation?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 13, 2016, 08:44:22 PM
I was monkeying around with my cam timing experiment and I banged the valves into the tops of the pistons.  Then I corrected the cam timing so this will not happen.  Are the valves bent?, I asked myself.  It is time for a compression check.  I put on the gage, hit the starter button, and nothing happened.  Hours later I found and corrected an intermittent break in the wire from the ignition to the kill switch.  Then I found and corrected another break in the wire to the knock light.  Finally, with all of that fixed, I smashed down on that starter button again.  There was this "fried electrical part" smell.  I rebuilt the starter this winter and screwed it up, I guess.  I took the starter motor down to the local rebuild shop this morning.  The lithium battery might be toasted, too.  My father called me a "one man wave of destruction" when I was a kid.  The name sorta fits. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on July 14, 2016, 06:52:21 AM
This engine has the cam and lifter style shown a few posts previous.  Is there a formula for maximum inches lift vs degrees duration at .050 with reliable operation?

If you have a displacement plot you can find the .050 value off of that data.    If you do not have a displacement plot (graph), it's time to make one for both int & ex.

 :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on July 14, 2016, 06:55:35 AM
I was monkeying around with my cam timing experiment and I banged the valves into the tops of the pistons.  Then I corrected the cam timing so this will not happen.  Are the valves bent?, I asked myself.  It is time for a compression check.  I put on the gage, hit the starter button, and nothing happened.  Hours later I found and corrected an intermittent break in the wire from the ignition to the kill switch.  Then I found and corrected another break in the wire to the knock light.  Finally, with all of that fixed, I smashed down on that starter button again.  There was this "fried electrical part" smell.  I rebuilt the starter this winter and screwed it up, I guess.  I took the starter motor down to the local rebuild shop this morning.  The lithium battery might be toasted, too.  My father called me a "one man wave of destruction" when I was a kid.  The name sorta fits. 

YIPES!!!

Sorry for your troubles.    When having a day like that, I advise taking a break from the project, just to preserve your sanity, and possibly your wallet.

 :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on July 14, 2016, 11:02:04 AM
WW, I asked a factory rep once how they found shorts and he said, "We just follow the smoke!"  :-o Unless you are a factory rep now I would advise against that method! FB is right - time for a break!  :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 15, 2016, 12:22:31 AM
Rose and I spent the evening having a good time down at one of our locals and Bim Bam Bop, a Korean restaurant.  That was my break.  Now I am at it again.  The shop finished the starter motor.  They said there was an assembly error and battery current was going straight to ground.  Electrical stuff is to me like the white whale to Ahab, the iceberg to the Titanic, or interns to Clinton.  Nothing but trouble.

The cam lobes have a profile where the leading face has a belly in it and the trailing face is flat.  Kibblewhite digitized them.  I asked them for the data and then I will draw up the valve displacement vs crank angle graph.

Today at work I finished a big project, signed and stamped my plan sheets, sent in the specifications, report, and cost estimate.  Then I sent the boss an e-mail saying I would be gone tomorrow to celebrate.  He wasn't there to say no so I will spend about 14 hours on the bike.  Progress will be made.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 16, 2016, 12:59:06 AM
The starter came back from the shop and it works great.  Cold cranking compression on the virgin engine was over 80 psi on the first burst and it raised right up to 240 psi really quick.  Both cylinders are identical.  I did not bend any valves.

The inlet manifolds were hogged out to match the new carbs.  The photo does not show it, but the intake valves are visible at the end of the ports.  This motor should work good.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 16, 2016, 10:57:56 AM
An attempt was made to measure the valve displacement from the high lift exhaust cam.  It does not meet the cam card specs in some areas.  Right off I noticed it provides only .020 more lift than the all purpose intake cam.  The cam card says the duration is 12 degrees more with the high lift cam.  That seems reasonable and to opens the valves 9 degrees sooner and shuts them about 3 degrees later.  The flanks on the all purpose cam are nearly flat.  The high lift cam has a shape like the front end of a trout from top view.  It holds the valves open longer at the higher lifts.
 
Kibblewhite sent up some new tappet buckets to go with the new exhaust cam.  It is in the engine now with the EC of the new cam real close to the EC if the old one.  My guess is the old intake cam will not give the needed lift and duration and the new one might.  This is the setup I will use this year.

Next year is the year of the cams and that is where most of my effort will go.  Measured profiles and more fancy computer work will be used.  Right now I am too tired to do anything intellectual.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on July 19, 2016, 08:07:30 PM
Talk about leaving no stone unturned?.
Bo, your attention to detail always blows me away.
No wonder you're tired. Have a rest brother. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 19, 2016, 10:48:20 PM
Hi Mike.  The competition are these fast Italian twin cylinder bikes like Ducati's and Aprilias with young folks turning the throttle.  The people that design them get paid for their efforts and have the latest computer programs, young and nimble brains, etc.  The only way I can counteract this is to work late into the night, stay focused, use wily methods, and attend to details.  Yes, I am tired.  There will be plenty of time to rest when I am "pushing up the daises," as they say.  Both of us think alike, in this respect.

Progress is being made...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 22, 2016, 10:34:48 AM
Gravity fed carbs are the system here.  It is the most reliable method if a fellow remembers to turn on the tap before starting the engine.  This bike runs fuel and the cock has the remote shut off.  This is a guzzler and they are rebuildable.  The manufacturer sells different bottom parts for much less cost than the whole assembly.  I did not do this.  Instead, I modified it myself.  It had two fuel line spigots.  One was drilled out and replaced by a threaded brass plug.  The other was drilled out and replaced by a threaded hole.  Another threaded hole was made in the bottom.  1/8 inch pipe threads are as big as one can go, sizewise.

The fuel cock should be on the tank and the tank on the bike when the manifolds are designed.  There is very little clearance.  The shop that sold me the carbs included some nice manifolds with rubber hoses and their lengths can be adjusted to put the carbs in the right place.  The inlet ports on this bike are too large to use those spigots so I used my old manifolds.  Larger rubber spigots are available from Mikuni so I removed the old ones for the 39mm carbs, put on new spigots for 45mm mixers, and ported the manifolds to match the spigots.

There was a lot of comparison shopping for fuel line fittings.  I looked at standard plumbing parts and Army and Navy items.  These A and N fittings made by XRP in the USA had the largest holes and best workmanship.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 22, 2016, 10:54:46 AM
The carbs are tall and the gas tank needs to be pulled back and up to be removed.  Any fitting on the bottom of the cock needs to be short so this can be done.  This elbow was ground down and the hole threaded large to do this.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 22, 2016, 11:10:39 AM
This is the other fitting.  The sealer is an equivalent to hylomar.  The owner of our local hot rod speed shop helped me with this.  The teflon tape I had been using can lose fragments that can hold the needle valve open.  He recommended this sealer.

The fuel line is #5 (5/16 diameter).  Number 5 fittings have internal diameters much less than this.  Number 6 (3/8 inch) fittings are used to keep the inside diameter near 5/16.  These reducer fittings were made up to change from one fuel line size to the other.  The larger lines are near the tank where the fittings are.

It is very hard to get fittings.  The local stores have gone to computer based inventories and they only stock what they sell.  Of course, since they only sell what they stock, their inventory shrinks considerably.  Only the most popular items are on the shelves.  A lathe and bars of brass are the only way a racer can get the fittings they need right away without resorting to mail order.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 22, 2016, 11:12:31 AM
This is the fuel lines ready to go.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 23, 2016, 12:03:17 PM
The guzzler fuel cocks are hard to assemble.  They are sort of like a spring loaded sandwich of gaskets and parts.  It is easy to have a gasket shifted out of place and drive a screw through it.  I did this and the fuel cock leaks.  Spare gaskets are a mail order item. 

Break in day was supposed to be Friday.  Plumbing supply houses had enough parts to make a temporary fowl system.  The miniature ball valve is an in-stock item the store keeps on hand for the wine and beer making folks.

Today will be when the rings get seated.  My reflexes and mental state needs to be at its peak.  So, Rose and I went to the Grateful Dead show in Portland and I got back at 2 in the morning.  It was the first concert since legalization.  i think I was still high when I got up out of bed.  Now I am completely straight and totally relaxed with absolutely no motivation. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on July 23, 2016, 02:58:39 PM
Bo,
As I run out of options for getting more hp and mph out the old Beezer, I've thought about moving to fuel, or at least methanol (as I now find myself out of spare cases).  The remote closing Pingel has got some thought, but I hate the price.  So I thought I might just try rigging up a standard shut-off valve using a choke handle and cable from a British bike. After seeing what you've had to come up with, I'll think more about a Rube Goldberg shut-off.  I am definitely a veritable cheapskate!
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WhizzbangK.C. on July 23, 2016, 11:02:53 PM
Bo,
As I run out of options for getting more hp and mph out the old Beezer, I've thought about moving to fuel, or at least methanol (as I now find myself out of spare cases).  The remote closing Pingel has got some thought, but I hate the price.  So I thought I might just try rigging up a standard shut-off valve using a choke handle and cable from a British bike. After seeing what you've had to come up with, I'll think more about a Rube Goldberg shut-off.  I am definitely a veritable cheapskate!
Tom

That's what Brian and I  both did with our bikes. Use bicycle cable since it's thinner, easier to work with, makes tighter bends, and is available in bulk lengths of separate sleeve and cable. Use a shift control lever that clamps onto the bar, you can work it with your finger or thumb. Easy to work with and works well to shut off, but you will still need to turn the valve to open it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 24, 2016, 01:52:54 AM
The fuel valve is the least of my troubles.  The high lift exhaust cam was put in as an intake cam.  It has more duration than the old intake cam.  1/4 of the added duration was used to close the intake valve later.  I did this imbalance of added duration to keep the dynamic compression ratio reasonable.  The other 3/4 of added duration was added to the overlap.

This morning the bike trailer was hooked up to Rose's truck and the toolbox was tossed in the back of the truck with some tie downs.  She followed me and I made the 45 mile test loop around Silverton and Silver Falls Park.  The bike runs great.  It really pulls hard.  That added intake duration and lift is a big, big, help.

Experience of the worst kind has told me to always check new cams to make sure they are bedding in and polishing up properly.  The valve cover was removed after the ride.  The inner intake lobes are just starting to wear through their hardening.  All four of the new tappet buckets are trashed.  The cam grinder gave me some strict break in instructions and I followed them perfectly. I do not understand what is happening.  The old lower lift intake cam is back in the bike now.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on July 24, 2016, 07:15:28 AM
Bo, I don't have any experience with the overhead cam bikes other than single overhead cams, so I can't offer anything more than the obvious.  That is, you are not running out of clearance at full lift?  I'm pretty sure you didn't flog it on a street ride, so I can't see anything like valve float or valve lofting happening.  Does the exhaust cam have the same dimensions as the intake cam in regards to center to center of lobes or any different dimensions regarding lobe to center of bucket?  How about end play of the cam?  You must feel like a guinea pig for the cam grinding people!
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on July 24, 2016, 09:05:22 AM
Bo, Tom,

This is from a post on the midget's build diary, 2015.   Pretty sure it applies in this instance regarding break-in @ reduced valve spring pressure.    I realize this is of little help now, but perhaps it will help in the future.

BTW, this applies to ALL flat tappet cams, not just OHC.   ANY steel cam must go though a careful "break-in" (more correctly a "bed-in") process.     Also, if your failed tappets are hardened through, and are thick enough, they can be refaced and/or re-lapped.     I do it all the time.    Any defect(s) found on the cam lobe must be carefully stoned and polished off.    ANY sharp edges on the cam lobe can act as a cutting tool on the tappet . . . . . . .      Insist that your cam grinder deburr and polish the lobe edges of your cam.    Alternatively, the lobe edges can be chamfered and polished.

Yes, I am aware that I am hyper-anal about this issue.    I am also tired of steel cam failures where the cam grinder shirks any responsibility.

 :cheers:
Fordboy



I hear you. My pistons were to be 2 weeks, took 6. Cams are now at 3.5 months and still going strong...... :-P

Mr Fordboy, while you are hanging about here, I know you have more experience with pushrod type engines than DOHC stuff with direct tappets or followers but do you have thoughts about breaking in new cams in this setting (direct tappets in this case),. I know regular flat tappet cams take a lot of babying in many situations to avoid wiping the lobes but with DOHC direct, the tappets don't rotate, are flat, but the actual load is much less. Less spring pressure, no rocker arm to multiply load on the lifter etc. Other than assembly lube in general would you do anything special lube/oil wise as is often suggested with pushrod flat tappets? Though way down the road for you and Midget, it does apply..... :cheers:

Jack,

As a matter of fact, back in the 80's and early 90's when I founded and owned PHP Racengines, I seem to remember building & dyno'ing about 100 Lotus TwinCams & Cosworth BD & FV variants, all with bucket "flat" tappets.    There can be problems with these types of valve trains.

My thoughts:

1]  Chilled iron cams with steel tappets have better "compatibility" than steel cams with steel tappets.
2]  Contact pressure is also a factor for break-in, I insist on running in on lowered valve spring pressure, NO MATTER HOW MUCH TROUBLE IT IS TO CHANGE VALVE SPRINGS.
     It is worth the effort.    I usually remove the inner spring, minimum, for "break-in".    Break-in rpm needs to be carefully controlled at reduced spring pressures.
3]  If the tappet is dead flat, I request the cam lobes be ground with "extra" lobe taper and/or offset, to spin the lifter.    NO tappet will survive without rotation.
4]  If the cam grinder recommends against a "flat" tappet, inquire as to whether they can spherically grind the tappet to a radius they recommend for "their" lobe taper.   If
     not, Dema Elgin can spherically grind tappets to a variety of radii.    One might inquire whether he has a setup for the tappet diameter you are using if you need this done.
5]  I had steel cams nitrided after grinding.
6]  "Parkerizing" of steel cams lobes and steel tappet surfaces is also a good idea that helps lubrication.    Chilled cast iron cams may not need this process.   DLC coatings
     are now being used to help with some of this, but I do not have any experience with them in this application.    Compatibility is a huge factor with DLC.    And it is
     expensive.
7]  My experience is that the tappets need to be about 54/58 Rc hardness.    Harder is not a problem on the tappet, I've used parts as hard as 65 Rc.
8]  Cams need to be 4/5 Rc hardness points softer than the tappet.    Cams/tappets at the same hardness are usually a problem.
9]  Rc hardness is relative, and can be less if the cam lobe nose "contact pressure" is less or low.    Good cam grinders can advise a user on this.    HIGH contact pressures,
     as in high velocity/acceleration cam lobes, with high valve spring pressures, and high valve train mass, need "harder" parts, and even this might not prevent wear.
10] I always insist on a cam break-in lube with "moly", generously applied during assembly.    Don't go nuts, but thoroughly coat both the lobes & tappets.
11] I always add a ZDDP additive on top of the moly assembly lubed lobes & tappets.    I tend to drown the parts.    This is only for flat tappet cams.
12] I like regular racing oil for "break-in" as opposed to break-in oils.    I worry about bearings too.    I tend to use lighter weight, multi-grade oils.   There is so much new
      information out there, or on the web, I would advise being careful with oil choice.    I tend to go for oils with higher film strength, because I am an advocate of "lower" oil
      pressure in general.

All of this will apply to the new engine for the Milwaukee Midget.    It is going to be interesting . . . . . .
 :cheers:
Fordboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 24, 2016, 10:05:49 AM
Today Rose and I will make another pass through the test loop to make sure the rings are seated.  The old cams are polished up by years of use so there should be no problems, there.  Tonight the conventional break in oil will be dumped and the synthetic will go in.  Dyno day is tomorrow.

The cams will be a project for next year.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on July 24, 2016, 08:52:54 PM
Have you and your advisers considered 'beehive' springs?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 26, 2016, 12:24:44 AM
Yesterday the break in was finished with another loop around Silver falls Park and Silverton.  The old intake cam was used.  The bike went on the dyno today.  It makes 3 more horsepower than before at 1000 rpm higher.  Peak torque is lower.  We tried jungle juice.  It does nothing.  That bike likes Sunoco Supreme or Standard.  A trip to Bonneville is not worthwhile.  I am tired and broke.  The possibility of further progress ended when the new cam ate the new lifters.  I will not be riding the bike at the speed trials this year.

The guy that sold me the cams should have told me about the need for bigger tappet buckets and special break in procedures.  He didn't.  There will be no more dealings with him.  The lifters and cam will go to Kibblewhite for a post-mortem exam and we will work from there.  I will try hand calcs and virtual modeling to rough in the lifts, timing, and durations I need.  Then, an expert needs to work up the details like valve train acceleration and deceleration, etc.  Then the springs need to be checked to make sure they are optimal.  Finally, some cams and lifters will be made.  The name "Dema Elgin" has been mentioned by more than one person.  That might be a good source of help.

It looks like I have the crap beaten out of me, its time to go into the corner, and to come back out when the bell rings. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on July 26, 2016, 08:47:18 AM
Yesterday the break in was finished with another loop around Silver falls Park and Silverton.  The old intake cam was used.  The bike went on the dyno today.  It makes 3 more horsepower than before at 1000 rpm higher.  Peak torque is lower.  We tried jungle juice.  It does nothing.  That bike likes Sunoco Supreme or Standard.  A trip to Bonneville is not worthwhile.  I am tired and broke.  The possibility of further progress ended when the new cam ate the new lifters.  I will not be riding the bike at the speed trials this year.

The guy that sold me the cams should have told me about the need for bigger tappet buckets and special break in procedures.  He didn't.  There will be no more dealings with him.  The lifters and cam will go to Kibblewhite for a post-mortem exam and we will work from there.  I will try hand calcs and virtual modeling to rough in the lifts, timing, and durations I need.  Then, an expert needs to work up the details like valve train acceleration and deceleration, etc.  Then the springs need to be checked to make sure they are optimal.  Finally, some cams and lifters will be made.  The name "Dema Elgin" has been mentioned by more than one person.  That might be a good source of help.

It looks like I have the crap beaten out of me, its time to go into the corner, and to come back out when the bell rings.  


Bo,

Take a "mental health" and "wallet" break.

When you have "recovered", please post up the data from the dyno session.    Might it be possible to include the old dyno data as well?

 :cheers:
Mark
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on July 26, 2016, 10:07:58 AM

http://www.landracing.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=6167.0;attach=55043


Bo,

When I view the photo of the tappet you posted, it does not appear that you require a "larger diameter" tappet.   The "wear pattern" does not "run off the edge" of the tappet diameter being used.

Without having more specifics of the hardness and metallurgy, (which could change my opinion), I'm thinking all your wear issues are related to:

A/   "bed-in" procedures,
2/   pre-lube, oil and oil additives,
d/   "bed-in" valve spring pressure.

Unfortunately, steel cams combined with steel tappets, and high velocities/accelerations combine to push those cams into the "very high contact pressure zone".    THAT is what requires special "bed-in" procedures.   WHAT, EXACTLY, that will end up being for your engine, I don't know.

BUT, I do know this:    If it was me, I would take the "shotgun" approach to cam "bed-in" and use every bit of advice I could glean from ANY source of useful information about steel cams, whether for bikes or cars.    The lengthy, "pain in the a$$" procedure I posted on the MM's build diary works for steel cams with steel tappets fitted to Lotus Twin Cam racing engines.    I did it that way not because I wanted to add complexity to the builds, but because it was the only method that worked.    I had to fabricate some special tools and define some special procedures, but it then worked.    BTW, those cams were ~ .520" lift and 320 degrees duration, in a 2 valve, semi-hemi DOHC 1600cc.   NO OTHER CAM GRINDS MADE THEIR KIND OF BRAKE HORSEPOWER . . . . . . .

 :cheers:
Persistentboy
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on July 26, 2016, 10:30:16 AM
Bo............Mark has good advice :-)...............Could you machine the existing tappet buckets?...............or machine new replacement units?  Lighten the spring pressure and follow the break-in advice?  Work - Yes, Cost..........minimal. :wink:  BTW.......did you play with timing while on the dyno?

Dave and others have advised me to NEVER let a motor idle with a new cam in it...........until its known to be 'worn-in'  And, yes, Dave agrees that the buckets should rotate with cam-contact.

If you won't be running your bike..............will you be at BMST as a spectator?  I always learn so much from other competitors..........especially when it counts :-) :-) :-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on July 26, 2016, 12:24:53 PM
Bo............Mark has good advice :-)...............Could you machine the existing tappet buckets?...............or machine new replacement units?  Lighten the spring pressure and follow the break-in advice?  Work - Yes, Cost..........minimal. :wink:  BTW.......did you play with timing while on the dyno?

Dave and others have advised me to NEVER let a motor idle with a new cam in it...........until its known to be 'worn-in'  And, yes, Dave agrees that the buckets should rotate with cam-contact.

If you won't be running your bike..............will you be at BMST as a spectator?  I always learn so much from other competitors..........especially when it counts :-) :-) :-)

Yes.    RPM must be higher than idle, say 2500 to 4000, but well below mid range to maximum.

If the buckets DO NOT rotate when the engine is turned over by hand during final assembly, NO ONE can prevent their destruction.    When the tappets don't turn, you need to be in a conversation with the cam grinder/supplier about WHY they don't rotate, BEFORE starting the engine.

And don't let any of those suppliers BS you that things will be fine when it fires up.   IF THEY DON'T ROTATE, THEY WON'T LIVE.   PERIOD.

 :cheers:   :dhorse:
Verypersnicketyboy, because I have to be . . . . . . . . and you should be too!!!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 27, 2016, 12:46:04 AM
Thanks for the advice.  Ducati desmo systems are looking good right now.  Two strokes, too.  Some of these items were done.  The high lift intake cam was too big for the buckets.  The exhaust cam would work with the buckets so that is why I used it as an intake cam.  I do check for rotation when I adjust the valve clearances prior to running the engine.  I did keep the idle above 2.000 rpm as advised by Webcam.  Kibblewhite checked spring pack length and I was plenty good in that respect.

The old cams were made by the same company and I broke them in using the OEM valve springs.  This time, I was using full strength racing springs for break in.  Previously I lubed the edges of the lifter buckets with oil.  This time, the bucket edges were lubed with break in grease.  They rotated, but not as freely as if they were oiled.

The rings are seated and the mineral break in oil has been changed to racing synthetic.  This should give better film strength when breaking in the new cams.  Also, I will use light springs for break in and the bucket sides will be lubed with oil and not assembly grease.  Particular attention will be paid to lifter and cam materials and hardness.

All of my various cam profiles will be measured for valve lift vs degree crank rotation.  Then, the head will come off and the damaged parts, head, carbs, filters, etc will be sent to Kibblewhite.  They are going to flow test the new carb and filter setup.  Then, cam design will begin. The goal this year is to be able to understand all of the terminology and data on the PipeMax printout, to interpret it, and to use it.  Learning Egyptian will be easier, but it is something I need to do.

All of this advice is being filed away and it will be reviewed during the year.  It is suggested that I go to speed week as a spectator.  I might do this.     



 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on July 27, 2016, 12:54:33 AM
Bo, we will be looking for you at Speedweek.   :cheers:

 Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on July 28, 2016, 06:17:08 AM
Bo,
Notwithstanding all of the excellent advice  above, in my opinion, no break-in procedure other than what you followed would have saved those buckets from self destruction.  The severe damage you show from a mere forty mile road break-in would have to have been caused by an incompatibility of the metallurgy or design of the parts, and is NOT YOUR FAULT!  Any reputable manufacturer of those parts should step up to the table and replace them without a question and bear the responsibility for the failure.

Using lower spring pressures or rpm or special oils during break-in may have shown up the problem, but would not have changed the final outcome that the parts were defective, period.

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 28, 2016, 07:02:16 PM
Hi Tom, as usual with fiascos where I am involved, my fingers are in the pie, as they say.  The guy that sold me the cams did not tell me about needing different buckets.  I did not have time or the desire to deal with him so I found buckets on my own.  This is a three ring circus, the cam vendor, the cam manufacturer, and me who made the big decision.  I need to get my facts straight before I start demanding stuff.  The valve train expert will look at things.

The head, cams, etc will be going back to Kibblewhite.  I need to collect data before they go.  Measuring valve displacements vs crank angles for the cams is the current task.  Last night I made this special tool to record valve event degrees.  The best degree wheel is this one from the local speed shop.  I really need one that reads from 0 to 720 degrees to give me direct readings of crank angle.
   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 28, 2016, 07:06:47 PM
The degree wheel is ready to go.  The crank is rotated through this little hole in the case.  Normally the wheel is attached to the crank.  This requires the oil to be drained.  The system I am designing does not require this.  More on this subject in the next post.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 28, 2016, 07:21:37 PM
TDC can be determined by a mark on the flywheel that is seen through this little hole.

Note that the cam gear is welded to the cam.  It is a simple matter to grind these off and to alter the cam timing.  This offers the possibility to do some cam timing adjustments at the dyno facility.  They have a grinder and welder.  It will be more convenient to do this without removing that alternator cover or dropping and refilling the oil.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on July 29, 2016, 07:48:57 AM
TDC can be determined by a mark on the flywheel that is seen through this little hole.

Note that the cam gear is welded to the cam.  It is a simple matter to grind these off and to alter the cam timing.  This offers the possibility to do some cam timing adjustments at the dyno facility.  They have a grinder and welder.  It will be more convenient to do this without removing that alternator cover or dropping and refilling the oil.

Bo,

Rather than the grinding/welding cam timing PITA*, is there room on the cam/cam drive gear for some slots fitted with "button" head socket cap screws?   What I am thinking of is a threaded hole in the drive gear, say 6mm x 1 pitch; a slot in the cam drive flange; and secured with 3 to 6 "flanged" bhcs.

This is what I'm thinking:

https://www.google.com/search?q=images+for+kent+vernier+cam+drive&biw=1920&bih=911&noj=1&site=webhp&tbm=isch&imgil=Rfz4_qD-46H_XM%253A%253BMJx0QdwvD-OWEM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.briskoda.net%25252Fforums%25252Ftopic%25252F292003-kermit-perhaps-highest-bhp-8v-1289cc-favorit-in-uk%25252F&source=iu&pf=m&fir=Rfz4_qD-46H_XM%253A%252CMJx0QdwvD-OWEM%252C_&usg=__TPEeXwlZs38FQf1OhApTpzsHL9c%3D&ved=0ahUKEwihtd7_yZjOAhUi74MKHXvVCfcQyjcIRA&ei=ID-bV6GlBqLejwT7qqe4Dw#imgrc=_

ALSO, on pages 35/36:

http://www.kentcams.com/documents/downloads/Kent%20Cams%20catalogue%202016(7).pdf

Kent also makes steel tappets and shims in various sizes, one of which might be suitable for your application:

Obviously, if the room does not exist to fit some securing fasteners, that's a deal killer.   BUT, I would be EXTREMELY creative on the possible fitment though . . . . . .

You have got to think "out of the box" on this, to solve this critical tuning issue.

 :cheers:
Forgetabouttheboxboy

edit:   After looking more carefully at your photos, it seems to me that there is room somewhere in the cam drive train to incorporate a vernier adjustment, even if it is only an "offset dowel" setup.   Get creative.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 30, 2016, 02:36:58 PM
Thanks for posting that info, Mark.  Sending a cam to kent Cams and asking them if they have ideas will be the best route.  They have the degree wheel I need.

       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 31, 2016, 01:22:37 AM
Another tool was made so the bucket travel can be measured by a dial indicator.  This shaft is mosquitoed into the workings so it touches the top of the bucket.

The entire lift profile will be measured.  This thick shim is installed to make valve lash zero.  This way, lift is measured all around the cam including the base circle.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 31, 2016, 01:28:37 AM
The valve travel is being measured by recording the bucket movement.

A few years ago I went on a navy ship with my son and posted pictures on the forum for off-season entertainment.  Rose got accepted to go on the same cruise with my youngest boy on the USS Harpers Ferry.  The vacation leave I saved to go racing will be used to spend a week in Hawaii with her before she boards the ship.  It has been a rough year and I need a break.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 31, 2016, 11:16:14 AM
Is there an on-line calculator or way for PipeMax to display or list piston demand at 28 inches vs crank angle for pistons with offset pins?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 01, 2016, 08:28:25 PM
There is some good information about piston pin motion with and without offset on the i-net.  The small 1 mm offset on my pistons does not make enough difference to justify the extra work to use it in the calcs.  I will use PipeMax to figure out piston demand.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 02, 2016, 12:43:34 AM
This is the piston demand curve bases on PipeMax.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on August 02, 2016, 06:11:34 AM
Is there an on-line calculator or way for PipeMax to display or list piston demand at 28 inches vs crank angle for pistons with offset pins?

Not that I know of.    PipeMax is a very basic tool.     There might be an offset pin option in EA Pro from Performance Trends or Engine Pro from QuarterJr.    But if your pin offset is "reasonable", the difference is going to be very small.    It will matter for the best cam timing, but a vernier cam drive and dyno testing at various cam timings, will resolve that issue.

Nice looking adaptors by the way.   On an "orphan" build like yours, expect to have to make the "special" tools and adaptors you will need to do the job properly.    Just the way it is.   Also, if you can buy or adapt something to work in this regard, do it.    Do NOT re-invent the wheel.     Save your efforts for things that are truly "custom" and one-off.

 :cheers:
F/B
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on August 02, 2016, 06:33:07 AM
This is the piston demand curve bases on PipeMax.  

OK.   Now overlay cam motion + head flow to see how well the "demand" is satisfied.   The easiest way is with CamFlowRPM from Schmidt Motor Werks, another useful, but basic program.    I hope you have it already.    I'm thinking it is no longer available.

Don't forget that there is a fulfillment lag dependent on rpm.    Model in the center of your proposed rpm range for best results, or across the complete rpm range if you want more data.

 :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on August 02, 2016, 06:47:11 AM
Bo,

You (and others) might want to read through this thread on SpeedTalk:

http://speedtalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=29407&p=488263&hilit=camflow#p488263

It is a couple of years old, but gives a better overview of the "demand" & "flow" concepts.    And yes, "It's Complicated".

 :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on August 02, 2016, 08:50:56 AM
Interested in the "Gone Fishing". Care to elaborate?. :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 03, 2016, 12:19:02 AM
Hi Mike, I could not find any references to "gone fishing"in the build diary.  I can try to explain something if I know more about what it is.

The cams are proprietary so I will be vague about their specs.  So as to stay out of trouble, the first intake cam is Moe.  Moe is a big bruiser.  The head flow steadies out at around 231 cfm at .400 lift.  This cam has .061 inches more lift than this and this is .021 inches more than recommended by EnginePro.  The other specs in comparison to EnginePro recommendations are the cam's LSA is 6.5 degrees more than recommended, the intake centerline is 9 degrees farther from TDC than suggested, and the exhaust duration is 10 degrees more than desired.

It will cost a lot of money to modify the cylinder head to accommodate this rascal and the delayed inlet valve closing drops the dynamic compression ratio considerably.  This looks to be more cam than the engine can use.  Does this seem reasonable?
 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on August 03, 2016, 08:52:07 AM
Wobbly, a few puzzlements on all this cam work--

Since “piston demand” is purely a geometrically and engine speed derived quantity, why do you keep citing it as being  at 28” ?   What does 28 inches have to do with it?  Also, the rpm at which this demand is calculated has not been given.

That being the case, on Moe’s graph, why does it show a demand after BDC? 

If this demand curve came out of EnginePro or someplace else, they apparently have made or used assumptions on the entire inlet tract--which gets into gas dynamics and is an area that EnginePro’s expertise may be doubtful.  In that case it is not so much “piston demand” but “ideal inlet tract demand discounting the existence of valves and other impedimentia as well as transient wave effects”.

You seem to put a lot of credence in EnginePro’s recommendations, but what is their basis for making those recommendations?  Is it for a good street engine or a full-on racer, or what?

The point is, making tuning evaluations on the basis of unclear representations may not produce the desired or indicated result.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 04, 2016, 09:52:59 AM
An error is corrected and the demand curve is moved over to where it should be as shown on the attached.  This is demand at 8300 rpm which was peak HP rpm when we did the dyno work using the lower lift cams.  Peak demand does change with rpm.  It does not make sense to use peak HP rpm.  This is on the decay side of the torque curve and inherintly flow into the combustion chamber does not equal piston demand.

What is the best rpm for these flow vs demand comparisons?

Engine pro is a program based on regression analysis statistics where they determine the characteristics of engines that give good performance in their sample population.  It gives a good idea of what seems to work.  It is good for telling the designer if they are out of the norm with some characteristic such as duration, etc.  It is not a design program.

The Schmidt program is not available.  What is a good program for analyzing this stuff including lag? 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on August 04, 2016, 09:56:35 AM
Bo, I get the basics but you lost me at Triumph!!!!!. :-D
That's some serious delving there. :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on August 04, 2016, 05:24:15 PM
Bo...........Your chart says that maximum flow is occurring at TDC :-o

Despite the annomoly, when piston demand exceeds flow capability................get out the Dremel..............or...........install a ram-air system............or both..............or............turbo/supercharge the motor.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 04, 2016, 09:41:05 PM
Hi, Mike.  The first step in fixing any valve train durability problem is to verify the cams are correct for the motor.  The disadvantage of cam on bucket systems is the lack of lift multiplication from a rocker arm.  The cam needs to do it all.

The Moe intake cam has a very successful history.  It was developed for an engine with much different airflow than the one I have.  It has plenty of lift and the lobes have a sort of fish head shape that gives plenty of lift for longer durations than a typical cam.  Unfortunately, it drops the valves onto their seats a bit fast.  Valve train longevity might be an issue.  This is something I need to figure out.  Is the massive amount of lift and duration it gives worth the added valve train wear?

The piston reaches bottom dead center and its motion no longer sucks in the mixture.  There is some momentum in the mixture traveling through the open intake valve and this forces the fuel/gas blend into the cylinder when the piston starts its upward travel.  This stops when the intake valve closes.  After this, the piston is traveling upwards and it compresses the mixture prior to combustion.  The intake valve closing is a critical event and I need to make sure it happens at the right time.  That is what I am trying to figure out now, and it is the optimum degrees for IVC.

Dennis, the head was reworked by one of the best guys in the country.  He found a lot of air flow in ports that had previously been ground on by others.  All I can do is to screw it up if I get out the Dremel.  What I am going to do is to lower the rpm I tune to so it matches what the head can flow.  I do not have much expertise in this and that is why I am posting it. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 05, 2016, 12:04:14 AM
Interested Observer, thanks for mentioning rpm and demand.  I was not aware of that.  The lower curve is at 7,800 rpm.  The maximum piston demand and the flow the head can supply match at 231 cfm at 28 inches.  It makes more sense to tune pipe lengths, pipe diameters, cams, etc to this flow rather than a larger one the head cannot supply.

Tonight I will start to measure the lift vs degrees of Larry.  This is the rephased exhaust cam I used as an intake cam.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 06, 2016, 12:46:14 AM
All of this cam stuff has me confused and I need to get it figured out.  last night I was looking around on the I-net and I found this www.audietech.com/dynomation-wrapper.html (http://www.audietech.com/dynomation-wrapper.html).
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on August 06, 2016, 08:35:42 AM
Wobbly,
The Dynomation program you found appears to be a dressed-up, more elaborate, and more user-friendly version of  the engine analysis program developed by Dr. Gordon Blair some while back.  His primary achievement was automated calculation of the gas transient dynamics involved in the inlet and exhaust tracts.  As such, the program would be a good tool for engine analysis/design, however, and I haven’t checked, you probably want to be sitting down when you look at the pricing.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on August 06, 2016, 09:47:32 AM
WW, you can buy direct: http://www.motionsoftware.com/purchasejac.htm

Some Dynomation data I can share from a [V-8] project just to show it's complicated! Units are mixed to get everything on one graph.

You can download the Dynomation manuals and it is a good education for free! Good overall explanations of a complicated, interactive subject.

You will still need a calibrated hacksaw to get the tuned lengths correct!  :-o :-D

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on August 06, 2016, 01:23:20 PM
Wobbly,
Thanks to Woody’s further info and the graph he presented, I think you can see that the program is rather powerful and useful for doing what you are setting out to do.  Eventhough the $500 is a chunk of money, it is considerably less than I had anticipated and much less than earlier, less well developed versions from Optimum software.  If I were in your shoes I would spend the money and save myself a lot of time and random misguided half-hearted partial efforts to synthesize a viable engine.  It will involve a certain learning curve and require a level of patience and attention to various details, but at least it deals with the whole enchilada, from the inlet horns to the end of the exhaust.  And it will give you a better understanding of what all is going on in the engine.  I would agree with Woody’s advice to download and digest the user manual and take a look at the following video clip that shows an example of how it works.

http://www.worlddragracing.com/downloads/UsingDynomation5_1.html
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 07, 2016, 01:48:35 AM
The records in the 1000cc classes are fast and getting faster.  It is a very competitive dogfight and I need to get lots of power in a hurry.  This rocket science type computer modeling is my only alternative and I will take your advice.

Old Burt Munro went faster than I will ever go without any of this fancy stuff.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 07, 2016, 12:15:36 PM
The crankshaft in the bike has 360 degree crank pins.  It also has 40,000 + miles of street use, over 260 dyno pulls, and 9 years of land speed racing.  There is an almost new 270 degree crank in the bone pile with balancers.  Can the program we are discussing work with the interactions between two cylinders with uneven firing order?  The enhance scavenging from connecting the two exhausts together on the 360 motor helps me a lot.  The math is simple in that application.  The headers are the same and correct length to make it work.  I suspect that headers of different lengths will be needed with the 270 crank and I do not know how to figure this out. 

The 270 crank gives better traction and that is what they use on the flat track bikes.  Heck, if new cams will be ground it is a good time to do the crank swap.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on August 07, 2016, 03:16:10 PM
Bo...........Lots of data on H-D 883 and XR motors............as well as Yamaha XS650 twins. The firing is at 270 and 360..............the crank is a 180..........Just like most of the Honda twins from '59 forward including current Shadow models.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 07, 2016, 07:51:41 PM
The 2001 through 2014 Bonnevilles, T-100's, and Thruxtons have crank pins at 360 degree spacing, and the Americas, Speedmasters, and Scramblers have 270 degree cranks with the crank journals 90 degrees apart.  The 2015 -on T-120 Bonnevilles, Thruxtons, and Speed Twins, etc have 270 degree cranks.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bones on August 08, 2016, 03:17:48 AM
Hi Wobbly
  How much HP does the computer say you can get with EVERYTHING  optimised?
  Will you get 10-15 hp? Which is maybe 5mph.
 Could you be better off developing the bodywork to get the increase in speed?
I know fiberglass is a bit@h to do,but I think aero is a cheaper and better way for speed when an engine is near its peak.

   cheers    Bones
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on August 08, 2016, 08:42:25 AM
Wobbly,
The following is a reply from Dynomation--

Dynomation will model multiple cylinder engines (1 to 16 cylinders). It will model collector exhaust systems. But Dynomation does not specifically model induction that joins two cylinders on the intake side. That is, if the intake valves from two cylinders are fed by a single port, this is not modeled. However, it makes little effect, UNLESS, those two joined cylinders draw charge during at the same time or have overlapping intake periods (like some early Mini engines). That does affect performance and is not modeled by Dynomation.

 

Thanks.

 

Larry Atherton

Motion Software, Inc.


Why do you want to change cranks?  Inspect the 360 for wear and cracks and put it back if OK.  It is also conceiveable to run individual pipes on a 270 if need be.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 09, 2016, 01:03:01 AM
Thanks for the advice.  I downloaded the users manual and they have some info about this.  The 270 cranks have a longer and shorter  intervals between power pulses as compared to the 360 crank.  The tire can dig in and get better grip during the longer pulses.  The flat track Triumphs all use 270 degree cranks for this reason. 

My downfall this year was trying to do too much and when I had problems I had no time and money to rectify them.  It is best that I keep the 360 crank in the bike and concentrate on cams, intake, and exhaust, only.

The bike is going into the wind tunnel after I retire and I have more time to work on it.  Chassis work does not cost much and takes lots of effort so it is a good task for that time in life. 

This is Curly, the retimed exhaust cam I used as an intake cam.  It has exactly the timing I want and it satisfies piston demand.  The intake valve closes 29 degrees earlier at .050 than with Moe and this give a much higher dynamic compression.  Also, unlike Moe, it uses the standard size lifter buckets.  The bike ran real good with this cam.  Unfortunately, it ate the tappet buckets and I cannot use it.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 10, 2016, 12:49:36 AM
This build diary shows basic tasks.  This is measuring figuring valve motion and cam timing.  The cam cards are often not accurate and various lift profiles can give valve motion properties that are not described on the cam card.  This is the intake cam "Larry."  It has been in use for seven or eight years.

The first step is to knock out the plugs in the cam ends.  It is important to replace these.  They are vital to maintain oil pressure on the cam journals.  Dorman plugs #555-007 and #555-092 work just great.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 10, 2016, 12:56:40 AM
Sometimes a part needs to be washed and it is too much trouble to get out the pan, brush, solvent, etc.  The cam is put in a plastic bag with a little solvent.  The bag is closed and it is swirled around and shook up.  Then the bag is opened and the clean cam is removed.  This is a trick I learned at the track years ago.

The little triangular badge that says "Made in England" was removed and a hole was drilled to turn the crank with an allen wrench.  A cover was made to block it off when the engine is used.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 10, 2016, 01:01:15 AM
This is another cover that is made to show TDC.  A scribe mark is exactly in the middle of the view down the hole when the pistons are at TDC.  The tool to hold the degree wheel is shown.  This is a double overhead cam engine.  A "double knocker" in British slang.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 10, 2016, 01:22:42 AM
The degree wheel is installed.  It is marked in crank degrees.  Valve motion data is wanted at 10 crank degree intervals.  The crank turns twice for every cam revolution.  Valve motion data is recorded at every 5 degrees of cam rotation to get 10 degree readings in crank degrees.

The degree wheel is moved so it reads TDC when the pistons are at TDC.  Now, the crank is rotated until the valve is 0.001 lower than  full lift.  This is an indicated 44 degrees ATDC.  Then, the crank is rotated through full lift and stopped when the valve is .001 lower than full lift.  This is at indicated 53 degrees ATDC.  Full lift is calculated as (44 + 53) / 2 = 48.5 degrees ATDC indicated or 97 degrees ATDC actual.  This is more accurate than trying to find full lift directly.  There are several degrees of crank rotation when the valve appears to be at full lift.

Cam base circles are sometimes not round or concentric with the cam centerline.  A habit I have is to always check and set valve clearance on the base circle directly opposite of the cam lobe tip.  This is at 48.5 degrees ABDC indicated.  The cam is rotated to this and the indicator is "zeroed." 

There is no clearance between the cam base circle and the bucket during any of this measuring.  The cam is in contact with the bucket during all 360 degrees of cam rotation.  The importance of this will become apparent later. 

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 10, 2016, 01:33:11 AM
The cam is rotated five degrees at a time and the valve movement is recorded.  It is rotated through a full 360 degrees and the measurements are compared.  The lift was "0.000" at 48.5 degrees ABDC when the indicator was zeroed and lift is "0.000" at the same position after the measuring is done.  This is called a closure check and it shows that the dial indicator was not knocked out of position during the measuring.  This is one reason to make sure there is no clearance between the cam and the bucket during this work.  It is hard to make a closure check if there is.

Raw instrument readings are recorded and no converting or calculating is done.  This means any errors on this sheet are from the measuring process.  Otherwise errors might be from measuring or calculating and it is hard to sort out which is which.  Calculations will be done later.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on August 11, 2016, 07:09:56 AM
Bo,
I always take an additional reading at .040" lift and .050" lift, in order to compare the cam to other cams which are usually rated at one of these two lift measurements.  Of course, you also have to revise the numbers to correspond with crankshaft degrees, as well.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 12, 2016, 02:35:11 AM
This is the valve movement curve.  It is based on 0.000 tappet clearance and its values are listed on the left.  A horizontal line is drawn .008 above the zero lift value.  This is the tappet clearance and I always set it at the bottom of the base circle opposite the cam lobe tip.

This displacement data will be used later during the computer analysis.  It is being collected now 'cause the engine is together.  I cannot get it if the motor is apart.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 12, 2016, 02:44:30 AM
This is the data listed on the upper right corner of the displacement sheet.  The flow data was measured at these lifts and theses are the degrees where these lifts happen.  Tom mentioned the degrees rotation at .040 and .050 lifts.  It would be measured from this displacement curve and it would be the distance above the horizontal line.  This is the actual lift.  The second picture illustrates this and where it is measured.  Lift does not occur until the tappet clearance is taken up.   

This is Larry, the intake cam that was in the bike during the dyno runs.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 13, 2016, 11:18:00 AM
These are the flow demand vs supply curves for Larry at 28 inches.  It does not flow all that bad.  I only got three horsepower with all of the modifications I did this year.  Larry was in the bike during the dyno pulls.  It is the only intake cam I have with functional tappet buckets.  Something else is wrong and it is preventing good performance.  The only thing to look at now is cam timing.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 13, 2016, 11:38:14 AM
Fap!, as Major Hoople used to say.  The problem reveals itself.

"What I need is a good set of cams for land speed that will not eat up the valve train.  I will optimize the engine around them."  That is what I said when I ordered the cams eight or nine years ago.  Larry and its exhaust cam buddy, Zeppo arrived in the mail.  These are the cams in the bike for everything I have done for many years.

Larry has 238 degrees duration and the cam card says 244.  Larry opens the intake valve .050 at 21 degrees BTDC.  The cam card says 15 degrees.  The intake valve closes at at 37 degrees ATDC.  The cam card says 47 degrees.

Larry would be a moderate cam if it conformed to the cam card.  It is a very mild cam as ground.  It is so far advanced that it cannot give good top end power.  This explains why I have been struggling with this motor for years and cannot get it to go fast.

A new cam supplier is warranted.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Sporty Dan on August 13, 2016, 01:40:40 PM
Wobbly, I'm glad you were able to find a root cause for the lack of power issues you have been having. Is there enough room to skip the cam chain a tooth on the gear? Or would that cause other issues?
As always I am impressed with the amount of research you do and data that you collect.  :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on August 13, 2016, 07:41:36 PM
Wobbly,
1)  Per the description in reply #2522, I assume the intake close at 37 deg ATDC should be ABDC.
2)  On Larry’s graph, also assume the 0.50” lift should be 0.050”.

Working from the graph, it would seem that the IO timing is about 15 degrees BTDC, as per the cam card.  Also, close at 0.050 would seem to be about 30 degrees ABDC, which doesn’t compare with the card or your citation of 37 degrees.  Where are you getting the 21 and 37 ?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 14, 2016, 01:28:54 AM
The cam check shown here should be standard operating procedure for all of us.  My LSR career would have been brighter if I would'a done this seven or eight years ago when I bought the cams.  The expression "back to the drawing board" applies in my case.  That is my grandfather's board and triangle.

Moving the cam a tooth to the retard will be something I look at with the big program. 

The y-axis on the graph shows lift with zero valve clearance.  The clearance is .008 so I measured lift from the horizontal line drawn that crosses the y-axis at .008.  The card has opening at 15 BTDC and closing at 49 ABDC.  The measurements from the graph show actual opening at 21 BBDC and closing at 37 ABDC with 238 degrees duration.  The cam card says 244 degrees.

The tools I have are books from various authors like Vizard, PipeMax, and EnginePro.  All sorts of valuable info is in them.  None tell me at what degree the intake valve closing event should be for my engine.  This is a critical item and the only way I know how to figure it out is Dynomation.

So, I need a place to run the program with a nice big monitor.  The junk in the shed is rearranged so there is a tiny "office" under the stairs.  This is the official Team Go Dog, Go! research and development center.  The keyboard is an old laptop with the screen removed.  It uses Windows 7 which is an improved version of Windows 8 and 10.

       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 16, 2016, 10:46:10 PM
My posts are pretty dull compared to speedweek.  The user's manual can be downloaded from the net without buying the program.  I will buy the software after payday.  The current task is to collect data to put into the program.  All of the intake cams are measured and now I am doing the exhaust cams.  This is Zeppo.  It is the companion to intake cam Larry and I have been running it for years.  The lobe centerline should be 105 and it is 91.  The duration should be 244 and it is 238, just like Larry.

The overlap is 47 degrees with a 94 degree lobe center angle and 238 duration, all at .050  This might seem to be pretty tight.  The Suzuki 1000cc GSXR runs a 90 lobe center angle with 80 overlap, so the cams might be out of spec, but not so far off as to be unheard of.  The Suzi has more duration, at 260 on both cams, so that might be how they make it work.  Both lift vs crank angle charts and the cam card are copied and sent to the grinder.  I am asking for a new set under warranty.  They clearly screwed up when they made mine.

These cams acted like ones with a lot of overlap, in hindsight.  A simple change such as going from one style of glasspak muffler to another yielded 8 HP.  Also, any sort of restrictive exhaust baffle caused horrible reversion problems.  Intake tuning was critical, too.  It had to be spot on to get HP.  Almost all of those over 200 dyno pulls were figuring this stuff out.  I am an idiot for not checking these cams during the initial install and a much wiser guy 'cause I did not.  They taught me a lot and at the very end I was able to get 90 HP from the motor. 
   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 02, 2016, 12:11:26 PM
The general rule for land speed racing is to do something on the bike every day.  The task for the last week or more is to walk down to the ABC market at 6 in the morning, buy a coffee and a hot rice bowl for breakfast, stroll across the street, sit on a bench overlooking Kapiolani Beach, and read the Dynomation users manual.  Tough duty, it is.  These Hawaiian assignments are rough.

The manual is at www.motionsoftware.com/downloads/Dynomation-UsersManual.pdf (http://www.motionsoftware.com/downloads/Dynomation-UsersManual.pdf)  It is 288 pages long and the Wave-Dynamics Analysis chapter at the back explains what I am doing.  The software will be ordered today and the first task is to model the engine I have and figure out what is going wrong.  The intake and exhaust systems were designed based on the cam card timing specs.  The cams are not close to those so the wave dynamics are goofy.  That is what I suspect and I will be able to find out if it is true.

Rose got on board the USS Harpers Ferry yesterday.  She will be puttering across the ocean to Camp Pendleton with Werner, our youngest boy, on the Tiger Cruise.  A hurricane will be passing by Oahu to the north when she is scheduled to depart.  That lady will have a story to tell about this, for sure.

. .  What I am doing is and
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 03, 2016, 12:46:10 AM
This is a reference that is recommended to me by the fellow who builds my valve train.  I ordered a copy.  www.sae.org/search/?sector=AUTO&qt=camshaft+reference+handbook&x=6&y=4 (http://www.sae.org/search/?sector=AUTO&qt=camshaft+reference+handbook&x=6&y=4)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 03, 2016, 12:54:02 AM
Another try.  Hopefully this works.http://www.sae.org/search/?sector=AUTO&qt=camshaft+reference+handbook&x=6&y=4 (http://www.sae.org/search/?sector=AUTO&qt=camshaft+reference+handbook&x=6&y=4)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 03, 2016, 01:01:49 AM
My small brain cannot figure out how to post a direct link.  Google "sae camshaft reference handbook" and it will pop right up like a chipmunk that smells popcorn.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on September 03, 2016, 09:19:09 AM
Try this link: http://books.sae.org/b-966/

You might like this one, too: http://books.sae.org/b-945/

"The Automotive Aerodynamics Handbook"

Woobly, I guess you will be our go-to camshaft guy now!  :-o :-D :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 04, 2016, 01:12:47 AM
Woody, thanx for posting those linx. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 07, 2016, 12:35:22 AM
The degree wheel I use is made for use on a crankshaft and I use it on the end of a cam.  This is recipe for confusion.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 07, 2016, 12:52:41 AM
This little chart makes things easier.  The degree wheel is set to TDC on the cam when the crank is at TDC in the overlap.  This way, the valve displacement vs crank angle drawings are easier to read.

Dynomation has a relatively simple Filling-and Emptying simulation, a much more complex Wave-Action simulation, and a hybrid that combines both of them.  The F&E simulation is the first one I will do and I need to describe the cams.  The program uses 10-point descriptions.  Four of the ten points are crank degrees for intake opening, intake closing, exhaust opening, and exhaust closing at 0.006 lift.  These are the seat-to-seat values.  Another four are these opening and closing points at 0.050 lift.  The last two values are the intake and exhaust cam gross lifts.  All are measure with no tappet clearance.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 09, 2016, 01:28:25 AM
This book is available from the Society of Automotive Engineers.  It does not have an ISBN number.  It covers a lot of topics about cams and valve trains that will help a person be a more informed consumer.  It is an important reference for me.  I will be evaluating digitized cam profiles, lifter and cam material compatibility, cam follower motion like displacement, speed, acceleration, and jerk, etc.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on September 09, 2016, 01:32:59 AM
http://books.sae.org/b-966/ (http://books.sae.org/b-966/) $149 list (printed), currently on backorder.  None on eBay or Amazon.

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 11, 2016, 02:17:03 PM
Maybe I got the last copy?  It is mandatory reading for someone like me who is working on an odd engine and pushing it to near its limits, or my wallet's, whichever is lower.

The wear failure on my cam is at the point of maximum curvature where the flank makes the transition to the toe on the leading side.  Valve spring pressure is greatest here.  There can be numerous causes for a failure at this location.

The Dynomation program comes with a library of over 6,000 cam profiles.  Likely suspects that give good performance can be modeled and I can ask the grinders if they can put them on my cams.  I can ask for a cam profile analyses and Hertz stress printouts for the lobes.  Also, I can ask for descriptions of the cam facing and recommended lifter materials.  Using this, I can verify if the proposed system will give me the performance I need with durability I can afford.

The camshaft reference handbook gives all sorts of lifter/cam compatibility data and maximum allowable contact stress info for OEM cam materials.  My cams will likely be hard facing or similar that is welded onto the OEM cams that will be sent in as cores.  The handbook does not address this.  Does anyone have any info about it?   

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on September 12, 2016, 11:03:51 AM
No help here..........other than welded-up cores are standard procedure at Mega-Cycle and my cam has no wear-marks. I am using standard rockers from a very low mileage motor. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 13, 2016, 01:03:25 AM
This is a link to a number of papers by Gordon Blair and Associates.www.profblairandassociates.com/RET_Articles.html (http://www.profblairandassociates.com/RET_Articles.html)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 13, 2016, 01:18:49 AM
Now, go down the list to "Making the Cam."  The type of valve train in the Triumph is bucket tappet as shown in Figures 1 and 3.  Note the cam profiles and especially Design D.  This aggressive profile is what I was using and need to use.  Note the oil film thickness.  It is less than with the other cams.  Any significant roughness on the cam or follower will break through the oil film and cause the radial scoring on the lifter and wear on the nose where the hertz stresses are the highest.  This is the distress I see.

Polishing the cam will be discussed with the grinder as well as the break in period with light springs.  One or both might be needed to wear and polish down the surface irregularities on the lobe and bucket top so they do not project through the oil film and cause metal-to-metal contact.  Also, using a 50-weight break in oil rather than 40 weight might help.  There is a special coating recommended by Kibblewhite for the bucket tops.  Slowly a plan is coming together.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on September 13, 2016, 07:57:55 AM
DLC (diamond like coating), is being used on some Pro Level engines with VERY high part loads.

You might want to inquire whether DLC might be compatible with the cam lobe material/finish.

Gird your wallet, it is expensive.

 :cheers:
F/B
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on September 13, 2016, 12:07:04 PM
F/B;

When I worked for Burr-Brown (later bought out by Texas Instruments) we used a diamond-like coating (DLC) on our integrated circuit wafers for surface passivation. I wondered then why it wasn't being adapted to cranks, cams, etc. It seemed like it would be even better than nitriding on journals. It sounds as if someone is using it now.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 17, 2016, 01:53:14 AM
There is quite a bit of information on it on the I-net.  Layer thickness, method of application, and lubricating oil additive package all need to be considered for DLC.  It is an engineered system.  The topic "So close but so far away" in the Technical Discussion group has a link to a good paper on it.

Imagine falling out of bed and landing on the top of your head on something that deforms when you hit it.  The impact load is spread out and it maybe you will survive the fall.  Picture yourself doing the same thing on a hard surface that does not deform.  The impact is not spread out and your head feels the concentrated load, your skull cracks, and your brains splatter.

It may be to my advantage to stay with a conventional softer lifters, polish the cams and lifters, and do the break in with light springs.  Also, I need to be careful and to choose a cam grind that avoids high stresses on the valve train.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on September 17, 2016, 11:44:54 AM
Race Motor = High Stress

Not too much, but ENOUGH :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 17, 2016, 02:34:44 PM
The Hertzian stress values for the cam and the lifter, valve drop and lift speeds off of the seat, and lifter and valve acceleration and jerk will be available from the programs I am getting.  Typical values for drag racing, circle track, road racing, and street are in the user's manuals and literature.  The stresses will be set up for a hot street engine.  Never have I had the desire to build a true race motor. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 18, 2016, 01:20:26 AM
This starts the 2017 build.  It will use Dynomation 5 virtual modeling.  Folks not familiar with the engine will be watching this.  Various things in earlier posts will be repeated so they can get a full picture of what is happening.  The first step is to measure components to get input data for the program.

The valve stem diameter is greater for the upper section in the valve guide.  The smaller diameter of the section in the air flow is used as program input.  It is 0.186 diameter for the inlet valve.

The combustion chamber type is needed.  This is a pentroof head with a squish band.  Cosworth did some development work for this engine and it shows.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 20, 2016, 01:09:42 AM
The intake port shapes after the bifurcation are elliptical except at the valve seat.  The area of an elliptical port is as follows.  a = the smallest diameter and b = the largest diameter.  Area = [(a x b) / 4] x pi

The area at the entrance to the intake port just downstream from the bifurcation is 1.01 square inches.  The area just upstream from the hole for the valve guide is 0.980 square inches.  The area just downstream from the valve guide hole is 0.942 square inches.  The inside of the valve seat is 0.963 square inches.

The minimum port area is used to calculate wave dynamics properties.  The intake valve stem obstructs the smallest port area.  I was going to subtract the intake valve stem area from the smallest port area.  Tech support says the stem is not a significant obstruction from a wave dynamics standpoint and its area should not be subtracted.  The minimum port area is 0.942 inches per valve in the data input.

This is the valve assembly part of the valve train.  it is a stainless steel valve, a spacer shim, a spring seat, an inner spring, an outer spring, a titanium spring retainer, and two collets.  Everything is made by Kibblewhite.  The parts can be purchased and installed by the builder.  Kibblewhite installed these.  The reason is they adjust the valve stem length so it is midway in the range of valve shim thicknesses.  Otherwise, there could be problems with obtaining the needed shim under the follower bucket.  They also check spring pack length and other critical dimensions. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 20, 2016, 10:56:45 PM
These engines are run to over 10,000 rpm in Australia.  The standard valve train is used as a baseline and I will make a simple and semi-accurate analysis to see if I want to do the same.  The valve train stresses are proportional to the reciprocating mass.  Heavier parts make more stress.  The reciprocating valve train is considered to be the intake valve, 1/3 of the valve spring weight, the spring keeper, and the collets.  The stock Triumph setup weighs 97 grams.  The racing system, wit a 2mm larger intake valve, weighs 83 grams.  [(97 - 83) / 97] x 100 = 14% less weight

The valve train forces are proportional to spring stiffness.  Seating force with the Triumph spring is 45#.  The spring force with the race springs and no shim is 52#.  This is adequate for milder race cams.  The spring force with race springs and the shim is 60#.  The shim will be used, so this is a [(60 - 45) / 45] x 100 = 33% more spring force

The standard rev limit was 7,300 rpm.  The rev limit I am using now is 9,000 rpm.  The Aussies are using 10,000.  This is 3,650, 4,500, and 5,000 cam rpm.  The valve train stresses are proportional to the rpm squared.  Squared, in millions of rpm, this is 13.3, 20.3, and 25.0  Using 4,500 rpm, the increase is [(20.3 - 13.3) / 13.3] x 100 = 53% more stress.  With a 5,000 rpm rev limit, the increase is [(25.0 - 13.3) / 13.3] x 100 = 88% more stress.

Adding up the pluses and minuses for a 9,000 rpm rev limit, 33 - 14 + 53 = 72% more  Doing the same for a 10,000 rpm rev limit, 33 - 14 + 88 = 107 percent more.  This assumes the same cams for both situations.  It does not consider the greater stresses from a more aggressive cam or the thinner oil film in a more highly tuned and hotter engine.

I am not sure which way I will go.

   

   dli{(on the      engi
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on September 20, 2016, 11:36:04 PM
"These engines are run to over 10,000 rpm in Australia."

Remember, down there the valves just fall back into place because the engines are upside down!  :-D :-D :-D  8-) 8-) 8-)

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on September 21, 2016, 08:21:14 AM
Wobbly, a couple comments--

The intake port looks more oval than elliptical, may have more area.

Have you acquired weightless buckets and shims for the valves?

Race springs likely have a higher spring rate as well as increased seating force.  Higher load/stress at or near max lift.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 21, 2016, 10:01:11 AM
The fellows in AUS also remove the counterbalancers and shave the crank bobweights.  In my thoughts now are the triumph streamliner team that are tying to do far too much, too soon, with little experience and getting no results except problems.  The bike has been in impound at the speed trials five years in a row and has held or holds seven records.  None of them are exceptionally fast but the incremental development method is serving me well.  It is best for me to stay at 9,000 rpm till I get that sorted, reliability wise.  Ten grand has a nice sound to it and is very tempting.

The buckets and shims are in the listed weights.  I forgot to mention them.  The standard Triumph bucket has a shim on the top which is 25mm dia and the race shim is 10mm dia and it sits underneath the bucket in a circular hole on the top of a titanium valve spring retainer.  That is how the race system saves weight.  The little ports that feed each valve are the ones I measured.  They are elliptical.  That big port is upstream from the bifurcation and it is oval.  The smallest port areas on this engine are downstream from the split.  The springs do have a higher rate.  I will need to consider that.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 23, 2016, 08:39:54 PM
The valve diameter is based on the outside diameter.  The intake valves are 2 mm larger than standard and the exhausts are the standard size.  The combustion chamber was enlarged to accommodate the larger valve seats and a minimal amount of metal was removed from around the valves to reduce shrouding.  This small change dropped the compression ratio considerably.  The pistons provide 13:1 compression with the standard combustion chamber.  The measured compression is 11.7:1 with the bigger intake valves.  The head provides plenty of flow so the valves will not be enlarged to get more.  The mach number will be checked and the valve size increased on that basis, if needed.

A piston is in the second picture.  The piston crown edge touches the bore side when the engine is cold and before the piston is fully expanded from combustion heat.  The ceramic coating was truncated on the crown top away from the bore edge.  This reduces the chance of the hard coating rubbing against the cylinder walls.  Two alloys can be used for these pistons.  High silicon 4032 which is long wearing and best for lower stressed street bike use is one alloy.  No silicon 2618 is more suited for race motors with high physical and thermal stresses.  These are the 2618 option.  It is a relatively soft alloy.  The coating is intended to protect the skirt from wear until the rings scrub down the fresh honing and smooth the cylinder walls.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 23, 2016, 08:47:12 PM
The gudeon pin offset is needed for the short block data.  It is used in the internal friction calculations.  A pin offset towards the piston thrust face makes the rod more "straight-up-and-down" during the compression stroke.  This reduces the pressure on the piston thrust face and consequently the friction loss.  The pins on these are offset just over 1mm toward the thrust face.

An easy way to figure out pin offset is to measure the distance between one piston face and the back of the opposite side of the pin, then turn the piston around 180 degrees and repeat the procedure.  Subtract the little measurement from the big one and divide the result by two.  This is the pin offset. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 24, 2016, 10:46:25 AM
The big brown truck stopped by a few days ago and the delivery guy gave Rose a package. In it is the Dynomation 5 program.  It was ordered from Audie Technologies, it cost $518 and there are two compact disks and a security key.  This gives the program some portability and durability.  I can move it from computer to computer and if the computer pukes up its hard drive, I do not lose the program.  The program is windows based.  My preference is Windows 7 for PC use.  Fortunately the thing will work with it.

The program is one of the two disks.  The other is the entire Comp Cams lobe profile library with over 1700 grinds.   This is what sold me on the program and its use.  All of the other cam grinders I know about do not provide this level of detail about their products.  Unfortunately for them, this profile data is what I need to make an intelligent choice, so Comp Cams grinds will be looked at.

The tech support fellow is giving me good service.  Several questions about how to measure things for input data were answered quickly and I was told what I needed to know.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 25, 2016, 12:30:28 AM
The engine data is entered and I went through the on-line Comp Cams catalog for lobe grinds.  There are three for an overhead cam engine with direct acting lifters and 1.1 inch wide buckets.  #9013 has 0.410 lift and 226 duration at .050, #9014 has 0.420 lift at 232 duration at .050, and #9015 has 0.430 lift at 238 duration at 0.050.

The cam timing optimization options were used in the filling-emptying model.  The best combination is a moderate lift #9014 lobe for intake and a higher lift #9015 for exhaust with a 110 degree lobe centerline.  This equates to 107 crank HP or 96 rear wheel HP.

The need for a higher lift exhaust cam makes me think the exhaust valves may be too small.  Tomorrow evening the wave action model will be used to look at mach numbers.

The intake flow data I entered was for the head, manifold, carb, and air cleaner at 28 inches.  Then, I also calculated and entered the carb restriction based on 10 inches.  A call was made to tech support.  I thought I was entering the carb loss twice.  They said I was and the flow data should be for the head and manifold, only.  Fortunately I have that and it will be entered later this evening.

The program has a feature to look for optimum cam timing for any fixed lift value.  I wanted to figure out optimum lift.  The tech support guy says that is too hard to program.  Flow and HP tend to get better with more lift and there is no way to set a realistic ceiling.  He said to look at the physical limits of the valve train, durability, and affordability to figure out maximize lift, then to optimize the cam timing for that lift.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 25, 2016, 11:28:16 AM
This morning I fixed the flow data.  Flow with the head and manifold at 28 inches is used.  The carb restriction is added separately.  Also, higher lift and longer duration intake cams were modeled.  None made much of a difference in power.  The power I am maximizing is the area under the horsepower curve between 5,000 and 9,000 rpm.  There are four choices to maximize, peak torque, peak power, greatest area under torque curve and greatest area under the HP curve.  The cam combination that worked yesterday is retained for today.

It looks like the barrier to more HP is in the exhaust side of things.  The system I was modeling and is on the bike is large headers with mufflers and no cats.  This morning the entry was changed to large dia stepped headers and open exhaust.  There was a big jump in power, 10 hp at the flywheel, so I need to do this change.  The program will give me the optimized dimensions for this exhaust type.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 27, 2016, 12:05:44 AM
Oops, I started to select cam profiles without considering the minimum base circle radius.  This is the radius of the cam opposite of the lobe tip.  It needs to be correct in order to obtain the correct tappet clearance.  There is a limited range of clearance adjustment shims.

The first step is to lay the head on a surface plate, which is a piece of plate glass in this shop, and to measure the height of the cam journal when it is sitting in the head.  It is 5.464 inches.

The next step is to measure the height of the base circle opposite from the cam lobe.  It is 5.560 inches. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 27, 2016, 12:15:07 AM
Now the cam journal diameter is measured.  It is 0.904 inches.  The height of the cam centerline is the height of the top of the journal minus half its diameter.  This is 5.464 - (0.904 / 2) = 5.012 inches

The base circle minimum radius is the height of the base circle minus the height of the cam centerline.  This is 5.560 - 5.012 = 0.548.  Base circle radii are nominally described to the nearest 0.010 inch, so the minimum base circle radius is 0.450.

There is another minimum base circle radius I can use.  It is based on the height of the button in the follower cap.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 27, 2016, 12:20:38 AM
This is measuring the button.  There are two button heights, 0.098 and 0.135.  Mine are the larger ones.  Use of the smaller ones allows a bigger base circle, as follows:  0.450 + (0.135 - 0.098) = 0.487 inches.  A cam with a 0.490 inch minimum base circle radius can be used if the followers have shorter buttons. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 27, 2016, 01:01:03 AM
Ack!  The cam profile selection for a 0.450 minimum base circle dia is exactly zero.  There is only one cam profile for a minimum base circle dia of 0.500 with reasonable lift.  That base circle dia is within the shim range if I use buckets with smaller buttons.  It is Comp Cams 6807, minimum BCR = 0.500, minimum tappet bucket dia = 1.000, duration at 0.010 = 286, and duration at .050 = 250.  It is for a flippin' Volkswagen.  Who knows, it might work.  That will be tonight's project.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on September 27, 2016, 07:52:31 AM
Quote
The base circle minimum radius is the height of the base circle minus the height of the cam centerline.  This is 5.560 - 5.012 = 0.548.  Base circle radii are nominally described to the nearest 0.010 inch, so the minimum base circle radius is 0.450.

Shouldn't that be 0.550 ?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on September 27, 2016, 08:49:17 AM
Hey - somebody else is awake enough to read the numbers carefully.  I thought i saw something funny -- but didn't question it.  I showered first -- and by then you'd seen it.

But - is it an error or is it Oregon Cam-Speak? :roll:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 28, 2016, 12:06:59 AM
This is really great for you'll to see my mistake.  I guess I cannot use that VW lobe.  It looked pretty good in the engine simulation.  The selection of lobes for a .548 base circle is even slimmer, there are a couple of ones at .540 and .544 for a flathead Ford...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jack Gifford on September 28, 2016, 12:53:58 AM
Hey Wobbly- if you don't mind a personal question- how'd you come by that moniker?
The most famous context of that word (at least to me) was the "wobbly web" wheel designed by Colin Chapman in 1957. I think it was a brilliant design. (Google it).
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 28, 2016, 03:03:53 AM
Jack, it was a tendency to get into speed wobbles on the salt flats that earned me that nickname.  The walrus part of it is sorta obvious when looking at my sleek and hydrodynamic shaped figure.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: ggl205 on September 28, 2016, 10:52:04 PM
This is really great for you'll to see my mistake.  I guess I cannot use that VW lobe.  It looked pretty good in the engine simulation.  The selection of lobes for a .548 base circle is even slimmer, there are a couple of ones at .540 and .544 for a flathead Ford...

Wobbly, give Dema Elgin a call at Super Lobes. I think his cam shop is still in Redwood City, CA. He has what you need.

John
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 29, 2016, 10:24:37 PM
The least cost alternative is to find an off-the-shelf cam set.  Calls have been made to folks I know in the UK, AUS, and here in the US.   What I am asking for is cam card data so I can enter it into the program and see how the cam works.  The next step if a ready-made pair cannot be found is to call Dema.

Lots and lots of early morning and late night hours are spent banging away at the computer.  What I am doing is varying something like valve size, compression, etc and looking at trends.  One thing that is notable is the best cam for the engine is not radical.  Basic optimum specs are .380 to .400 lift with no advantage to the higher lift, 107.8 to 108.8 lobe center angle depending on lift, 103 to 103.5 intake centerline depending on lift, 271 to 272 intake duration at .006 lift (seat to seat), and 283 to 284 exhaust duration at .006.  These are mild enough specs that a long lasting and low maintenance valve train is possible.  Also, these lobes will fit on the standard tappet buckets.  Life is good.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 30, 2016, 10:33:22 AM
Some sort of a plan is coming together.  These Cosworth style four valve heads, professionally ported, flow real good. It does not take  huge valves to provide all of the flow the engine can use.  This is good 'cause fitting bigger valves requires enlarging the combustion chamber around them and the compression drops dramatically.  The program says the valves and ports I have are basically OK, with 1mm larger exhaust valves helping a very small amount.  The cams that are needed to make all of this happen are fairly mild so valve train durability is easy to get.  That is one big worry I had.

Now, it seems there are no major obstacles to moving the rev limit up 1,000 rpm to ten grand except the pistons.  An e-mail will be sent to Arias asking them about this.  They made the pistons and should be able to give some good advice.  The program says there are some big advantages to increasing the peak HP rpm from 8,500 to 9,500. 

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 01, 2016, 10:51:08 AM
There are three models in Dynomation with different input requirements as per cam information.  The relatively simple filling-and-emptying model uses a 10 point cam description including opening and closing degrees at .006 lift, opening and closing degrees at .050 lift, and lift.  That is five points per lobe and ten points when both lobes are considered.

A lot of details on the intake and exhaust systems are not used in the simple F and E model.  I simply entered the type which was a stepped header and the model assumes I have optimized the design of a header of this description.

The F and E program optimizes the lobe center angle, intake and exhaust cam timing, and durations for a given lift.  So, I futzed around using different lifts and found those in the .380 to .400 range work good.  Also, the program figured out the optimum cam timing.

The next stage is wave analysis when the detailed intake and exhaust system info is input and the serious work starts.  Lobe profiles are needed for this.  So, the task is to find a person willing to share their profile with a complete stranger so they figure out whether or not they will buy the cam.  Also, that person needs to be willing to grind the profile on the cam.  This is sorta like being a horny dachshund in a cage full of great danes.  Rejection City.

There are three options i am looking at.  First preference is to look at the cams used in the mile racers like I saw at Sacramento.  The big carbs were purchased from that tuner and he is a nice guy and easy to work with.  Second is to work with a custom cam grinder like Dema if mile bike cams will not work.  Cost might be an issue.  Third is to order two OEM Triumph intake cams for a 790cc model, grind the welds off that hold the gears to the shafts, realign the shafts on the gears, and use them.  That third option is what I will investigate this weekend.  It is always good to have a Plan A, Plan B, and Plan C.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 01, 2016, 03:36:59 PM
There is a Plan D.  Two sets of race cams were made by the same company.  One was bought in 2009 at I used it since then.  The other is a new set I that I used the exhaust cam from for development purposes.  The old set has profiles that are ground to spec.  The intake and exhaust lobe centerline angles are 9 and 12 degrees out of spec.

Note how the gear is tack welded to the shaft on the new cam and not on the old.  Methinks the camshafts slipped in the gears after almost 200 dyno pulls and years of racing.  This is why I could not get more than 87 HP out of the engine despite all sorts of work.

Ten point lobe descriptions are put into Dynomation for those old lobes.  The optimize option is used to determine the best durations and timing for those aged rascals.  The recommended durations are more than these cams have so they are not optimal in that respect.  The lobes were put in the optimal settings based on lobe center angle and intake centerline angle.  The virtual crank HP is 114.98 at 9,000 rpm.  That is right up near the best I have found after days of dinking around with various combinations of lift, etc.

The plan is to ask web cam to move those gears around to the settings I want and to tack them in place.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 04, 2016, 03:26:33 PM
There are a lot of things that can be changed on an engine and it is hard figure out the right combination.  This is how I use Dynomation to figure out some basic stuff, like optimum valve size and cam lift.  The filling-emptying model is used and it assumes these are optimized:  ignition timing, exhaust system using a stepped header, intake system tuned length, and gasoline selection.

The descriptive data is entered for the engine.  The "Cam Timing" option is selected with optimization of the area under the horsepower curve between 5,000 and 9,000 rpm.  As many things as possible will be optimized so the two variables I am interested in comparing will be segregated from all of the other stuff that could be changed. 

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 04, 2016, 03:32:35 PM
The program is run.  The output screen shows the combinations of duration, lobe center angle, and lobe centerlines for the cam with the lift value I entered.  The bars on the graph are in horsepower-rpmx1,000.  This reflects the area under the curve.  The first cam timing combo looks good so I select it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 04, 2016, 03:36:35 PM
This is the data screen.  The lifts are the values I originally entered.  The cam timing values such as durations, lobe centerline angle, and lobe centerlines are changed to reflect the optimum settings. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 04, 2016, 03:40:32 PM
This one of the engine data output screens and the horsepower is listed in the orange column.  This combo gives about 92 crank HP at 8,500 with typical Bonneville salt flats atmospheric conditions.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 04, 2016, 04:00:07 PM
This scratchy set of shop notes shows nine combinations of valve diameters and cam lifts.  The flow test results from the 26mm intake valves in the bike were extrapolated to get flows for the bigger valves.  The drop in compression from the head work to install bigger valves is considered, too.

This chart shows several things.  First, there is nothing to be gained by installing 2mm larger exhaust valves.  This would require new seats and is quite expensive.  I was going to do this before I got the program.  There are some small increases from installing 1mm larger exhaust valves.  This can be done using the existing seats.  This I will do.

The area under the power curve between 5,500 and 9,500 was optimized.  Cams with optimum timing all give HP peaks at 8,500 rpm.  The ignition modules are all programmed for a 9,000 rpm rev limit.  They can be left alone.  Nothing is gained by reprogramming them.

There are very slight power increases to be had by increasing lift.  This is not enough to warrant it.  The cams can have lift between .380 and .400 which provides the gentlest valve action.

The program has paid for itself by preventing me from making previously planned changes that would have done nothing.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 04, 2016, 05:31:16 PM
The old cams I have been using are slipped in their timing gears.  Their gross lift is 0.388 and their duration at .050 is 244.  These lobes were entered into Dynomation and the timing optimized.  Their best is 92.53 hp at 8,500 rpm.  Not bad and only a HP less then the optimized cams on the previous worksheet.

Next, I called web cam to get the gears reinstalled at the settings I want and to have them tack welded.  They suggested that I buy a set of adjustable cam gears so I can adjust the cams to exactly what they should be and this will compensate for wear in the timing chain, etc.  It made sense from a financial outlay viewpoint to do this so I ordered a pair.

The old cams make make 92.88 hp at 9,500 rpm with the big 28mm valves.  This will require reprogramming the ignition modules and having new seats installed along with bigger valves for only a fraction of a horsepower increase.  Again, this will be big financial outlay for not much gain and not worth the trouble.

The plan is to send the head and cams to Kibblewhite so they can install 1mm larger exhaust valves and get a tad more flow from the exhaust ports and get the old cam profiles digitized.  This can be used to design the intake tuned length and the stepped header.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on October 05, 2016, 06:10:24 AM
The old cams I have been using are slipped in their timing gears.  Their gross lift is 0.388 and their duration at .050 is 244.  These lobes were entered into Dynomation and the timing optimized.  Their best is 92.53 hp at 8,500 rpm.  Not bad and only a HP less then the optimized cams on the previous worksheet.

Next, I called web cam to get the gears reinstalled at the settings I want and to have them tack welded.  They suggested that I buy a set of adjustable cam gears so I can adjust the cams to exactly what they should be and this will compensate for wear in the timing chain, etc.  It made sense from a financial outlay viewpoint to do this so I ordered a pair.

The old cams make make 92.88 hp at 9,500 rpm with the big 28mm valves.  This will require reprogramming the ignition modules and having new seats installed along with bigger valves for only a fraction of a horsepower increase.  Again, this will be big financial outlay for not much gain and not worth the trouble.

The plan is to send the head and cams to Kibblewhite so they can install 1mm larger exhaust valves and get a tad more flow from the exhaust ports and get the old cam profiles digitized.  This can be used to design the intake tuned length and the stepped header.

Bo,

You will not regret making this purchase.    Adjustability is the way to go.   There is nothing more frustrating than not being able to adjust something the way you want to or NEED TO . . . . .

 :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 08, 2016, 12:59:55 AM
The big brown truck brought the cam gears.  I made the mistake of opening the box and looking at the gears during dinner.  Oldest daughter, Heidi, picks up the invoice and says "Those dinky parts cost HOW much?!"  The explanation I had didn't sound very convincing to Rose.  I will never make that error again.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on October 08, 2016, 08:59:37 AM
That, Bo, was a major screw-up!!!!  Normally I know we don't hassle one another (on this Forum) for making dumb mistakes, but this takes the cake and all racers need to see what happens when --

When we don't ask the vendor to put BOTH invoices in the box, the "Mrs." version being right on top.  You know -- the version that says: "WebCam Adjustable Cam Gears - $12.44 plus shipping of $2.76".

The "real" invoice will likely include a surcharge for the Mrs. copy, but what the heck -- it's worth it! :cheers: :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 09, 2016, 01:52:40 PM
Rose does the books and knows exactly how much I spend, most of the time.  Lots and lots of money has been spent since the Pendine race with no results and she knows this, too.  She hasn't said anything negative and I am staying within my $500 a month race budget, sort of.  She rode pillion on our first date on the back of a BSA A-65 Spitfire.  That was 40 years ago.  Maybe she figures bikes and husband are a package deal.

The first stage in the build design is done and it used the filling-emptying model with ten point cam data.  There is a procedure for optimizing bore and stroke.  That cannot be changed due to budget considerations so I did not look at it.  The first thing looked at was inlet port minimum area.  The formula is on Page 250 in the users manual and it is (RPM x Stroke x Bore Squared) / 190,000.  The minimum area is 2 x (8,500 x 2.677 x 3.8**2) / 190,000 = 1.73 square inches.

The minimum port area is between the valve seat and the hole for the valve stem.  It is 1.89 square inches for the two ports.  The engine has adequate intake port minimum area.  There are all sorts of problems if this area is too big so it will be left as is.  The intake valve sizes will stay at 2mm larger than standard.  There is flow data for this size valve and an old and smaller manifold so I had to estimate flow with the new bigger manifold.  Kibblewhite is asked to do a flow test with the bigger manifold so I can rerun the simulations using measured values.

The second thing examined was the exhaust valve size.  There is a measured flow vs lift curve for 26mm valves.  The low lift flows for bigger valves are extrapolated based on increases in curtain periphery.  The high lift flows are based on the proportional increase in valve head area.  The flows at intermediate lifts are interpolated between these.  This represents bigger valves, seat diameter enlargement, and some grinding on the ports.

All cam timing simulations compared the three different valve sizes, 26, 27, and 28 mm.  The compression losses due to combustion chamber modifications were also considered.  This is 11.7 to 1 with standard exhaust valves, 11.5 to 1 with 1mm larger valves, and 11 to 1 with the 28mm valves.  The 27 mm exhaust valves consistently gave better performance in the simulations.  The flow data estimates are sent to Kibblewhite.  They will be asked if these flows appear to be obtainable with using the existing valve seats, enlarged a tad, with 27mm valves.  This will be done if it is possible.  The compression loss associated with bigger seats will be too much and the 26 mm valves will be the best option if this occurs.

Cam timing was the third thing considered.  Sensitivity analyses were made to see how performance changed with variations.  Lift was not a significant factor as long as it was over .370 to .380 inches.  Duration was not critical as long as it did not get too far from the optimized values of 273 for intake and 284 for exhaust at seat-to-seat (.006 lift).  Cam timing was most critical with 102 for intake centerline and 115 for exhaust.

The all-purpose cams I have used for years have .380 lift.  This is adequate.  Seat to seat duration extrapolated from .050 timing values is 291.6 for both.  These cams, with intake and exhaust lobe centers at 101.5 and 114 give good simulated horsepower.  These cams will be used.  Kibblewhite is asked to send me digital lobe profiles so I can do more complex wave simulation modeling.  They are also asked to check spring tension and valve train harmonics with these cams.

Last, rpm at peak power was looked at.  Cam timing and valve size could be varied to move the horsepower peak up from 8,500 rpm to 9,500 or higher.  Peak horsepower did not increase.  Torque decreased and this was offset by the higher rpm to produce the same power.  Peak power target rpm is kept at 8,500.  There is less chance of wearing out and breaking stuff at that rpm.

That is it for now.  The head, cams, etc were sent out yesterday.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 15, 2016, 12:29:41 AM
The simpler filling-and-emtying model assumes the intake and exhaust systems are optimized.  The more complex wave-action model is used to design these two systems.  A digital model of a cam lobe needs to be imported into the program.  It cannot use the simple 10-point cam descriptions.  The fellow who is going to digitize my cams is out of his office on business and I want to start on the modeling.  This is an imported Comp Cam profile that is similar to my cams if I enter a 1.063 rocker ratio.  Using this, I can rough in the intake and exhaust system designs.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 15, 2016, 11:07:47 AM
Some wave analysis shows me that tuning the intake system is a no-brainer.  The intake length tuned to the second harmonic gives more power but with a peakier power spike.  The intake length for the third harmonic gives a bit less power but a wider peak.  Preliminary results say moving the bell mouth back about 3/4 of an inch should do the trick for max power at 8,500 rpm with the third.  This will be fine tuned when I get the lobe profile.

The filling-emptying model assumes the exhaust system is optimized and it shows a big power gain with a stepped header and collector system as compared to the one I have.  It is an "H" header with two glass pak mufflers.

The picture shows the race exhaust system on the Triumph factory team mile bike.  It is a stepped header going into a collector and it is basically what I need.  The header pipes are parallel for a considerable distance upstream from the collector so there is room for me to move the junction for fine-tuning.  The program will give me the info I need to do this.  It looks like I can get my dirty little paws on one of these.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 18, 2016, 12:21:35 AM
Now it is time to start the virtual build.  A Comp Cam 9042 profile is selected with .360 lift, 265.8 duration at .006 (seat-to-seat), 221.1 duration at .050, .55 base circle radius, and default lobe centerline angles of 110 degrees.  It will be used for intake and exhaust.  The first pix shows its profile being imported into Dynomation.  The entry screen with the 110 lobe center angles is shown in the second pix.

The cam timing is optimized for the greatest area under the horsepower curve between 5,000 and 9,000 rpm.  265.6 intake duration and 277.2 exhaust duration are recommended.  The 9042 lobes are not far from this.  103.9 and 113.3 intake and exhaust lobe center angles are recommended.  The cam manager screen showing this is in the third pix.  The input screen for the cams set to those specs is show in the fourth pix.



   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 18, 2016, 12:40:07 AM
The 9042 cams produce 83.40 flywheel HP at 7,500 rpm with 71.69 pounds-foot torque at 4,500 rpm.  This is shown in the first pix.  The valve clearance I am using is .008 intake and .010 exhaust.  There is a good chance I can nip that up a couple of thou with no problems, and especially if the valve heads are thermal barrier coated so they stay cooler and the valves expand less.

The lash is nipped up to .006 intake and .008 exhaust.  The input screen in the second pix shows this.  The cam timing is optimized again and the lobe center angles are 102 and 113.4 for the intake and exhaust cams, respectively.  Power is now 86.59 at 8,000 rpm and torque is 71.85 at 4,500 rpm.  A few horsepower more and worth the trouble.  This is something I can discuss with the expert at Kibblewhite.

Now, I have the cam profile and it is Comp Cam 9042, the lobe centerline angles at 102 intake and 113.4 exhaust, and the lash at .006 intake and .008 exhaust. 

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Freud on October 18, 2016, 01:05:30 AM
 Duration was not critical as long as it did not get too far from the optimized values of 273 for intake and 284 for exhaust at seat-to-seat (.006 lift).  Cam timing was most critical with 102 for intake centerline and 115 for exhaust.


(.006 lift?)

Really

FREUD
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 18, 2016, 09:33:28 AM
The seat-to-seat valve timing is defined as .006 lift in a Society of Automotive Engineers guideline or standard.  This accounts for some variation in the base circle radii due to manufacturing tolerances.   A lot of lobes do not have a fully round base circle and there is one low spot on the base circle and everywhere else is some sort of lift, even if it is a few thousandths.  The seat to seat duration would almost be 360 degrees when measured with no tappet clearance.  This way of defining seat-to-seat allows for small imperfections in the base circle radii.

It is a controversial practice.  More than one cam grinder tells me that it means nothing as per comparing cams against each other in real-world performance.  They say I should only look at the part of the lift curve when the valve is open enough to provide flow.

The software uses these .006 lift figures for all sorts of things.  My feeling is "when in Rome act like a Roman" as the saying.  So, I do things the way the user's manual and tech support guy says.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 19, 2016, 12:56:55 AM
The intake tract length from valve face to the primary expansion point, the minimum intake port area, and the intake area just inside the intake bell is entered.  The minimum exhaust port area is entered along with some initial exhaust system specs.  There are formulae in the users manual to compute the latter.  Now it is time for wave analysis.

The intake tract length is optimized first.  The primary expansion point can be moved about 1/2 an inch back or an inch forward.  These are the screens I am looking at to do this.  The vertical striped bar on the top graph shows the rpm that is being analysed.  HP and torque are shown, too.  The second graph shows port pressure with the green line being the intake and red line the exhaust port.  The space between the vertical lines IVO on the left and EVC on the right are the area of concern.  This is the overlap period.

Cylinder pressure is shown on the bottom graph at two different scales.  The green is an overview of pressure throughout the entire cycle and the red is a detail of the pressure during overlap.

The goal is to have the pressure in the intake tract drop during the overlap.  The green line slants down from left to right between IVO and EVC when this happens.    Fresh charge is pushed into the combustion chamber when this occurs.  Note that at 6,000 rpm there is very little pressure drop.  Things are a lot better at 8,000 rpm.  There is a big pressure drop during overlap. 

Various intake tract lengths are looked at within the 1.5 inch adjustment range and the best one will be selected.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 20, 2016, 09:53:23 PM
Within the overlap period the inlet port pressure should decrease as the crank angle increases.  Five intake tract lengths are examined, 9.2, 9.7, 10.2, 10.7, and 11.2 inches.  The port pressures had the best gradient with a 10.2 inch inlet tract and this is a half inch shorter than it is now.  Here are the printouts from 5,000 to 9,000 rpm. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 20, 2016, 09:55:23 PM
And 9000 rpm.  The horsepower numbers also show this length to be the best.  Next, the exhaust system will be optimized.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on October 22, 2016, 09:56:24 AM
"Duration was not critical as long as it did not get too far from the optimized values of 273 for intake and 284 for exhaust at seat-to-seat (.006 lift)."

A cam with durations of 273/284º at .006" lift would only have durations around 220-240º (or less) at .040" lift.  Isn't this a very mild cam?  I don't have any experience with OHC 4 valve motors, so maybe they don't need the long duration valve timing that our pushrod 2 valve motors.

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 22, 2016, 12:04:59 PM
The two lobe profiles I can find are for Comp Cams grinds and they are supplied with the program.  The best one is this 9042 profile.  There is no success in getting profiles from anyone who grinds these cams.  There are lobe profiles for radical full race cams I have.  They were digitized by Kibblewhite.  The intake cam would beat the valve gear apart pretty quick.  The exhaust cam is OK in that respect and I am modeling it in an alternative virtual build.  The old all-purpose cams I have been using for years have decent lobe shapes.  Kibblewhite is digitizing them.  The combos I am looking at in the other model are old intake and old exhaust, new exhaust used as new intake with old exhaust, old intake with new exhaust, and two new exhausts used together.  The folks that sold me these want to keep their details off the net so you'se guys see the 9042 cams in the build diary.  They are limp, no doubt.

The interpretation of squiggly lines is too much for an already confused mind.  The old guy understands horsepower.  Possible intake tract lengths with the range of adjustment are analyzed at half inch intervals.  HP at various rpm are tabulated.  See attached table with highest HP numbers circled.  10.2 inches looks best and it is a half inch shorter than it is now.  Note the high HP sneaking onto the bottom row of the right column.  That is another harmonic.  It would be the one I would tune for if operating rpm was more than 8,500.

The users manual gives a formula for minimum intake port area.  The ports are OK based on it.  They recommend looking at mach number, too.  Recommendations are .5 to .6 at peak HP for an engine built for top end power.  The far left column in the printed table is crank angle on a 720 degree basis and this is at 9,000 rpm.  The mach number is in the column to the far right and it is at the lower end of the recommended values.  The intake port throats are plenty big and nothing good will happen if they are enlarged.     

This is consistent with guidance written by Vizard.  He mentions a 1mm increase in valve sizes being enough for a four valve head.  A 1mm valve size increase on all four with a good port job would be ultimate for racing.  This head will have 2mm oversize intakes with 1mm bigger exhausts.  The only reason for the 2mm bigger intakes is the need for a bit extra flow at very high rpm and this is not needed for other types of racing.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 23, 2016, 03:30:13 PM
The intake tract length is entered as 10.2 inches.  This is the best based on the prior worksheet.  Packaging considerations limit the range of header pipe lengths from 23 to 33 inches.  A length of 25 inches works best.  The horsepower ratings are not very sensitive to header length.
 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 23, 2016, 03:36:59 PM
A 25-inch header length is used when the header step dimensions are optimized.  An 1.75 inch initial diameter and a 1.5 inch final diameter work best.  Packaging problems make the 1.75 inch tubes awkward. The initial diameter is reduced to 1.625 inches.  This is easier to fit and there is minimal sacrifice in power.  The exhaust dynamics are sensitive to step dimensions.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 23, 2016, 03:42:13 PM
The 1.625 - 2.0 step diameters are entered.  Collector length is calculated next.  A 12 inch length is selected.  This gives decent power and the end is in a good location, packagewise.  The power ratings are not sensitive to collector length.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 23, 2016, 03:54:05 PM
An 11 inch collector length is entered.  The diameters are optimized.  A small diameter collector is recommended.  It is only 3.125 inches diameter.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 23, 2016, 03:57:48 PM
A megga is needed to put the exhaust system outlet back behind where my foot will be.  The collector diameter is its starting diameter and a 5-inch outlet is selected for length calculation purposes.  A 21-inch long megga works great.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 23, 2016, 04:03:05 PM
The 21 inch length is entered.  Various end diameters are looked at.  A 6.50 inch one gives primo power.  This concludes the virtual build around the Comp Cam 9042 lobes.  These are milder than the original equipment Triumph 790cc cams.  Those Triumph cams with adjustable timing gears should work just great for all but the most radical race builds. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on October 23, 2016, 07:15:25 PM
An end diameter of 6-1/2"?  Sounds huge to me.  It might affect your aerodynamics!

You certainly end up with a wide horsepower curve.  You might consider taking it to the drags for testing.  After you're wound out in 1st and 2nd gear, it looks like you will never drop below 78 hp shifting at say 8500 rpm.

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 23, 2016, 11:18:38 PM
This cam is one that I have a profile for.  It came on a CD that accompanied the program.  It is a good profile to use to show how I am using the program to design the engine.  Cams with more lift and duration will be used for the build and power will probably be peakier.  Power at Bonneville is 86 percent of what it is in the valley here.  Those cams give 86 / .86 = 100 flywheel HP here near Salem.  Assuming a 10 percent power loss going to the back wheel. 100 x .90 = 90 HP.  That is good for one of these engines with mild cams.  Hopefully rear wheel HP will be over 100 on the dyno in Beaverton with a hotter cam combo.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 27, 2016, 09:16:04 PM
Now it is time to make sense of the graphs and other input data.  This first printout is the best intake length within the range of adjustment.  It is 10.2 inches.  Note the peak in the power curve.  See the green curve in the second graph.  This is inlet port pressure and vacuum during crank rotation at 8,000 rpm.  The port pressure drops during the overlap phase.  The area under the 1.0 line and above the green line is greatest with this length.  Also, the vacuum pulse is timed to occur when the intake valve is open.  The red line is cylinder pressure vs crank rotation.  The area under the 1.0 line and the red curve is maximized with this intake length.  This shows there is the most vacuum in the cylinder with this length.  This will suck in more mixture. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 27, 2016, 09:25:21 PM
This is the worst intake length within the adjustment range.  It is only an inch different at 9.2 inches.  Note that all of the good things mentioned in the previous post are not as good with this length.  Static pressure at near ambient occurs at the beginning of overlap.  This can contribute to reversion.

The users manual says to measure the intake tract lengths from the valve seat to the point of contraction where air enters the air horn (velocity stack).  This makes sense.  The waves originate at this location when the valves open and close.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on October 27, 2016, 10:00:34 PM
I've always wondered about the length which is supposed to include the air horn (velocity stack).  Some modern carbs have an enlarged bell mouth which in my opinion would result in a reflection of the wave at that point which would negate the effect of a velocity stack after this point.  Any mention of that in your program?
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Bruin on October 28, 2016, 10:30:01 AM
My stack experience is purely anecdotal: At Bonneville I pulled off the large fram filter and pulled the stainless steel liner out of a tall traveling drink cup. I cut off the bottom where the diameter matched the carb intake diameter and attached it with a hose clamp. It's about 7" long. The following run was 4 mph faster, from 100 to 104. (I had tried to calculate the proper intake length once and it seemed ridiculously long... so I went with dumb luck.)

It might not be best, but it was better.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 28, 2016, 10:22:25 PM
Tom and Brian, several bell mouths are shown on the attached.  The elliptical profile reflects a soft wave and it is best if wave dynamics cannot be calculated or utilized, or if a wide power band with no humps and dips in the torque curve is the the goal.  The simple radius reflects a sharper wave and it is best if wave tuning can be done and be taken advantage of.  It will result in spikes and dips in the torque curve.  This can be a big asset if the spikes can be utilized.

The simple radius bell will be used on this build with 1/4 inch radius.  The tuned length will be based on the fully contracted cross-section 1/4 inch inside the bell mouth.  The average distance between this section and the valve seat will be the tuned length.  This is the average of the distances along the bottom of the port, the distances along each side, and the distance along the top.  This is what the users manual recommends as best as I can interpret.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 28, 2016, 10:57:16 PM
That image was carpy.  Here is a better one.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 29, 2016, 12:37:05 PM
The step headers and collector arrived.  They are stainless steel. This was recommended to avoid corrosion perforation.  The headers and collector are held together by springs that attach to tabs on the pipes.  The tabs have holes in them for the hooked spring ends.  They are not welded on.  The header primary length needs to be determined first.  It can be varied six inches by cutting the lower straight part of the headers.  The next posts show how I will figure this out for the Comp Cam grind.  These pipes are made for me to the factory team mile bike race specs by Bonneville Performance in Florida.  The mile bike has a broad and flat power band with lots of HP throughout.  This engine will be tuned for a less wide power band with enhanced power in the upper mid range and top end.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on October 29, 2016, 01:02:18 PM
Bo, they look really good.

Do you think you might be building one the strongest Triumph motors around?.
I know you have a limited budget but the amount of R&D you put in is unbelievable.
Awesome man, you are one guy that keeps me going. :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on October 29, 2016, 01:16:49 PM
WW;

Back in my days at NRAO we used feed horns that looked similar. These were flared ends of waveguide (a hollow tube that microwave energy travelled through) and it was important to know where the effective length of the horn was located. That point was the "phase center" of the horn.

It may be that an air horn effective length can be thought of as a similar problem-- if it could be determined just where the acoustic phase center is located in the mouth of the air horn. I haven't the slightest idea of how to calculate this- someone like Mayf may be able to determine it.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on October 29, 2016, 02:20:21 PM
That's a REAL NICE pipe.............I would not cut anything until your on the dyno...............and then make a long section cut so you can add incremental length...........if the pipes are about 29-inches to the Y........you may just have to remove the up-swept tail and add a short reverse mega.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 29, 2016, 10:41:17 PM
Mike, it should be the strongest engine I can afford to build.  The fellows in AUS are building some very radical engines with the balancer shafts removed, very big valves, polished and knife edged cranks, and lots of RPM, more than 10,000.  They will have the strongest engines.  My approach is to have a well balanced package with a combination of a good engine with decent streamlining and lots of experience with running the thing.

Neil, I do not know how to figure that effective length either.  A simple stack with 1/4 inch radius on the flange helps.  My guess cannot be off more than 0.25 inches, probably.

Dennis, There will be two headers for the dyno work.  One will be this one untouched.  Another will be one I make according to the computer program.  They will be quite different in dimensions.  I cannot weld anymore so I need to find someone to make the computer pipes.           
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 30, 2016, 11:43:05 PM
There are two cam grinds I can use.  One is web cam #813 and I have been using it for years..  it has 629 degrees duration at .050 per inch of lift.  The other cam is a web cam #146.  This is the exhaust cam I used as an inlet cam.  It has 614 degrees duration at .050 per inch of lift.

The comp cam #9042 grind has the same base circle radius and it has 616 degrees duration at .050 per inch of lift.  This cam, with a 1.08 rocker ratio, gives a good representation of the #813 lobe.  The #9042 with a 1.17 rocker ratio closely resembles the #146 lobe.  This is the best I can do.  The comp cam is the only one I have with a digital profile.  Extensive computer modeling was done with these combinations:  #813 for inlet and exhaust, #813 inlet and #146 exhaust, #146 inlet and #813 exhaust, and #146 for both.

The #813 cam has .388 gross lift and the #146 has .420  I was expecting to see a big difference in performance.  Not so.  All combinations were within a horsepower of each other and all made peak ponies at 8,000 at 8,500 rpm.  Every time I tried to force peak power to occur at a higher RPM, the HP dropped off.

The #813 cams I have, they are in good shape, and they are broken-in.  The one #146 cam I have is galled along with its tappet buckets.  I need to get it reground, get another cam ground the same specs, buy eight tappet buckets, and solve the durability problem.  It is a no-brainer decision to stay with the old cams.

The Filling-and-Emptying model was used for all of this.  It assumes the intake and exhaust system are optimized.  It says 87 horsepower is all the flywheel HP I can expect at Bonneville with the intake and exhaust sorted.  This is my best estimate of the rear wheel HP on the dyno at Beaverton:  (87 / .86) x .9 = 91 HP.  The power I got last fall with those cams that were horribly out of time was 90 HP.  Something is goofy in the modeling.  The program cycles through all sorts of iterations and it lists the peak HP when it does them.  The peaks are in the 90's and they are a lot higher than in the final result table.  Somewhere I am losing all sorts of power.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 31, 2016, 10:26:41 AM
The program has a feature that optimizes cam timing and duration for a given lift.  That is how the lobe center angles are calculated for the actual cams.  The optimized cams have the best timing and duration.  They gave power in the mid to high 90's.  The cams I put into the model at those optimized lobe center angles are the comp cam profile with rocker arm ratios to enhance their lift.  Unfortunately, the duration was not enhanced proportionally.  The HP output with them in the model is in the mid 80's.  That is is why I lost all sorts of virtual HP.  I need to wait until I get the digitized profiles from Kibblewhite before I do anything.  This rocker ratio enhancement trick does not work.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 01, 2016, 01:06:25 AM
A call to Arias asked about piston speed.  There is no problem with running these slugs at high rpm.  Average piston speed at 10,000 rpm is just under 4500 feet per minute.  That seems like a good rev limit so the igniter boxes will be reprogrammed for that.  They are at 9,000 rpm now.  Another call was made to web cam.  One of the ladies calculated the cam durations at .006 lift for the #813 cams I am using now.  She also told me about a #208 grind that has a bit more lift and duration than the 813, but it is not too radical.  Also, I mentioned my idea about using thermal barriers on the valves and running them with tighter clearances.  She said it seems OK.  The cams were modeled with typical Bonneville atmospheric conditions.  Flywheel HP is 80 at 7,000, 83 at 7,500, 87 at 8,000, 88 at 8,500, 88 at 9,000, 88 at 9,500, and 85 at 10,000.  This assumes the intake and exhaust system are optimized.  This is a nice spread of power.  An advantage of good HP at high rpm is that it allows higher gearing ratios and this, combined with the horsepower, will give a lot of tractive force.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 02, 2016, 01:52:22 AM
Lots of late night trial-and-error modeling did the job.  The ghetto blaster low budget motor is designed.  Fast and cheap.  The dream build is next on the drawing board. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on November 02, 2016, 08:55:10 AM
Quote
An advantage of good HP at high rpm is that it allows higher gearing ratios and this, combined with the horsepower, will give a lot of tractive force.

Once again, HP = force x velocity.   For a given velocity and a given force (drag), all you need is a certain horsepower.  A wide spread of power is nice since it minimizes the hole between top and next-to-top gear, but if all you need is 88 hp, why spin the motor to 9500 if you can get 88 hp at 8500 (or 87 at 8000)?  It makes no difference in tractive effort--88 at 8500 starts out with more torque which is then acting through taller gearing.
Unless one is attempting to minimize driveline capacity (size/weight), there is no particular reason to go to the high speed, low torque route.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 04, 2016, 12:52:08 AM
IO, you are correct and my thinking was goofy.  That is good 'cause rpm = $$$.

Right now I an dealing with a packaging issue.  It seems that short and fat headers, collectors, and meggas do the trick.  Cramming them inside the fairing is an issue.  Some guys in the Triumph factory built a special engine with the cylinder head on backwards.  There are merits to this.  It makes it easier to use correctly sized exhaust pipes.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 07, 2016, 01:28:28 AM
The advice I get from Kibblewhite on intake cam lift is to look at the flow data and the last lift increment before further increments do not give significant increases.  Then, intake cam height should be 110 percent of this, as a general rule.  This would be 0.400 x 1.10 = 0.440  The cam in the bike now has 0.380 lift so it is a bit short.   Webcam makes an intake cam with 0.400 lift and they sent me estimated 10-point data.  It was modeled in Dynomation this weekend.  A lot of effort went into optimizing it with a 9,000 rpm rev limit.  It was modeled with my old 0.380 lift exhaust cam.  They make an exhaust cam to go with it that has higher lift.  It will be modeled next. The results from the .400 intake and .380 exhaust are on the attached.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 10, 2016, 11:13:06 PM
The engine simulation program has an option to optimize lobe center angles using a simplified emptying-filling model.  The exhaust system types are input and the model assumes they are optimized.  It gives realistic lobe center angles for the application.  Usually this is 100 to 105 for the intake and 110 to 115 for the exhaust.

The intake and exhaust systems are not optimal due to packaging and lack of $$ factors.  The actual intake and exhaust characteristics are entered into the program.  The more complex wave-action model considers the intake and exhaust characteristics as input.  It optimizes cam centerline angles considering this.  It gave me these nice and high HP results in the previous post.  Note the horrendously large overlap.  The lobe center angles are tight, like in the 80's and 90's.  The program is optimizing the lobe center angles to my goofy and compromised intake and exhaust systems, is my figuring.

There will be structural problems with these tight LCA"s, like valves hitting each other and the piston crown.  Now, the lobe centerline angles are optimized using the filling-emptying model and those recommended values are used throughout the remainder of the virtual build.
 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 11, 2016, 02:07:52 PM
The rough draft engine design is done.  It gives me 15 to 20 HP more than I had on the high end.  The best cams are skinny with moderate lifts.  Going wide on duration or tall on lift costs HP.  Now I will order the cams with digital profiles so I can make a more accurate virtual model.  Right now, the design is done using 10-point cam descriptions and this in not the most accurate method.  The lobe centers are wide enough so the valves will not hit the pistons or each other.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on November 11, 2016, 02:47:25 PM
What would the virtual performance be if you reduced the collector from 3" to 2.5"?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 12, 2016, 01:33:36 PM
Collector diameters were modeled from 2-5/8 to 3-1/4 inches ID in 1/8 inch increments at 5,000 through 10,000 rpm.  Power was the same at 5000, 5500, 6000, 6500, 7000 and 8000 rpm.  There was a one HP difference at 7500, 8500, 9000, and 9500 rpm.  There was a two HP difference at 10000 rpm.  These are the differences among the entire range of tested diameters.  These differences are small and it is likely something else in the system can be adjusted to compensate for the loss caused by a 2.5 inch dia collector.  This virtual engine with the cams and lobe center angles used is not sensitive to collector diameter.

This is a Cosworth style engine with two exhaust valves per cylinder and it has very good flow at low lifts.  A short duration exhaust cam with a wide lobe center angles is used to prevent rapid bleed down of cylinder  pressure at exhaust valve opening.  A two valve per cyl engine would be a slow old three legged dog if it used the design specs for this engine, intake, and exhaust system.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 15, 2016, 08:22:22 PM
www.bbc.com/earth/story/20161114-from-planet-earth-ii-a-baby-iguana-is-chased-by-snakes (http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20161114-from-planet-earth-ii-a-baby-iguana-is-chased-by-snakes)  Land speed race is a big deal for that little guy.  We have it pretty easy.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 22, 2016, 09:57:41 PM
That movie with the iguana reminds me of tech inspection.

The step header and collector I ordered are used on flat track bikes that run the mile.  Dirt track racing requires a flat torque curve so the engine produces predictable power over a wide range of rpm.  The dimensions and sizes are input into the virtual model and, sure enough, that is the power it makes.  What I need is maximum power on top end and different dimensions and tubing sizes are needed.  Also, pipe mounts and the megga need to be made.

Burns Stainless makes the parts I need to do the work in 304 stainless.  Some way to glue them together is needed.  TiG welders cost a lot and I do not have much $$.  The shed is wired for single phase 220V.  This was done in anticipation of getting a welder.  The Lincoln 180C Mig welder looks affordable.  Is there a big advantage to TiG for light duty work like welding sheet metal and general bike related fabrication?     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on November 22, 2016, 10:23:25 PM
A tig offers much finer control and neater, higher quality welds. Look for a tig welder with available high frequency AC and you'll be able to weld aluminum as well. Mig welding stainless requires a very specific gas mixture. One of the best sites to learn techniques is weldingtipsandtricks.com .

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 23, 2016, 08:09:22 AM
A tig offers much finer control and neater, higher quality welds. Look for a tig welder with available high frequency AC and you'll be able to weld aluminum as well. Mig welding stainless requires a very specific gas mixture. One of the best sites to learn techniques is weldingtipsandtricks.com .

Pete

Bo,
I bought a Thermal Arc 95S for under $500 and Pete pretty much trained me to Tig weld over the phone!  But the little Thermal Arc welder has no foot pedal current control which made for some not-so-pretty end of welds.  On the other hand, with a Mig welder (not sure about the SS) you could just tack the pieces together and find a shop to finalize the welding. But learn to make the tack welds very small or your Tig guy won't be happy.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 23, 2016, 10:18:39 AM
How does the foot pedal tig control work when you are laying on your back or in the other awkward positions that are often used when welding?  The jig for tacking up the the pipe will be the bike.  There are all sorts of confined and hard to access places where I will need to squirrel in a tack weld.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on November 23, 2016, 10:43:33 AM
Bo, it works with your knee, your foot sideways, your other hand... yep, rarely need filler rod for a tack.

forgot, they do have thumb control torches... never used one though
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on November 23, 2016, 12:21:44 PM
In really awkward situations I've been known to use voice control. Someone else runs the pedal and you just shout whether you need more or less. It usually works pretty well.  :-D :-D :-D

The problem with not having a pedal is that the end of the weld usually turns pretty hot. The only way to cool it down is to feed filler rod faster or else stop and let things cool a little and then finish.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 23, 2016, 07:39:21 PM

The problem with not having a pedal is that the end of the weld usually turns pretty hot. The only way to cool it down is to feed filler rod faster or else stop and let things cool a little and then finish.

Pete

Pete,
It's that "stop" that always got me in trouble.  Without amperage control, I got a little volcano at the end of the weld - - never got the hang of feeding more filler rod, retracting the torch (to break the arc), and getting a nice finish.  I've since had the pleasure of using a torch with a foot pedal to taper off the current while leaving the torch in place with the Argon still flowing - - what a difference!

Tomorrow I'll be welding up a new muffler for an Ossa using the Thermal Arc, so I'll get another chance to make several stops and starts.  If it turns out well, I'll post a picture for Wobbly to ponder the results of pedal-less tig welding!

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on November 23, 2016, 08:16:44 PM
Bo, it works with your knee, your foot sideways, your other hand... yep, rarely need filler rod for a tack.

forgot, they do have thumb control torches... never used one though

Gus sits on the foot control when he has to crawl under to weld.
A trick Willie Buchta taught him.   :cheers:

I also have a thumb control, I like it but Gus does not, to each his own.

Bo, I'm only 100 miles South of you, if you want to come try your hand at it.

  Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 24, 2016, 03:35:34 PM
A general lack of talent combined with minimal patience and no experience tells me I should get a decent welder to start.  The Hobart 165i EZ-TIG looks good.  It is american made.  The shop that sells these is a few blocks from my local so I can nip into the pub when I get welding supplies.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on November 24, 2016, 03:58:58 PM
Bo, that would be a perfect choice. There's a website called welding tips and tricks that would likely help you a lot getting started. Get extra tungstens because you'll use them until you get used to the procedures. PM me if I can be of assistance.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Hoody on November 24, 2016, 04:21:25 PM
I assume the welding site is linked to this Youtube channel which has some handy vids on it?  https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqq70AnPkj4-UApS_m_6mPw (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqq70AnPkj4-UApS_m_6mPw)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 24, 2016, 05:34:51 PM
Thanks for the advice.  It will be  awhile until I get it.  Cams are being ground and bigger exhaust valves installed.  Paying for them comes first.

There is another thread where the subject of race gas was discussed and a fellow recommended calling Rick at ERC.  In the past I used Sunoco 'cause that is what I could get here.  Their Standard and Supreme gave me good results.  Both are leaded and I used them while I was monkeying around with nitropropane and toluene.  The lead helped to calm those fuel mixes.

Now I am using gasoline without those helpers.  It would be nice to switch to unleaded for the sake of the dyno operator, me, and all of you at the track downwind from the thing when it is running.  ERC does a good job with no-lead blends so I called Rick.  He does have a dealer in Oregon, now.  He gave me a leaded and unleaded gas recommendation.  MUL-C is the unleaded.  I will try that.

The highest cylinder pressures are around peak torque rpm on the dyno.  The knock light will be installed and if it blinks red it is time to switch back to leaded gas.  Hopefully the no-lead will work.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on November 24, 2016, 07:09:15 PM
Hey Bo,
"A general lack of talent combined with minimal patience" is something most of us are blessed with  :roll:

 :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on November 24, 2016, 08:22:22 PM
I assume the welding site is linked to this Youtube channel which has some handy vids on it?  https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqq70AnPkj4-UApS_m_6mPw (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqq70AnPkj4-UApS_m_6mPw)

Hoody, you hit it bang on!  :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on November 25, 2016, 01:27:56 AM
Bo, I'm self taught and welding is a passion for me. I love it.
A good machine makes you a better welder. Buy the best you
can get. All the advice posted is spot on. Lying on the foot control
takes getting used to though. :-D :-D :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 25, 2016, 11:38:30 AM
Set up and made a small muffler for my trials bike using the Thermal Arc 95S - - here is an example of what I can get without foot control:(http://i1103.photobucket.com/albums/g465/koncretekid/Ossa%20muffler%20end%20cap.jpg) (http://s1103.photobucket.com/user/koncretekid/media/Ossa%20muffler%20end%20cap.jpg.html)
With a coat of paint:
(http://i1103.photobucket.com/albums/g465/koncretekid/Ossa%20muffler%20painted.jpg) (http://s1103.photobucket.com/user/koncretekid/media/Ossa%20muffler%20painted.jpg.html)

While we're on the subject, Pete, how does that Hobart compare with the Miller Diversion 180 and the Lincoln Square Wave TIG 200 TIG Welder?  The Lincoln is the cheapest that seems to have the same specs.

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on November 25, 2016, 11:52:55 AM
I'm impressed Tom.  :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

Hobart is a totally acceptable brand. They are actually owned by Miller and their products are the equals of Miller and Lincoln. I haven't used any of the smaller machines recently but in the past I've found them to be just fine. The main thing is to ensure that they have AC and high frequency capabilities so they can weld aluminum. If you don't get that capability you'll be kicking yourself forever.

Bye the way Tom, where did you get those caps for the ends of the muffler?

Pete

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 25, 2016, 03:51:11 PM
Pete,
The end caps are just freeze plugs.  They're only 2" OD, but the resultant muffler (96 - 1/8" holes in the central 1" diameter tube, with a washer welded inside the 1" tube and wrapped with fiberglass matt) does a nice job on the old Ossa trials bike.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 26, 2016, 09:25:05 PM
Those welds look like they will do the job.  Actually, for the typical bikes of the Ossa's vintage they look better than most factory welds.

The folks at Kibblewhite digitized my old #813 cams and they sent me the file.  Then, the digital models were input into the virtual build and the exhaust and intake systems were redesigned.  The digital models give more accurate results than the ten point cam lobe descriptions.  This made quite a bit of difference.  The power curve is much flatter when I use the actual profiles, for some unknown reason.

Vizard, on Page 107 in "How to Build Horsepower" has a graph for lobe centerline angle.  It looks like 116.8 degrees is about right for an engine with 11.68 CI per inch valve diameter.  Then, 0.75 more spread is added to account for the 11.5 to 1 compression ratio.  It is 1 point higher than the 10.5 to 1 ratio for the graph.  Now the spread is 116.8 + 0.75 = 117.5 degrees.

He says "To compensate for the valve angle, practice indicates anything from zero to 2 degrees, depending on the port downdraft.  The Triumph head has angled valves and well shaped side draft ports.  I was thinking of adding a degree to the LCA to account for this, but Vizard does not say to add or subtract.  Does anyone have recommendations?       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 28, 2016, 08:28:40 AM
Valve timing is still a mystery to me in spite of reading several articles.  This year I tried (my basic premise seems to be trial and error) increasing the duration and overlap by using tappets with a larger radius than recommended by Megacycle.  The effect was about 20º more duration and maybe 15º increase in overlap.  No dyno time but the results at Loring and Bonneville produced almost exactly the same speed as last year (actually down .5mph at both events), so no help there.

In your post of November 18 you stated the following: "The engine simulation program has an option to optimize lobe center angles using a simplified emptying-filling model.  The exhaust system types are input and the model assumes they are optimized.  It gives realistic lobe center angles for the application.  Usually this is 100 to 105 for the intake and 110 to 115 for the exhaust."  That would indicate a lobe separation angle of 105º to 110º by my calculations.  Now you're talking lobe separation angles as high as 117.5º.  If you set these cams to give 105º lobe center on the intake (early opening and closing), you're going to get very early closing of the exhaust valve (130º exhaust lobe center, if I've done the math correctly, which seems to indicate valve closing at TDC with 260º duration.)

You won't get much (any) overlap at TDC on the exhaust stroke.  Am I doing the math correctly?

Valve timing-ly challenged Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 28, 2016, 11:59:18 PM
Tom, maybe this will help.  The engine is two 500 cc singles.  This is virtual power.

The lobe centerline angle based on Vizard's predictions is 118.5.  This gives 3.5 degrees overlap at .050.  Not enough and the virtual power was bad.  This is what works best and the engine is not especially sensitive to LCL.  The cams are all-purpose grinds and numbers are based on digitized profiles and include the effects of tappet clearances.  Intake and exhaust lift is around 0.380, intake duration at .050 = 241.0, exhaust duration at .050 = 239.8, intake centerline = 104.5, exhaust centerline = 113.5, lobe center angle = 109, overlap at .050 = 22.5.  Power is 90 at the back wheel, at 8,000 through 8,500 rpm, at 6,025 feet altitude, 72.1 degrees F, and 34% humidity.  All figuring was done for this environment.

Headers from valve seats to merge points are 28.7 inches long.  Taper is in steps from 1.335 to 1.750 inside diameter.  HP was more sensitive to taper than most anything else.  Collector is 2.5 inches in dia and 15.8 inches long.  The 2.5 inch dia is the biggest I can get from Burns Stainless and a 3-inch woulda worked better.  Megga is 20 inches long with 4 inch end dia.  Intake length from valve seat to first major expansion is 10.7 inches.
   
These are the backup cams in case I have problems with the bigger ones.  Flywheel power at SAE conditions is 115.  The engine can make up to 117 HP using the Harold Bettes/Superflow equation based on 225 cfm intake flow at 28 inches.  These moderate cams do a good job.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 29, 2016, 07:52:20 AM


The lobe centerline angle based on Vizard's predictions is 118.5.  This gives 3.5 degrees overlap at .050.  Not enough and the virtual power was bad. 

This is exactly the point I was trying to make.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 29, 2016, 08:48:24 PM
The notes for the engine setup in the post-before-last are looked.  The cam centerlines were optimized for peak power at various rpm.  The lobe centerline angle (LCA) stayed about the same.  Both cams were retarded nearly the same amount to move peak power up in rpm and the same procedure in reverse to move the peak power rpm down.

The LCA on a BSA cam is fixed at grinding.  An offset woodruff key on the cam drive or driven gear might be used to change the can timing.  The offset is for 1/3 of the tooth pitch.  For example, shifting the the cam gear 1 tooth pitch moves it 15 degrees.  Using the offset key it can be advanced 5 degrees with no shift in gear teeth.  Shifting the gear teeth one tooth and reversing the offset key gives 10 degrees advance.  Shifting the teeth one tooth and using a straight woody key gives 15 degrees advance.  The opposite would be used to retard the cam.  Use of the engine simulation package with the cams at various settings should give one that works good.  Another way is to leave the key out, optimize cam timing, and to tack weld the gear on to the shaft in a location where it can be easily ground off when the motor needs to be taken apart.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 02, 2016, 01:14:06 AM
Various cam lobe treatments were discussed with the cam grinder.  She saw some used cams that had super finish treatment that looked like new.  She did not remember many details beyond that.  This is one of a couple of super finishing sites on the i-net.  Does anyone have experience with this?  www.cryogenicssuperfinish.com (http://www.cryogenicssuperfinish.com)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on December 02, 2016, 06:41:28 AM
O.K. for what it is worth..taking a page out of the MotoGP world from a few years back; I've recently started setting cam timing based on PTV clearance and not worrying that much about numbers.  On my all motor engines, setting the quench area really tight (say ~0.030) produces more TQ/HP (power over the curve high up in rpm) than getting the cam "numbers" just right.  I just make sure that the PTV clearance is at least 0.045 on the intake and 0.075 on the exhaust PLUS I check the valve to valve clearances (but that is another subject all together).  Of course the rest of the build must be able to handle those tight clearances..
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: ggl205 on December 02, 2016, 10:07:36 AM
Various cam lobe treatments were discussed with the cam grinder.  She saw some used cams that had super finish treatment that looked like new.  She did not remember many details beyond that.  This is one of a couple of super finishing sites on the i-net.  Does anyone have experience with this?  www.cryogenicssuperfinish.com (http://www.cryogenicssuperfinish.com)

Yes.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 03, 2016, 10:05:34 PM
Us old Triumph tuners know all about that procedure.  It is the "dial in as much overlap as you can without bending the valves" method.  It does work.  Unfortunately, on this bike the pockets in the pistons are made for much bigger valves and higher lift cams than I am using.  The lobe center angles can be tightened up to some pretty insane values before the clearances get to those specified or there is valve to valve contact.

The program looks at cam profiles, flow test results, intake and exhaust characteristics, and a bunch of other things in the "HybridSim" modeling method.  It optimizes the lobe center angles.  A single analysis takes about 45 minutes.  The results are typically big horsepower over the rpm range when the exhaust system sonics are optimal.  Outside of that range the power is limp.  Right now I am looking at different collector/megga combinations to widen that peak power period rpm.  There is a lot of overlap when I do this procedure.  Much more than Vizard or anyone else recommends.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 05, 2016, 08:46:36 PM
This is how the cams were selected.  The grubby worksheet shows flywheel HP at Bonneville environmental conditions.  The numbers in squares are the highest readings in the columns.  All are for the #813 all purpose cams I used for years and they are in good shape.  I just need to realign the cam gears.  The hybrid-sim method was used and it considers the wave action from the exhaust system and measured cam lobe profiles.  Power was optimized for the range of 7,500 to 8,500 rpm

Option 1 are the cams with the slipped cam gears. Intake centerline is 97, exhaust centerline is 89, and lobe centerline angle is 93.  The piston to valve clearances are pretty tight.  HP is not exceptional.

Option 2 are the cams at settings Web Cam recommended a few weeks ago.  Intake centerline is 107, exhaust centerline is 103, and LCA is 105.  Good results with intake lengths of 10.2 and 10.7 inches.  Up to 91 HP.  Primo.

Option 3 are the cam settings on the cam card, 107 intake, 105 exhaust, and LCA = 106.  Good results with the same intake lengths as in Option 2.

Option 4 uses settings recommended by the Hybrid-Sim method using 10-point cam data.  Intake is 96, exhaust is 112, and LCA is 104.  Good low end and midrange power.  Not good settings for land speed hi jinx.

Option 5 uses settings recommended by the filling-emptying method using 10-point data.  104.5 intake, 115 exhaust, and 109.8 LCA.  Not exceptional.

Option 6 uses Vizard's recommendations assuming they are for 0.050 lift.  Intake is 116.8, exhaust is 116.8, and of course, LCA is 116.8.  Nothing exceptional here.

Conclusion.  None yet.  The full race cams are digitized and they will be looked at next.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 05, 2016, 11:12:24 PM
These are the other two cams I had digitized.  They are all-out racing cams designed for land speed.  All eight tappet bucket bores need to be enlarged with all new buckets.  Also, the ignition modules need to be reprogrammed for a 10,000 rpm rev limit instead of the 9,000 rpm setting they have.  The fellow that digitized these said the valve seating speed for the intakes is very high and I will have durability issues.  Analysis settings are just like with the #813 cams posted previously.

Combo 1 uses the cam card timing which is 112 for intake cam centerline, 111 for exhaust cam centerline, with an LCA of 111.5.  These cams only help on the very top end with power at this setting.  Otherwise the lowly 813 cams are better.

Combo 2 uses settings determined by Hybrid-Sim optimization.  Intake is 92.6, exhaust is 109.2, and LCA is 100.9.  These settings make about 5 HP more than the 813 cams within an RPM band I can easily use.  There might be clearance problems between the valves and pistons with this tight LCA.  These cams almost certainly might benefit from the tuning method described previously by RansomT. 

Combo 3 used center angles optimized by the filling-emptying method in the computer program.  Intake is 104.2, exhaust is 112.4, and LCA is 108.8.  This is not an optimal timing for these cams.  HP is not as great as it is for Combo 3.

Combo 4 uses Vizard's 116.8 intake and exhaust angles and LCA.  No exceptional power.  Maybe VIzard's durations are for a valve lift less than 0.050? 

Conclusion.  Somewhere between these two cams is a better lobe profile that will give more HP than the 813 cams and use the tappet bucket size I have with good long term valve train durability.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 05, 2016, 11:14:52 PM
There is a paper by Dema Elgin titled "Performance Camshafts" http://www.elgincams.com/campaper.html (http://www.elgincams.com/campaper.html).
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 05, 2016, 11:48:58 PM
Good, the link works.  That does not always happen for me.  The paper describes lots of the issues I am facing when I look at the squiggly lines on the computer screen.  Webcam makes all sorts of profiles and they sent me a bunch of timing and lift data.  Unfortunately they do not have digital profiles.  I need to have the cams made and get them profiled.  There is quite a bit of information on rod ratios and valve sizes on Page 3.  It is also mentioned that "Exhaust flow in 4-valve engines is very high, somewhere in the 80% to 90% region."  The Dynomation program also said this would help.  The head is down at Kibblewhite now getting larger exhaust valves put in with port work.  It should give exhaust flow figures more closely matching the intakes after this is done.

Cam timing is discussed in some detail.  He says on Page 10 "Make the overlap period as short as will complete the job of scavenging."  This is something I will do after I get the new cams with their digital profiles.  That is, widen the LCA until the power drops and use the widest that makes good HP.  Dema explains on Pages 11 and 12 why moderate cams work best in these engines.  The new cams will have 258 degrees duration at 0.050.  This is within the range he mentions.  He also says "In a four valve engine the intake and exhaust cams can use the same duration until the intake cam gets into the 270 to 280 degree duration range.  So, two identical cam profiles were ordered being the same on the intake as the exhaust.

Somewhere in the article Dema says to make the cam lift as high as the valve lift where the head flows well.  The intake flow peters out after 0.40 lift.  A #208 grind is specified for the new cams.  It has .408 lift and after subtracting tappet clearance this should be right at .40.   Plus, it should work with the existing 28mm tappet bucket diameter.  This is as tall as the cams can be for these buckets.

That is the reasoning behind the cam selection.  Adjustable gears will be put on them so the timing is not an issue now.   

 

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on December 06, 2016, 01:48:36 PM
Interesting info from Elgin
Thanks for the link
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 09, 2016, 02:33:45 AM
This is the worksheet for the #208 cams.  The exhaust and intake systems are as good as I can get.  Power is optimized for 7,500 to 8,500 rpm.

The first ten runs under the circled "1" use the hybrid-sim method to select cam timing and duration.  It give ten combinations.  All lobe center angle combinations are modeled using the hybrid-sim method with #208 cam ten point descriptions.  Intake centerlines run from 90.5 to 94 degrees.  Exhaust centerlines are from 112.0 to 115.5 degrees.  Overlap at 0.006 varies from 105 to 110.5 degrees.  Good results come from some of these lobe timing combinations.

The three runs under the circled "2" use the filling-emptying method to select cam timing and duration.  It gave ten combinations.  Like with the first ten runs, the combinations are modeled using the hybrid-sim method with #208 cam descriptions.  Results were lousy so I modeled the first, sixth, and tenth combinations.  Intake centerlines vary from 102 to 104 degrees, exhaust centerlines are from 113.5 to 114.5 degrees, and overlap is 94.5 to 108 degrees.

The single run under the circle ed "3" is from the cam card timing.  It is modeled using the hybrid-sim procedure.  Power is lame.

The ten runs under the circled "4" used the wave-action method to figure out ten lobe center angle and duration combinations.  All were analyzed using the hybrid-sim method and ten point descriptions for the #208 cams.  Intake centerlines vary from 93.0 to 94.0 degrees.  Exhaust centerlines are from 103 to 109 degrees.  Overlap at 0.006 is 110 to 115.5 degrees.  Some combinations give good power.

Use as little overlap as possible, Dema advises in his paper.  The fifth combination under the circled "1" gives good HP with less overlap than many other combinations.  Intake centerline is 90.5, exhaust centerline is 112.5, and overlap is 110.0 degrees.  Idle quality and power below 3,000 rpm are awful according to the computer simulation.  That is a sacrifice made to the god of speed.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on December 09, 2016, 09:43:43 PM
I assume the HP is at the crank..............which means something is not optimized for this 'sim' build. I see 94 to 95 HP which is about what I have in my 2v Honda motor at 750cc. Did I miss-read something? 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 21, 2016, 03:20:32 PM
Hi Dennis.  This is a late answer to your question.  Rose and I were in Hawaii for awhile.  Also, I did a lot of work with the program since the last post.  It is referred to as "recent modeling."  Some background info follows then an answer.  The program has a simulation method that uses general assumptions for intake and exhaust and it does not use wave action simulation.  It is the filling and emptying method.  It gives reasonable results assuming the intake and exhaust can be optimized.  Packaging considerations prevent this on this bike.  Tuned lengths and other wave making things are compromised 'cause everything needs to fit somewhere.  The F and E method generally is not applicable for this application and it was not used in recent modeling.

There is a wave action model that uses wave analysis to get output.  It is useful, however, a lot of the results are unrealistic.  It was not used for recent modeling.

The hybrid simulation uses features from both of the preceding methods.  It gives results as good the program can make.  It is used for recent modeling and most everything I will do in the future.  No canned "optimization" methods were used to figger out cam timing in recent modeling.

The ten point profiles for the cams I ordered with the optimized intake and exhaust systems were modeled.  The initial lobe centerline angles were 110 degrees each side.  Then I varied them and looked at power curve changes and wave forms.  The best power occurred when the intake cam centerline coincided with the crank degrees of peak demand.  This is a real tight centerline angle and the valves would be smashed into the tops of the pistons.  It looks like the method RansomT suggests for determining intake centerline angle, based on piston to valve clearance, will be best.  A 100 degree intake centerline is my best guess without doing the clearance measuring.

The exhaust centerline likes to be a bit wider than clearance, alone, would dictate.  A 115 degree centerline gives the best power and wave forms.  It gives a nice shaped power curve with 95 HP, peak.  This is flywheel HP at Bonneville conditions.  Tonight I will draw up the expected power curve at the rear wheel with SAE correction. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 21, 2016, 09:12:16 PM
These are the latest power and torque estimates based on program input of 0 feet elevation. 68 degrees temp, and 0% humidity.  The flywheel numbers are reduced 90 percent to get the rear wheel estimates.  Peak HP of 110 occurs at 9,000 rpm.  It is my best estimate of dyno results converted to SAE.

The hybrid-sim models show that power and torque drop when density altitude rises, as expected.  Also, peak horsepower and torque rpms decrease.  Slightly different cam profiles, cam timing, valve sizes, etc are needed to optimize power at B'ville as compared to near sea level.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 23, 2016, 12:40:38 AM
This graph compares SAE conditions of 0 feet equivalent altitude, 68 degrees fahrenheit, and 0 percent humidity to B'ville conditions of 6025 feet equivalent altitude, 72.1 degrees Fahrenheit, and 34percent humidity.  B'ville power is 77 percent of SAE.  Usually I figure it should be 84 to 86 percent less.  Density altitudes from a bunch of timeslips is averaged to get the 6025 value.  Perhaps the equivalent altitude is less than density altitude and more like the physical altitude?  I might be making a mistake and need some help with this.  The user's manual does not address it in any detail.

Note that peak power occurs at 8,500 rpm with both cases.  I made a math error and it looked like the power peaked at lower rpm at higher altitude.  What I said about this in the last post was wrong.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on December 23, 2016, 08:56:02 AM
Wobbly,
In your text it is not entirely clear whether you applied the 6025 density altitude in addition to the temperature and humidity factors.  The density altitude already takes the temperature and humidity into account so, if so, you may have doubly reduced the expected Bonneville power.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on December 23, 2016, 11:11:02 AM
Wobbly,
In your text it is not entirely clear whether you applied the 6025 density altitude in addition to the temperature and humidity factors.  The density altitude already takes the temperature and humidity into account so, if so, you may have doubly reduced the expected Bonneville power.


Good Catch!  With the weather conditions, altitude should be 4220 ft.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 24, 2016, 11:18:01 AM
Thanx for the advice.  Yes, I entered the DA as the equivalent elevation.  This morning it will be changed to 4220 feet and I will rep lot the data.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 25, 2016, 07:50:18 PM
The corrected virtual dyno curve is shown.  It looks like 92 HP at the rear wheel on the salt.  There are two methods I use to calculate the power required for different speeds.  To get 165 mph needs 109 or 111 rear wheel HP depending on the calculation method.  It looks like the engine will be the focus this year and aero the year after with a visit to the wind tunnel.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 27, 2016, 09:08:48 PM
The virtual power curve shows 110 rear wheel horsepower under SAE corrected conditions.  This is realistic and about all I can hope for based on what I have seen others do with this engine.  So... speed has to come from somewhere else.

The Aussies remove the balancer shafts and knife edge the crank.  That is something I can do next year.  It will give a few more HP.  This is my best tuck from one of Scooter's photos.  If I get lower the top of the helmet eye port blocks the track and I cannot see where I am going.  In my younger days I could arch my back in reverse like a sway back horse and get real low on the tank and see where I was going.  That was 40 to 45 years ago.  The plan is to figure out some sort of helmet that lets me see better.  Then I can tuck down more and this will give me the speed I need.www.scootershoots.com/BUBMotorcycleSpeedTrials/2014-Bonneville-Motorcycle-Spe/i-xPgLVn9 (http://www.scootershoots.com/BUBMotorcycleSpeedTrials/2014-Bonneville-Motorcycle-Spe/i-xPgLVn9)   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on December 27, 2016, 11:40:35 PM
The helmet may just be your key. Some are much better than others when it comes to aero while in the wind, look for that.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on December 28, 2016, 12:10:36 PM
Bo,
The only way I can see ahead is to rest the chin of my helmet on a cushioned chin rest. It pushes the helmet up as well as taking a lot of weight off your neck.  Not easy to do on your bike, but I'm betting if you can, you'll be able to comfortably get down another 4 or 5".  You can see it here.
(http://i1103.photobucket.com/albums/g465/koncretekid/Bonneville%20bike%202012%20top%20view.jpg) (http://s1103.photobucket.com/user/koncretekid/media/Bonneville%20bike%202012%20top%20view.jpg.html)
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 01, 2017, 12:23:54 AM
This is the first winter I tried to do outdoor construction since I was in my 20's.  It is a lean-to attachment so things can be stored away and give more room to work on things in the shed.  Tomorrow the last roof sheathing will be nailed on if it does not snow.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on January 02, 2017, 06:20:02 PM
I've been traveling for the past few weeks...........110 RWHP may be a bit optimistic, but anything over 100 should get that record :-) :-)

Tom certainly gets his head down :-) :-) :-) and so do other riders on well known Triumphs...........including Tom Mellor :-) :-)  I'm told that the angle of your back has more to do with poor aero than the shape of your helmet. I adjust my helmet before each run to get proper visibility...........but it gets more difficult to bend my neck with each year..........hmmmmmmmmmm
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 03, 2017, 01:07:22 AM
The back should be as level as possible I was told years ago.  Some peeking around on the i-net tells me that a company in Portugal makes a helmet with a tall eye port.  That is the easiest solution and I am investigating it.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 10, 2017, 12:32:59 AM
The subject of old tools was a topic on another build diary.  A monkey wrench was a tool I mentioned.  My father used one and I do not remember what it was.  Some looking on the i-net gave me an idea of what it was.  There are some tools I inherited from him and his monkey wrench is one of them.  It was made by Diamond Calk Horseshoe Company in Duluth, Minnesota.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on January 10, 2017, 12:42:32 AM
My dad left me a left-handed version :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 11, 2017, 12:36:22 AM
It is hard to believe it now, but summer will be here eventually.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: edinlr on January 12, 2017, 10:28:05 AM
When I visited the AIM motorcycle show in Orlando last fall I seem to remember either Shoie or Arai saying that they had some new models with taller eye ports.  You may want to visit their sites to see.  The way that the Moto GP riders tuck in, I am sure it is an issue for them too.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 12, 2017, 11:32:40 PM
Those two fellows are my middle and youngest sons.  I will ask Shoei and Arai about tall port helmets.

The head flows increase along with valve lift up to around 0.400 inches lift.  The old cams I had provided 0.380 net lift.  These new cams give 0.400 net lift so they match the head flow better.  A narrow cam was recommended by the duration equation in the "Horsepower Chain" book.  Narrow cams are also recommended by the Dynomation program.  The ladies at WebCam sent me data for four lobe profiles with lifts around 0.400.  All were entered into Dynomation and the narrowest profile worked best.  It is a #208 grind and I am using them for both intake and exhaust.  The standard 1.1 inch diameter tappet buckets will work with these cams.  They require a 1.03 inch diameter bucket, minimum.

A lot of effort is going into reducing the rate of torque decay as the RPM's rise above peak torque rpm.  The added lift these cams give with a tad more duration promotes cylinder filling at high rpm.  The old #813 grind has 244 degrees duration at 0.050 lift and these new ones have 258.  Modeling more lift and duration than this seemed to be unproductive or give only marginal power increases.  These cams are as big as this motor can use.

The next step is to grind the welds off of the cam gears, push the gears off, push on the adjustable gears, tack weld the stationary parts of the gears to the cams, and send the lifters and cams out to be superpolished.

A lift vs duration table came with the cams so a digital profile can be generated.  This is what I will use in Dynomation for future virtual tuning.  It gives much more useful data than a ten point description based on duration at 0.006, duration at 0.050, and maximum lift.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 13, 2017, 01:19:37 PM
The cams and buckets are sent to Kibblewhite this morning.  They will use the buckets and cams to verity the valve stems have the correct length so as to put the shims in the middle of the thickness selection range.  This is a needed task for direct acting overhead cam engines.  They are also looking at recommended tappet clearances as related to cam and lifter life, verifying that spring tension is matched for the task at hand and not excessive, and checking the valve train spring harmonics.  The things in the previous post will be done later.   

The cam tip rubs across the flat lifter.  The cam tip deforms and the lifter also deforms.  The contact patch size between the two is a function of the compressive load and the elasticity of the cam and lifter materials.  Higher loads and more elastic materials result in larger contact patches.  A problem occurs if the lifter is too hard.  This makes the cam do the deforming that is needed to obtain the contact patch.  This increased deformation, if in excess of the fatigue limits of the cam material, will cause micro cracking and eventual spalling of the cam lobe tip.

This is why Diamond Like Coating is not used on the lifters.  It makes them hard and it will force the deformation into the cam tip.  Possible durability problems result.  This is also why I am fussy about not using excessively strong springs and keeping the redline to 9,000 rpm so they are not needed.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 13, 2017, 01:38:10 PM
Imagine that you are spreading a layer of plaster on a wall with a wide smooth edged putty knife.  The knife floats over a nice and thick layer of plaster while you work. Picture what happens if there are grooves and bumps in the putty knife.  The plaster flows through the grooves in the knife edge and the bumps on the edge touch the sheet rock underneath.

The as-ground lifters and cm lobes are rough.  They will be super polished to make them smoother.  Also, a break in will be done with light valve springs.  This work is intended to provide maximum oil film thickness between the cam lobe and cam bucket.

Research also shows that thicker oil can also help to maintain oil film thickness.  I was breaking in the cams using conventional 10-40.  High grade racing synthetic with an upper viscosity limit of 50 w will be used for cam break in.  This will promote better oil film thickness.   
 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 13, 2017, 01:46:41 PM
The geometry of the interface between the moving cam lobe and the lifter is an important item to consider.  A cam lobe rubbing on a flat lifter is best for trapping an adequate oil film thickness.  A lobe rubbing on a radiused surface, convex to  the cam lobe tip, has more difficulty.  The double radii give more room for oil to escape.  The lifters have a small radius on their edges.  The #203 grind cam I was using was a bit large for the tappet buckets.  The cam lobe tip was too close to the edge and adequate oil could not be trapped before the wiping motion.  A nice feature of the new cams is they are a tad shorter and oil entrapment should not be an issue.  Experts gave this verdict to me. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on January 13, 2017, 02:10:35 PM
Good information Bo, thanks.

  Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 13, 2017, 02:19:08 PM
Lobe shape is also an issue that influenced cam selection.  The programs and equations recommend around 238 to 240 degrees duration at .050.  A person needs to consider that during relatively few degree of rotation the cam needs to pop those valves up to and down from maximum lift.  This requires fairly flat flanks that accelerate and jerk the valve significantly.  Also, a tight radius of curvature is needed at the tip and it is hard to get adequate oil film thickness under the tip.  For these reasons, a special cam lobe profile was not developed.  Instead, a proven profile was selected that gave the narrowest duration of the profile selection.  This is done to promote valve train life by limiting tip radius of curvature to a reasonable level and the convex cam flanks give gentler valve acceleration and deceleration.  The peak opening, tip, and closing acceleration values are 0.000603, -.000223, and .000562. I do not know if these are good values.  Help is needed here.

These engines in full race tune customarily use 5mm or 6mm oversize valves.  This actually hurts performance according to Dynomation.  2mm larger intakes and 1mm larger exhausts are used.  Mach numbers are plenty low and performance is at its best.  These smaller valves weigh less and need weaker springs.  This helps out the valve train life.

The goal is to build a fast motor that lasts a long time and costs less to build.  Dyno day will prove if this works.    
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on January 13, 2017, 06:25:40 PM
“...acceleration values are 0.000603, -.000223, and .000562”

These are awfully small numerical values--what are the units they use?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on January 13, 2017, 08:41:13 PM
Parsecs per square erg, maybe? :?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 13, 2017, 10:24:31 PM
I do not know the units.  I was given numbers, only.

http://www.mdesign.ftn.uns.ac.rs/pdf/2010/machine_design_2010_for_web.pdf
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 13, 2017, 10:41:01 PM
It takes awhile to download this rascal.  There are a bunch of good articles so the entire compendium is linked.  You will not drill an oil hole in the top of the conroe after reading the article on rod deign.

Interesting is the link between exhaust cam temperature and bucket wear.  Thermal barrier is recommended in the exhaust port and on the exhaust valve heads by Kibblewhite to reduce spring temperatures and the possibility of annealing.  It look like the barrier can help exhaust valve train life, too.

These posts are short 'cause I have a bad cold.  My job when night temps drop below 25 is to keep the fire burning all night so the pipes do not freeze.  Two nights ago I got out of bed and went to toss a log on the fire.  No logs.  So, it is a trip out to the woodshed and it is about a hundred feet away.  Getting my slippers and bathrobe means turning on the room light and waking up Rose.  So, logic told me to streak out and back barefoot and buff before I had a chance to freeze.  Douglas fir (Psuedotsuga menziesei)  is the only wood in the batch in the shed with the right properties.  It will light from being placed on hot coals.  I forgot about this detail and it took agonizing seconds to grab what I thought was D Fir.   Then I streaked back and tossed the wood on the coals.  It was oak.   The fire went out.  Then it got cold in the house.  The ladies lit the fire wham they got up.  What I got out of all of this is one bad head cold.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 15, 2017, 05:05:34 PM
The most thorough plans sometimes do not work.  The stepped header pipe and collector for a Sacramento Mile Triumph does not fit this bike.  The entire lower section of the fairing needs to be rebuilt so the fairing will fit on the bike.  Or, the pipes need to be hacked up to the extent that it will be just like making a new set.  It took years to get that fairing shape right.  Ack!

These nice Italian Arrow pipes fit under the fairing.  They were on the race bike when it was in the Progressive Insurance bike show in Portland.  They are so well made and pretty that I could not keep them on the race bike.  They went onto the street bike.  It took weeks to get the EFI sorted so it works primo with these.  I sorta forgot what I did to make it work or what the settings were for the stock pipes.  It was a near miracle to get it figured out and it will be dang near impossible for me to redo, so these pipes will not go back on the race bike.

Right now I am pricing out the options of buying another set of Arrows or making a complete set of pipes from scratch. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 16, 2017, 12:38:40 AM
The Italian Arrow pipes are of a quality I cannot duplicate.  They do not have optimal dimensions as per tube diameters, although they are good in other respects.  The mile bike pipes are made from materials I can find and put together using methods I can match - sort of.  What I need is to build a complete exhaust system using the routing of the Arrow pipes, the general style of fabrication of the mile bike pipes, with the dimensions from the Dynomation work.

The first step is to weld together some step header pipes with 1.386 beginning diameter, 1.5 inch mid section diameter, and 1.75 inch end section diameter.  This taper is critical to get a few ponies near 8,000 rpm where they are badly needed.  No problemo, señor.  All I need to do is buy the tubing, buy a welder, learn how to weld with it, and melt everything together.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on January 16, 2017, 12:57:32 AM
Bo, you planning stainless for the exhaust?

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on January 16, 2017, 11:10:00 AM
Bo.........take a look at Hindle (sold through Ripple Rock in Canada) for SS exhaust ideas.........minimal welding......and adjustable.  Remember to wash SS with acetone before starting the motor :wink:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 16, 2017, 11:25:22 AM
Bends and parts from Burns Stainless...their biggest selection is in 303.

A long time ago I left home on my BSA A-65 with a remington revolver, a down filled paratrooper sleeping bag, some tool and other junk, and a few hundred bucks.  A couple of years filled with drugs, dope, booze, wemon of all types, wemon who were actually men, and all sorts of mayhem followed.  Circumstances led to me having to take a job high in the Sierra Nevada as a professional welder.  It was at a gold mine with this foreman with one and a half legs.  Just him and me.  The mine owner was this rich doctor in the San Francisco Bay area who had this gold mine as a tax write-off.  The old guy scrounged scrap from all sorts of abandoned mines and it was piled all over the place.  It had to be made into a working mine by a certain date or the doc would get in trouble with the tax guys.

Nobody stayed at this job very long.  I lived in a mine shack all alone except when the old guy was there I was fabricating or operating heavy equipment.  Life sucked big time.  It was cold and lonely.  I faked being a serious drug addict on the mend to justify my lack of talent and inability to recall my past and it was not far from the truth.

I knew how to gas weld.  The welders were stick arcs powered by flathead V-8's.  They would rev on and off of their speed governors when I struck and broke arcs.  Since I never touched a arc welder and knew nothing about it, some quick learning happened quickly.  The electrodes were bundled in little boxes with paper describing the welding procedures for them.  I took them home and read them in my little shack by lantern light.  Most of the carp on them was in some sort of egyptian that a welder could understand.  I got enough info to melt the scrap together into a mine.  There were times where the old guy was holding onto my feet while I hung upside down and welded.  A lot of the electrodes were sorta laying around and I just picked them up and used them.  That would be my eventual downfall.

The mine was ready to go.  It was a Monday morning.  The doc showed up at the mine.  I was in town doing something to my BSA.  I showed up late.  It was like the groom being late for the wedding.  We had a dump truck full of rock.  I backed it up the ramp and dumped it into the tipple.  The old guy turned on the water and it flowed through the flumes and sluices.  Proudly I yanked open the gate and the rock poured in.  The sluices were jiggling and everything was primo.  Then, my flippin' welds started to break.  Critical ones.  The non important ones worked great.  The setup fell apart right in front of us.  Inappropriate rod selection was the culprit.

My final paycheck was written on the spot.  It was a big one.  I could't spend much money on the side of that mountain and the doc was not around often so I had a bunch of pay due.  A rich hippie with a down filled sleeping bag, remington revolver, and A-65 headed out.  In town I got one of my friends drunk, sold him my bus, and moved back to the low country where I met Rose.  Our first date was on the A-65.

That is why I never got a welder and would not get one now, except I need that horsepower.  The memories.  It will not be a stick welder, for sure.  

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on January 16, 2017, 12:38:17 PM
Bo, if you're going to weld up an exhaust system you need tig. It just happens that a tig also makes a good stick welder. If you're going to buy a tig, get one that can do aluminum too. If you don't you'll definitely regret going a little cheaply a little later down the road. You'll be able to learn how to weld, both stick and tig pretty easily. There are lots of good sources for learning how on the internet. I'd use "Welding Tips and Tricks" to start. There are lots of bad sites, but they're generally pretty obvious. I recommend getting one of the brand name American built machines because it's much easier to get service and repairs. The local welding supply store can be your best friend.

If you have any questions PM me.

I've been able to help several people on this site get up to speed with their welding.


Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 23, 2017, 09:56:20 PM
The TIG process looks to be severely mental with the need for multi-limbed coordination.  Uggh.  The MIG process seems to be a good place to start.  A TIG welder might be a future project after I figure out the basics of FCAW and GMAW.  This Millermatic 211 is a very popular welder in this area and it had a $100 rebate.  The next project is to build a welding table and welder cart.  The steel dealer is cutting the plates for the table and Rose is getting them tomorrow.  These two books have lots of info.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 26, 2017, 10:34:45 PM
The ripple rock pipes from Canada are not made for Bonnevilles.  It looks like I need to make them.

A lot of the 110 volt wiring in the house I did using 12 gauge Romex for the wire with 20 amp circuit breakers and components.  That type of wiring is simple and the system is stout.  The 220 volt wiring was done by Rose's carpenter buddies when they built the shed.  The welder instructions describe the 220 power supply and show some pictures of what should be in the breaker box.  The things the guy's installed look different and some parts in the picture are not there.  Prudence says it is best to use the welder on 110 current until a genuine electrician checks out the 220 volt supply.

The Arrow headers will be used as a pattern.  They have the right dimensions, basically.  The only differences with the new pipes will be a three step header, a larger collector pipe diameter, and a different taper on the megga.  Burns stainless makes the parts I need in 16 gage 304 stainless.  They do not have everything in the other materials like 321 stainless, 18 gage 304, or mild steel.  There will be slip joints where the headers join the collector and where the megga connects to the other end of the collector.

These arrow pipes use bend angles besides 15, 45, and 90 degrees.  Bends in those three angles will be ordered and there will be some lobsterback work to get the same angles as the Arrow pipes.  I want to keep the lobsterback to a minimum although the entire system could be made that way.  That method takes a lot of time and effort and its acoustic characteristics are questionable.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on January 26, 2017, 11:06:18 PM
If you're planning on welding stainless with the mig Bo be sure you're using the right shielding gas and wire in the machine. Your local welding supply store should be able to set you up correctly. Be sure you use enough heat and if necessary pulse the mig with your trigger finger to get the result you need.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 01, 2017, 12:54:19 AM
It is windy here a lot so it would be hard to weld outside and to maintain a gas shield around the electrode.  The shield gas would blow away.  The storage shed I am building is a lot longer than the boat and trailer in it so there is room for a small welding shop near the door.  A door was made and hung last weekend and the other one will be finished this weekend.  The door is lined with sheet metal and the walls will be, too.

Electrical current is 110 volts from a 50-foot long extension cord.  The gas I have is 75% argon and 25% carbon dioxide.  The wire is 0.030 ER308/308L.  The metal is 16 gage 304 stainless and the welder is a Miller 211 MIG.  Does this appear to be reasonable?

The guy at the welding shop says I need to get the 220 volt power source sorted so I can get higher quality welds.  The welder will work on 220 V too.  Is it a good idea to postpone this pipe building project until the 220 volt power supply is working? 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on February 01, 2017, 02:18:07 AM
Bo, start learning on cheap material.  I wouldn't weld anything important with my Lincoln SP-135 at the end of a 50' extension cord. 

PM me with a phone #, I can drag my light-weight machine down there and give some basic lessons. I have lots of scrap I can bring.  I have a stainless gas bottle and wire for my machine that I used to fix a mal-placed s/s gad tank inlet for an old hot rod, long gone.

Don't pizz away money needlessly.

I'm a fair-to-middlin' MIG welder sometimes.  Initial rough weld of Jeep top into '30-31 Model A Tudor sedan:

(http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee171/4-BarrelMike/Tudor%20Top%20Fill/2011-03-1403.jpg)

(http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee171/4-BarrelMike/Tudor%20Top%20Fill/2011-03-2303.jpg)

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on February 01, 2017, 09:09:13 AM
I googled mig welding stainless steel and came up instantly with a bunch of good information on both the Lincoln and Miller web sites. They had a bunch of information specific to small machines.

Don't start out working on your project Bo. Get some scrap stainless pipe and practice first. You may want to look into back purging. I use that all the time when I'm tig welding stainless. You want to be sure that the inside of the welds are smooth in an exhaust system.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 01, 2017, 11:59:14 PM
Thanks for the advice.  I needed some second opinions on a few things and you gave me those.  The shop will be wired correctly and finished before the pipes are fabricated.  It will take me a few months to do this.

Rose and me were down at the local having dinner and more than a few pints.  We walked out the door and saw it parked across from the pub entrance.  A most exquisite and rare automobile, between 30 and 40 years old and in excellent original condition.  It is something I never knew existed.  Ferraris and Lamborginiis are common fodder compared to it.  Rose took some pictures with her Kindle.  We will get one of our kids to figure out how to download them.  I will photo shop them so they look good and post them. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 02, 2017, 07:27:13 PM
The breaker box I looked into last week was in the house cellar.  The breakers for the wires going to the shed were not there.  This morning I remembered that there is an electrical box door hidden behind where I hang up my leathers and bike riding jacket.  Voila! The breaker box for the shed it is.  The wires going from the house to the shed are plenty stout stranded wires.

The welder book says the wires should be 14 gauge, minimum.  The 110 V lighting circuit has 14 gage and the outlet circuit has 12 gage.  The 220 V outlet circuit has stranded wires a lot bigger than 14 gage.  Both the 220 and 110 V circuits have plenty big wire.

The welder book says the 110 V circuit should have a 15 or 20 amp fuse or circuit breaker.  It has a 20 amp breaker so this is OK.  The book says the time delay fuse for the 220 V circuit needs to be 25 amp or if it is a normal operating fuse it is 30 amp.  What amp breaker should I use in for the 220 V outlet, 25 or 30 amp?  It seems the 50 amp breakers in there now are too big.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on February 02, 2017, 08:46:12 PM
The values in the book are minimums. The 220 volt outlet for the welder will likely be a 50 amp rated outlet although it's quite possible a lower rated outlet will be suitable for that machine. It never hurts to have a larger capacity circuit for a welder. In my case I use a 100 amp circuit for my big tig. The machine is capable of drawing 89 amps and when welding heavy aluminum I have been known to blow the old 70 amp breaker. in theory my machine should be hard wired into a box.

That's a long winded way of saying the 50 amp circuit is great. In this case bigger is better. You won't ever blow a breaker.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 02, 2017, 11:58:29 PM
It looks like there is plenty of 'lectricity.  That is great.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on February 03, 2017, 06:00:19 AM
Bo, my thoughts:  Use the biggest wire/smallest gauge number you can afford.  That is -- if the "book" calls for 14 ga -- 12 ain't much more money and is capable of carrying a higher load.  And 10 ga is bigger still, and if you use a bigger wire you'll have less future hassles with losses from too-small wires, less chance of damage from too much current through the (too small) wires, and you'll suffer one way -- the heavier wire is more difficult to work with - harder to bend/flex, terminate.

But you'll be glad in the long run.  Get the heavier wire.  Same size breakers, but heavier wire.  My two cents' worth. . .  YMMV.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on February 03, 2017, 09:07:34 PM
Bo, I do not see a grounding electrode conductor in your panel.

This tells me it is being treated as a subpanel.

Which means that your neutral buss has effectively been turned into a ground buss because of the equipment grounds landed on it.

This is not good because the neutrals carry current and the grounds only carry current in case of a fault.

Unless there is something I am missing in the picture, a ground kit should be installed and the grounds and landed on it.

If you install a ground kit, make sure that the neutral buss is not bonded to the enclosure, this only applies to subpanels.

Hope this helps, Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 04, 2017, 10:24:34 AM
Mike, it looks like there are some infrastructure improvements I need to do and it will be a few months before I invite you down to help me.  I need to install a ground to the shed circuit breaker box and make a well lit work area for welding in the new shed, as well as shingle the roof and finish the other door.

Slim, Peter, and Don, thanks for the advice and what you mentioned will be done.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on February 04, 2017, 10:42:09 AM
Bo, A ground kit is nothing more than a terminal block that mounts inside the panel.

The issue I see is that maybe one or two of your grounding conductors may be a bit short.

  Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 15, 2017, 12:44:14 AM
The MIG needs a wind-free welding room so the shielding gas stays over the weld.  The boat shed will be the welding area.  The other door is finished and hung.  Note the most excellent door handles.  They are from a junk shop in Portland.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 15, 2017, 12:53:35 AM
Two 5/8 inch copper plated ground rods are sunk 12 feet apart near the shed.  A big thick copper wire runs from them up the shed wall.  It connects to the 'lectrical panel.  Inside the panel the ground kit is installed.  The neutral and ground wires are reconnected to separate busses.  The panel is grounded.  Progress is being made.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on February 15, 2017, 09:42:04 AM
Note the most excellent door handles.  They are from a junk shop in Portland.

Soooo, we call them junk shops now!  :wink: :wink:
Nice door knobs W²! :-D :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Ron Gibson on February 15, 2017, 10:21:36 AM
You have to press the four little buttons on the front to get them to open :? :? :? :? :-D

Ron

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on February 15, 2017, 03:18:17 PM
Ron;

Someone's been pushing them already-- see how shiny they are?  :-D

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 16, 2017, 12:29:01 AM
Those handles seem great from the male viewpoint.  The females around here have a much different perspective.  My butt got reamed.  The woman's mind is a mystery to me. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on February 16, 2017, 12:36:15 AM
Those handles seem great from the male viewpoint.  The females around here have a much different perspective.  My butt got reamed.  The woman's mind is a mystery to me.  

Bo, if they need to go to keep peace in the family I'll store them for you.

Always trying to help a fellow racer, Don   :roll:
Oh yeah, much better on the electrical panel.   :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 21, 2017, 12:52:42 AM
There is not enough room in the bike shed for serious welding.  There is some room in the boat shed for a welding area.  Four #8 wires leave the sub panel in the bike shed.  They go out through the wall and up about 18 inches.  Then, they go back through the wall, across the bike shed under the attic, through the wall, across the ceiling in the boat shed, along the wall, and to a future panel box.  Two more ground rods are installed beyond the boat shed and the ground will tie into the boat shed panel box.  It took all weekend to figure this convoluted route and to install the ground bars, conduit, and wires.  Welding up these pipes is a major project and I have not even started yet. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 21, 2017, 12:55:11 AM
The wires coming out in the boat shed.  The floor under the boat will be poured this summer and the shingles put on the roof. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on February 21, 2017, 01:28:16 AM
While you're planning Bo, figure on a proper welding table with good lighting above it. You'll definitely appreciate it once you have it.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 21, 2017, 09:00:11 PM
Someone stole my lights when I had only one door on the shed.  Fortunately they were some of those Taiwan LED lights and it was no big loss.

A dedicated 220V 50A breaker and circuit will be wired in for the welder.  The other breaker will be 110V 15A for the lights and 110V 20A for the other outlets.  Is there a situation where using 110V is preferred?  I can wire up a dedicated circuit for the welder in that capacity if it will be useful later on.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on February 21, 2017, 10:53:06 PM
Always use 220 if it's available.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on February 22, 2017, 11:00:47 AM
If you weld with a torch the 220V wiring might not be necessary.  :-D

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 23, 2017, 01:15:36 AM
The 304 stainless is difficult to weld with a torch based on what I read.  It is my favorite welding method, however.  I need to learn new skills.

This is what arrived today from Burns Stainless.  The short megga is what the computer program says will work best.  The bike will be loud. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 23, 2017, 01:20:03 AM
A picture of the megga.  The collector is shown.  Burns makes these up to customer specification.  Note the large collector diameter.  Dynomation says this is critical.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 04, 2017, 07:38:53 PM
The conduit is installed and the wires are pulled through them.  This was a big chore.  Lots of swearing and cussing and pushing and pulling and tugging was needed to get those rascals through those tubes.  No it is time to install the outlets.  Do ground fault interrupt outlets work with welders?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 04, 2017, 08:03:38 PM
Disregard the previous dumb post.  The welder is on the 220 circuit w/o gfi outlets. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 13, 2017, 02:04:35 AM
This welding room is a big project.  Things to learn were how to set up grounding rods, install a subpanel, wire 240 volt circuits, and to work with PVC conduit.  The electrical work is done and the sheathing is installed.  The next job is to cover the walls with sheet metal so the welding sparks do not start a fire in the wooden shed.

There are two lighting circuits.  One is a conventional setup with a switch on the outside wall, an exterior light, and two interior lights.  This is adequate for most tasks.  The other lights are plug-in LED strip lights four feet long.  Four of them stuck up between the rafters do a great job of lighting the area where the welding bench will go.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on March 13, 2017, 08:22:37 AM
I'm seeing I'm arriving a little late to the party for this one Bo, but I would have used drywall to cover the walls rather than plywood. I don't like covering the walls with a conductor in a shop where I'm welding. It would be way too easy to cause a short somewhere and maybe even burn the fire resistant building down.  :x :x :x :cry: :cry: :cry:

Pete

P.S. - Really nice job on the shelter. It looks really finished.  :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

P.J.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 13, 2017, 09:51:32 AM
The roof needs shingles, the remainder of the floor needs to be poured, and the siding needs to be put on so I have more work to do.  I can tape the seal the plywood joints and put a coating of topping plaster over the wood.  Is there a fire resistant paint?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on March 13, 2017, 02:15:14 PM
Could you fasten drywall panels right over it. It's available in a fire resistant version but it's basically fire resistant anyway.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on March 13, 2017, 08:39:32 PM
Maybe use Green-Board...........its moisture resistant as well.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Dr Goggles on March 13, 2017, 08:45:01 PM
or cement sheet..... flame resistant, non conductive.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 14, 2017, 12:19:37 AM
That cement board is a good idea.  They have several brands of it available.  This one is extremely fire resistant. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: bones on March 14, 2017, 02:55:57 AM
Guys
While we are talking about welders-- does anyone know how a 240v 50hz would go with your 220v 60hz.

cheers   Bones
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 21, 2017, 11:48:23 PM
This is the cement board on the wall.  One shot is of the board by itself.  The other shot shows the board on the other wall.  The joint was taped and sealed and the board was covered by a layer of tile grout.  This was sanded to an almost smooth texture.  It is like sanding concrete so progress is slow.  Then, it is topped with a layer of topping compound.  This is easy to sand to a smooth finish.  Then, the cement boards will be painted.  This work makes a tough and non-flammable surface.  Progress is slow.  Some hours are going to do overtime at the job and the family is doing things, too.  This weekend I should start welding.  The first project is to FCAW a welding bench together.  The metal is cut and ready to go.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 22, 2017, 12:03:16 AM
Bones, old folks talk about 110/220 volt current.  Now days it is 120/240 volt, except places far from the substation might get somewhere around 110 volts.  You should be OK for voltage.  Not sure when it about the frequency and whether or not the different one hertz your welder.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on March 22, 2017, 12:08:40 AM
Just a note for those contemplating building or revamping a shop. When I built mine I put all the wall outlets at 52" high, This makes them much more handy for plugging in and it means you can lay a four foot wide sheet against a wall and not block the outlets.

Oh yes, and you can never have enough outlets. Mine are placed every four feet along the walls and the two outlets are split so that each is on a separate breaker. There are several plug ins on each breaker, just not two from the same outlet box.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 22, 2017, 12:26:27 AM
My post on a 240 volt appliance from overseas working on USA 240 volt 'lectricity is wrong.  Lots of the world wires up their 240 volt stuff different than ours.  It is best to check with the welder manufacturer, not wobblywalrus.

Pete, you are right.  These outlets are at the correct height for a house.  Unfortunately they are low enough to be in the spark and mayhem zone for a welding bay.  They would be installed much higher if I do this job again.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on March 22, 2017, 07:03:32 AM
Bo, your careful work to put the cement board in - and so many other things that you're doing - will let you enjoy a good feeling when you're working in the shop and sparks fly or whatever.  You'll reap the rewards of safety and a good-looking shop.  Lotsa work - lotsa benefits.  Good Job! :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on March 22, 2017, 12:56:58 PM
Just a note for those contemplating building or revamping a shop. When I built mine I put all the wall outlets at 52" high, This makes them much more handy for plugging in and it means you can lay a four foot wide sheet against a wall and not block the outlets.

Oh yes, and you can never have enough outlets. Mine are placed every four feet along the walls and the two outlets are split so that each is on a separate breaker. There are several plug ins on each breaker, just not two from the same outlet box.

Pete

Pete, You know your stuff!!!!!!!. Excellent. :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on March 22, 2017, 05:27:55 PM
Amen to that! Now I wish I had put twice as many outlets in my shop.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 24, 2017, 09:48:38 AM
Something I learned about wiring up outlets.  There was a fire recently at one of our daughter's friend's houses.  An outlet overheated and that is where the fire started.  Nothing was plugged into it.  This happens occasionally and decades ago someone told me why it happens.  It is possible to rig up a string of outlets where the hot wire goes from outlet to outlet.  The current for the entire string goes through at least one outlet and to a lesser degree, the subsequent ones.  Those connections between the outlets and wires can be problematic and they are in outlet boxes that are crammed pretty tight.

Another method is to run a main line for the circuit and to branch all of the outlets from it.  The connections to the outlet branches are more secure wire nut connections in roomier junction boxes.  Each outlet connection only has to deal with the current for its load.  Also, it is good to use roomier deep boxes so things are not crammed in so much.  This reduces the chances of overheating and fires.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on March 24, 2017, 09:56:17 AM
I've more than once - many times, in fact - thought I oughta take a course in basic household electrical stuff.  I've done it all for all my life - but I never got taught the RIGHT way to do stuff.  For the life of me - I'd pay good money to learn how to get all the wires terminated and into the box and the receptacle in place - on the first try.  Something manages to get loose - or whatever - dang near every time.  Wouldn't it be great to see how they do it so well they can make a living out of it?

Yes, I have wired most of the stuff around the house and we've never had any fires.  The nice glow (around the receptacles and switches) at night serves well as nightlights, too. :roll:

Back to you, Bo.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 31, 2017, 12:05:51 AM
Back in my younger days I worked in a CETA program for the summer.  It was job training and we rewired a Forest Service engineering office.  That was my first exposure to engineering and I likes what I see.  Eventually I went back to school and made a career of it.  The lead guy showed us the basics, inspected our work, and hammered on us till we did it right.  Some formal training helps, like a course in community college.  It is hard to self-teach something like that when mistakes can be so costly.

The first attempts at MIG welding are FCAW on mild steel to make a welding table.  The puddle was visible when I gas welded so I could work the torch and rod to get good results.  The MIG welding moves fast and I cannot see the puddle.  It is sorta a trial and error process to get it right...with mostly error.

This is going to be difficult.  I do not do enough welding to memorize the correct speeds.  It would be nice to have a method where I could look at the puddle and adjust as needed based on visual observations.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on March 31, 2017, 05:35:43 AM
The puddle should be visible. Sometimes a little weave or back and forth motion helps to get a satisfactory weld. I often use a combination of the two. Go into the website "Welding Tips and Tricks". Jody is a really good teacher and there's a huge amount of information on that site. Don't go chasing around on you tube trying to get advise from many of the other sites. While there is some good advise there's lots of really bad information. Oh, and welding requires a steady hand. Use both of them to support the mig gun properly and rest your forearms or elbows on some solid support so you can make the bead go where you want it.

If you continue to have problems seeing the puddle check the shade on your lens. As we age our eyes seem to lose a little sharpness. I find the recommendations for lens shade tend to be a little on the dark side. The recommendation is often an 11 but I find that a 10 usually works a little better for me. Going down that slight amount isn't going to have any adverse effect on the average person's eyes.

Don't start on your welding table until you've done a bit of practice. Get some scrap material, a piece of plate no thicker than a quarter inch works best, and practice running beads until you can see the puddle properly and watch the edges of the weld tie in. I usually find it's better to push the gun than pull it although both methods are acceptable. I find that using the presets on a welder usually result in a slightly cold weld.

If you continue to have problems shoot me a PM and we'll set a time where you can call me and we'll see if we can't sort out your issues. I've been fairly successful helping several members on this site get up and running successfully with both tig and mig.

Good luck.

Pete

PS - One more thing. If I remember you did get gas and bare wire with your machine. Use that for your welding table project. Flux core wire is smokey and dirty and makes it much more difficult to see the puddle. It's also way more expensive to use than bare wire with a gas shield. The place to use the flux core is when you need to do a repair or small fab job outside in the wind. In that case mig doesn't work because the gas shield gets blown away. The gas shielded welds are cleaner and way easier to see and they are way cheaper to make because the fluxed wire is very expensive.

P.J.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on March 31, 2017, 01:52:34 PM
One more thing on the welding Bo. If you're welding hot rolled material the results will be much better if you remove the mill scale first. That's kind of a "do as I say, not as I do" sort of thing. The only times that I actually do it is if I'm going to be tig welding the material or if the quality has to be more or less ultimate.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on March 31, 2017, 02:08:28 PM
If you haven't already done so, go to the drugstore and look for the largest pair of glasses (not just readers) in a stronger strength than you normally use.  Bifocals or readers just don't cover enough area and you will constantly be moving you head to get the image in the best place.

Also, some of the old timers (Pete?) eschew the self darkening shields, but I simply can't get everything lined up with the non-self darkening shields.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 01, 2017, 11:34:44 PM
The gas was hooked up last night, the polarity reversed, and solid wire installed in the machine.  Tonight I used manual rather than auto settings so I would know what they are.  Some futzing around with voltage and wire speed settings shows me that the settings on the back of the lid work best. 

The plate is 3/16 thick and the channel under it is 1/8 inch thick. The welds that give good penetration are physically big and sorta industrial appearing like stick welds rather than small and petite like some TIG welds.  Is this a characteristic of MIG welds?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on April 01, 2017, 11:47:56 PM
The welds where you're just getting the upper and lower corners look really good. Once you're picking that up watch the center of your puddle and try to make sure you're getting right to the bottom of the vee.

It looks to me like you're making good progress Bo.  :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wheelrdealer on April 02, 2017, 09:17:13 AM
I have to second Peter Jack's recommendation of weldingtipsandtricks dot com site. Jody's arc videos showed me how to over come  a couple of bad habits that were impacting my weld strength and looks.

My experience, when I start welding with tig/mig my tendency was to try and weld too hot. Seems most beginners I work with do the same. What I learned was to use welding technique instead of cranking up the volts.wire speed. On a corner or any joint with dis-similar size metals sometimes it helps to add some motion to your weld technique in the photo example I would try a small in-cursive e motion with a slight pause on the thicker material. Jody has a bunch of videos on his sight in the mig welding section. The other technique it the upside down ^ movement, again with a slight pause over the thicker material. As you watch the leading edge of the puddle you should see the weld cut into the edge of each material. If the materials are the same then no need for a pause. The pause just lets the weld puddle burn into the thicker material. You will also note the beloved ridges that look good but do not do anything for the weld. 

Welding is like the definition of beauty there is not shortage of interpretations on what works or what is beautiful.

My 2 cents.
BR
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 03, 2017, 07:10:45 PM
Our community college has a "Basic Metal Arc (MIG) Welding" class on Saturday mornings.  It starts this week.  Hopefully they accept Wobbly's late enrollment application.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 03, 2017, 07:36:34 PM
This is interestingwww.bbc.com/news/uk-england-hampshire-39431234 (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-hampshire-39431234)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 04, 2017, 10:43:16 PM
This is odd.  The steel filings from weld grinding line up in little rows on the floor.  Sort of like ants.  It is the side of the welding bay that faces the north side neighbor.  Years ago I did something rotten, although I do not know what it was, and she installed protection.  It is the guy hanging in the tree near the fence line and it faces our house.  My best guess is that it is intended to keep my mojo on my property and its voodoo powers are strong.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Geo on April 05, 2017, 09:19:04 AM
Looks like you have a follower of Santa Muerte close by.

I find the best thing for a new welder to do is practice, I ran about 10 feet of practice welds over about three days before I welded anything I wanted to keep. And I made a few items, welder stand, push plate for the truck, etc., then I welded on the race car. I still run a few practice welds before the real weld as I only weld every few months.

Geo
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WhizzbangK.C. on April 05, 2017, 09:44:47 AM
Bo, take a pic of those lines of filings, then sweep them up and sprinkle them on the floor again to see if they fall in the same pattern. They may be following the lines of flux in a magnetic field caused by flow of electricity through the ground, or though rebar in the floor. They may be telling you that you have a grounding issue of some kind.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on April 05, 2017, 09:54:34 AM
I think you'll find that those are where your cable's been lying while you were welding. The flow of DC current through the cables creates a magnetic field in the area adjacent to them.

I have no explanation for your neighbor. That's weird.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on April 07, 2017, 06:54:45 PM
Our community college has a "Basic Metal Arc (MIG) Welding" class on Saturday mornings.  It starts this week.  Hopefully they accept Wobbly's late enrollment application.
WW, be sure to wear your best B'ville t-shirt without a welding jacket! You will burn the graphics onto your chest!  :-o :-o :-o :-o
Don't ask me how I know!  :x :x :x :x
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 09, 2017, 11:33:27 PM
Yesterday was Saturday morning welding class.  We got some long lecture about safety and neatness in the welding shop.  Then we welded.  The MIG welders there are big.  I was welding away, as happy as I can be, and the wire quit feeding out of the gun.  No matter how hard or long I pulled the trigger, no wire came out.  Close examination of the gun tip showed that a flying drop of molten metal welded the wire to the gun tip.  That was why the wire would not feed.  No problemo, señor.  An easy fix.  Lifting the cover over the wire feed mechanism revealed a bird's nest of wire around all of the gears and pulleys.  The feed kept feeding wire.  Since it could not go through the tip it jammed itself into the mechanism.  This was not an easy fix.  It took the rest of the class period to make the welder functional.  It can only get better from now on.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on April 10, 2017, 10:37:25 PM
WW..... great lesson in welding there.... when the machine quits welding, so should you  :-o  Might want to have a little less drive tension on the wire also.... JMO, not necessarily that of the professional welders as well as the staff and management  :|
 :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on April 10, 2017, 10:54:30 PM
We've pretty much all done something similar once. It's when you don't learn from the experience that you should really find something else to occupy your time.  :-D :-D :-D

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 17, 2017, 02:10:31 AM
The cellar shop has a ghetto blaster.  FM reception has been very poor during the last few years.  Lots of static.  The LED bulbs near the radio were replaced by these clear halogen bulbs.  Problem solved.  Now FM reception is good.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 17, 2017, 09:46:32 PM
The welding table is done.  Now it is time to buy a bottle of tri-mix for welding stainless pipe.  Cutting the tubing is a real pain in the behind.  Titanium is not exactly easy to work with and it is slightly better than this stuff.  Now I am trying to find an American made miter chop saw.  A kalamazoo KM10 looks good. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 18, 2017, 08:24:40 PM
The last pieces arrived for the exhaust system.  Everything except the muffler is 16 gage 304 stainless.  The muffler uses thinner stainless.  The muff will be there  when light valve springs will be used to polish in the cams and lifters and for general development work.  It is a Burns 2-stage.  The dang thing is sized for a car so it will not restrict a bike exhaust and it will be nice and quiet.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 22, 2017, 11:02:49 PM
Shed building, learning how to MIG weld, and life are keeping me plenty busy.  Not much is being posted here although I read and enjoy what everyone else is posting and I like watching their builds.  Also, seeing the jumping tire test in Hokkaido answered questions that kept me awake at night.

The latest progress on the build is a reevaluation of fuel selection.  Lots of different gasolines have been tried over the years and I settled on Sunoco Standard, a 110 octane leaded gas.  The dyno shed ventilation is not the best in the world and there are folks around the race bike that breathe in the exhaust fumes, including me.  So, a change to unleaded is considered.  Also, I want to use a fuel that ERC sells on the salt.  Standard operating procedure is to carry two 5-gallon cans of gas to the salt in the back of the truck.  Not the safest thing to do, for sure.

Two gasolines are recommended by ERC for the Triumph.  One is the leaded 110K and the other is unleaded MUL-C.  The fuel of choice will be the unleaded.  The fuel price itself is reasonable.  The shipping to Oregon costs much more than the gas and it makes it too expensive.  We can get Sunoco here for a reasonable price.  The bike will be tuned on Sunoco SS100 and ERC MUL-C will be used on the salt, based on advice from ERC.  Both fuels are similar enough to allow this.  This works out nicely.  There will be no need to pack fuel on the trip to Utah.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: joea on April 23, 2017, 05:51:20 PM
interesting that ..."shed ventilation"  is a factor in determining the
optimal fuel...for world record pursuits

i suppose we all make choices during these journeys...that are interesting to others..

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 25, 2017, 01:56:41 AM
The lower heating value in BTU per pound fuel divided by the recommended stoichiometric ratio by weight gives an idea about the heat available in a pound of fuel air mix.  The Standard 110 octane leaded gas has this:  18,700 / 15.0 = 1,247 BTU per pound air fuel mix.

The SS100 104 octane unleaded has 18,000 / 14.2 = 1,268

The 260 GT Plus 104 octane unleaded has 17,400 / 13.7 = 1,270

The leaded gas is more efficient.  It has a leaner stoichio ratio.  It also costs a lot less.  The unleaded gases have the potential to make as much or a bit more power.

Octane needs are a big unknown factor.  The piston crowns, exhaust ports, valve heads, and combustion chamber will be ceramic coated.  I am not sure if this will retain heat and require more octane than an uncoated engine.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 25, 2017, 09:44:06 AM
A 90 degree bend in 304 stainless tubing needs to be made into a 64 degree bend.  A pie shaped slice is cut out of the middle of the bend.  The wall thickness is very thin at the outside compared to the inside of the bend.  The weld area is cleaned up and it is tacked.  Tri mix is used from the gun and there is no back purge.  308 stainless wire 0.030 diameter is used with 7 volts and 60 feet per minute wire speed.  This works OK on the thicker wall.  The voltage is dropped to 6.5 with 60 feet per minute wire speed for the sides and this does the job.  The voltage is 6.5 with a 50 fpm wire speed for the outside of the bend.  The tacking blows a hole through the pipe.

 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 25, 2017, 09:52:59 AM
Finer .025 308L stainless wire is installed after this catastrophe.  An argon tank and regulator is set up for back purging.  A dissipator is made to bleed the argon purge gas into the pipe.  An attempt will be made to weld this thing after Rose and me get back from dinner, a movie, and a couple of pints at the local.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on April 25, 2017, 10:41:04 AM
Bo, you don't need the dissipator. Plug both ends of the pipe with a cap of some sort, tape works but it's messy. Insert the hose or a piece of tubing to which the hose is attached through the cap. Make a small hole in the cap at the other end. Let the back gas flow for a couple of minutes, then weld away. This will make for a solid atmosphere of argon instead of random flow. I think if you taped your dissipator into the pipe that might be a good fix.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on April 25, 2017, 10:42:42 AM
 An attempt will be made to weld this thing after Rose and me get back from dinner, a movie, and a couple of pints at the local.
You might want to wait till morning!

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on April 25, 2017, 11:01:27 AM
A long time ago I posted pictures and a short narrative of how I reworked my regulator so I could use it effectively for both welding and back purge at the same time. This is a fairly common practice in industry. Hopefully this link works.

http://www.landracing.com/forum/index.php/topic,10731.0.html

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 25, 2017, 07:54:47 PM
The logic was that I need to buy a regulator and argon tank for welding aluminum so the separate tank system looks good from a cost viewpoint.  Also, argon costs a lot less than tri-mix.  Is there a problem with using argon for a purge gas in this application?  If so, I will switch to the setup you show.  I have all of those fittings in the plumbing spare parts box.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on April 25, 2017, 10:33:32 PM
I see no reason why Argon should not work as a purge gas. Then again I always tig stainless so I have no experience with this setup. If you have a couple of thin stainless coupons you could try it before you get serious. If I were doing it I'd turn the heat way down, try the weld on a coupon before I tackled the real thing and pulse the trigger using a push with the gun at about 30 degrees.

Good luck.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 26, 2017, 01:33:14 AM
My big night out with Rose is tomorrow.  I have been thinking it is Wednesday all day.  So, a 90 degree bend has been cluttering up the shop and wrecking my life.  It is gone.  A spiff 64 degree bend has taken its place.

Pete, how do you do the pulsing?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on April 26, 2017, 02:04:31 AM
Just pull the trigger for short bursts at a time. It allows the weld to cool between bursts so you don't continue to build heat in the weld. It's generally the heat buildup that causes burn through. The resulting weld will look somewhat like a tig weld because it will result in ripples similar to those caused by feeding the rod with tig.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on April 26, 2017, 02:16:06 AM
Bo, PM sent.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 27, 2017, 09:41:01 AM
The back purge gas is from the argon tank.  It is heavier than air and a flame will not burn in it.  The purge hose is stuck in one end of the pipe and that end is taped shut.  The other end is raised above the table a little bit and taped shut.  An air escape hole is made in the highest point of the taped end.  The pipe is purged with argon until a flame goes out when a match is held near the escape hole.  This indicates the pipe is purged.  Then it is welded.  This purging seems to be needed to make the weld metal melt in and penetrate on the back side of the weld.  The weld on the inside of the pipe is much smoother if the purge is effective.  I have no clue about why this happens.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on April 27, 2017, 01:01:20 PM
Glad to hear it's working for you Bo. Don't bother to question it, just be happy that you're getting the desired results.  :-D :-D :-D

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 29, 2017, 08:15:35 PM
The professor looked at the welded pipe before class this morning.  He asked me if the pipe ends were in contact with each other when welded.  I said yes.  Both of us butt welded together some metal strips that were contacting each other.  Then we welded some more that had a little gap between them.  The penetration was much better and more consistent with the gapped strips.  He said to set the pipes up with this small gap before e welding.  Also, he recommended an ER308L-SI wire for this 304 stainless tubing.  I was using ER308L.

An expert PM'ed me and said I should not grind the welds flush until I get good enough to always have good penetration.  This makes sense.  Tonight another joint will be welded up with a gap between the two halves.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on April 29, 2017, 09:16:51 PM
Make it a very small gap and it will work great. If you try to stretch it out a bit that thin section at the outside of the bend will become a real challenge. It sounds like you have a really competent instructor who cares. Good deal. You'll find the wire he recommended will flow a little nicer.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 01, 2017, 02:10:37 AM
Both of my pipe welds looked good.  The welds were ground flush with the surrounding metal.  An expert, in a PM, suggested I check for porosity.  He saw some in the picture of one pipe.  Some rubber stoppers were put on both ends of the pipes.  A hose and spigot were attached to one stopper so I could blow air into the pipe when it was underwater.  Little bubble trails indicated pinholes on both pipes at the outsides of the bends.  These little holes proved to be impossible for me to fix.  The metal around the welds was ground a little bit when I made the welds flush.   Now it was far to thin and perforated.

Some work with a center punch showed where the thin places were.  I tried to build up the metal thickness using little pulse welds.  It worked.  Tomorrow I will put on another layer to fill in the gaps and holes.

Yesterday I welded my skoolwork project to the metal table.  The prof brought over an electric angle grinder to remove it.  He asked "Do you know about these?"  I said "Yes, I am very familiar with this tool."
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 02, 2017, 09:41:49 AM
Last Sunday Gretchen was trying to learn some sort of French etude on the piano.  She kept banging away on the same line of music till she got it right.  Then she moved on to the next one.  That is what I need to do and it is to repeat the same thing till I get it right.  So, a bunch of lobster back practice rings are cut from a 16 gage straight section.  The gap between the two sections was set at .030 and it was tacked up.  Then, I went around the periphery with small tack welds one next to the other.  No penetration.  Tonight I will do the same thing with tacks except I will make a small circular movement to put more heat into the weld pool.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on May 02, 2017, 09:56:44 AM
You're now learning why tig is so much nicer for this type of work Bo. With the control pedal you can vary the heat as you work and it's almost impossible not to get the proper penetration. I have no doubt you'll succeed with the mig. Your determination to master whatever you attempt sometimes amazes me.  :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:  :-D :-D :-D

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 02, 2017, 11:26:21 PM
Some stuff about MIG welding stainless is on Lincoln's website.  They say to follow the seam with a back and forth method.  Sorta like walking in a straight line and taking two steps forward and one back.  The weld in the first photo shows a 3/4 inch long pass made that way.  The second photo shows penetration on the other side before I remembered to turn on the back purge argon.  The third photo shows penetration with argon.  Note how it is much better with than without it.  The hole in the pipe happened when I was working with the torch too far away.  It is vital to keep that 10mm tip to part distance.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 05, 2017, 09:14:51 PM
The cylinder head flow data arrived from Kibblewhite.  This last intake tract test they made was on a head with 2mm larger intake valves, porting, a hogged out Triumph manifold, 39mm Keihin flat slide carbs, and oiled foam pod filters.  The setup flowed around 212 cfm at 28 inches.  Bigger carbs and a pleated oil gauze filter was recommended by Kibblewhite.

The bigger carb and filter idea sounded good.  How to do it was confusing.  A conversation in Sacramento with the tuner for the factory Triumph mile bikes gave me the answer.  He had a set of 45mm Mikuni's with big K and N filters.  I bought a pair and they were installed with a hogged out Triumph Performance manifolds. This does the job.  Flow with the same valves and ports goes up to 230 cfm, an 8.5 % increase.  The basic horsepower formula says:  0.26 x 230 x 2 x 0.9 x .86 = = 92  hp at the rear wheel at B'ville.  This is not enough to get me a record.  It will be good for over 150 mph with a streetable motor running on unleaded with a muffler, which is a long term goal.

The valves in a Cosworth design are at the corners of the combustion chamber.  Larger valves and seats require metal removal from the periphery of the chamber and this dramatically drops compression.  A tuner needs to be aware of this and increase valve sizes just enough to do the job and no more.  The intakes had larger seats installed and a 2mm increase in diameter.  The exhausts were enlarged 1mm and the stock seats reworked to give better flow.  This increased flow between 2 and 16 percent depending on valve lift.  The desired exhaust flow is between 80 and 90 percent of intake flow.  That target was hit.  The intakes and exhausts flow the same at low lifts near 1/8 inches.  This is not uncommon and no need to worry according to the expert at Kibblewhite.  This cylinder head is the best it can be.

The K and N sock was used over the filter during the flow tests.  It was on the filter when I sent it to him and I asked him if it is a good idea.  He said yes.  The sock is a good thing when considering the racing environment.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 10, 2017, 01:18:08 AM
Progress is being made in weldingville.  My welds are ugly but better than before and functional.  A mount is cobbled up for the back end of the collector and a lobster back piece is attached.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on May 10, 2017, 01:32:11 AM
Keep up the welding with as many projects as you can and then build another set of pipes in a year or two after you've had a reasonable amount of practice. The results will be totally different from what you're getting now. Hand skills take a while to build up and actually seeing what's happening in the puddle takes a while too.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 10, 2017, 08:05:52 PM
I was told to use .025 or .023 wire to keep the welding a bit slower and easier.  That helped a lot.  The teacher showed me how to lay the pipe on its side and to weld vertically in the downhill direction on the side of the pipe.  That helps to get penetration.  Also, he said to set the pipes up with a small .030 to .050 gap.  This helps.  Also, chamfering the pipe ends helps, too.

This place is backwoods.  A week and a half ago I ordered the .023 308L-SI wire through a local welding supply.  Four stores do not carry it.  It was due to come in today.  The wire was never shipped 'cause it was less than some exorbitant minimum order.  No one told me.  So, I cancelled the order.  it was ordered from Grainger and will come in on Tues or Wed next week.  Now, everything the welding stores do not have on their shelves for instant purchase will be ordered through Grainger or McMaster Carr.

The next set of pipes will be made from 18 gage.  These 16-gaage pipes weigh as much as a baby elephant.  There is no need for ballast. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 14, 2017, 02:24:37 AM
The collector is finished an mounted.  It is 2.5 inches ID which seems awfully big for a 1,000 cc engine.  The virtual modeling tells this big diameter is needed to get correct wave action.  In fact, the program would go nuts and give me goofy results if I used a smaller diameter collector like 1.750 inches.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 14, 2017, 11:58:20 PM
Argon is used as a purge gas inside the pipe.  Lots of folks tape the pipe ends or use corks to keep the gas inside.  These will not work for lobster back construction.  Short tubing rings are welded onto the pipe and the welding is near the end.  A cork or tape would be burned.  This is another method to keep the gas in the pipe.

Washers that are leftovers from hole sawing are used with some metal plates.   One washer that is just small enough to fit in the pipe is attached to a square plate with an eyebolt.  A spring is attached to the eyebolt and a chain is attached to the spring.  A round disk is also made up with a washer and eyebolt for the other end of the pipe.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 15, 2017, 12:03:40 AM
This is the gas fitting on the other side of the round plate.  The chain is threaded into the pipe and the square plate is held up against the end.  The chain is threaded through the pipe and the piece to be attached to the pipe.   The spring is stretched and a link of chain is attached to the hook on the round plate.  The remaining chain is inside the pipe.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 15, 2017, 12:06:41 AM
The spring tension holds everything together for welding.  The purge gas is retained in the pipe, too.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 17, 2017, 12:08:52 AM
Equivalent gasolines so I can tune for MUL-C are not available here for a reasonable price.  The MUL or its Sunoco equivalent need to be shipped.  The freight is very expensive.  Two drums of Sunoco's highest octane unleaded are ordered.  It is GT260 Plus.  One drum will be for tuning and the other for B'ville.  There is no shipping charge for this blend.

Cam lobe and lifter failure have been a problem when cams taller than the all-purpose #813 grind are used.  The situation was reexamined by the expert at Kibblewhite.  The lobes are too close to the edges of the lifters.  The the head is being bored for 30mm tappet buckets to replace the standard 28mm ones.  That will put the bucket edges 1mm further out and it will be just enough for the higher lift #408 cams.

The valve springs were ordered for a set of cams much more radical than the 408's using a 10,000 rpm redline.  Careful tuning using salt flats density altitude says these milder cams with a 9,000 rpm redline will work just as good, or better.  Kibblewhite examined the spring rates for this milder setup and reduced the pressure over the nose by 30#.  That should help valve train life.

The 308L-Si wire arrived today.  It lays down and penetrates better than the 308L wire.  It is better for pipe building.  The megga is done.  This short bugger gives the best wave dynamics according to the virtual model.  Progress is being made.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 18, 2017, 12:14:18 AM
It is no problem to make a decent MIG weld now.  The only issue I have is seeing where I am going.  Do the top end welding helmets give any advantages for this?  The one I have now is a Miller Digital Infinity.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on May 18, 2017, 12:20:36 AM
Better helmets do definitely help IMO.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on May 18, 2017, 06:29:58 AM
What you're using is as good as anything you can get. Keep it as clean as possible and play with the shade settings. As our eyes age we often have to lighten the shade slightly. I notice you're wearing glasses. Bifocals won't work. You'll never see anything properly. If you can eliminate the glasses and use a cheater lens in the helmet instead you may find that helps as well.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 18, 2017, 09:28:13 AM
Thanks for telling me this.  My glasses are bifocals.  A magnifying lens came with the helmet.  I will try it without wearing glasses.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on May 18, 2017, 10:15:13 AM
If you can read without your glasses try welding doing the same. If you're inclined you may want to use safety glasses. I find the less layers of glass between me and the weld, the better I like it.

The other thing that might help is getting rid of the bulky glove on your gun hand. A tig glove will give you much better control. I use the relatively cheap brown gloves. They're a light leather and unlined. You don't need the perfectly made white form fitting gloves even if they are more stylish.  :-D :-D :-D

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on May 18, 2017, 07:32:41 PM
Sometimes I go gloveless and as the filler rod gets shorter it gets hotter but you don't want to let go
until you finish. :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on May 18, 2017, 09:09:48 PM
I almost always go gloveless on the hand feeding the filler rod when I'm tig welding. That's old school and I doubt that it's recommended any more. My guess is that it encourages melanoma caused by the strong UV rays produced by the arc.

There's no reason to go gloveless when you're mig welding. I tend to use my non gun hand to help steady my hand / gun hand to produce a much better quality weld. This causes that hand to be relatively close to the action and the extra protection is welcome.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 19, 2017, 01:59:07 AM
That two handed method seems like a good idea.  Tomorrow I will try it with a lighter glove on the gun hand.

This lobster back thing connects the muffler to the collector.  Three exhaust setups will be tried on the dyno.  One will be the megga.  The other will be this connector pipe without the muffler.  A "blooey" pipe is what my father called this.  The third will be the muffler.

The muffler might work best.  The last version of this engine put out its best performance with mufflers.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 30, 2017, 02:15:27 AM
The welding bay is at the front of the boat shed where I poured the floor last summer.  It is a patch of concrete as wide as the shed and six feet long.  I was welding the muffler bracket, flipped up my mask to look at the weld, and stepped back off of the edge of the slab.  Fortunately I did not impale myself on anything when I hit the deck.  Finishing the slab is a priority now.  Today exactly 3 feet 4.5 inches length was added.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 31, 2017, 02:58:42 AM
The muffler hangers are done.  All are 304 stainless.  The muffler stay is two pieces of 14 gage sheet metal separated by little rectangular pieces of 11 gage.

The two power welding hood lens insert works great.  I can see much better with it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on May 31, 2017, 03:05:13 PM
Good use of the kitchen table Wobbly!  :cheers: Just don't get caught!  :-( :cry:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: ggl205 on May 31, 2017, 03:16:31 PM
Woody, you need to drag out the old MC hiding in your garage and come join the fun. I will not accept "my wife says no" for an answer.

John
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 01, 2017, 02:41:16 AM
A Sawzall is what I use to cut metal and I have done this for decades.  It does not work well for tubing and especially for thin wall.  The teeth catch on the tube and the tube gets bent.  So, it is time for a metal chop saw that uses a cutting disk.  There are all sorts of nice saws made in China.  I want one made here or in some non-commie country.  There is one brand made in the US.  I will get less saw for my money.  The warm and fuzzy feeling of keeping my money here persuades me to order it.

The lady that orders these things for me in Portland says these guys make the saws after the order is placed and it takes six weeks to build one plus a week or two for shipping.  That is too long and I cancel the order.  She calls back.  They can make the saw in three weeks and take a week to ship it.  This is OK so I reorder it.

It arrives in the Rose City.  I take a day off from work and drive up there to get it.  It is in a wooden crate so I do not get a good look at it.  It is uncrated when I get home.  It looks like a nice saw until I start to use it.  It was ordered as a single phase 230 volt saw.  There is one of those dinky three prong 15 or 20 amp 115 volt plugs on the cord.  I look at the internal wiring for the saw motor.  It is set up for 230 volts.  What the heck?

The cutting disk goes down till it cuts the table in half.  There is no blade stop.  It is missing.  Mary Jane must be legal where they make that saw.

An e-mail is sent to the idiots that made this thing.  The president of the company e-mails me back.  He says there are a variety of 230 volt outlets and plugs.  They put the 115 volt plug on 'cause they do not know what 230 V outlet I have.

This is discussed with the legal and electrical guys at my job.  The legal expert says the first person that plugs this thing into a 115 volt outlet and gets electrocuted will be dead and I do not have to worry about him or her.  The family of the stiff could sue me and if they found out that I knowingly had something like this I could be exposed to criminal negligence charges.  He also said my insurance coverage might be null and void if this thing causes a fire.  The electric expert said the saw will trip a circuit breaker and it will not start so no one will get hurt.

Either way, the saw cannot be used as is.  I e-mailed the president and told him to ship a proper cord and a blade stop pronto.  I sure miss the WWII generation.  They took things more seriously.  This would not be happening if they were in charge. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on June 01, 2017, 11:34:31 AM
WW;

I'll bet the president of that company blames Harbor Freight for their own lack of business success. Waiting until an order is placed before building a chop saw is not the way to market such a low-level "commodity" tool. Then, after 3 weeks for a custom build, to deliver it without the necessary parts installed illustrates this company's incompetence.

I prefer a US-made product, too, but I expect it to have at least the quality of a cheap import.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 03, 2017, 01:23:33 AM
No help seems to be coming from the company.  It looks like I will be fixing it.

The cylinder head is done and Kibblewhite shipped it to Swain Tech in New York.  The thermal barrier will go on the exhaust tracts, combustion chambers, and valve faces as recommended by Kibblewhite.  The coating will also go on the radius faces of the valves and the inlet tracts as per my preference.

The fellow that did all the work is Mike Perry, the head of the Kibblewhite research and development department.  The worked on this thing on weekends and at home in addition to the time spent at the business.  He saved my land speed program.  Lots of this stuff is custom built and I cannot buy it anywhere.

The details of how this head is set up can be posted if anyone wants to see what was done.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on June 03, 2017, 09:30:10 AM
Wobbly, you are such a tease!  :-o Let the posting begin ................ :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on June 03, 2017, 10:28:50 AM
Bo, being patriotic is a good thing when it's practical but there are times when you're much better off buying an American brand such as Milwaukee or DeWalt which is at least providing American jobs on the distribution end, is properly engineered and has a proper guarantee. I imagine the president of the company you corresponded with was just taking time off from assembling saws in his garage to hit the computer for a short while. You'll probably also find your American saw is assembled on this continent from mainly Asian parts. The guy obviously doesn't understand electricity and in that regard he's just plain dangerous and it sounds like the saw itself may fall in the same category in that it's missing critical parts to make it work properly. The best thing that could happen is that he be shut down before someone gets seriously hurt.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 04, 2017, 01:56:54 AM
Pete, there is a Consumer Product Safety Commission here.  They will be the first contact.

Woody, I think I am the only nut racing one of these bikes on Landracing.com.  There might be limited interest.  This will be the first of a few posts.

The engine had been raced for ten years and had over 200 dyno pulls while parts and settings were being developed.  I could not get the power to set records and a fellow who gave me a lot of advice retired.  The other specialists on these engines were not saying anything about what they did or they were full of carp.  It was time for a new approach.  Virtual modeling was used and the Dynomation method was selected.  There are three methods in the program.  One is a simulation model with minimal use of wave action.  Another model predominately uses wave action.  The third model combines the two to have a hybrid model.  The third model is what I used.  The answers made the most sense and the wave action piece of the tool was very valuable.

Measured data was entered into the program such as burette based compression ratio and head flow data at 28 inches.  The cam profiles were approximated using cam card data until Kibblewhite gave me digital cam files.  They measured the cams to make them.  This is very important to get good results from the program.

There is a relationship between cam duration and performance according to Vizard.  Shorter durations work better at higher altitudes.  This will be a Bonneville engine so typical salt flats climatic data was entered. 

The stock tappet buckets are 28mm diameter.  They will handle cams up to 0.380 lift.  This includes the WebCam #813 grind cams and there are good all-purpose knockers.  The tappet buckets on this head were bored out to 30mm. This is as big as they can go without overly weakening the cam support bearings and brackets.  This allows net lifts up to 0.400 inches.  A WebCam #208 grind has 0.400 net lift.  That is what will be in the new engine.  This are is the biggest cams I can reliably use.

The next post will be about peak RPM.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 05, 2017, 02:04:20 AM
My last post is incorrect.  Vizard talks about compression ratio vs duration.  It is on page 70 thru 72 of "How to Build Horsepower."  The engine's compression ratio is the same irrespective of altitude.  The pre-combustion cylinder pressure does change with altitude. The virtual modeling showed me that a medium to high compression ratio engine at  Bonneville is like a low compression engine 'cause of the thinner air.

It is important to minimize duration for higher altitudes so as to keep the compression pressure pushing down on the piston rather than escaping out of the exhaust valve.  Also, it is important to not close the intake valve too late so as to start building compression.  This is what I think I see from looking at all of the graffs and tables.

This engine flows very well at low to medium valves lifts as is typical of a Cosworth design.  This makes limiting duration especially important.  The engine is very effective at dumping cylinder pressure when the exhaust valves open and and it is also very good at not building up cylinder pressure until the intake valves are shut.

The maximum lift is 0.400 due to structural concerns.  There are a couple of cams to choose from with lifts similar to this and different durations.  The cams with the shortest durations were chosen for the reasons above.   
     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: revolutionary on June 05, 2017, 10:41:18 AM
Wobbly, in my previous career life, we used to bump up the compression on comp engines running at Denver to 17+:1 in order to make any power up there. If there is no air to begin with, you better compress it all you can. 

The tough spot is that it is extremely hard to do with a small bore engine like you have. The best option is to start where you are, dyno the thing and move the cams where you want, then get a new piston blank with a blob dome and clearance it to barely fit and clear the valves now that they are in the right spots and make a new set of pistons off that. It is a major pain but that will do the trick.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 06, 2017, 12:42:06 AM
The flow in these Cosworth motors tumbles across the piston crown to get mixed up before ignition.  A high crown can mess this up and this is especially true in a engine like this with a big bore and short stroke.  This is a 13:1 crown based on the volume of the standard combustion chamber.  The 14:1 crown was really tall and pointy.  This crown height seemed like the best compromise.  It gives 11.9 to 1 compression on my head which has bigger intake valves and the metal removal needed to put them in and unshroud them.

A long term goal is to run in the UK again at the Yorkshire Mile, the promenade in Brighton, Santa Pod, and maybe Pendine.  This lower comp ratio might be the best.  It can be hard to get race gas over there and everything is close to sea level.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on June 06, 2017, 09:26:16 AM
Yes!  While you do consider static compression, dynamic compression is more important.  :-D Those cams should work really well.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 07, 2017, 10:19:02 AM
The cams give the best dynamic compression of any available.

The model was made using 10-point approximations of the cam profiles.  This is durations at .006 lift, durations at .050 lift, and total lifts for intake and exhaust lobes.  I had to buy the cams based on 10-point analysis and have them digitally profiled by Kibblewhite.  The profiles arrived with the cams last week.  The engine model is invalid.  The profiles give much different virtual performance than the 10-point approximation.  Use actual cam profiles from the beginning with virtual modeling is my advice to all of you.

The intake mach number is 0.48 at peak power rpm.  It should be 0.5 to 0.6.  The intake valves are 2mm larger than standard.  A 1mm increase would have been OK.  Modeling shows the mach number would be just about perfect.  The stock seats could have been reworked and there would be no compression loss from the metal removal to install the bigger seats for the 2mm larger valves.  The 13:1 static compression would be retained.  It was a mistake on my part to use those 2mm bigger intake valves.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 09, 2017, 09:36:07 AM
Another three feet of floor was poured in the shop, a dedicated outlet installed, a new cord and plug of adequate and proper design was put on the chop saw, and a blade stop was made from a stainless steel bolt.  Now the saw is up and running.  It was suggested the outlets be installed high on the walls in this forum.  This was done.  Theses outdoor use covers keep chips and swarf off of them. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on June 09, 2017, 12:09:24 PM
That's a good looking installation Bo. I'm surprised those guys were so Mickey Mouse in their performance. The saw looks like a really good piece overall.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 14, 2017, 01:51:22 AM
The saw works well.  This is the first of many lobsterback sections that will be made from 304 stainless.  These are time consuming to make with a Sawzall.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on June 14, 2017, 07:53:38 AM
Would you not be better off buying bends from an outfit like Burns Stainless and cutting the required segments with the saw. The inside of the pipe, which is the part that counts will be much smoother and you won't go through nearly as much in the way of welding supplies. Often it's easier to remove the supplied clamps and devise other methods of holding tubing down to cut it. Very often I don't use a clamp at all. U-bends stay put when just hand held in place against the back rest. Just keep your hands clear of the blade.

This is the way I normally cut tubing when I'm building custom headers.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 15, 2017, 01:44:48 AM
This is a Burns stainless 45 degree bend I tried to splice by cutting it through the mid point in the bend, removing a pie slice, and welding it back together as a 64 degree bend.  The metal on the inside of the bend is thick from compression and it is thin on the outside from being pulled when being bent.  Getting good penetration on the thicker metal was hard.  I blew lots of holes through the thin sections and fixed them by welding up the edges of the holes.  It sorta worked.  The insides are rough and look like bowel cancer.

The voltage and wire speed had to be changed as I worked around the pipe from thick to thin metal and back again.  I got minimal penetration or blow through unless the settings were just right.  There is a talent deficit here.  Awfully wrong settings happened more often than just right.

The lobster back rings are a lot more work to make.  The metal is of uniform thickness all of the way around and it is a lot more predictable to weld.  Some trial and error is used to get just the right amount of penetration.  Then I leave the settings alone and weld the entire circumference using them.  The inside of the weld is much smoother.

The variable thickness would have been no big deal when gas welding.  A fellow automatically compensates for it when welding.  The wire feed does not do that.  The wire comes out at the same speed and voltage regardless of the thickness of the metal.  Maybe when my skills get better I will try cutting and splicing bends again. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on June 15, 2017, 11:19:03 AM
You should never have to splice a bend. Cut the bend at the desired angle and then just weld on a straight piece or a bend that goes off in a different direction.

You're quickly learning why anyone who's serious about building racing exhaust systems uses tig to fabricate them. The result is a much better product using a much simpler procedure.

Keep working at it Bo. Hand skills will continue to improve. Most of us have been at it more than a few hours.  :-D :-D :-D

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 16, 2017, 08:48:54 PM
The local steel supplier gives me a good deal on metal.  It is the fab shop price.  So, I ordered a 20 foot length of 304 stainless with 16 gage wall thickness and 1-7/8 inch OD.  The OD is 1.9 inches.  Odd.  The gage is not quite 16.  There are no ASTM stamps on the outside of the tube.  It cuts a lot easier with the chop saw than the tube I have with ASTM specs stamped on it.  What the heck?  Further investigation and measuring shows me this is 48mm tube made in Taiwan.

The carp is some inferior alloy and it does not slip fit into the ASTM size collector made by Burns.  A lesson is learned.  I need to find a local supplier for American or Canadian steel made to ASTM specs.  Burns Stainless is good steel made here to ASTM specs.  It is sort of expensive in long lengths with that UPS or Fed X shipping.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on June 16, 2017, 10:24:36 PM
Bo, go read all the technical information on stainless on the Burns website. The material from your supplier may not be inferior material, just a different material intended for a different purpose. There are a lot of different stainless alloys. The first thing to do would be to find out what your supplier sold you.

You do have to stick with either imperial or metric units for the tubing you're using. Just make the decision and stick with it.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 17, 2017, 10:49:49 AM
It was sold to the supplier as being 304.  It is weaker and easier to cut than Burn's 304.  At my job this is something I deal with.  We have "spec steel" that has the spec number painted or printed on it with the heat number.  There are matching mill certs for the heat saying it is OK.  There is nothing stamped on this pipe and no mill certs are available.  We call this "commercial grade" pipe to be polite and politically correct.  We have other names for it, too.  It is OK for this exhaust system.  Spec steel will be used for critical parts.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on June 17, 2017, 07:23:02 PM
I can tell, you're fully up to speed on the system.  :-D :-D :-D

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 19, 2017, 01:03:55 AM
The 304 taiwan tube was discussed at yesterday's welding class.  It is a welded seam tube.  The Burn's tubing is seamless.  The extrusion to make seamless tube gives it strength and toughness.  It also has tighter tolerances than the welded seam tubing.  The 304 designation is for alloy content and stainless steel having many different properties can be 304.  It is totally legit for welded seam 304 to not be as tough as seamless 304.  Seamless 304 should be chosen if dimensional tolerances and strength and toughness are a concern, I was told.

Country of origin was discussed.  Bad experiences were noted with Korean, Indian, and Pakastani steel.  Chinese and Tiawan steel could be good or bad.   European steel, and especially Finnish tubing, is good.  Chromium is a big ingredient.  SA is a big source.  Aparthied and concerns about political correctness dried up the sources of this element in this country.  Stainless steel production was crippled and never recovered.  A lot of good stainless comes from overseas.  They did not have to deal with the PC issue, it was said.

Gringo steel tubing has the ASTM designation stamped on it.  Furrin tubing might not, I was told.  The wrapper was taken the Taiwan tube when I got home.  There was an ASTM designation and heat number on a sticker.

The tubing I have is probably pretty good and much better than I thought.  Tomorrow I will post some of the other advice I got. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 30, 2017, 10:48:32 AM
The advice I got was to stick to seamless tube if I am fussy about dimensions and wall thicknesses.  It is stronger than welded tube due to its manufacturing process.  The ASTM specs are pretty broad, I was told, and it is good if the tube meets them.  One fellow said that I need to work with the engineering and sales folks of a reputable tube manufacturer to get exactly what is best for the application and to buy it from the closest vendor they ship to.

The last day in welding class was interesting.  We could switch to a process other than what we enrolled to learn.  TIG welding stainless steel sheet was my choice.  I can see why people like this method more than MIG.

My welds are "rough" according to the instructor.  He was looking at the lobster back welding i did at home.  Those welds were done using 0.023 wire fed from the rollers on the welder.  A spool gun was bought and used for aluminum welding.  The 0.023 stainless wire was put into the spool gun and the gas was switched from argon to tri-mix.  The welds on stainless with the spool gun are much better and more consistent.  There might be a problem with the wire feed on the welding machine that prevents it from feeding the wire at a consistent rate.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Ron Gibson on June 30, 2017, 11:10:12 AM
I found the rollers on my MIG would slip some with .023 wire. The groove was .024 as checked with a feeler gauge. The wire was bottoming in the groove and the wheel still had the black coating so it wasn't worn. I took a piece of the .023 wire to the welding store. The wire was gripped on the sides on new roller. That seemed to solve the problem with the machine, the rest was me. :-D

Ron
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on July 02, 2017, 11:04:33 PM
The 304 taiwan tube was discussed at yesterday's welding class.  It is a welded seam tube.  The Burn's tubing is seamless.  The extrusion to make seamless tube gives it strength and toughness.  It also has tighter tolerances than the welded seam tubing.  The 304 designation is for alloy content and stainless steel having many different properties can be 304.  It is totally legit for welded seam 304 to not be as tough as seamless 304.  Seamless 304 should be chosen if dimensional tolerances and strength and toughness are a concern, I was told.

Country of origin was discussed.  Bad experiences were noted with Korean, Indian, and Pakastani steel.  Chinese and Tiawan steel could be good or bad.   European steel, and especially Finnish tubing, is good.  Chromium is a big ingredient.  SA is a big source.  Aparthied and concerns about political correctness dried up the sources of this element in this country.  Stainless steel production was crippled and never recovered.  A lot of good stainless comes from overseas.  They did not have to deal with the PC issue, it was said.

Gringo steel tubing has the ASTM designation stamped on it.  Furrin tubing might not, I was told.  The wrapper was taken the Taiwan tube when I got home.  There was an ASTM designation and heat number on a sticker.

The tubing I have is probably pretty good and much better than I thought.  Tomorrow I will post some of the other advice I got. 

We have some good local stainless here. I like the German stuff from Guth but Jaguar Stainless Steel sells good quality. Some of the "other" material isn't pure. I'm no world champ on welding but even I can tell the difference. Back purge if you can. Vince Roman from Burns will always give you free advice. He's  agreat guy IMO.


Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 04, 2017, 04:32:12 PM
Ron, the rollers were checked and they are OK.  There is some restriction in the gun that is causing the jerky feed.  Figuring that out is an AB (After Bonneville) project.  The spool gun will be used now.

Mike, I am going to use Burns.  Their stuff looks good.

The lower bends in the header were made by cutting sections out of the middle of two 90 degree bends to make two 64 degree bends.  The stretched metal on the outsides of the bends was very thin compared to the thicker compacted metal on the insides of the bends.  This variable metal thickness did not weld up very well with the wire feed welder.

The bends were cut out and I made up a lobster back bend for one of them.  The welds were ugly so I ground them flush.  That was a mistake.  There were some areas with less than full penetration and the metal was too thin there after the grinding.  The lobster back section was weak.

A fellow told me to never grind a weld flush unless I am absolutely sure it is a full penetration weld.  He showed me how to polish down the welds and to leave them protruding at the beads.  That is what you see here.  These two lobster back lower sections are plenty strong. 

Note the splice locations on this professionally made pipe.  They are at the ends of the bends where the metal is of even thickness all of the way around.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on July 04, 2017, 07:35:26 PM
There can't be a more exciting and rewarding sport than LSR even though I've never turned a wheel.
See how we all learn, grow and keep the brain working. This is awesome.

Bo, I love the way you research EVERYTHING. :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 15, 2017, 01:13:00 AM
The engineering crew was not called out for this so I did not see it in person.  The maintenance and hazmat guys and ladies had to clean it up.  www.bbc.com/news/world/us-canada-40605743 (http://www.bbc.com/news/world/us-canada-40605743)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 16, 2017, 11:32:53 AM
The correct address is www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40605743 (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40605743)

Most headers have equal length primary pipes.  How critical is this?  The nearside primary pipe is done and it takes the shortest route possible to the collector.  It will be hard to make the offside primary pipe as long as it.  The offside exhaust port is much closer to the collector. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on July 16, 2017, 12:21:02 PM
That's why good headers generally look like a bundle of snakes. It takes a lot of indirect routing to get everything the same length. A set of V-8 headers takes a lot of planning to make an effective set of the desired length and make them all the same length.

Having different lengths is going to make a different power band for each cylinder. Your power band will likely be broader while sacrificing some top end.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 16, 2017, 04:37:11 PM
Thanks, Pete.  Your post gave me an idea.  The Toshiba did the figuring.  The digitized cam profiles and measured header dimensions were input into the Dynomation model.  I made best guess at the short pipe length.  The Row 11 is crank HP at Bonneville climate conditions with the short 23-inch primary pipe.  Row 12 is with the longer 27.125 inch primary.  The wave dynamics analysis says equal power with either.  Considering how little time there is between now and race day and the vast amount of work I need to get done, this goofy primary pipe setup will be "good enough."  Fabbing up equal length primaries are a 2018 project and hopefully with TIG.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on July 16, 2017, 05:57:34 PM
Headers!!!!!!
Tough job but thank the Lord, you only have two pipes
and it's not a 2 stroke.
Bo, I just love your attention to detail. :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 23, 2017, 10:27:42 AM
It has taken a very long time to make these.  It is nice to only need two.

The exhaust system is done and wrapped.  The cylinder head arrived on Friday.  The bike will be run on the street with only the outer springs and no shims to polish the cam lobes.  The rpm will be kept under 4,000 so there should not be any valve float issues.  These low bars will go on for this.  These will be used when I go to the UK.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 29, 2017, 01:30:12 AM
A valve train failure scrapped my chances at Bonneville last year.  It was an expensive issue, for sure.  It was after the time for refunds when I found the problem and my full FIM entry fee was a "donation."  That is some serious motivation to fix the problem.

A definite cause of the tappet bucket pitting and cam lobe tip galling was not found.  There might be multiple reasons for it.  The cam lobes were tall and it appeared they were running off the buckets on the intake and almost running off on the exhaust.  The intake net lift was .445 inches and the exhaust .412 inches.  The head does not flow well at lifts beyond .4 inches so it appeared little would be lost by using shorter cams.  These tall cams were reground to give .400 net lift intake and .398 net lift exhaust.  This reduces the chances of the lobes running off of the buckets and it reduces nose pressure.

The buckets were trashed and they were a bit loose in their bores from years of racing.  The bores were enlarged 2 mm and wider buckets fitted.  This helps to assure the cam contact surfaces stay away from the bucket edges.

The spring package was a generic one for race use.  Kibblewhite used a digital model of the cams in a computer analysis to select springs that are not excessively stiff for the rpm and cams.  Lighter outer springs were fitted and this reduces nose pressure significantly.

The valves are a direct path for heat between the combustion chamber and the tappet buckets.  The outer and inner valve faces, ports, and combustion chambers are ceramic coated to reduce heat transfer to the tappet buckets.  This will keep them cooler.  It will help maintain oil viscosity and film thickness between the cam lobes and the bucket faces.

The valves are set up without the inner springs and shims.  Tomorrow I will ride around town at low rpm to polish the cams.  Then, the full spring package will be fitted.  This should also help to prevent galling and pitting. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on July 29, 2017, 10:35:19 AM
Looks Good!

For what it is worth: a few years back, I pulled a set of race cams out of a Hayabusa.  The exhaust cam and 5 lobes of the intake were perfect.  However, the other 3 lobes and buckets where chewed up.  I sent the intake to the maker of the cams, their comment was the wrong kind of oil was used.  I know for a fact, after dyno break-in, the engine only saw Amsoil.  Furthermore, why would only 3 intake lobes be pitted and not the rest?  I still suspect some quality control issues with the cam manufacture.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 29, 2017, 02:51:13 PM
It takes effort and time to properly regrind cams I am told.  Sometimes, based on the prices charged for regrinds, it is suspect if some of these hot cams are properly done. 

How long does it take to polish a set of cams using the light spring method?  I was thinking a trip to the local and back for a pint or two and a hot pastrami sandwich is good enough...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 30, 2017, 02:02:27 AM
Most of the afternoon was spent bopping around town.  The cams were pulled this evening.  The lobe tips and buckets polished up great.  Tomorrow's task is to put in the valve spring shims and the inner springs.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 01, 2017, 01:11:47 AM
The engine is back together with a full valve spring set.  The dyno session is scheduled for Sunday.  The operator is doing it on his day off.  That is a big favor.

Usually I run in FIM twin cylinder partially streamlined naturally aspirated class.  There was so much to do that I let the deadline pass for the FIM application.  I was not going to run this year.  Gretchen wants to go to Bonneville and Rose does, too.  That is motivation so I put in some serious effort to get the old warhorse ready.

The entry this year is for the bike trials running in 1000 cc MPS-AF on a 211 mph record.  The AMA does not allow standard OEM frames in the altered class so I cannot run in APS-AF with the tail.  An equivalent gasoline to the blends sold on the salt could not be found for a reasonable price here in Oregon.  The gasoline will be Sunoco GT260 Plus, a high octane unleaded.  This puts me into the fuel class.  There is no chance for a record this year.  There is a 150 mph medal at the speed trials and that will be a nice thing to take home.  This should be a good year. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RidgeRunner on August 01, 2017, 07:40:07 AM
     Records sure are nice but they are not everything.  It's all about doing the best you can with what you have when you can and achieving personal goals.  Those that matter will recognize your efforts and stout runs towards your goals under the conditions, for others no amount of explaining will ever have them understand.

     Having family with you to share the experience is priceless. My wife and grand daughter had been to Loring with me as spectators, had a good time but never really got into it all.  At the Maine Event last month we were all part of an entry and they now understand thanks to the staff, other entrants, and the extended LSR family.  They are excited and looking forward to going back for the Harvest Meet in Sept.  Like you, that is keeping my motivation factor high as the car gets improvements.

     All the best for a safe, fun, and fast meet for you and your family. 

                   Ed
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 02, 2017, 01:56:26 AM
Thanks for the encouragement, Ed.  I will take the time to explain to Rose about what's going on.   

It is in the 80's here and too hot to sleep.  This is a cold climate and hardly anyone, including us, has a swamp cooler or AC.  The bike is ready to go to the dyno.  It seemed perfectly logical to splash some race gas in the tank and go for a ride.  A warm night, almost deserted streets, and a hot bike.  Suddenly I felt 45 years younger.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 06, 2017, 10:48:27 AM
The porting, carbs, air filters, valve sizes, and cam profiles are the best they can be.  The only things left to do are the cam timing, pistons, and exhaust tuning.

The pistons say 13:1 compression ratio on the box and this is with the standard size combustion chambers.  Mine are a bit bigger due to installing 2mm larger intake valves and deshrouding the chamber walls around the valve margins.  The actual compression ratio is in the high 11's.

The valve head to piston clearance was checked with the new cams while rotating the engine.  The valve pockets are far too wide and deep for the setup I have.  This is to be expected.  Most folks that tune these bikes use 5 or 6mm larger valves and cams with up to 0.45 inches more lift than I am using.  The compression ratio can be raised considerably by custom made pistons to work with the cams I have.  This is a project for this winter.

Optimal cam timing varies with compression ratio.  Once I have the new pistons I can see what comp ratio I have and use the 'puter program to optimize the timing.  This is a project for this winter.

The exhaust will be done today on the dyno.  I leave to go to Portland in about half an hour to do this.  The goal today is to see if my conservative approach to cam lift and valve size will get close to the power I need.  The other objective is to figger out the best exhaust end treatment.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on August 06, 2017, 05:50:00 PM
Bo,

I know zilch about your "modern" Triumph motor, but can you leave the base gaskets out for higher compression?  This will back up the valve timing a bit, but that's not necessarily bad (later openings and closings). Just a thought, as I don't think you can ever get too much compression at Bonneville.

See you in three weeks.  You are lucky your family members want to come and I look forward to meeting Rose, and seeing Gretchen again.

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 07, 2017, 09:57:26 AM
The deck clearance is at its minimum now.  The piston would hit the head if the gasket was removed.  We will look for you on the salt.

The dyno room had ventilation problems.  The poison gas alarm sounded in the morning a few times.  Trial and error testing, lots of fans, cardboard, and duct tape made it sorta work.  The operator ran the bike and got the readings.  He left the room to detox.  I went in and changed the jets, etc, then I went outside. Going home, I felt light-headed and slightly goofy.  A couple of pints and the Sunday steak dinner at the local cured the problem.  Now I am back to as normal as I can get.  The session went well and the jetting, exhaust setup, and spark curve is all at its best.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 07, 2017, 09:37:40 PM
Exhaust end treatment is a goal of the dyno session.  The muffler curve is the baseline.

The muff is removed and the blooey pipe is tried first.  It is a constant diameter pipe that connects the collector to the muffler.  Horsepower levels off at 80 then it starts to climb at 8,000 rpm.  It is up to 18 horsepower down on the muffler.  This is a bad setup.  No further development of it.

Second is the collector with nothing attached.  It makes more power than the muffler at midrange.  Further development is considered and discussed.  Fresh air dilutes the exhaust gas around the O2 sensor and the mixture readings are inaccurate.  We want the mixture input.  This, and the awful noise, make us not do anything more.

The megga is tried last.  Note the erratic power output and bad performance.  This is the setup to recommend to the competition, for sure.  The muffler is reinstalled and further testing uses it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on August 07, 2017, 09:54:12 PM
Well, this makes me just scratch my head.  Wonder if your header pipes are a size too big and you are loosing scavenge velocity (that the muffler slows down so the pulse can catch up) ?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 08, 2017, 01:19:11 AM
You might be right.  This is not the first time that this is observed with this engine.  It was seen with some small diameter headers, too.  They worked far better with slightly restrictive mufflers.  My feeling is that Cosworth engines flow well at low lifts and there is a potential to over scavenge during valve overlap.  The added restriction from a muffler reduces this.  This is my theory and someone smarter than me might know the real answer.

Carbs are superior to EFi for this type of racing 'cause they do not rely on electronics, the inlet tract is cleaner without the butterfly valve, the settings stay at where I want them to be, and WW understands them.  This is how I set up the jetting.

1) The jetting was changed during the dyno runs and #145 and #147.5 produced the best power.  #147.5 is the richest jet that makes the best HP.  It is selected.

2)  Dyno printouts show the temperature to average at 88.4 degrees during the three dyno pulls.  The dyno elevation is 189 feet

3)  Run records show the average temperature to be 72.1 degrees at an elevation of 4,213 feet at B'Ville

4)  The -16.3 degree temp change and +4,024 foot elevation change are set on the slide rule.  a #140 jet will be used for the flats.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on August 08, 2017, 07:26:48 AM
Those are impressive looking results, Bo.  I played around on a dyno with my bike this spring, 72 dyno pulls, 4 different intake lengths, 4 different exhaust lengths, numerous timing and jetting changes, tappet change with different radius, etc, etc, and all runs were within 5 hp, and only about 1-2 more than I have been running.  Time for some drastic changes for me if I want to go faster!
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 08, 2017, 10:14:46 AM
That BSA is making good power considering it is a single cylinder pushrod engine on gasoline.  Methanol was what Burt Munroe used.  Maybe that is the way to go.

The exhaust system was designed using Dynomation and a ten-point approximation of what the cams might be.  The cams were ground and digital models were made by Kibblewhite.  The digital profiles were entered into the Dynomation program.  It is like looking at two completely different cams.  The entire virtual design needs to be redone using the digital profiles.  Do not waste time using these computer programs with ten-point approximations.

A second exhaust system will be designed and built this winter based on the digital profiles.  I might go back to using PipeMax.  The new setup will use a muffler 'cause I have a lifetime of tuning with mufflers and this is the first time I have used open pipes.  I use the muffler as a performance enhancement and feel at a disadvantage without one.  Odd, but true.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 08, 2017, 11:50:11 PM
Today the fuel line covers were attached, the carbs rejected, and I put the carbs back on the bike.  "Fap!" as Major Hoople says.  The flippin carbs only open 3/4 of the way.  The way I adjusted them was like I did with the Keihins.  These rascals require a different method.  Another dyno appointment is requested.  There might be more power in that motor.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on August 09, 2017, 07:36:50 AM
Maybe the dyno results will make sense this time....and thank goodness you found the carb problem.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 10, 2017, 10:01:32 AM
The pressure waves travel down to the final expansion point and they are bounced back toward the intake valve at opposite polarity.  This is what i call the "end effect" 'cause it usually happens at the end of the system.  Pressure waves travel at the speed of sound and this is related to the temperature of the gas.

Gas temperature drops as it goes through the system with it being hottest near the exhaust valve and coldest near the end.  The relationship between the magnitude of this drop and the length of the system is the temperature gradient.  A short system with a big temperature drop has a high gradient.  Gasses that go from a hot to a cold environment sort of "stack up" on each other as they he decelerate.  The less dense hot gasses collide with the slow moving cold gasses and this creates turbulence.  There are swirling pockets of hot gasses next to cold gasses.  This f's up the wave action because waves travel at different speeds gasses of varying temperatures.  This is why it is a good idea to insulate the exhaust system.  The headers are wrapped sand sixteen gage stainless is used on this system to give some degree of insulation.  I have that "base covered" as they say.

An open ended megga on a large diameter system is the devil's playground in terms of temperature control.  The O2 sensor pipe was stuck more than a foot into the system and it indicated lots of fresh air intrusion with turbulence between pockets of it and hot exhaust gas.  This creates a temperature differential across the cross-section of the collector with it being especially bad in the megga.  This completely destroys useful end effect wave action.  Note how the turbulence creates the warbling effect on the torque and power curves.

The blooey pipe has a lot less taper.  The O2 sensor indicates fresh air intrusion, but less of it.  It has less of a problem with temp diff than the megga.

The header, alone has the least problems.  It has less fresh air intrusion, but some cold air does get in.

This is a big muffler.  The end effect happens before the end of the muff and it is in an area of hot gas with minimal temperature differential across the opening where expansion occurs.  It bounces a pressure wave back with a strong signal.  This end effect wave can be used to make HP, unlike with the other systems.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on August 10, 2017, 05:42:51 PM
Wobbly, your reply #2850 seems to be just a construct to try to build a mental picture of the results of the recent dyno testing.  However, I think there are some holes in the analysis and your thinking about what was going on.  You might consider the following comments.

“The pressure waves travel down to the final expansion point and they are bounced back toward the intake valve at opposite polarity.”   The pressure waves travel to any and all expansion points, the first and probably the most important of which is at the collector.  This is why header length is critical to the tuning possible in the exhaust tract.  The reflected negative wave starts back there, and should be timed to achieve the best effect.  Generally, a megaphone immediately follows the collector which, by providing a gradual expansion of area tends to spread out the reflected wave in time, broadening the rev band over which the effect is felt.

“Gasses that go from a hot to a cold environment sort of "stack up" on each other as they he decelerate.”
Are we talking about gases or waves here? Presumably waves.  In which case, they can’t overtake one another since at any point the temperature is the same and the wave velocity would be the same.  They may slightly approach each other (in space), but how would the trailing wave overtake the leading one?

“The O2 sensor pipe was stuck more than a foot into the system and it indicated lots of fresh air intrusion with turbulence between pockets of it and hot exhaust gas.”
Postulating that atmospheric air has traveled upstream against a very robust exhaust stream strains my credulity.  What physical evidence is there that this is happening?  Was there a smoke generator at the exit that showed anything like this was going on?
It is far more likely that the O2 sensor is telling you that there is evidence of incomplete combustion, ie., residual oxygen in the exhaust, probably inlet charge lost during overlap.  All of which brings into question the appropriateness of the tuned lengths and configurations of the various tested arrangements. 
It is clear from the torque curves that the non-muffler configurations work at lower than desired revs and that they just are not right for other rev ranges.  That the muffler works better may just be a happy coincidence of longer length working in conjunction with the header/collector length and some increased back-pressure having a serendipitous effect on inlet charge capture.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 11, 2017, 01:29:29 AM
You are probably right on this.  A day spent breathing carbon monoxide, partially burned toluene, and listening to all of that racket might have affected my brain.  I might not be completely wrong, either.  This is a very large diameter system for this displacement engine when comparing it designs using other common methods.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on August 11, 2017, 03:31:40 PM
When are you going to hit the dyno again?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 12, 2017, 12:10:10 AM
Sunday.  That muffler from Burns is their quieter model.  It is originally intended to be a convenience feature for the street based R and D.  I never figure on using it for racing.  It is screwed together so I take it apart to see what is inside.  It looks just like a monster size version of a US Forestry approved spark arrestor.  Primo!  I know exactly how to deal with one of them, as I wuz a dirt bike guy for most of my life. 

The muff is designed to be a wave dump.  In other words, it is designed to capture and neutralize waves.  This is my guess based on looking at the internals.  This is exactly what I have found to work best on Cosworth engines.

These motors have two intake and two exhaust valves in rows next to each other.   There is no high piston dome to separate them.  Any cam with significant overlap with funky exhaust has the potential to blow the intake charge right out the exhaust, or any of many bad alternatives, with no difficulty.   This makes tuning these motors a real pain in the donkey.  There are few exhaust dimension combinations that work and lots that perform awful.  The wave dump style mufflers seem to work well.  They dampen the intensity of the waves returning from the end of the pipe.  This seems to work best with these Cosworth engines.

This exhaust is tuned the way I have learned that works best.  The headers and collectors are designed using conventional methods.  Instead of a megga at the end of the collector, a subtle taper section is used to give gentle wave return.  It is located where the megga would start.  The collector end goes from 2.5 to 3 inches diameter in a few inches on this bike.  This limited expansion and gives a nice subtle back wave that does not pull or push the gasses too far between the valves.  The muff is beyond this and it is one that is a wave trap design.

The engine configuration in 2016 made 90 HP with #147.5 main jets.  This new configuration with the gentle taper and the dump muffler, at partial throttle, makes 101 HP with #147.5 mains.  This indicates the new setup does not under or over scavenge.

This summarizes what I have learned. It is to pay attention to wave effect intensity as well as timing.



Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on August 14, 2017, 09:10:04 AM
Wobbly,
It would be well worth your time to obtain and read, especially Chapter 6, the following book.

Design and Simulation of Four-Stroke Engines
Gordon Blair
publications@sae.org

In which he extensively examines the various parameters of a 2 liter 4 cylinder 4 valve (that is, 2x what you are working with) engine that has been very well developed and produced about 130 hp/liter.  Your inlet and exhaust seem to be in the neighborhood, but not all the info is in your build diary.  See attached pdf of the engine layout.  Dimensions are in millimeters.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: revolutionary on August 15, 2017, 07:42:51 AM
Wobbly,
It would be well worth your time to obtain and read, especially Chapter 6, the following book.

Design and Simulation of Four-Stroke Engines
Gordon Blair
publications@sae.org

In which he extensively examines the various parameters of a 2 liter 4 cylinder 4 valve (that is, 2x what you are working with) engine that has been very well developed and produced about 130 hp/liter.  Your inlet and exhaust seem to be in the neighborhood, but not all the info is in your build diary.  See attached pdf of the engine layout.  Dimensions are in millimeters.


Great book with tons of usable information. Read up on the design of elliptical air inlets...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 16, 2017, 12:59:22 AM
Fixing the throttle gives a few HP.  The final runs on Sunday were all 107 HP.  It was 87 HP the last time I was at B'ville when the bike went 146.  It might go faster this time.  Last time the rear sprocket was 38 teeth.  This motor winds out to much higher rpm.  A 40 tooth sprocket should work just fine.  40 / 38 = 1.05  There is another 5 % in tractive force in addition to the power increase.  This motor has street compression ratio, uses unleaded, has a muffler, and it idles and runs fine at low rpm.  A hot street motor is all it is.  Nothing special.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on August 16, 2017, 09:58:27 PM
If I read the AFR correctly, it looks like you need to move the needles up.  That should get rid of that ugly rich condition in the mid-range.  The jets are correct.  But of course, I could be wrong ... know a lot more about EFI than carbs.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 17, 2017, 12:04:08 AM
This is a difficult deal.  Once I leaned out the needle to correct a midrange power drop and this burned a hole through the piston crown.  What I learned is that a heavily cammed engine can go "off song" at an rpm when the exhaust tuning is incompatible with the cam action and piston movement.  The mixture goes rich during this period.  I am not sure why.  When I compensate for this by leaning out the needle setting, the mixture when on the needle is too lean at "on song" rpm. 
I did raise the needle one notch for B'ville along with going two sizes smaller on the mains.  This dip in the middle of the powerband has given me problems since 2007.  What I learned is to keep the engine rpm above the dip.

This is not unexpected.  The wave action analysis showed me this would happen.  It was a tradeoff.  Big horses on top or less ponies and a smoother power curve. The triple step header and the mongo wide collector gave the most HP.  A two step header and reasonably sized collector gave me a smooth power curve but less on top.

The plan is to wind the little devil up till the tach needle passes completely through the red zone, bangs on the peg, then shift.  Messrs Carillo, Arias, and Kibblewhite will take care of the rest.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on August 17, 2017, 06:11:31 AM
and this is why I stick primarily to EFI...

and yes, the easiest work around is NOT to be in that RPM range.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on August 17, 2017, 07:19:47 AM
If I read the AFR correctly, it looks like you need to move the needles up.  That should get rid of that ugly rich condition in the mid-range.  The jets are correct.  But of course, I could be wrong ... know a lot more about EFI than carbs.

I thought about moving the needles up while experiencing the same richening at mid range during dyno pulls.  But what good would that do?  I am, and I suspect Bo is too, using a wide open throttle during the entire dyno pull.  That is the needles are pulled out of the main jets.  Dropping them down a notch would either not do anything, or if they interfered with the fuel flow, would lean up the entire pull, as I see it.

However, as we only need to pass thru that rpm range during 1st gear acceleration, we can slightly close the throttle when the motor starts to stumble, thereby leaning the mixture out until we achieve a higher rpm where the motor cleans up.  Then by keeping the motor to the higher rpm range, it need not drop down thru that rich zone again.

The exiting part is when in 1st gear, the motor cleans up suddenly and lights up the rear wheel.  Yes, it can happen with only 50 hp on tap.  Keep it on the boil once thru the offending rpm range.

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 26, 2017, 09:20:43 AM
Not much has been posted from me on this website lately.  This has been a minor thrash since Aug 2016, a moderate one for the last three months, and a major fiasco for the last three weeks.  It is best to not post a lot when one is tired and burnt out.  All of that is behind now.  We are on our way and should be there on Monday.  Things are looking good and I am a very happy little grasshopper.

The bike will be running without the big tail.  The FIM changed the rules this year and the back part behind the seat is too tall.  The AMA won't allow it to be used on a bike with a production frame.  So, it stays home.  This is not all bad.  I doubt if flow is attached behind the rider and it occupies an area of turbulence.  This is a situation that makes it useless.  It does move the CG back and this is never good.

The power curve refinement will be done this Fall when I have a decent computer model.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 28, 2017, 11:59:28 PM
This is Rose's first visit to the salt.  We stayed the first night at the Malheur Field Station.  Gretchen took her 250 off the trailer and rode ahead of us between Frenchglen and Fields along the base of Catlow Rim.  Then we went through Winnemucca and east to our usual camp at Angel Creek in the Humboldts.  The forest fire smoke is bad in eastern Oregon and western Nevada.  This morning we ate at Bella's in Wells and checked into the KOA at Wendover.  The paperwork is done and the bike has gone through tech.  We are in the third row across from Koncrete Kid.  Maj and Bones are further down in the pits.

It is a small meet with around 150 entrants, I hear.  One track is running.  A fellow who rode a rigid frame S and S Harley type of bike talked to me in the KOA.  He said the track is so rough that his bike broke up.  It seems the frame flexed to the degree that the secondary and primary chains put too much tension on the drivetrain and this broke the trans apart.  Not good.  I get similar stories from other folks and that is this is a very rough track.

This evening I went swimming to loosen up my back and shoulders.  The plan is to grip the bike with my knees, put most of my weight on the pegs and not on my ass, and ride with loose shoulders and arms, like in a desert race.  The bike will figure out its way down the track.  Tomorrow will be a challenging day.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on August 29, 2017, 05:51:33 AM
Best wishes ... be safe!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 30, 2017, 11:06:14 AM
We got up at 4:00 PST and got in line at land's end.  It was still fairly dark when the bike was set up and we went to pre-stage right after the rider's meeting at 7:00.  The first and only run was around noon.  It was a rough track that turned real soft and rutted during the flying mile.  The engine was revved till the needle hit the peg and the rev limiter kicked in at the top end of fourth and then I shifted into fifth.  I did this a few times.  It would not top out in fifth.  The bike did well handling wise until decel when it went into a tank slapper.

A last minute switch to FIM did not give me enough time to rebuild the tail to the new FIM rules.  I left it off and used the stock seat instead.  This raised my head 3 inches.  Plus, the aero was really hurt without the tail.  Weight distribution was too front heavy and this caused the decal speed wobble.  The bike was seat up bad.  "Run it naked" was Tom Mellor's advice.  I was pretty used up by being in leathers on a hot day for six hours so working on the bike was out of the picture.

The 145 I ran was less than my lifetime best of 146.  We packed up and left.  There was nothing I could do to make the bike faster and the track would not get better was my guess.  This year I will retime the cams to bring the power peak down a thousand rpm, rebuild the tail, make triple clamps with 2mm less offset, and have some high compression pistons made.  This is a "development year" as they say and I now know about a streamlining setup that definitely does not work.  A record run in 2018 is the goal. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on August 30, 2017, 04:29:58 PM
Wobbly, plan your work and work your plan!  :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
As you have discovered, the battle plan changes as soon as you engage the enemy!  :x :-o :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 30, 2017, 11:10:01 PM
The suspension is setup right, that is for sure.  It was a good meet.  They did the best they could with the track.  The salt was thin.  A problem with this is that if it is overworked with drags and sledges to try to get it smooth, it breaks apart and becomes a total mess.  A lot of fast times were set and records broken so it was not a bad handicap for those who knew how to deal with it.

We took the day off and went exploring.  Gretchen wanted to see the Rocky Mountains.  Most all in the vicinity have Basin and Range geology.  The closest Rocky Mountains I know about are the Sawtooth in Utah north of Wendover.  We drove west on I-80 to Oasis and then went north through Montello to Rosette in Utah.  At Rosette we drove west up to Dove Springs Pass.  We climbed up a knob to the north of the pass, looked around and then walked back down.  Then Gretchen decided to climb to the top of Marble Canyon Peak to the south.  Gretchen is 20. Wobbly is considerably more vintage.  Eventually I got to the top.  There are outcrops of pure white marble.  It is definitely a part of the Rockies.       
Title: Re: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Frank06 on August 31, 2017, 02:02:07 AM
The suspension is setup right, that is for sure.  It was a good meet.  They did the best they could with the track.  The salt was thin.  A problem with this is that if it is overworked with drags and sledges to try to get it smooth, it breaks apart and becomes a total mess.  A lot of fast times were set and records broken so it was not a bad handicap for those who knew how to deal with it.

We took the day off and went exploring.  Gretchen wanted to see the Rocky Mountains.  Most all in the vicinity have Basin and Range geology.  The closest Rocky Mountains I know about are the Sawtooth in Utah north of Wendover.  We drove west on I-80 to Oasis and then went north through Montello to Rosette in Utah.  At Rosette we drove west up to Dove Springs Pass.  We climbed up a knob to the north of the pass, looked around and then walked back down.  Then Gretchen decided to climb to the top of Marble Canyon Peak to the south.  Gretchen is 20. Wobbly is considerably more vintage.  Eventually I got to the top.  There are outcrops of pure white marble.  It is definitely a part of the Rockies.     
WW: I talked to your daughter briefly when you were at tech but by the time I had a chance to drop by to meet you, Tom told me that you had already left.  I wanted to admire your bike up close; maybe next time!  Good luck with the mods.  Frank

Sent from my MotoE2(4G-LTE) using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 04, 2017, 12:25:11 AM
Hi Frank.  We took Weds off to go exploring and I went back on Thurs to take pictures and socialize.  What bike are you running?  I may have talked to you and both of us did not know it.

A few talks with folks supposedly familiar with course prep give opposite answers.  One side of the spectrum is "the salt is thin and too much effort spent to groom it will cause the drag to break through and create a total mess."  The other is "the salt is thicker than normal and so hard that the drag skip over the dips and cannot make the track smooth."  Who knows?  What I saw and felt was similar to others and it was a hard and bumpy track with a soft spot on the middle.  As per experience running there for ten years, the track was rougher than I have ever ridden on.  One year the track we as soft so I had seen this before.  It was hotter than I remember.

As per suspension setup, a person riding a rigid bike needs to look at Royal Enfield's frames over the years.  The way they did their suspension combines the low ride height os a rigid frame with decent suspension offers by a swinging arm.   

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 05, 2017, 12:19:37 AM
Wave action analysis with a stepped header, collector, and muffler is not done by the Dynomation 5 computer program I am using.  Is there another computer program that does this?
Title: Re:
Post by: Frank06 on September 05, 2017, 09:22:57 AM
Bo, I was helping out with KillaJoule.

Sent from my MotoE2(4G-LTE) using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: jacksoni on September 05, 2017, 10:27:17 AM
Wave action analysis with a stepped header, collector, and muffler is not done by the Dynomation 5 computer program I am using.  Is there another computer program that does this?
Try EngMod4T by Vannik software. Will do this and more. You have to enter a lot of stuff and it takes some getting used to but best I can tell is the best consumer level ( not 1000's  or 10000's of $) software out there. Not totally cheap by some standards but for what you get is a real bargain. Was $400 in past not sure if that has gone up. Neels ( Vannik) is good answering questions and with updates. There is so much stuff in this you will be forever finding it all. (that is a good thing, not a complaint). He is in South Africa. Everything available by download. Don't remember how I did payment but you can work it out.
http://vannik.co.za/index.htm


edit: Just checked. He now takes Paypal so payment is easy.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: hoffman900 on September 05, 2017, 10:33:01 AM
Wave action analysis with a stepped header, collector, and muffler is not done by the Dynomation 5 computer program I am using.  Is there another computer program that does this?
Try EngMod4T by Vannik software. Will do this and more. You have to enter a lot of stuff and it takes some getting used to but best I can tell is the best consumer level ( not 1000's  or 10000's of $) software out there. Not totally cheap by some standards but for what you get is a real bargain. Was $400 in past not sure if that has gone up. Neels ( Vannik) is good answering questions and with updates. There is so much stuff in this you will be forever finding it all. (that is a good thing, not a complaint). He is in South Africa. Everything available by download. Don't remember how I did payment but you can work it out.
http://vannik.co.za/index.htm


edit: Just checked. He now takes Paypal so payment is easy.

+1 and Neels is awesome to work with. Responsive and an absolute gentleman. A rarity it seems in the motorsport arena.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: jacksoni on September 05, 2017, 11:29:33 AM
Wave action analysis with a stepped header, collector, and muffler is not done by the Dynomation 5 computer program I am using.  Is there another computer program that does this?
Try EngMod4T by Vannik software. Will do this and more. You have to enter a lot of stuff and it takes some getting used to but best I can tell is the best consumer level ( not 1000's  or 10000's of $) software out there. Not totally cheap by some standards but for what you get is a real bargain. Was $400 in past not sure if that has gone up. Neels ( Vannik) is good answering questions and with updates. There is so much stuff in this you will be forever finding it all. (that is a good thing, not a complaint). He is in South Africa. Everything available by download. Don't remember how I did payment but you can work it out.
http://vannik.co.za/index.htm


edit: Just checked. He now takes Paypal so payment is easy.

+1 and Neels is awesome to work with. Responsive and an absolute gentleman. A rarity it seems in the motorsport arena.

Hoffman- glad to see you noticed this and piped in as well. I know you use his software.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: hoffman900 on September 05, 2017, 12:14:24 PM
I'll take a moment to dig through this later this afternoon, but I've done A LOT of exhaust simulations on a 500cc single cylinder application in EngMod4t as well have talked with Calvin Elston at length. Additionally, a friend of mine works with Calvin on stuff and another friend has used Calvin with fantastic results. I'll sum up what I have learned the last year in a bit.

Took a bit of a look through this. I can double up my engine combination in EngMod4t. It's for a SR/TT500 engine. I'll use my cam specs, head, etc, just to look for trends in exhaust patterns. This will drag out over a couple weeks as I'm traveling all next weekend.

It seems you're on the right track. Megaphones still seem to be preferred in the single cylinder / flat track world, but seem to be going out of vogue. You are on the right track with the small diameters. Velocity preservation is critical and this goes right back to everything Calvin Elston preaches.

I'm likely going this route, and running it into a smaller Burns muffler than what you have:
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/bg9OPge737iH9u6xHuU-xZtKxXEvY7PfTAD5MJPK2TqKV8wA_7OYUgR8OpKmfhZs4uOZ1QGxvzdZVxroDksapxELXhRnMvPglFuuIGmWCan9eyWT06GuVJPzCSN_a2Bk4aKqJFyaI7rJBGtLes9k1DKgVEoE49GprkoUF_d1DmjrJ3Bv8PZar6DqswSTMwpu-Tc_WLJSl2mcD5WD3XNqkGWZwoY4SbbaIOFQ4-OsYlhqhWXg368xqrqZlbH_nWhSrdeh2EzHot7XyQWkcK9CFsJOIPSPwxOpPYpjB96Aob69OoQRi1SYuW8nw3mPgqfXnvRSM02INoixr6PSLn2up16Bnpk2kb6dFPZ0HIiE-XvdYtfnkbkU0rFNl-zw_n2tg8XQp4GAjgH4Ieia_pNNQO4cVD8N8nuDjtuC9fBu0AEt4lN1P-6NKD8hU_PRy6ifWaj9NPGOWfj771Kbm3sRvbWfa8bi_Cic-l56VqpXsQGdCxr-A5P6vL77yl1D0dphLP8c7zA3x3jBfVxC4fBtbLkXs6KygJSsWKL9UEiW_jUVuvfEFFYAhyn-qlUcBTk3lSue8IGipoY7Ep-Ygx-k7cuHrlQg55Hrid3IL1_vYKr442tJmnQ3=s974-no?.jpg)

With my rpm range (peak at about 7k), I'll be placing it 10-12" from the head/interference.

Calvin did a header for a friend of mine with the Fueling A/R chambers at the first step location. The overall length of the header was within 2" of what it was before. The difference is the tubing off the head went from 1 5/8" to 1 3/8" to match the port exit area. Power was up 10-12% across the entire range and with down a jet size. This was his first time using the chambers in the primaries, but his theory and results with A/R devices like this, is the tubing even smaller due to his belief that you are removing reverse flow, and thus the pipe will have less mass in it.

In EngMod4t, I found stepping the pipe like you did provides a similar benefit as a proper megaphone / reverse cone, but without the bad (and it's lighter and easier to construct). A megaphone really only works with a reverse cone, which really acts as a A/R device. Also they need to be a bit longer than what you have.

To see where things are now with the factories, take a look at the exhausts on the factory Indian flat track bikes.

(http://www.cycleworld.com/sites/cycleworld.com/files/styles/medium_1x_/public/images/2016/08/cw0816-indian-ftr750-racebike-test-image-21.jpg?itok=X8FOA844)
(http://www.cycleworld.com/sites/cycleworld.com/files/images/2016/07/indian-flat-tracker-prototype_chassis-26.jpg)
(http://www.aimag.com/wp-content/uploads/Indian-Scout-750-Flat-Track.jpg)
(http://www.cycleworld.com/sites/cycleworld.com/files/styles/325_1x_/public/images/2016/07/indian-flat-tracker-prototype_chassis-6.jpg?itok=U18Rqhjy)

The factory V&H Harley XG750R (which is a unreliable dog) has a similar looking exhaust into a x-pipe, but without the big step (stepping up kind of like yours does).

I will likely do something really similar, but the double A/R chamber will be (in spirit) where that big step is. EngMod4T has trouble modeling these devices, but I can work it out via just regular steps, which is how the engine should see it. I'll build two pipes though and test back to back.


Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: JimL on September 05, 2017, 04:42:55 PM
One more thumbs-up on the stepped header and chambering.   :cheers:

That is what TRD built for my pushrod bikes exhausts, but with some shorter areas due to the much higher peak rpm.  The only thing I noticed (and later asked about) was the rather sudden power drop off at the end of the revs.  I guess that is ok.....it is pretty hard to get "something for nothing".

Also....still fun following your thread and many experiences!

Jim
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 06, 2017, 12:49:20 AM
Jack, I cannot get a message through to Vannick.  His "captcha" spam filter does not recognize anything I type in.  Please send me a personal message with his e-mail address.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on September 06, 2017, 11:34:58 AM
Wobbly, I believe the new Dynomation 6 now does stepped headers and other stuff. You should be getting an upgrade notice in the mail.
If you don't get Vannick's email PM me.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 07, 2017, 10:27:14 AM
An advertisement for Dynomation 6 came in last week's mail.  They mention megaphones as end treatment options for headers with collectors.  There is no mention of mufflers.

The dyno work says meggas are not a good setup for this engine and mufflers are.  This is backed up by my experience with earlier versions of this build.  Vannick's software literature says their program can look at other options besides meggas.  Now I have his e-mail and I will order a copy of his program today. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: hoffman900 on September 07, 2017, 06:04:26 PM
An advertisement for Dynomation 6 came in last week's mail.  They mention megaphones as end treatment options for headers with collectors.  There is no mention of mufflers.

The dyno work says meggas are not a good setup for this engine and mufflers are.  This is backed up by my experience with earlier versions of this build.  Vannick's software literature says their program can look at other options besides meggas.  Now I have his e-mail and I will order a copy of his program today.  

I disagree about megaphones. They can work very well when built correctly. It looks like your earlier versions had baffles in them? No bueno.

Megaphones with mufflers need to look like this:
(http://scontent.cdninstagram.com/t51.2885-15/s480x480/e35/15101683_386541065017641_3535327979523538944_n.jpg?ig_cache_key=MTM4NDQxNDUyNzM1ODM1Nzc0NQ%3D%3D.2)
(https://scontent-sea1-1.cdninstagram.com/t51.2885-15/s480x480/e35/17932318_802680836547993_8378712017392893952_n.jpg?ig_cache_key=MTQ5NTkzNjE4MjAyMTE4NjE1NQ%3D%3D.2)
(https://scontent.cdninstagram.com/hphotos-xfa1/t51.2885-15/s640x640/sh0.08/e35/11375357_1601411093458250_1288969450_n.jpg)

Then the muffler slips over the reverse cone lip. This is how the flat track guys do it as well as the sport bike guys (take a look at the inside of the Factory Yamaha Graves exhausts).

Modeling a set up like this works VERY well for filling in the mid range as well as power up high. I'll post more later with examples.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 08, 2017, 01:49:52 AM
Thanks for posting this.  What do the inside of the mufflers look like?   Do they quiet the bike down?



Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: hoffman900 on September 08, 2017, 07:28:46 AM
Thanks for posting this.  What do the inside of the mufflers look like?   Do they quiet the bike down?





Just straight through, with packing. The id of the muffler slips over the outside of the reverse cone. The annuals between it and the housing is filled with packing. Noise level? Still really loud, but it's also dependent on how much packing / size of the muffler. The cool thing that anyone who has been around exhausts like this is the pulse of air coming out of it. The megaphone slows down the exhaust pulse and reduces its amplitude. In return, it increases pressure. It feels like one of those air guns if you're behind the bike. 

To make exhausts like this really quite you build a 'boom box', which is basically a box that goes over the outlet of some volume and a hole on the opposite end. Like this:
(http://883r.jp/shop/special/boombox-310-424w.jpg)

I'll post stuff at the end of the weekend as I'm on my way out the door for a camping trip.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 08, 2017, 09:54:58 AM
There was twin cylinder Superbike racing in the late 1990's.  The manufacturers made small batches of the bikes for the street so they could homogulate them for racing.  Someone took one of them to the BMST and raised the twin cylinder record to the high 160's.  It was in the high 150's before the meet.  Right now I am rethinking about this hobby.  It is hard for the homebuilder to match factory technology and be in contention for records.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 10, 2017, 12:47:01 AM
A switch to FIM 2-cylinder partially streamlined forced induction will allow me to use the tail.  This class is for home builders.  There is no factory built bike that can enter.  None are made.  The plan for this year is to do the listed and make one more attempt at the NA record.  Remake the tail to fit the new FIM regs.  Make some new triple clamps with a few mm less offset.  This will reduce or eliminate the speed wobble during decal.  Figure out the best cam timing using the computer programs.  Get some pistons made with 13:1 static compression based on my combustion chambers.  Design another exhaust system using EngMod4T.  Try three exhausts on the dyno, the old one I used before 2017, the one I used in 2017, and the new one built this year.  Go back to using Sunoco Standard for tuning and its ERC equivalent when on the salt.  Thanks everyone on this website for the help.  Faith at Webcam, Denis Manning, and Mike Perry at Kibblewhite all gave me some good advice this year.  There is hope.

The engine made more torque with the old cams and pipes.  Now, with the new cams and pipes it makes more power.  A big task is to get back the lost torque and retain the new power.  The current lobe center angles are 112 and 111 degrees intake and exhaust, respectively.  That is pretty wide and tightening them up can give more torque.  Torque between 6,000 and 9,000 rpm was calculated using different lobe center angles with Dynomation.  The best torque curve used 108 inlet and 110 exhaust lobe centers according to that program.  Raising the compression from 11.7 to 13 to 1 helped too.  Both changes give 3 to 4 more pounds-feet throughout the 3,000 rpm range.  The EngMod4T program is ordered and I am figuring out how to load it on the computer.  I will recheck these LCA's using that program.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 18, 2017, 11:19:54 PM
This time last year I had a 90 horsepower engine and was a lost soul.  I could not figure out how to get more power.  This program was ordered, installed on the PC, and I read this book five or six times.  A virtual model was made of the motor and I started to do computer based hop-up.  One thing I learned was the "garbage in-garbage out" saying really applies.   Actual flow test results, digital cam profiles, and measured compression ratios are essential to get decent results.  I used approximations at first and then had to reanalyse everything over again when I got the better input data.  The predictions were quite different depending on whether or not I used refined input.

The program manual has some guidelines about what to look for in all of the output graphs and tables.  Good references are Vizard's books, Dema Elgin's website articles, and "The Horsepower Chain" by Don Terrill, among others.  A couple of other engine builders gave me advice, too.  It took months of late nights for me to figure out the various concepts.

The results are a 107 hp engine.  This is right where most folks get with these engines powerwise.  The upside of all of this work is that all of this is done with much smaller valves, lower compression, and milder cams than most other tuners folks are using.  That is the beauty of virtual tuning.  It is getting the right combination of parts.

The downside of the program is the exhaust tuning.  Only limited options are available that can be used with wave tuning.  The exhausts I made based on program data did not work at all.  These engines need something other than open-ended pipes or meggas, like mufflers or reverse cones.  The program could not model these with wave action.

Do I recommend the program?  Yes.  It is a good learning tool and an additional 17 HP from an already developed motor is not bad.  The next step is to use another program that models many more exhaust options.   

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 23, 2017, 12:36:17 AM
The Triumph uses custom made forged pistons in plated cylinders (Nakisil or similar).  The static compression ratio is 13 to 1 based on the original equipment manufacturer combustion chamber volume.  The combustion chambers are larger than this due to bigger valves and seats being installed and relieving the combustion chamber walls around the valve margins for better flow.  The actual static compression ratio is 11.7 to 1.  It would be nice to have some custom pistons made that give 13 to 1 static compression ratio for the larger combustion chambers.

The bores, pistons, and rings are in good condition.  I was thinking of having a set of high compression pistons made, putting the old rings on them, and using them in the old bores without any honing.  Has anyone done this?  Does it work?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: jacksoni on September 23, 2017, 08:08:06 AM
If you are getting new pistons, you have the opportunity to look at the ring package and perhaps (not knowing what you have now) go to a better package. Thinner perhaps ( less friction) or other changes that could improve sealing or control. Unless really unusual $ not too bad and hone is cheap. Take advantage of being sure the freshening is top notch. It's a race motor and you are working hard to get every last HP out of it. Why cheap out now?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 24, 2017, 01:36:35 AM
Time is the big issue.  A hone and new rings means a bunch of extra tasks like changing to break-in oil, bedding in the rings, changing back to race oil, etc.  Right now I am working a lot of overtime at the job there is not much time to do all of this.  This means I am looking for Mickey Mouse ways to get by with minimal effort for BMST 2018.  I retire in July so I will have lots of time to get the engine right for BMST 2019.  Of course, as a pensioner I will have no money so I will be looking for Mickey Mouse ways to save $. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on October 07, 2017, 12:06:24 PM
Bo...modern parts usually do not require break-in oil..........Do the dyno testing and put in fresh oil for the BIG WHITE DYNO.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 07, 2017, 07:59:18 PM
There is more to this story than what is in the build diary.  The bores are plated with something like nakasil.  The last piston swap was from 10.5 to 1 pistons to 13.5 to 1 pistons (based on the standard size combustion chamber).  The local machinist would not hone or break the glaze for me.  He said the bores were worn enough to make it too risky.  He said if he honed them round there was a chance he could break through the plating and there would be too much skirt clearance.  He also did not want to break the glaze.

So, I broke the glaze myself using hillbilly methods.  The rings seated perfectly.  Lots of cranking compression with the new motor.  Also, very little blow by past the rings based on looking at the oil retained in the breather catch tank.

Another try at backwoods honing for a new set of rings is risky.  Also, having the bores plated and honed for new pistons is risky, too.  Right now I am having very poor luck with work I farm out to others.  Either they screw it up or they do it right and take a long, long, time to do it.

The plan is to have Arias make a new set of pistons and rings with higher compression.  Then, I will put the new pistons in with the old rings and do a cranking compression test.  If it works, that is great.  If not, I will have the bores replated and honed for new rings.

The flight I will be on from Atlanta to Portland will center punch Hurricane Nate.  It will be a tropical storm when we go through it.  Pistons and rings are my least worry now.   
 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 09, 2017, 10:52:29 AM
We flew through the remnants of Nate.  It was rough.  I was worried that the wings would break off of the plane.

Racing on a pension is something I thought a lot about while in Virginia.  It was good that I got soundly thrashed at the speed trials.  A lot of these 1000cc bikes setting new records in Bolivia and elsewhere are using OEM engines or close to it.  They are water cooled with downdraft or semi-downdraft ports and the bike that has the record this year is a factory designed race bike.  The Triumph is an air cooled twin with old style side draft ports tuned by a backwoods hillbilly.  Its days of being competitive in naturally aspirated gasoline burning form are done.

Then I looked at aero.  The drag coefficient with the tail on is reasonably low.  A fellow racer looked at my helmet and neck when I was in a tuck at the BMST.  I thought my leathers are pushing my helmet forward so I can not see where I am going.  That is not the case.  It looks like I have a short turkey shaped old folk neck and it is my shoulders that are tilting the helmet forward.  There is nothing I can do about this.  My tuck is poor and that is what it is.

Medical expenses for Rose and I during retirement are basically medicare supplemented by a wobbly walrus funded insurance plan.  There are some big coverage gaps in this with major financial impacts if I crash the bike and need long term care or have serious hospital costs.  This makes pushing speeds a lot higher with forced induction or fuel unattractive.  This bike is not a hayabusa or anything designed for going fast.

Fortunately I like to travel.  This gives me some realistic and satisfying goals.  No more record chasing.  The plan is to dink around on the bike during the off-seasons to keep it running and to do modifications I can afford.  Another attempt at 150 mph is planned for the 2018 BMST trials.  A trip to the UK is planned for 2019 or 2020 to run the Yorkshire mile.  I have never done runway racing.  Then, the bike stays in Europe and I will try to run on the frozen lake in Sweden.  All of this will keep me busy for a long time.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 17, 2017, 01:13:58 AM
The program described in Post 2872 was purchased.  Evening after evening is spent trying to figure the damn thing out.  It is like making passes at a frigid lesbian.  User unfriendly.  Is there another program that analyses exhausts?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Tofu on October 17, 2017, 10:59:12 AM
Is this of any assistance?

http://www.rddreams.com/neels/Baleno.htm
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 18, 2017, 01:19:24 AM
That is useful info although I am working with a four stroke engine.  Right now I am getting up at 5:00, going to work for long days, getting home, doing chores, and have only an hour or two before midnight to work on the computer modeling.  It looks like I was sent a beta version.  It is non functional and I am in no mood to troubleshoot it.  Other computer analysis programs are being investigated. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on October 18, 2017, 08:46:35 AM
Wobbly,
At the end of a long and frustrating day with only a short time available to consider use of the program is probably not the best way to approach it.  Although I haven’t seen it, the program offered by Neels Vannik is apparently a derivation of, and extension of, the Blair technology (which I have seen) and is likely as good as you are going to find at modelling gas dynamics.  It may not be easy to digest at first but you need to sit back with an open mind and spend some time absorbing the overall approach that it uses.  Come to grips with what it offers and how to use it.  It is much more sophisticated and capable than Dynomation.
And do not expect to get instant, simply obtained, answers.  There is a reason that Dynomation doesn’t do a good job of gas dynamics analysis.

There are any number of testimonials for the successful use of the program, including rddreams (just above, #2893) which, if you read through it, uses the Vannik program.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: JimL on October 19, 2017, 12:31:09 AM
Bo....your reply 2892 sparked a funny memory.  I will post the little story in the jokes section, since you brought the actual event to mind. :wink:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 19, 2017, 10:27:15 PM
Some shopping around shows me that the only other programs that do this type of modeling are real expensive, available to corporations, only, or both.  I am very thankful to have this program.  It is essential to get the power I need to be less slow.

The problem is toggling back in the screens to change things that were previously input.  Once I figure this out the big user related problems are solved.  Rose is on vacation so I moved the computer onto the kitchen table.  Some serious effort will be made in the next week to get some useful results.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 22, 2017, 12:11:02 AM
My problem is being tired when I work with the program.  Last night I had 8 hours of sleep.  This morning I woke up, had two cups of coffee, and started to model the exhaust system.  It took about a half hour to figure out solutions to the problems I was having.  Now the exhaust, intake, and engine are modeled.  Tomorrow I will take the head off and measure the parts and model the cams and valves.  Progress is happening. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WhizzbangK.C. on October 22, 2017, 12:47:46 AM
Don't you just love the feeling of the "ah-ha moment" when everything just clicks into place and becomes clear?  :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 22, 2017, 08:06:49 PM
Clarity of thought is a rare occurrence around here.  More enlightenment happened today.  Timing was measured for both cams to get data to put into the program.  The lobe centers are both retarded around 4 degrees.  This might be due to cam chain wear.  Advancing them back to the settings on the cam card should help to move the torque peak to lower rpm where it will be much more useful.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on October 23, 2017, 10:35:40 AM
Clarity of thought is a rare occurrence around here.  More enlightenment happened today.  Timing was measured for both cams to get data to put into the program.  The lobe centers are both retarded around 4 degrees.  This might be due to cam chain wear.  Advancing them back to the settings on the cam card should help to move the torque peak to lower rpm where it will be much more useful.

I went back and looked but couldn't find it..with those 4 degrees what was the actual timing?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 23, 2017, 10:35:54 PM
The cam grinder gets agitated when the specs are posted on line.  The RB Racing dynamic compression calculator is used with a 4,100 foot elevation and intake valve closing as per the cam card.  Dynamic comp is 8.69 to 1.  Actual cam timing lags 4 degrees and it gives a dynamic of 8.41 to 1.  The can grinder says I can advance the intake cam as much as six degrees from the card value.  This gives dynamic comp to 9.09 to 1. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on October 24, 2017, 06:58:23 AM
Those 4 degrees could be "scruffing" off a lot of TQ.  Went back and looked at your last dyno sheet, you definitely could take advantage of moving those 4 degrees.  You would gain TQ and increase power over the curve high in the RPM range and might even pickup peak HP.  Lobe separation would remain the same. Where the cams are now, you really don't know where peak HP occurs.  I know you will, but if you move them make sure you check PTV clearances.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 25, 2017, 12:10:27 AM
Hopefully this new program will help me to figure out the lobe center angles.

Cam and bucket wear was a big problem last year.  The cams I had were proven race grinds that set land speed records.  They pitted and scored the buckets and the lobe tips.  High dollar race teams use valve train packages that last for a race, I was told.  These cams did not seem to be too excessive when this is considered.

My program is low to no budget so this would not do.  That is one big reason for the computer modeling.  It was to emphasize lower RPM, higher volumetric efficiency, and lighter parts to get power instead of lots of revs, low efficiency, and big valves and cams.  Power in an affordable engine is the goal.  Plus, in the UK the bike will be my transportation when I am not racing it.

Cams with lift that matches the flow capacity of the head were selected.  The head flows good to .4 lift so cams with .4 lift were selected.  These are webcam #208.  This is much less lift than those old race cams.  This reduces stresses on the oil film at the lobe tips.

The 208 cams might have worked with the old 28 mm tappet buckets.  Maybe.  30mm buckets were installed to be safe.  Kibblewhite did this work.  This is a big deal.  The cams need to stay on the buckets to give long life.

I was using a generic race spring package from a reputable source.  Most folks use valves 4 to 5mm larger than standard and rev the engines past 10 grand.  These springs were stiff to do this.  The valves are 1 to 2 mm larger and the red line is 9 grand.  Softer springs could be used.  A special set was made by kibblewhite for this engine and cams.  They looked at spring harmonics and other critical things.  The result is much lighter springs that do the lob.  This reduces valve train stress.

The cams were broken in using the outer springs, only, with no spring seat shims.  This advice came from land racing.com.

Real good quality synthetic race oil with a zinc-phosphorous package was used for the break in.  It is the oil I normally use.  I would not use it for piston ring seating.  Mineral oil is used for that.

The cams and buckets polished in primo.  They look better than any Honda cams or standard Triumph cams I have seen and are nice and shiny like Yamaha cam lobes.  This part of the build is working great.   

       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 27, 2017, 01:36:02 AM
That latest computer program and the walrus do not get along.  It takes a nuclear rocket scientist to figure it out.  That excludes me.  The earlier program gives me no trouble.  It models a large diameter tapered header with a collector and a generic muffler without a catalytic converter.  Three intake and exhaust lobe center combinations were tried.  107-116 is what it is now.  112-111 is recommended on the cam card.  106-108 was a tightened lobe center setting the cam grinder says might work.

Based on the 11.7 to 1 compression ratio the bike has now, the 112-111 combo puts out 1 to 2 pound-feet more torque in the 6 to 9 grand range than the current settings.  The 106-108 combo puts out 3 to -1 more or less torque than the current settings with the torque addition at the lower rpm ranges.  The 112-111 combination works best with the 11.7 to 1 comp ratio.

Using a 13:1 ratio, things change.  The 107-116 combo puts out 2 to 5 more pound feet than the current settings and comp ratio, with the greatest increases in the lower rpm.  The 112-111 combo puts out 3 to 5 more pound feet than the current settings.  It is almost identical to the 112-111 combo.  The 106-108 mix puts out 5  to 1 more pound feet than the current setup with the greatest help in the lower rpm.  The 107-116 or 112-111 combos work well with the higher compression.

Pistons with 13:1 static comp ratio will be installed.  It appears these along with the 112-111 lobe center combo will restore the lost torque. 

,   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on October 27, 2017, 07:59:31 AM
Wobbly, are the results you discuss in #2905 coming from Dynomation or Vannik? 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on October 27, 2017, 09:06:32 AM
I always like my intake higher numerically than the exhaust and separation of at least 2 degrees but no more than 5. I would recommend as a starting point, 108-112 or 110-114.  108-112 should bring the peak down and increase the TQ across the curve.  But of course this depends on the center line of the ground.  I'm actually having a mental disconnect: usually, when you move the timing down on the intake side you gain TQ at the cost of higher peak HP.  So, moving the cams to 106-108 shouldn't cause a loss of TQ down low like you are seeing with the 11.7:1 pistons.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 28, 2017, 12:34:20 AM
The results are from the "D" program.  The "V" software is not functioning at this time.

All of the combinations mentioned in the last post, plus the 108-112 and 110-114 mentioned, were run in the program.   That 108-112 works best.  It puts the torque where I need it.  That is what I will use.  Thanks for the big help.  Life is looking good.
    
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 29, 2017, 12:31:28 PM
The "V" program needs a smarter guy than me to get results.  I could not get past problems with data entry.  Everything except the exhaust system could be designed using the "D" program.  Engine data will be sent to Burns if this motor works good.  One of their services is pipe design.  They will send me back the specs and I will make the pipe.  That is in 2019.  This year I will try both of my existing exhaust systems and choose the best one.

The cams need to be retimed.  Light springs are used for the outer left valves.  I can push them down with my finger.  The shims under the other valve's buckets are removed.  This way, only the outer left valves will get close to the pistons.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 29, 2017, 12:37:54 PM
A cam was put in the lathe and I attempted to remove the welds.  Three different types of too bits could not cut the weld.  Then I got smart and deployed Mister Angle Grinder.  The weld was ground down quite a bit.  Then, I tapped the gear and the weld broke.  Heck, these welds might be brittle.  The cam was turned 180 degrees and the gear tapped without any grinding.  The weld broke.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 29, 2017, 12:39:09 PM
The gear was gently tapped down off of the cam.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 29, 2017, 02:24:05 PM
There are two race cams I use.  One set is the older all purpose cams.  The other is the Bonneville race cams.  Adjustable cam gears were ordered for both.  The obvious measurements are checked.  The original gear inside diameter is measured.  The ID is 1.517.
A gear from a set of adjustables is checked.  The ID is in the 1.490's.  The fit is too tight.  They will be sent back to the supplier for a refund.  The IDs of the gears in the other set is checked.  They are 1.517.  This set will be used.  The old gear is used as a reference.  Otherwise, the tolerances would be checked using guidance in the Machinist Handbook.

The hot setup for these engines is to port and polish the head, use late model T-100 high compression pistons, put in early model 790 cams, and leave the rest alone, with standard air box, filter, and intake snorkel.  This makes a fast engine and avoids all of the funkiness of using non OEM parts.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 29, 2017, 02:29:38 PM
Heat is used for the gear reinstall.  The gear is heated with propane.  It is not hot enough to lose its temper.  The cam is slid into the gear.  The gear and cam are clamped in the arbor press until cool.  This is important to get a tight fit between the gear and the shoulder of the cam.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 29, 2017, 04:41:10 PM
There is a slight radius at this location on the gear holder.  The inner edge of the gear is sharp.  There is interference and the gear is held .010 off of the holder.  Should I put a small radius on the inside face of the gear so it fits up against the holder flange with no clearance?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on October 29, 2017, 06:02:26 PM
There is a slight radius at this location on the gear holder.  The inner edge of the gear is sharp.  There is interference and the gear is held .010 off of the holder.  Should I put a small radius on the inside face of the gear so it fits up against the holder flange with no clearance?

Definitely

 :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 29, 2017, 07:54:09 PM
Thanks.  Will do.

One experience type lesson I learned we as about welding rings onto shafts.  The weld can heat the ring so there is a clearance fit.  The ring hardly ever settles back down to where it should be when it contracts during cooling.  Now the rings are restrained so they move back into place where they should be.  This should not be a problem with these small tacks.  I am not taking any chances.
 
The old all-purpose cams were checked for valve opening degree settings when they were installed.  They were OK.  It was almost impossible to get decent power from that engine during the next six or seven years.  No matter what I did, power was never over 87 at the back wheel.  The cam gears were slipping on their shafts and the valve timing saw goofus.  Now, the gears are tacked to the cams now so they will not move.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 29, 2017, 07:59:40 PM
The squirrels are bringing in nuts and leaving them all over the machine tools and welding bench.  Winter is coming.

The cams are checked to make sure they are still straight.  I do this with new cams and old ones that have been worked on.  Another experience taught lesson.  My typing finger is out of breath.  It is time for Sunday steak dinner at the local pub.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 31, 2017, 10:02:11 AM
The cams are symmetrical with lobe centers halfway between the ramps and the same profiles on either side.  The digitized profiles are in the "D" program along with measured flow data.

Cam chains wear and cam timing retards with use.  An estimated four degrees retard in crank degrees is anticipated.  Lobe separation angles of 108, 110, and 112 were looked at in the program with 4 degrees advance when the new cam chain is installed, two degrees advance at midpoint in the wear cycle, and no advance at chain replacement.

The combos with 108 LSA are 104-112 initially, 106-110 at midlife, and 108-108 at replacement.  This gives good torque and power throughout the chain life.

The settings using 110 LSA are 106-114, 108-112, and 110-110.  These also give good performance and it is identical to the 108 LSA.

The 112 LSA uses 108-116, 110-114, and 112-112.  Power and torque are not as high as with the other two LSA.

Some new high compression pistons will be made.  It seems the 110 LSA will keep the valve heads further from the crowns than the 108 LSA and this will allow shallower valve pockets and more compression.  Does this make sense?  It was figured out at midnight and hopefully the logic is sane.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on October 31, 2017, 11:26:24 AM
Makes perfect sense.

I don't know what static compression you are aiming for but, with the size of valves you are using, along with the race cams;  I would suspect that 106 on the intake maybe a tad too close with the PTV clearance.  Likewise, you may run into issues on the exhaust PTV about the 109 mark.  108/112 maybe the winner.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on October 31, 2017, 12:32:32 PM

It seems the 110 LSA will keep the valve heads further from the crowns than the 108 LSA and this will allow shallower valve pockets and more compression.  Does this make sense?  It was figured out at midnight and hopefully the logic is sane.


Yes.   You are doing fine, but I DO NOT recommend doing critical analysis when you are sleep deprived.    Sleep deprivation does nothing positive for anyone.

How it works is:  With equal timing and the center at TDC, the "tighter" the LCA, the LESS valve to piston clearance that you have.  "Opening up" the LCA retards the intake for more clearance, AND, advances the exhaust for more clearance.   As you can see, it can get "tricky" quickly, when the timing is not equal to TDC.

2 degrees of cam change gains or loses valve to piston clearance depending on which direction you go.  The rate per degree is equal to the net valve lift (or loss) per degree at that point on the flank lift curve.   The maximum flank lift per degree is fixed by tappet diameter for "flat" tappet cams.   This can be a significant amount, so you need to do a check at the mock up stage, OR, do a VERY accurate simulation.

On some engines, you also need to check on valve to valve clearance.   On big valve Cosworth 4v engines, advancing the inlet cam REQUIRES advancing the exhaust cam just to maintain valve to valve clearance.   It's not the best for power, but it is necessary to keep from "clashing the valves".

Most engines may run better with the cam(s) 2 to 4 degrees advanced.    Larger trapped volume from the early intake closing helps provide more torque, with little to no top end bhp penalty.    BUT, when you get closer to the "optimum cam profile for the application", cam timing becomes "very fussy".    "Long duration" cam grinds seem to benefit from this strategy more than "high intensity" cam grinds.   Again, it is about the "trapping volume".

Where the closest point of valve to piston clearance is located, depends primarily on cam positioning (timing), BUT, Build Geometry (tm) does have influence on this critical performance parameter.   Build Geometries which feature long piston dwell times at TDC can create fitment difficulties.    It's the old: "Five pounds of crap in a three pound bag" problem.

And, achieving a suitably high compression ratio is ALWAYS a "dogfight" with small displacement engines, regardless of whether they are big valve or small valve.   It's never a problem on a 632 cubic inch BBC, but it's always difficult below 122 cubic inches . . . . .   :|

BTW, IMHO, if your engine runs better with the cam(s) more than 4 degrees from what is recommended, you need a different cam or cams, or possibly: "more development".

Hope this helped . . . . . .
 :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 31, 2017, 10:38:06 PM
The most advanced setting is when the cam chain is new.  That is 106-114.  The intake valve to piston clearance will be checked with the intake cam at 106.  Clearance is smallest then and it gets greater when the cam chain wears and the cams retard.

The 108-112 setting is midway in the wear cycle.

The most retarded setting is when the chain is worn and the cams retard to 110-110.  The crown to exhaust valve head clearance will be checked at that setting.

Arias made the pistons in the bike.  The plan is to measure the clearances with those pistons and send them to Arias with the piston order.  It will be best to raise compression by reducing valve pocket size is my best guess.  Raising the dome might screw up the turbulence patterns.  The pockets are way too big now.

Hopefully my logic is OK and I do not have any concepts backwards.  Thanks for all of the advice.  It helps. 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 01, 2017, 08:56:57 AM
Last night I did some book learning and computer modeling.  Vizard has a graph that uses valve diameter to displacement ratio to get LSA.  It gives an LSA of 107 when his compression ratio correction is applied.  The "D" program has a cam timing optimization feature.  It recommended ten combinations in the 107 to 108 range.  The concept of lost and non-recoverable compression on good breathing four valve engines, rod stroke ratio, and compression ratio is also explained.

It looks like it is more critical to not have too wide of an LSA in these engines as compared to two valvers.  Tonight I am going to model LSA's of 107, 108, 109, and 110 with advance leads of 4, 2, and 0 degrees.  The "D" program gives me trapped mass numbers.  The LSA combo that maximizes those will be noted.

Is there something else I need to look for in addition to trapped mass and checking the valve to piston clearances?   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 02, 2017, 09:45:52 AM
Trapped mass is at crank position TDC is tabulated for 500 rpm increments from 5000 rpm to 9000 rpm.  LSA angles of 107, 108, 109 and 110 are tabulated a 4 degrees advanced, 2 degrees advanced, and no advance.

The 7,000 to 8,000 rpm trapped mass is almost unaffected by LSA angle or advance changes.  Trapped mass below 7,000 rpm benefits from tighter LSA angles and more advance.  The opposite occurs above 8,000 rpm.

This was done at SAE atmosphere.  Tonight it will be redone using Bonneville air.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 02, 2017, 10:11:21 PM
The worksheet from last night
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 03, 2017, 01:14:37 AM
Now I am figuring out the timing settings with no valve lash so I can time the cams.  IO, IE, etc.

The cam card lists a 17 BTDC intake opening with no lash at 0.050 lift.  It lists the duration at 0.050 as 258 at .050.  Using the formula for a cam with the lobe centered between the ramps, the intake centerline is (258/2) - 17 = 112.  This is the intake centerline listed on the cam card.

These cams were digitized by Kibblewhite and the file is input into the "D" program.  Note that the intake centerline is entered as 112 just like on the cam card.  The intake duration at 0.050 is 258.8 degrees using the IE + 180 + IO formula.  This is very close to the value on the cam card.

The lobe tip should be centered between the ramps according to the cam card.  The intake centerline based on the opening and closing values from the digital model are (258.8/2) - 20 = 109 degrees.  This is not the 112 value.  This cam is ground funny, or it is ground correct and the cam card is goofy.  I can't win.

That table made last night is based on the digitized cam profiles in the "D" program.  It looks like these settings work best.  103-111 when the cams are installed with a new chain, this will go to 105-109 when the chain is half worn, and 107-107 when the chain is worn out.  It gives the best trapped mass at lower rpm with only a small loss on top.  Keep in mind, these cams with their dingbat profiles might act like ones with wider lobe centers.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on November 03, 2017, 09:38:52 AM
From the screen capture...I get intake at 111 and exhaust at 111.5 so that's close enough....goofy cam ground maybe..

(http://)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 03, 2017, 08:42:51 PM
By hand using data from the screen shot for 0.050:  intake duration = 20 + 180 + 58.8 = 258.8  exhaust duration = 60.6 + 180 + 17.6 = 258.2  overlap = 20 + 17.6 = 37.6  intake centerline = (258.8/2) - 20 = 109.4  exhaust centerline = (258.2/2) - 17.6 = 111.5  LSA = (109.4 + 111.5) / 2 = 110.45  This input was entered into the RB Racing cam calculator during lunch and I got similar results.

The lobe centers are set in the "D" program at 112 intake and 111 exhaust and it is using the digital profiles  This is what I think is happening.  The exhaust has a typical profile with the front and back faces symmetrical.  The opening and closing is what one would expect from the simple math equations.  The intake cam is ground with a more convex front face and a less convex rear.  It is opening and shutting the intakes like a symmetrical cam would with a 109.4 lobe center angle.

This hypothesis will be tested using a degree wheel on the cam and a dial indicator on a lifter.  The initial modeling in the "D" program used 10-point data based on cam card values.  The card data is based on symmetrical lobes.  Later modeling used digitized profiles.  There was a significant difference in the results.  This might explain why this happened.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 04, 2017, 10:20:27 AM
What is the formula to alter static compression ratio to simulate change in air density between SAE conditions and the climate at the salt flats?  I am aware that the actual ratio does not change.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 05, 2017, 02:54:03 PM
This is the worksheet for peak cylinder pressure using 13 to 1 static compression ratio and SAE atmosphere.  The highest pressures are boxed.  The most boxes are in the 107 to 108 range.  This corresponds exactly to the value recommend by a chart in one of Vizard's books.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 05, 2017, 03:10:37 PM
The compression ratio is lowered to 11.1 to 1 to simulate the atmosphere at the salt flats.  The chart was redone with the same results.  The 107 and 108 angles give the best pressures.  The valve timing will be set using 107.5 LCA.  The lobe centers will be set at 105.5 and 109.5.  This is 2 degrees advanced.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 05, 2017, 11:46:34 PM
Some background information.  The cylinder head has good low lift flow and this is typical of a professionally ported four valve head.  It is very effective at dropping cylinder pressure when the exhaust valve opens at the bottom of the compression stroke.  The head is also good at bleeding off pressure when the piston rises before a the intake valve closes.  The result is they need shorter duration cams than would be expected.  The cam in this bike is tall in relation to the diameter of the tappet cap.  A narrow profile cam will not push the cap down enough far enough to stay on the tappet when the lobe tip crosses it.  Some convex profile is needed near the lobe tip to depress the tappet enough so the tip will stay on top of the bucket when it passes over it.  This gives the cams more duration than is desired.

"Set cam timing so excess duration is thrown toward the overlap" is what I remember being told, and "This maintains the best cylinder pressures."  This is what the computer program says, too.  It results in a tighter than expected optimum LSA.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 10, 2017, 11:24:50 AM
Intake valve head to piston crown clearances are measured.  The minimum clearance recommended by Arias is 0.090 inches.

The first trial is for the 107.5 lobe separation angle recommended by the program and Vizard's book.  The cams are set at 4 degrees advanced with a new cam chain.  The cam advance is expected to be optimal at 2 degrees after the chain beds in.  No cam advance is expected when the chain wears out.  The piston gives 11.7 to 1 compression with the measured combustion chamber volume.

The smallest piston to valve clearance is 0.100 at 4 degrees advance.  This shows me that this is the tightest intake angle that can be had with these pistons using the valve pockets they have.  Raising the compression ratio to 13:1 will require raising the crown, only.  No depth can be removed from the valve pockets.  They are just deep enough for this separation angle.

Next, the 110 degree separation angle recommended by Ransom T will be checked with 106-114, 108-112, and 110-110.  That larger angle might be needed to give enough clearance for a compression raise.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on November 10, 2017, 01:39:17 PM
Intake valve head to piston crown clearances are measured.  The minimum clearance recommended by Arias is 0.090 inches.


0.090" seems a little on the conservative side for the intake.  0.060" IN , 0.090" EX is what I check against.  It all depends on piston manufacture, rods, combustion design, etc...  But if Arias recommends it, I would stick with it..also could be valve to valve clearance if it gets tighter than 0.090"..
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 11, 2017, 01:08:46 AM
It is an air cooled engine and the pistons are wide and short.  They rock in the bores before they get warm and expand to a tighter fit in the cylinders.  That 0.090 recommendation seems to be valid based on experience, too.

The RB Racing dynamic compression calculator gives combustion chamber volumes.  The volume now with 11.7 to 1 compression is 46.50 CC.  The volume for 13 to 1 compression is 41.46 CC.  The difference is 46.50 - 41.46 = 5.04 CC.  The deck height and head gasket thickness are at minimums now.  The only way to get compression is to add metal to the combustion chamber or to the piston crown.  Reworking the chamber is far to mental for this guy.  New pistons with higher crowns are the way to go.

The top of the existing crown is 1.5 CM by 7 CM.  The top of a higher crown would be 0.5 CM by 6.5 CM  The crown would be 0.163 CM higher.  This gives a crown addition volume of 1.06 CC.  This leaves 5.04 - 1.06 = 3.98 CC that needs to be added to the pistons.  The only way to do this is to raise the valve pocket floors.

The valve pocket floor area is 34 square centimeters.  The rise in pocket height is 3.98 CC / 34 SQ CM = 0.12 CM or 0.046 inches.

My calculations are not rocket science precision.  A minimum 0.100 inch clearance will be used between the valve head and the piston crown.  This is slightly higher than the 0.090 recommended by Arias.  Intake valve clearance at 107.5 degrees lobe separation is checked first.  The smallest clearance is 0.119 inches at 10 degrees ATDC.  The valve pockets can be raised 0.019 inches.  This is not enough.

The minimum clearance at 110 LSA is 0.123 inches at 10 degrees ATDC.  This is not enough, either.  It needs to be at least 0.146 inches.  The clearances will be checked at 112 and 114 LSA tomorrow.
   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: jacksoni on November 11, 2017, 06:33:55 AM
You should check your P-V at additional spots besides the "magic" 10* before and after  (EX and IN) TDC. Each engine is different. On mine the closest on the intake valve was closer to 20*after TDC and was a lot closer than at 10*. I start checking each at 20 before and go until it starts getting bigger after, every 5*. And that may be too big a jump if you are running really tight (you  are being generous and safe at .100".) I think you can get away, some engines, with a lot less on the intake- I have run under .030"- but you better be sure of your valve control in that sort of setting and with your cam advance changing so much with chain wear, what you are doing is wise.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on November 11, 2017, 09:55:12 AM
Just a thought: Sometimes folks forget the interaction of the spark plug into combustion chamber, especially when using the assumptions of computer generated chamber sizes.

And: I've heard stories of drag race engine builders from a couple of decades ago, that would incrementally reduce the quench area to the point that the pistons would scruff the head and call it perfect!  But, when the rod bearings would wear, you had a big boom!


Of course, you know that sometimes 1 degree of cam timing movement frees up a lot of PTV clearance.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 11, 2017, 10:13:11 AM
That is what I did.  It was to check the clearances every two degrees on either side of the tightest.  It was tightest at the usual 10 degrees.  It looks like big LCA is needed to give as much as 0.090 clearances.  This will cancel out the advantages of using higher static compression.  The wider angles kill the dynamic.  There is another solution.  

The intake valves are 2mm larger than standard and new seats were installed.  The removal of cylinder head material to accommodate those seats and to reduce the shrouding around the bigger valves is causing the bigger chamber volume.

The exhaust valves are 1mm larger than standard and the existing seats and ports are reworked to get better flow.  There is no loss in combustion chamber volume.  The compression would be 13 to 1 if I had done similar with the intake valves.

Mach number calculations show the 2mm larger valves are not needed.  Computer modeling shows that a slight loss in intake flow at low lifts does no harm at all.  There is an almost new cylinder head in the junk pile.  Right now I will go with the pistons I have and redo that newer head when I get the time.  That will give me good flow, 13 to 1 compression with the pistons I have, and allow a tight LCA.  There is a new set of pistons and rings just like the ones in the bike now with thermal and friction coating in the junk pile.  This is incentive to work on the newer head.

    
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on November 11, 2017, 10:38:12 AM
That is what I did.  It was to check the clearances every two degrees on either side of the tightest.  It was tightest at the usual 10 degrees.  It looks like big LCA is needed to give as much as 0.090 clearances.  This will cancel out the advantages of using higher static compression.  The wider angles kill the dynamic.  There is another solution.  

The intake valves are 2mm larger than standard and new seats were installed.  The removal of cylinder head material to accommodate those seats and to reduce the shrouding around the bigger valves is causing the bigger chamber volume.

The exhaust valves are 1mm larger than standard and the existing seats and ports are reworked to get better flow.  There is no loss in combustion chamber volume.  The compression would be 13 to 1 if I had done similar with the intake valves.

Mach number calculations show the 2mm larger valves are not needed.  Computer modeling shows that a slight loss in intake flow at low lifts does no harm at all.  There is an almost new cylinder head in the junk pile.  Right now I will go with the pistons I have and redo that newer head when I get the time.  That will give me good flow, 13 to 1 compression with the pistons I have, and allow a tight LCA.  There is a new set of pistons and rings just like the ones in the bike now with thermal and friction coating in the junk pile.  This is incentive to work on the newer head.

 :cheers:  The best option by far!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 11, 2017, 03:17:12 PM
The exhaust valves were checked this morning.  The tightest clearance is 0.164   This can be reduced 0.064 inches.  This, the taller crown, and the small reduction in valve pocket depth on the intakes gives enough volume reduction.  This is using the tight 107.5 lobe separation with a four degree lead.  This is the best setup using 'puter modeling.  An e-mail will go to Arias.  Life is looking good again.  I retire on 30 June next year and I want to get this motor done while there is some cash flow.

An extra set will be made.  This way, if I build a new head in future years with a small volume combustion chamber, a pair of these slugs can be used to give real high compression.  An alky motor in the future?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 13, 2017, 09:27:14 PM
The combustion chamber volume was measured again after the ceramic coatings were applied.  The coatings raise the compression from 11.7 to 1 to 11.9 to 1.  Coatings are on the inside and outside faces of the valves, the combustion chambers, the insides of all ports and the tops of the pistons.

There is no smell of oxidation in the oil or signs of oxidation or excess heat in critical areas such as under the exhaust valve spring seats.  The coatings did their jobs. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 19, 2017, 10:34:03 AM
The overtime I am doing at the job is preventing me from doing much work on the bike.  The plan is to use the engine I had in September with retimed cams, a rebuilt tail section, and triple clamps with less offset.  Also, maybe a different rear tire with some "off road" capability.

Wheelspin was an issue based on calculations using timeslip speed and tach reading.  The crank firing is at 360 degree intervals now.  A 270 - 450 degree firing interval can be built into these engines to give better traction.  Parts have been collected over the years to do the 270 - 450 conversion. A side project is to obtain the rest of the parts while I am working and have money.  The engine will be assembled after I retire.

This is an almost brand new crank my youngest boys got from a crashed bike.  The gear that takes power from the crank to the clutch was damaged in the wreck.  They tried to remove it.  The attempt managed to remove one gear retaining bolt and broke several others off so the threaded parts are in the crank.

Triumph never intended for these bolts to be removed.  Methinks they are a slight interference fit and they were installed when the crank was warm and it shrank down onto the bolts when it cooled.  The broken bolt removal is too complicated for WW.  Is there someone who does a good job of fastener removal?

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on November 19, 2017, 07:30:37 PM
WW;

Find someone with an EDM; that should remove the bolt without buggering up the holes in the gear.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 19, 2017, 11:50:25 PM
Duuuh, what is EDM?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on November 20, 2017, 12:06:28 AM
Duuuh, what is EDM?

Yeah, me too.   :?

I looked it up, Electrical Discharge Machining.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Queeziryder on November 20, 2017, 03:48:19 AM
Hi Bo,
Commonly known as spark erosion, done in a vat of oil or similar.  :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on November 20, 2017, 08:15:45 AM
Here's a start Bo. They're in Beaverton, OR.

www.bdeinc.com

Good luck.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on November 20, 2017, 09:52:58 AM
WW, may just be "Loctite" that needs heating (300~400°F) to soften before you can remove them. EDM will not remove these threads - only the core or threads and all. Normal threads after EDM can just be screwed out with a pick. If it is threaded it is meant to be removed.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 21, 2017, 02:23:40 AM
It is some super high strength Loctite they use.  Heat and lots of cussing removed one bolt.  The head was drilled off of the remaining bolt.  The little cover was removed.  Now I see how Triumph put this crank together.  The broken bolts are in the gear that i am replacing.  The gear is press fit on the crank shaft.

Some lunchtime I-net research says the gear can be gotten by buying a crankshaft.  They are not sold separately.  The cost of a decent used crank and a new one are not much different.  A new one will be ordered.  This way, the journals will be fresh and I will know the condition of what I am buying.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on November 21, 2017, 07:59:45 PM
You did cuss counter-clockwise - right?  :? :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 21, 2017, 10:21:44 PM
It is a British bike.  Whitworth swaring did the job.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on November 23, 2017, 09:51:14 AM
Sounds more like BS to me!  :x  British Standard that is!  :-D  :dhorse:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 23, 2017, 10:26:03 AM
A slightly used 270-450 crankshaft with gear attached will be in my oily paws tomorrow.  A long time benefactor has one and he gave it to me.  A new one costs over $900 so this is a big help.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on November 23, 2017, 11:24:55 AM
Sounds like a WIN!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 23, 2017, 10:51:06 PM
The nice thing about these Bonnevilles is that they are easy to work on.  Bikes are like ladies, it seems.  Good looking and fast is what we look for when we are young and affordable and easy to live with is what we like when we are older.

  










Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 24, 2017, 10:56:35 AM
This post is for anyone who does this crank conversion.  Triumph changed the engine breathers midway in the Bonneville series.  The crankcases and side covers changed as well as the breather itself.  A part of the breather is attached to the end of the crank.  Some part number research shows that the crank part number was the same before and after the breather change.  This morning I verified this.  The scrambler crank with the chipped gear is a 2014 270-450 crank and the one in the picture is a 2003 360-360 one.  The ends measure to to be the same.  The picture shows an end.  The parts needed for the conversion are the staggered crank, the two balancer shafts, a flywheel with staggered ignition triggers, an ignition module programmed for staggered firing order, and two appropriate cams.  The two different cranks will work with either style of breather.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 25, 2017, 12:01:01 AM
The left cylinder rod bearing shells have always been problematic.  The babbitt flakes off the shell.  Custom "Top Loader" rods were installed so I could renew the rod shells every year without tearing the bottom end apart.  It was a pain in the arse and I was really worried about it with the new motor.  The new engine has 600 rpm higher redline and puts out 20 more horsepower.

Used rod shells were sent in to an industry expert.  He told me to set the journal to shell clearances between 0.017 and 0.022.  He also told me to have the shells coated.  Polydyn was one of the recommended sources and they did the shells.  He also mentioned some different brands of oil.  Joe Gibbs was one and that is what I chose.
 
The motor was ran at B'ville and did a lot of dyno pulls.  Close inspection of the shells shows that these changes did not completely cure the problem.  They made a vast improvement, though, and the issue is maneagable.  Hopefully the problem will go away with the new crank.

Coating the bearing shells and using the recommended oil are now standard operating procedures.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 26, 2017, 06:04:19 PM
The engine has 11.9 to 1 static compression ratio.  The cam centers were degreed after I came back from Bonneville.  The intake and exhaust centers were 116 and 106.5, respectively.  The dynamic comp is 9.71 to 1 with maximum cylinder pressure of 96 bar at 7,500 rpm.  PipeMax recommends 106.6 to 106.4 (R+M) /2 octane for this.

Cams timed at 106 and 108 give a dynamic ratio of 10.36 to 1 with a maximum cylinder pressure of 98 bar at 7,000 rpm.  PipeMax recommends the same octane gasoline.  This is a high dynamic ratio and significantly greater than the ratio in actual use.  It is suspect that a higher octane gas would not be needed.  Is there another way to calculate octane needs? 

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 26, 2017, 07:42:01 PM
This is the worksheet for today.  The first row shows cylinder pressures for the cam timing I had at B'ville.  It is 116-106.5.  Peak cylinder pressures vary from 74.1 bar at 5,000 rpm to 96 bar at 7,500 rpm.  The last row shows the cylinder pressures using the cam grinder's second recommendation.  They vary from 82.2 bar at 5,000 rpm to 98 bar at 7,000 rpm.  There are big increases in cylinder pressure up through 8,000 rpm.  The horsepower and max power rpm are identical at 125.74 crank hp at 8,500 rpm.  The big difference is in the urge up to the peak.

The data was entered into PipeMax and the VE was adjusted so PipeMax gave the same horsepower.  The octane requirements are in the mid 100's.  Sunoco Supreme, VP 110, or ERC 110K should have enough octane.

That dynamic ratio seems awfully high.  It is for Bonneville, however, where the actual cylinder pressures will be quite a bit lower.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on November 27, 2017, 06:57:06 PM
Y :cheers: :cheers: Your way ahead of me on building that motor....................but PLEASE consider proper wheels and tires for TOP SPEED.........Advise to look at Tom Mellor and ALP Triumph builds
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 27, 2017, 10:21:54 PM
Spoked wheels tend to bend rather than shatter in impact situations like hitting the edge of a pothole.  The tires are zr rated battle-axes.  The rims are good quality alloy ones.  The spokes are heavy duty stainless.  It seems like a good setup to me.  A treaded rain tire for road racing is being considered for the back.  They do a lot of road racing with classic bikes like Matchlesses and Norton Manxes in the UK.  Occasionally it rains there.  They might have just what I need.

The peak cylinder pressure was 96 bar with the funky cam timing used last summer.  The highest peak pressure does not significantly increase above this in any of the six rows of data.  Maybe that is why the PipeMax program did not say that more octane is needed for the higher dynamic comp ratios.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on November 28, 2017, 12:22:04 PM
My suggestion is minimal tread and narrow profile...........at 150 mph........how much of the tire is actually in contact with the salt? Traction and speed-wobble is all about weight-bias ratios and easing off of the throttle / body-air braking.  Just look at the speeds of the production bikes. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 29, 2017, 12:57:22 AM
The guy that beats me is the best teacher.  Some bikes needed to be sold to the public to homogulate a bike for super bike racing.  I think it was 50 that needed to be made and sold.  One of them was what was used on that funky track to whip my butt.  Picture a factory road race bike in your mind.  It is a short wheelbase one with wide tires and very good suspension.

There seems to be different ways to get speed.  One is with long streamlined bikes with narrow wheels and good aero.  The other is with sophisticated versions of standard bikes.  There are some bikes like the ones the Aussies run that are halfway between the two.   

The deciding factor is the track.  Long bikes with good aero will dominate on smooth salt.  Shorter and more conventional bikes will dominate if the salt continues to be rough.  The reason is that it is hard to build real good suspension into a long bike.

What will I do?  Probably stay with what I have and gradually upgrade it.  The bike is "paid for."  For now, that means a soft compound grippy rear tire in the 130 through 150 x 17 size.  It needs an over 150 mph speed rating and not made in red China.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 02, 2017, 08:16:08 PM
The new used crank had a flywheel on it for electronic fuel injection.  A wheel for a carb bike was found on e-bay for $200.  The first picture shows the new wheel on the crank and the old one was similar.  Removing the old one was a multi step process.  "Use heat" was what a few people told me.  A flywheel removing too was screwed into the flywheel and tightened up.  The flywheel was heated up with a hair dryer.  It would not come off.  The tool was screwed in tighter.  The wheel was heated with a propane torch.  It would not come off.  The MIG welder was cranked up to full voltage and a couple of circle welds were made around the inside of the rascal.  The wheel was really hot.  The tool was screwed in tighter and the threads stripped.  The flywheel did not come off.

A trip was made to the machine shop.  The machinist looked at it and gave me instructions.  "Chuck it up in your lathe and cut off the snout.  Thread a bolt in the hole and use a strong wide washer."  This was done.  The wheel and crank were put in the press, pressure was applied, and there was a big snap.  The wheel came off.  The guy charged me $10 and did it while I waited.  Good service.  The 270 degree crank pistons, rods, and e-bay flywheel are on their way to Long Beach where the crank will be balanced.

The bottoms of the pistons show no signs of oil oxidation.  The thermal barrier coatings work great.  It is hard to believe such a thin coating can do this.  "Magic" is my best guess.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 03, 2017, 11:12:29 AM
The engine build would be done next year as planned.  The cam chain was worn so the cams were lagging more than four crank degrees from "with a new chain" timing.  The lower chain sprocket is on the crank and it cannot be replaced without putting in a new one.  It is a good idea to keep the chains from getting too worn and letting them trash the lower sprocket.  So, the big rebuild is being done now.

Lobe centers as tight as 107 to 108 are recommended by the computer and Vizard's book.  This makes a long overlap period.  The valves are in two rows next to each other, they flow well at lower lifts, and there is a minimal piston crown height to keep the flow from going out the intakes and out through the exhausts, or vice versa.  Exhaust and intake tuning needs to be very good to make these engines work and they run really bad if it isnt.  My resources to monkey around with different systems to fix problems are limited.  It is the time and money issue.  Reducing overlap is a good idea.

Overlap shows up as a triangle shaped area on a graph of the two cams lift vs crank angle.  A result of this is that any reduction in the degrees of overlap makes a more significant loss of overlap area than just the reduction in degrees would suggest.  The two settings recommended by Ransom T had 110 and 112 lobe spread.  These larger separation angles would reduce the overlap window areas considerably.  They were entered into the program and lots of time was spent looking at graphs and tables.  A "new chain" setting of intake and exhaust at 106 -116, with a mid range setting of 108 - 114, and a "replace the chain" setting of 110 - 112 gives good virtual performance throughout the chain life.  Performance is much better than with the 116 - 106 setting used at B'ville last summer.  The lobe separation angle is 111 degrees.

A bolt on cam sprocket came loose on one of my engines decades ago.  Now, adjustable cam sprockets are used for checking clearances and dyno work only.  The sprockets will be welded to the cams.  Two new cams were ordered from Triumph and they will be sent to the grinder on Monday. 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 03, 2017, 03:16:13 PM
This service was mentioned in a recent junk mail.  It looks pretty good for car engines.  They do not do Triumph cams. www.controlledinduction.com (http://www.controlledinduction.com)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 10, 2017, 01:55:24 PM
There is an article about rebuilding a Honda 400 four in the October 2017 Classic Bike Guide.  It shows a picture of the rods and crank and sez;  "The crankshaft assembly has been cleaned and the con rods carry new bearing shells.  Make sure the keys on the shells face the exhaust side of the engine."

What is the general rule on tab side orientation in respect to the piston thrust face or crank rotation direction?  Why is it a concern?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: CNC-Dude on December 10, 2017, 02:46:50 PM
If you aren't removing the piston from the rod for instance, the piston may have valve reliefs cut in them that are exhaust and intake specific, and if the piston and rod assembly are placed in the engine backwards, piston to valve contact may occur and the resulting damage is the result. Also, some connecting rods have spit hole oilers or grooves milled in the rod check faces to oil the thrust side of the cylinders, and reversing the rod orientation can negate the benefits of those features by directing oil the other direction. Another example is that some rods may be offset on the big end and reversing them may force the small end of the rods to dig in and even bend if they are in a bind from contacting the pin boss in the piston. A lot of variables can dictate why they mention the orientation of the rods even if they don't give the reasons why.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Rex Schimmer on December 10, 2017, 05:57:36 PM
Not sure if Dema does motorcycle cams but worth a try. His web site is: http://www.elgincams.com. Great guy and knows his stuff!

Rex
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 13, 2017, 10:07:22 PM
The articles on the Elgin cam website were taken seriously when the latest version of this engine was designed.  The cam grinder I am using now has a bunch of profiles for these engines.  One by one I looked at them in various combinations using Dynomation.  The grinds I am using are pretty good.  The dyno will tell the story in a few months.

The smart thing would be to work with someone like Dema from the beginning back in 2007.  I knew this and would have more records if I did.  It is a deliberate decision to struggle with it myself.  The hard part is unlearning most of what I know and reeducating myself.  Lots and lots of nights are spent figuring things out.  It is paying off.

A lot of thought is given to an idea.  It is working with Dema to make a refined version of the motor I build this year.  The problem is getting the power to the salt and turning it into speed.  More power won't do much if it goes into wheel spin like it does now.

The subject of high port helmets is on the forum.  Some research shows that the Shoei X-14 helmet has a high eye port and good aerodynamics.  A few land speed racers use and like them according to Shoei.  Today I went up to the local Honda shop and did some more research.

It seems that my head is round and pointy in the back and has a neanderthal like sloping front.  Helmets tend to ride low at the front 'cause there is not a lot of skull and brains to hold them up.  The salesman told me this in much more delicate terms.  The X-14 has adjustable pads.  They can be arranged to fit my cave man noggin and to keep the helmet higher in the front.

The X-14 is an expensive helmet used by racers and they do not keep them in stock according to the salesman.  The Shoei helmet one step lower in price has the same tall eye port as the X-14 but not the adjustable padding.  I tried one on.  The upper edge of the eye port is much less visible.  It will be completely out of visual range with the padding adjusted to fit my head.

A higher eye port means a lower tuck and less wind resistance.  Better aerodynamics increases speed more than added horsepower in traction limited situations.  The money that was set aside to have the 13 to 1 pistons made was used to order an X-14 helmet.  They gave me a racer's discount.  A new and unused Arai Vector-2 will be up for sale.  It meets the latest safety sticker requirements and is a great lid for someone who does not need a tall eye port.

 



 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 16, 2017, 10:15:55 PM
The dyno room is torn down at the Triumph shop and the dyno is for sale.  Lack of demand for its services is the big reason.  Far fewer folks are doing hop-up and the new performance modifications come with appropriate EFI map changes.  It is "plug and play" for the average customer.  It looks like I need to find a new shop to do the dyno work.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stan Back on December 17, 2017, 12:45:53 PM
. . . or buy it (cheap?).
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on December 17, 2017, 12:54:43 PM
Sounds like a great retirement job investment.... aren't you approaching....
Just Saying  :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 18, 2017, 02:25:44 PM
Me too old.  Right now I am fixing the house up for eventual sale and getting rid of things.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 24, 2017, 11:03:20 AM
Werner is my youngest son.  He is a marine corporal at Camp Pendleton and he is visiting us for the holidays.  A few years ago he bought a pickup truck to pull his house trailer.  It pulled the thing to a new trailer park but barely made the trip.  The truck engine is an inline six diesel and it was too low powered.  He did not buy a bigger truck.  Instead he took the little motor apart and started work.  This is his second engine.  The first was a 150cc Honda bike motor for his land speed race bike.  He talked to me about this project at the start.  I know nothing about cars or diesels.  My advice was that he was a complete idiot.  It seemed like an expensive fiasco. So, I get no credit for his success.

The engine was rated at 144 HP from the factory.  He added n additional turbo that was scrounged from a vehicle at the san Onofre dump.  Then he learned to weld from the University of U-Tube and he made his manifolds.  The bottom end was taken apart and the bearings coated and some other things.  He cut grooves in the block for o-rings around the cylinders.  Then he took apart the tranny and rebuilt it.  Harbor Freight tools and his older brother helped.  The truck is running and he took it to the local dyno and did some tuning.  It puts out 711 HP at the back wheels. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on December 24, 2017, 11:14:33 AM
"Impressive, young Skywalker."

Keep it together.

Happy Holidaze!!

from the flatlands . . . . . .

 :cheers:
M
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on December 24, 2017, 12:01:19 PM
That sounds adequate for hauling the trailer. Congratulations Werner.  :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 24, 2017, 10:11:23 PM
One day he might join the forum.  His CO (commanding officer) does not allow him to go to B'viile.  More marines get killed in goofy stuff like bike and car accidents than in combat.  The CO is acting logically based on the typical viewpoint about racing.  They do not know that competition is safer than street riding.  The trailer is for sale now and the truck will be up for sale soon.  He has two kids and needs a house.

The boy is the fourth of five children.  By then, I was sorta burned out on being a super parent.  We are in a poor state.  "Timber Appalachia" it is called.  Nothing much was going to happen in his life unless he made it happen.  He had to figure things out for himself.  The kid is a basic hot rodder.  He is far ahead of where I wuz at his age.  He will be here for a week or two.  I will try to teach him what little I know.  Introduction to Dynomation will be a good start.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 26, 2017, 01:20:35 PM
Werner uses an exhaust gas temperature gauge when he pulls the trailer.  He hooked up a pump to a tank of windshield washer fluid and it squirts into the intake tract when he activates a switch.  He keeps his EGT temps from getting too hot using this setup.  The washer fluid has methanol in it as well as water.

High eye port helmets are a topic on another thread.  A chinese one was mentioned.  A land speed crash will be a bad one so it seems logical to get a good quality helmet.  In addition, I do not buy anything from mainland china for various reasons.  The one I got was a Shoei X-14.  It replaces a new Arai Vector 2.

The street bike is parked in front of the shed door.  I crouch down lower and lower until the top of the black windshield meets the lower edge of the helmet eye port.  The groove on the door that lines up with this is recorded.  The X-14 groove is the highest one.  Some geometry calculations using triangles shows that I can lower my head a fraction of an inch.  The triangle between the edge of the windshield and the shed door is much longer than the triangle between the windshield edge and the helmet.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 26, 2017, 01:33:55 PM
This is the Vector 2 and X-14.  The vector is the normal shaped helmet.  The X-14 has an emergency release.

My hope was the high eye port helmet would allow me to get my head down 1.5 inches.  This will not happen.  The aero advantage from the Shoei might help.  This is something I cannot evaluate without wind tunnel testing.

This research on helmets used lots of asking questions.  The Snell standards have a frontal impact test, I was told, and this limits how high the eye port can be.  The helmet will be too weak if the eye port is very high and it will not get Snell certification.  The X-14 meets Snell standards.






   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on December 26, 2017, 07:42:45 PM
Looks good Bo, especially on the aero.  In 2013 I made 9 little changes (including finding and donning my lucky biker shorts!) and gained 9 mph.  If only we could always be that lucky.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 26, 2017, 11:55:03 PM
Maybe that will work for me.  Does washing them between meets diminish their lucky power?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on December 27, 2017, 09:47:53 AM
Maybe that will work for me.  Does washing them between meets diminish their lucky power?

I'll let you know when I get around to that!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 28, 2017, 10:19:05 PM
The T-100 Bonneville has a traditional 360 degree firing order with both pistons going up and down together.  One piston is at the top of the power stroke and the other is in the middle of valve lift overlap.  The chopper style America and Speedmaster models and the scrambler have crank throws with a 90 degree offset like the one in the foto.  These are typically run with a 270-450 firing order.  The Triumph dirt track team does this.  This is what I am doing this year.  They can also be set up for 90-630 firing order.  I might do this, too, at a later date.

The parts came back from Revco where they were balanced.  Little drill holes and spot grinding indicate that work was done.  They were balanced for the big bore pistons and the Carillo rods.  These lopsided firing order twins are very smooth.  This should be an almost vibration free race motor.

This conversion is costing me a lot more than I initially figured.  The shed is being cleaned out and a few things are posted in the classifieds on the Triumph forum.  There is no interest there.  I will post them here, too, under the W. Walrus Shed Sale thread.  A donation will be made to Slim if I can get rid of these most excellent items.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on January 01, 2018, 10:24:01 AM
That's one beautiful bit of eye candy!  I especially like the knife block, olive oil, and microwave oven - - a true motorhead's dinner table.

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 01, 2018, 12:05:11 PM
That kitchen counter is Rose's territory.  Those parts were gone without a trace in minutes after the foto.

The conversion from 360-360 to 270-450 firing order was accelerated after Noonan's crash.  The engine has a lot of power now and the back end like to kick out to the side in the lower gears.  This conversion should make that issue more manageable and reduce the risk of highsides.  The expensive parts like the crank and balancer were free.  A new alternator rotor was $220 on e-bay.  Good used 270-450 cams could not be found so I ordered some new ones for $650.  Then, the last task was the electrics.  This always is my weak area.  New racing coils were needed.  The wiring harness was 15 years old and ratty and lots of mods would be needed for the conversion.  A new one was bought.  None of the 360-360 ignition modules could be reprogrammed so five new ones were bought for the advance curve tuning.  The electric things, other than the rotor, cost over $2,000.

My next land speed engine will be a diesel with mechanical fuel injection and a kickstart.  There will be no W.Walrus attempts to control and channel those wild and uncooperative electrons. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 04, 2018, 11:18:06 PM
The journal to compressed bearing shell clearance is OK with one coated shell on the rod big end and one uncoated shell on the rod cap.  The clearances are too small with any combination of two coated shells.  Has anyone used a combination of coated and uncoated shells?  These shells have the coating done by Polydyn.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 07, 2018, 11:15:39 AM
The new Shoei X-14 helmet has slightly better visibility under the eye port than the helmet that was bought a few months previous.  That is with standard pads in the X-14.  A thicker front pad and a thinner rear pad are ordered from a racing supply store and fitted.  This moves the helmet higher at the front and lower at the rear.  It makes a big difference.  Now the X-14 provides the best eye port height of any helmet I have tried on.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 08, 2018, 09:06:39 PM
The Triumph rod big end shells are classified by thickness using a color code.  There are blue, red, and white coated shells.  The white ones are the thinnest.  The clearance was 0.0015 on both journals with them fitted.  This is OK for a production motor.  Racing clearances between 0.0017 and 0.0023 are recommended by Mahle.

The crank was set up in the lathe using this aluminum tab that is bolted to the face plate.  It keeps the crank from spinning.  This aluminum tab and harness setup holds the rod up against the crank.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 08, 2018, 09:24:02 PM
The clearance is checked with plastigauge.  The best for this is Triumph part # 3880150-T0301  It makes nice and fat spreads that are easy to measure.  Toothpaste is put on an old bearing shell and the journals are carefully lapped to the correct size.  The plastigage stuck to the bearing caps, sometimes.  Acetone and a clean rag was used to wipe it off.  The toothpaste lapping and shell wiping eventually increased clearances 0.0005 inches to 0.002 inches, total.

The coatings subtract 0.0006 from the big end bearing diameter.  That requires lapping the journals down 0.0006 inches or lapping 0.0003 off of each shell thickness.  Does anyone have any experience with lapping shells to get clearance for coatings? 
 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: CNC-Dude on January 08, 2018, 10:40:09 PM
The bad thing about plastigage is it only shows you what the clearance at the exact spot on the crank is relative to a matching spot inside the bearing ID. Usually when you fit bearing clearances, you confirm the rods are a specific ID size and round within a tenth or less with no taper. I have had to recon hundreds of brand new Carillo, Crower, Oliver and the whole alphabet of billet rods because they didn't fit our specific size needed to achieve our desired bearing clearances. Coated bearings also added more challenges because it makes the clearances tighter, obviously. You often have to switch several sets or even mix extra clearance bearing shells with standard size to get your desired clearances. So you may find that opening up the housing bores will help, even aftermarket rods rarely come the size that provides the optimum clearance. Polishing the journal's can often make them v-shaped and tapered which isn't desirable for a race engine.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 08, 2018, 10:57:35 PM
The rods were checked by a machinist a couple of years ago.  They big ends were round and the right size.  I have a micrometer that reads in tenths. I will check the journal roundness to make sure there I did it correctly and there are no high spots.  It seems like I should quit now and not keep lapping to give clearance for coatings.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 08, 2018, 11:49:18 PM
Will enlarging the rod big ends reduce the the crush on the shells to an unacceptable low amount?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 09, 2018, 01:03:16 AM
The journals are measured in nine places, each.  All measurements are within plus or minus 0.0001 of the average. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: CNC-Dude on January 09, 2018, 02:12:49 PM
Connecting rods have a +/- tolerance, usually a .001 from the high to low spread. So as long as the housing bores stay within that spread the bearing crush will be fine. But it does give you a .001 to play with if you need to tweak the bearing clearances.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 09, 2018, 08:13:38 PM
Thanks for the advice.  The local engine machinist can hone rod big ends.  He will need to enlarge them 0.0006 for room for coatings.  The upper shells give me trouble if I have it.  Can just the upper shells be coated?  That way, a 0.0003 hone should work.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WhizzbangK.C. on January 09, 2018, 08:44:54 PM
Thanks for the advice.  The local engine machinist can hone rod big ends.  He will need to enlarge them 0.0006 for room for coatings.  The upper shells give me trouble if I have it.  Can just the upper shells be coated?  That way, a 0.0003 hone should work.

Bo, I don't know if it's directly applicable to your question or not, but the latest generation of Detroit Diesel truck engines have upper and lower rod bearing shells made from different materials with different coatings on them, and the engines are designed to last for over a million miles with very heavy usage and high duty cycles. Seems that the engineers have decided that the upper and lower shells see different loading conditions and can benefit from different material specs. The upper shells get a lot more force applied to them than the lower ones do, so the bearings material is harder and also designed to retain oil film better under loaded conditions. Apparently it's also much more expensive so using a lower spec material on the bottom shell saves money without sacrificing performance. The take away to me is that it should not matter if you only coat the top shell, but ultimately you need to make that call. Hope this info helps. Keep plugging away at it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 11, 2018, 01:08:13 AM
Thanks for the info.  Do you know someone who can hone rod big ends?  The plan is to add 0.0003 to the ID and use coated upper shells and uncoated lowers.

The weak link on these engines are the fasteners that hold them together.  This fretting gets worse when the horsepower increases.  I do not know how to fix the issue.  I manage it by minimizing the runs down the salt to just what I need to do the job and tightening the bolts every off season.  The 107 HP the engine makes now looks to be the limit until I figure out a solution to this problem.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WhizzbangK.C. on January 11, 2018, 10:36:50 AM
Thanks for the info.  Do you know someone who can hone rod big ends?  The plan is to add 0.0003 to the ID and use coated upper shells and uncoated lowers.

The weak link on these engines are the fasteners that hold them together.  This fretting gets worse when the horsepower increases.  I do not know how to fix the issue.  I manage it by minimizing the runs down the salt to just what I need to do the job and tightening the bolts every off season.  The 107 HP the engine makes now looks to be the limit until I figure out a solution to this problem.

I would think that just about any GOOD automotive machine shop could hone them to your spec. The Sunen hone has been a shop staple forever, and it's really not rocket surgery.

On the fretting issue. Do you find that the fasteners are actually loosening, as in the nuts or bolts backing off? Or is it more a matter of stretching fasteners or creeping threads in the case? Do you use torque indicator stripes on the nuts/bolts and if you do are they moving? When I worked on airplanes every torqued bolt had a "torque seal" applied to it by the inspector after he witnessed the torque. This type of stuff.

 http://www.mrochemicalsupply.com/product-p/dykem-crosscheck-1oz.htm?gclid=Cj0KCQiAs9zSBRC5ARIsAFMtUXE3OxebyDJZV3wxNDO_cnaslucGAZn9NOPtWKw6E8FngDPA3vxabZsaAopwEALw_wcB

A stripe of it laid on the side of the fastener and run down onto the part. It dried hard and made it possible to visually inspect whether the fastener had moved, as it would crack if that did happen.

One often overlooked cause of loss of clamping force it thread creep. It can happen during torquing  if the applied torque is more than the base material can stand. It can also happen during operation when heat expansion and engine vibration combine to increase the actual load on the threads, especially if the static torque was already close to the max they could stand. Some designs (later model Harley engines with aluminum cylinders and studs that run from the heads, through the cylinders, and into the cases are one example) cope with this by specifying cold assembly torque specs that are shockingly low, but once everything expands they provide correct clamping force without over stressing the threads in the cases.

One way to check if this is what's happening would be to make a "thread creep gauge". This would be nothing but a short bolt with a line inscribed on the head at one point of the hex, and a hardened washer. Before assembling the engine, lubricate the threads and put the bolt into each hole and torque it to a very low but repeatable number. Make a small scribe line or punch mark (not enough to causing sealing issues) on the case surface to line up with the line on the bolt head. Do this exactly the same way to each hole. Keep the bolt and washer in a safe place. The next time you tear the engine down, perform the same torque sequence with the tool and see if the marks line up. If they don't, The threads are pulling in the case and need attention. Thread inserts can help to hold more torque by spreading the load over a larger surface area of the case, or in some cases actually lowering the assembly torque could be beneficial.

Another thing that can happen is fastener stretch. Test this by documenting the overall length of each bolt or stud prior to assembly, and then checking it when you take the engine apart. On some of the big diesel engine the head bolts have a maximum length that is allowed for re-use. The are known to stretch every time they are used and can only take so many uses before they fail.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on January 11, 2018, 11:03:44 AM
WBKC;

I have sometimes used my wife's red nail polish on a fastener to indicate that it has been torqued to spec and as an indication that it has not moved. Cheap & easy but not as good as those brittle lacquers.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: jacksoni on January 11, 2018, 11:22:19 AM
Because torque wrenches, particularly those used by amature builders- as opposed to race shop pros- rarely get calibrated, lubricants used (or not as in torqued dry) may vary from specs set out by the fastener mfg, and other issues many engine builders recommend measuring the stretch of critical fasteners like rod bolts rather than relying on torque specs. As Whizbang suggests measuring the length free and after every torque/run cycle can help determine if a fastener has lost its strength. After stretching, they should return to the pre use length. If not, throw away.

Also, of course, use the best fasteners you can lay hands on- ARP and similar. Upgrade the rod bolts, quality and size if possible. Follow the MFG's recommendations for torque and stretch. If your rods use bolt and nut, if you replace them the rod ends need to be resized- which you are looking at with the clearances.   All this stuff I am sure you know so apologies if my restating is an issue.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: CNC-Dude on January 11, 2018, 04:43:37 PM
Thanks for the info.  Do you know someone who can hone rod big ends?  The plan is to add 0.0003 to the ID and use coated upper shells and uncoated lowers.

The weak link on these engines are the fasteners that hold them together.  This fretting gets worse when the horsepower increases.  I do not know how to fix the issue.  I manage it by minimizing the runs down the salt to just what I need to do the job and tightening the bolts every off season.  The 107 HP the engine makes now looks to be the limit until I figure out a solution to this problem.

It's common on split cases like this in both automotive and cycles to have the case halves doweled to reduce the halves from shifting and fretting once they begin to exhibit signs of these issues.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on January 11, 2018, 07:54:22 PM
Quote
measuring the length free and after every torque/run cycle can help determine if a fastener has lost its strength

Not really--all that some residual stretch says is that the fastener has undergone a bit of plastic deformation, it says nothing about its strength.  When did it “lose” its strength, before it was un-torqued, or after?  If before was the original make-up adequate?  Why was it OK to use in its original stretched and slightly deformed condition and not in a later application?  If it was adequate the first time, why would reusing the item not be just as adequate?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: jacksoni on January 11, 2018, 09:59:02 PM
It is my understanding that an over stretched bolt, usually by torqueing without measuring stretch, loses its clamping ability- and an under stretched one may come loose or otherwise fail regardless of the apparent torque used to install. And that an overstretched bolt will not return to original specs (within some minor limit) My comments came from many recommendations by engine builders. Yes on the internet. Maybe wrong. The attached recommendation by Scat says in no uncertain terms that an over stretched bolt should be discarded. So perhaps we can agree to disagree.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 11, 2018, 10:22:03 PM
Triumph made two changes to the eight problem bolts around the crankshaft.  The first bolts were 118.5 mm long, galvanized, and torqued to 10 Nm and then to 40Nm.  They were in the bike originally.  They got tossed and I made the first upgrade.

The first upgrade was to 118.5 mm anodized bolts with 10 Nm followed by 75 degrees of turn.  That is what is in the bike now.  They were installed with Loctite.  The Loctite helps prevent loosening.  It also gives more thread engagement is my feeling.

The last upgrade is to use chrome plated bolts, 120.5 mm long, with 10 Nm torque followed by 75 degrees turn.  There is a late model bolt in the junk pile.  The short green ones are in the bike.  The plan is to upgrade to all new long bolts.

The old crank had both pistons traveling up and down together.  One was firing every 360 degrees.  These motors have serious vibration.  The counterbalancers cancel it.  They are located in the upper crankcase half.  There is a lot of pushing and tugging through those crankcase bolts while the crank and balancer pull in different directions.  Both pistons are being yanked from TDC and BDC at the same time.

The crank pins are 90 degrees apart on this newer crankshaft.  The crank will continue to tug and push against the balancer.  Only one piston is at TDC and BDC at any time.  This might help fix the problem.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 11, 2018, 11:42:29 PM
The bolt is a tension spring and it has to stretch under load to provide clamping force.  The stretch must not be large enough to permanently deform the metal.  Otherwise the bolt cannot return to its original length after stretching and it provides insufficient clamping force.  The limits in the chart are likely the limits on stretch values that will not permanently deform the bolt and they include a safety factor.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on January 12, 2018, 04:23:13 AM
Read these 2 fastener installation tech explanations from ARP, one of the standards of the industry . . . . . .


http://arp-bolts.com/p/technical.php#p7TPMc1_3


http://arp-bolts.com/p/FAQ.php



There is also a fastener failure diagnosis pictoral . . . . . . .

http://arp-bolts.com/p/technical.php#p7TPMc1_6

 :cheers:
F/b
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WhizzbangK.C. on January 12, 2018, 09:12:34 AM
 The reason that I follow this thread, and the Milwaukee Midget one, is that it's always been my belief that in order to design or fix anything it helps to understand completely what is happening that shouldn't or what isn't happening that should be. These two threads in particular give me insight into the detailed investigation and study that goes on with these projects. That's why I suggested that Bo perform some experiments in keeping with his thorough and disciplined manner, to find out exactly what the issue is. He may need stronger bolts, stronger threads in the case, different torque values/procedures, or something else unidentified as of now. As with everything, until you know exactly the nature of the failure, making an appropriate fix by just changing parts is only possible with luck.

Speaking of threads, has anyone investigated using this type threads?

 http://www.stanleyengineeredfastening.com/brands/spiralock
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on January 12, 2018, 09:55:09 AM
Quote
Triumph made two changes to the eight problem bolts around the crankshaft.  The first bolts were 118.5 mm long, galvanized, and torqued to 10 Nm and then to 40Nm.  They were in the bike originally.  They got tossed and I made the first upgrade.

The first upgrade was to 118.5 mm anodized bolts with 10 Nm followed by 75 degrees of turn.  That is what is in the bike now.  They were installed with Loctite.  The Loctite helps prevent loosening.  It also gives more thread engagement is my feeling.

The last upgrade is to use chrome plated bolts, 120.5 mm long, with 10 Nm torque followed by 75 degrees turn.  There is a late model bolt in the junk pile.  The short green ones are in the bike.  The plan is to upgrade to all new long bolts.

The old crank had both pistons traveling up and down together.  One was firing every 360 degrees.  These motors have serious vibration.  The counterbalancers cancel it.  They are located in the upper crankcase half.  There is a lot of pushing and tugging through those crankcase bolts while the crank and balancer pull in different directions.  Both pistons are being yanked from TDC and BDC at the same time.

It looks like Triumph has a poorly designed bolt--the more highly loaded, stretchy, part is short, between the threads and the larger shank, which presumably is larger to provide some sort of locational function.  The progression from galvanize to anodize to chrome suggests they are more concerned about a possible corrosion problem than anything having to do with a bolting problem.
I would be very leery about using a chrome plated bolt that doesn’t have an underlayer of some other soft material since chrome is very brittle and is typically shot full of cracks.

Regarding vibration etc.  If the bolted joint has been properly designed, the preload generated by the bolting should be greater than the unbalanced forces and the bolt, therefore, is essentially in a static load situation and isolated from load variation.

Quote
The stretch must not be large enough to permanently deform the metal.

Says who?  WHY?  Yeah, it’s the manufacturer of the bolts.  But they never drag out the stress-strain curve because that would muddy the water and undercut the “don’t (permanently) stretch the bolts!” criterion.  The don’t stretch ‘em criterion is simple, conservative, in many instances overly conservative, and one easily defended by the manufacturer.  But it is not the last word on effective utilization of the bolt.

(There are schools of thought that say to load the bolt well into the plastic zone--if it doesn’t break on installation--it’s good to go.)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on January 12, 2018, 10:29:28 AM

The bolt is a tension spring and it has to stretch under load to provide clamping force.  The stretch must not be large enough to permanently deform the metal.  Otherwise the bolt cannot return to its original length after stretching and it provides insufficient clamping force.  The limits in the chart are likely the limits on stretch values that will not permanently deform the bolt and they include a safety factor.
 

Bo,

This is a really complex subject, with lots of nuance regarding total load Vs fastener diameter, fastener material, serviceability, thermal loads, part re-use, and other complex issues.

Interested Observer is correct about deformation/elongation.    In a nutshell, if he was not, torque to yield fasteners would not work.    He is also correct about fastener manufacturers being very conservative in their recommendations.   And torque to yield does work well.    OEM's would not specify its' use if it did not.    The basic concept is that a fastener in a "slight" yield condition is better than an "improperly" installed fastener.    Fasteners, of course, MUST be replaced when servicing.    Not an issue for OEM servicing, but dicey when the "quality" of the service tech is at issue.     I know a "Ferrari mechanic" (self labeled) who refuses to own a torque wrench, because, he knows "how tight to make things".     The engines he works on suffer from several issues . . . . . .   let your imagination run wild.

And the strength of the casting, where studs and/or bolts engage, is also an important factor.    Obviously, the best bolt can not compensate for any clamp load lost by engagement in a low strength casting.

 :cheers:
F/b
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on January 12, 2018, 10:57:33 AM
Fordboy;

"I know a "Ferrari mechanic" (self labeled) who refuses to own a torque wrench, because, he knows "how tight to make things". "

That is the old philosophy of "Tighten it until you feel it 'give", then back off half a turn".   :-P

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ   


Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on January 12, 2018, 11:39:54 AM
Tangent, sorta:  For Christmas Nancy bought me a fine new torque wrench.  Her 20% employee discount made it an economical freshening to my toolbox.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 12, 2018, 11:51:38 PM
The eight big bolts near the crankshaft were installed using loctite.  I am pretty sure they did not rotate counterclockwise during use.  Only 15 lbs-ft was needed to remove the bolts.  Much greater torque was used to install them.  This indicates some deformation.  Either the aluminum in the cases is deforming or the bolts are stretching.

Thanks to all of these comments, and all are taken seriously, W. Walrus has developed a rocket-scientist type testing plan.  New OEM Triumph bolts will be measured to the nearest 0.0001 inch before installation.  They will be installed to Triumph specifications.  Little dots of fingernail polish will be put on them to see if they rotate.  The bike will be run on the flats in 2018.

Post run, the engine will be torn down.  The fingernail polish dots will be examined to see if the bolts loosened due to rotation.  The bolts will be removed and the torque required to do this will be recorded.  The bolt lengths will be measured.  This will help me make some informed decisions.  Doweling the cases or something else might be needed.

The standard Triumph big end shells will be installed without coatings at the desired 0.002 clearance.  They will be examined to see if there are any issues.  The rods might be honed out and coated shells installed if there are any problems.

Rose and me are coming up onto our 40th wedding anniversary and the race budget will be used for a trip to Italy.  Deferring these issues for another year, for "research" purposes, make a lot of sense.  There is a lack of both time and money in the immediate future.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on January 13, 2018, 01:03:21 AM
To be accurate, both ends of each bolt is going to have to be machined and a micrometer designed to measure bolt stretch used.

I hope you solve the issue. No one tries harder.  :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on January 13, 2018, 08:48:47 AM

Rose and me are coming up onto our 40th wedding anniversary and the race budget will be used for a trip to Italy. 
  

Bo,

Excellent choice!  You won't regret it.

It's year 40 for me & my better half this year as well.   I wish we would have traveled more when we were younger . . . . .

 :cheers:
Mark
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on January 13, 2018, 10:37:59 AM
Monza? Maranello?

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 13, 2018, 09:19:32 PM
Roma, Sorrento, Florenzia, Como, Bolzano, then Venezia.  Side trips to Lucca and Pisa.  In Como we will be near Monza.  Maybe another side trip?

The bolts might be stretching, in which case some stronger ones can help.  Or, the aluminum case might be compressing and less clamping force might be optimal.  Or, the bolts might be rotating out.  The solutions to these problems are completely different so more data collection is needed.

Doweling might help.  Who does this?

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 14, 2018, 12:46:47 AM
The 2015 trip to Wales to race at Pendine was my first overseas trip besides going to Hawaii.  Working, learning a trade, engineering skool, and raising children used all of my time and money.  Summer vacations were spent helping my parents with projects too big for them to do.  It is nice to get the time to go somewhere. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 21, 2018, 07:21:31 PM
The crank is shown in the upper case and the empty places in front and behind the crank are for the counterbalancers.  The balancers are shown in the other foto.  The crank crank and balancers tug against each other through the bolts I am having problems with.

The Triumph flat track race bikes use dynamically balanced 270-450 firing order cranks without the counterbalancers.  My bike will not use the counterbalancers this year to reduce stress on the case fasteners.  The crank was dynamically balanced a couple of months ago so that task does not need to be done.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 26, 2018, 01:48:05 AM
The rod big end shell to journal clearances recommended by Mahle are 0.00075 to 0.001 inch clearance per inch journal diameter plus 0.0005 for a race motor.  This is 0.0017 to 0.0021 for the Triumph.  The journal lapping with toothpaste makes the clearances right in the middle of this range.  The rod big ends are not too tight.

The recommended crank main shell to journal clearances are 0.0016 to 0.0020 using the same formula.  The measured clearances are 0.0015.  This is a bit tight although it is within Triumph manufacturing tolerance.

The crank shell housing is aluminum alloy and it expands almost twice as much as steel crank per degree of temperature increase.  Some calculations are made.  It is assumed the recommended clearance is measured at the typically specified 68 degrees F.  Heating both the cases and the crank 30 degrees F expands both.  The crank main journal diameter increases 0.00029 inches.  The housing for the main bearing shells expands 0.00062 inches.  This increases the crank to shell clearance to 0.0018 inches which is OK.  It appears, clearance wise, that starting with a warm engine is all I need to do to get the correct main bearing clearances.

My question is this.  How is main bearing clearance set up in an aluminum block engine?  It seems there must be a way to account for the differences in expansion for the materials.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WhizzbangK.C. on January 26, 2018, 08:44:35 AM
My understanding has always been that assembly clearances are specified as measured under standard room temperature conditions, and that those tolerances are calculated by the engineers to provide proper running clearances at operating temperatures.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: CNC-Dude on January 26, 2018, 04:10:38 PM
The rod big end shell to journal clearances recommended by Mahle are 0.00075 to 0.001 inch clearance per inch journal diameter plus 0.0005 for a race motor.  This is 0.0017 to 0.0021 for the Triumph.  The journal lapping with toothpaste makes the clearances right in the middle of this range.  The rod big ends are not too tight.

The recommended crank main shell to journal clearances are 0.0016 to 0.0020 using the same formula.  The measured clearances are 0.0015.  This is a bit tight although it is within Triumph manufacturing tolerance.

The crank shell housing is aluminum alloy and it expands almost twice as much as steel crank per degree of temperature increase.  Some calculations are made.  It is assumed the recommended clearance is measured at the typically specified 68 degrees F.  Heating both the cases and the crank 30 degrees F expands both.  The crank main journal diameter increases 0.00029 inches.  The housing for the main bearing shells expands 0.00062 inches.  This increases the crank to shell clearance to 0.0018 inches which is OK.  It appears, clearance wise, that starting with a warm engine is all I need to do to get the correct main bearing clearances.

My question is this.  How is main bearing clearance set up in an aluminum block engine?  It seems there must be a way to account for the differences in expansion for the materials.
Different alloys of aluminum expand more/less than others at the same temp. It seems most motorcycle engines are the die cast variety, while most automotive race blocks are cast or even billet, and have different expansion rates than a die cast block does. Many racers with aluminum engines also use block and oil heaters before they crank an engine at a race to allow everything to expand and be race ready. But as with your extra clearance recommendation for the rods, you also would follow suit and increase the main bearing clearances the same. Keep in mind that extra bearing clearances sometimes means lower oil pressure, so prepare ahead and see what changes in your oil pump can compensate for that so you can maintain a good pressure.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 26, 2018, 05:55:04 PM
Thanks for the help on this.  The rods and crank have similar thermal expansion coefficients so the clearances are not expected to change much between 68 degrees F measuring temperature and operating temperature.  The die cast aluminum cases and the iron or steel crank have vastly different thermal expansion coefficients with the cases expanding more than the crank.  It seems to get correct operating temperature clearances the clearances must be tight at 68 degrees F.  Maybe I should be happy with 0.0015 clearance at 68 degrees F.  I am not sure about this.  There is very little info available on the finer points of bike engine tuning
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 27, 2018, 12:54:32 AM
The new version crankcase bolts arrived.  They are the same diameter as the old ones.  They are longer and they engage the threads 5 mm further down in the crankcase.

The crank bearing shells are made by NDC Bearing Co. in Japan.  The older shells have F-780 stamped on them.  The NDC website says these are lead-bronze on steel and they are "High load half bearings."  Triumph made a change to the part number.  The newer shells are stamped with FC170 and the website says these are "Half bearings with higher load capacity, compared to F-780."  It was a no-brainer decision to upgrade to the newer main bearing shells.  Eight are on order.

The rod bearing shells are stamped with F-780, too.  An upgrade seems like a good idea.  The Rocket III engine uses the same rod bearing shells that I do according to Triumph part numbers. They use Rocket III engines in the Triumph streamliner.  The folks that build these engines might know about an upgrade.

Research continues.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 27, 2018, 11:25:55 AM
The search for a team rider is over.  The major qualifications are to not argue with the team owner, tuck in well, and stay out of the beer stash.  This little guy does all of that and more.  www.bbc.com/future/story/20180126-meet-the-motorbike-racing-robot (http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20180126-meet-the-motorbike-racing-robot)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 10, 2018, 12:39:09 AM
The class I took and the reference material I have give me all sorts of information to set the wire feed welder feeds and speeds for full penetration welding.  All I need to do here is to build up a bead on this aluminum casting so it can be machined down to fill in the gap.  Full penetration would be for a 7/16 piece which seems like far too much wire feed and amps.  Any help with this is appreciated.

This is the rear hub for my desert race bike.  It is so old that they do not make a new hub for it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on February 10, 2018, 01:16:36 AM
You're walking on seriously shaky ground here Bo. Without seeing what you're attempting to weld but mentioning a hub, I would say safety rates high with this project. First be sure you know what alloy you're dealing with and match it as closely as possible. Second, remember that generally aluminum softens under the heat of welding and must be properly treated to regain its strength. Thirdly, this sound like a precision job and mig definitely is not a precision process. It's not something I'd approach with mig. Tig would be by far the preferred process.

That being said, be careful to keep everything super clean and use preheat if you decide to go ahead.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 11, 2018, 12:34:08 AM
Some off season entertainment...

"The One" is the big bike show in Portland.  The sun was out.  It was sunglasses in February for Rose.  The line was a quarter mile long to get in.  It was hard to snap pix.  Butts and legs everywhere.  It took patience to get photos.  The venue is an old factory.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 11, 2018, 12:38:08 AM
This is a really old honda.  From the mid or early 50s.  Note the perimeter frame.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 11, 2018, 12:43:37 AM
This Benly honda is four or five years younger.  Look at how much the casting and metal work advanced in a few years. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 11, 2018, 12:49:59 AM
Two honda 90s  The stretched one is hopped up and it is fast enough to go on the freeway.  The other one is in Gulf race colors.  The owner has a matching car to use when the weather is bad and he cannot ride his bike.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 11, 2018, 12:55:43 AM
A Matchless-Norton and a Norton.  One has a doll's head gearbox, as I recall.  A significant number of Pacific Northwest racers rode Nortons.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 11, 2018, 01:03:24 AM
A Ducati and the eyeball chick.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 11, 2018, 01:07:15 AM
Nice metal work on this Ducati.  Bones.  There a rat bike phenomenon just like the rat rod one.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 11, 2018, 01:10:14 AM
Spikes.  A grate seat.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 11, 2018, 01:13:46 AM
This guy does his wiring just like me.  This truck brings back memories.  It was simple days when a race team worked out of a transit van.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 11, 2018, 01:18:26 AM
An Alaska bike.  The other BSA is Rose's favorite.  It is a C15, I think.  That is all for today.  The multi cylinder bikes will be posted tomorrow.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 16, 2018, 12:23:57 AM
Twin cylinder engines now.  This is a Yamaha 650 with minimalist bodywork.  The frame is either stainless steel or Ti. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 16, 2018, 12:25:55 AM
A land speed Ural. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 16, 2018, 12:28:51 AM
Normally these are single cylinder engines.  This is two of them mated to be a v-twin.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 16, 2018, 12:31:42 AM
Old and new v-twins.  Old and new on the same bike.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 16, 2018, 12:35:04 AM
Rat bike.  This seems to be a passing fad.  There are fewer of them on display this year. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 16, 2018, 12:37:33 AM
Now the multi cylinder bikes.  This is a Champion framed TZ 700 flat track bike with lights.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 16, 2018, 12:41:10 AM
A six cylinder Kawasaki drag bike.  That is it for the pictures I have.  It is a very small sample of everything there.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 16, 2018, 11:18:05 PM
The newest version of the Triumph crankcase bolts were ordered and they arrived.  I knew about them and did not use them for a reason.  They are poorly designed with a wide and shallow recess for a torx drive.  It is possible to install them without stripping the torx openings.  They also can be removed if care is used to make sure the torx bit is always perpendicular to the bolt face.  Maybe one time.  Repeated removal and installation after that is dependent on the alignment of the planets and pure luck.

The work I was doing requires a few assembly-dissassembly cycles.  Bolt heads were welded onto the bolts so a hex socket could be used.  The bolts are magnetic stainless, either ferritic or martenisic.  The bolt heads I welded on are austenetic.  It worked.  They have not broke off after a few put-together take-apart cycles. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 16, 2018, 11:35:09 PM
The new bolts are used with new bearing shells for the first trial.  Prussian blue is spread on the housings and the bolts are tightened down to Triumph's original torque spec.  The cases are taken apart and the shells are removed.  They are not seating correctly.  There are two big problems with this.  One is poor heat transfer from the shells to the case.  The other is extra openings to bleed off oil and this lowers the oil pressure at the rod big end.

The process is repeated with Triumph's latest tightening procedure which is pre-torque followed by degree of turn.  The shells seat when the new procedure is used.

The flaking on the rod big end shells happened when I was using the old torque specs with 10W-40 synthetic, and uncoated shells.  The distress was reduced last year by using coated shells and thicker oil.  Hopefully the new uncoated shells combined with the thicker oil and the latest bolts and torque specs will eliminate rod big end bearing distress.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: charlie101 on February 17, 2018, 02:45:20 AM
Wow. That makes a difference. Thanks for showing the research, method and result! I find it always interesting!

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 18, 2018, 10:48:11 AM
The leap from qualitative to quantitive reasoning could not be done.

Qualitative:  The rod big ends can be honed to larger inside diameter to make room for bearing shells with polymer coatings.  Heat transfer from the shells to the rods and the resistance of the shells to spinning in the big ends are somewhat dependent on crush.

Quanitative:  How much crush does it have now?  How much does it need to be?  How much bore enlarging will be too much?  All of this is needed to verify if the big ends can be enlarged.  I could not find any info about how to do this.

Qualitative:  The crankcase is made from a metal that expands thermally twice as much or more than metal used for the crankcase bolts, bearing shells, and the crankshaft.  Hot running clearances might differ than cold clearances when the engine parts are measured in the cellar.  Some allowances may need to be made.

Qualitative:  This needs to be figured out.  Again, I could not find the procedures to do the measurements and the math.

The end result is simply doing what Triumph did and that is using late model bolts, bearing shells and tightening procedure.  The last was modified slightly using recommendations from the Triumph flat track engine builder.  It would have been a big mess if Triumph did not do what they did and I was on my own to figure out a solution.  It was a humbling experience.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on February 18, 2018, 12:28:57 PM
WW, another useful source if you haven't found it: http://www.kingbearings.com/technical-info/

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 25, 2018, 11:37:16 AM
Thanks for posting this.  The "Design of Crush Height for Performance Bearings" article is most useful.  It appears that altering shell to journal clearances by enlarging the housing bore is a very risky option and this is especially true with aluminum housings.  The less problematic alternatives are to find oversize or undersize shells or to adjust the journal diameters.

The relationship between shell bearing internal diameter, crush, and housing temperature is the critical piece of information I cannot find.  Time determines the strategy.  The engine is being put together and it will be run for a hundred miles on break in oil with reduced spring pressure to bed in the cams and tappet buckets.  Then race oil and springs will be installed.  Next will be the dyno work and two runs down the salt.

The engine be taken apart next winter and the bearings examined.  The wear marks will tell me about clearances and any changes I need to make.  Of course, the motor might decide to dissemble itself before winter...   

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 17, 2018, 07:00:30 PM
The engine is together with light valve springs installed to polish in the cams.  The changes this year are going from a 360 degree firing order to a 270-450 arrangement with the counterbalancers removed.  Also the cam timing is advanced in an attempt to regain lost torque at mid range.  The basic engine is a 2003 T-100 and the new parts are from a 2015 Scrambler and various other engines.  The fitting of parts form later to earlier engines was a big challenge with lots of machining.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 18, 2018, 02:54:13 PM
The bike frame is hung from the roof of the boat shed.  The engine is done and now it is time to figure out the electricals.  The mechanical parts were relatively easy to get for low to no cost.  Some folks helped me with this.  The electrical stuff was a different tale.  There are three sources of original Triumph parts for this conversion, the Bonneville America, the Bonneville Speedmaaster, and the Bonneville Scrambler.  All need to be carb models.

The alternator rotor is from a 2004 Bonneville America and it was sourced on E-Bay. 

The America/Speedmaster versions are chopper type bakes.  Their wiring harness will not fit a normal style Bonneville.  The Scrambler harness will work.  This one was ordered new.  It was hard to find and it took a long time to get.  It was found in the UK.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 18, 2018, 03:04:41 PM
The bike that is being modified is a T-100 model with the ignition module under the seat.  The Scrambler has the module between the main frame tube and the engine.  This new mount is OEM Triumph for a Scrambler.  I was too lazy to make one.

This German ignition coil and wire setup has worked very well.  The wires are being reused.  The T-100 uses a single coil and the Scrambler/Speedmaster/America engine uses two, so some new ones were ordered.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 18, 2018, 03:21:32 PM
At least five ignition modules with slightly different advance curves are needed to obtain the data points to select the optimum ignition timing.  The old 360 degree boxes could not be reprogrammed so I ordered five new ones.  They are a Stage 3 curve that has worked well in the past with -4, -2, 0, +2, and +4 degree retards and advances.  The rev limiter is at 9,000 rpm now.  It might be changed to 9,500 or 10,000rpm once all reliability issues are resolved such as rod big end shell fatigue.

The plugs that seem to work best are NGK SIKR 9A7.  These have fine iridium wire center electrodes, platinum tipped ground electrodes, and projecting tips.  They do not appear to wear or corrode from race fuel blends.  The set I have will last to the end of my racing career.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 24, 2018, 06:27:49 PM
The frame was powder coated by Triumph.  Salty water gets under the paint and it causes bad corrosion.  Bubbly paint is the clue.  Every few years the delaminated paint is scratched off with a dental pick.  The rusty areas are cleaned with a little donut shaped wheel on a Dremel tool.  Red rusty metal primer is applied first, then grey primer, and then satin black.  This seems to work best.  I would sandblast off all of the powder coat and put on an etch primer and urethane topcoat before building the race bike based on experience.  This would save a lot of work in the long term.

A visit was made to a race dyno shop this morning and time is booked in July.  The shop is not the closest or the cheapest.  The business does race bikes, only, and the operator is one of the most experienced in Oregon.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 25, 2018, 01:18:00 PM
The bikes that are beating me are v-twins.  One is a late model Aprilia and the other is a Suzuki homogulation super bike from the late 1990's.  Either one is stock or slightly modified.  Both can make good speed with the less than optimal track conditions we have now.  These bikes have things in common, like light wheels, sophisticated suspension, lots of power, strong frames, and smaller riders with good tucks.  The first two I can get.  The third is about as good as I can get.  The last two are impossible with me riding the thing.

There are no more records for me.  These guys and gals raised the bar too high.  What I can do is take some lessons from this into my last few races and get a respectable personal best speed.  The frame is bare and hanging from the ceiling of the boat shed.  Everything going onto it is being checked for overweightness and is trimmed down like this steering stem.  Non-essential parts are removed.

This is the perfect time to upgrade to EFI.  A lot of parts I scrounged like a gas tank with a fuel pump inside of it and an EFI alternator rotor.  A way to hack into the EFI programming was found and I monkeyed around a lot with it on the street bike.  It was time to make the switch.  Then, I recalled all of the people I saw on the salt with EFI problems they could not figure out and electronical stuff is my weak point.  So, a carb wiring harness and carb alternator rotor were bought.  The big Mikunis will stay on.  The last few years will be spent adapting to new conditions with attention to the chassis and aero.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 26, 2018, 04:51:17 PM
Last year the front streamlining was used and not the rear.  The bike was more nose-heavy than usual and it had twenty more horsepower and the track was very rough.  The tach needle hit redline and back pedaling could not get traction.  I would have been over 165 mph and in record city if there was no wheel spin and instead I did 145 mph.  There would have been major wheelspin associated with going 145 using 165 mph gearing.  The bike tracked straight and there was no fishtailing.  Maybe the clutch was slipping?

There were shock loads on the drivetrain from bouncing in and out of the dips and the oil I used was 15W-50 for aluminum block car engines.  It might have so many friction modifiers in the oil that the shock on the drive line caused by hitting the bumps made the clutch to slip and it would not regrip.  The oil should be switched back to a bike oil made specifically for wet clutch engines.       

This is advice from last night given by the guys at the local.  Today I have a mild hangover and a possible cause and solution to the big problem.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on March 26, 2018, 05:06:45 PM
Last year the front streamlining was used and not the rear.  The bike was more nose-heavy than usual and it had twenty more horsepower and the track was very rough.  The tach needle hit redline and back pedaling could not get traction.  I would have been over 165 mph and in record city if there was no wheel spin and instead I did 145 mph.  There would have been major wheelspin associated with going 145 using 165 mph gearing.  The bike tracked straight and there was no fishtailing.  Maybe the clutch was slipping?

There were shock loads on the drivetrain from bouncing in and out of the dips and the oil I used was 15W-50 for aluminum block car engines.  It might have so many friction modifiers in the oil that the shock on the drive line caused by hitting the bumps made the clutch to slip and it would not regrip.  The oil should be switched back to a bike oil made specifically for wet clutch engines.       

This is advice from last night given by the guys at the local.  Today I have a mild hangover and a possible cause and solution to the big problem.   

Dyno time will tell you if the clutch is slipping.  High Gear pulls and a knowledge of what MPH at a specific RPM will tell.  And yes, I would definitely use a quality motorcycle race oil.  Alisyn makes a 15w40 that might just be your best bet.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 27, 2018, 10:23:48 PM
Everything looked OK when it was on the dyno, although I do not remember if the mineral break in oil was in the bike or the synthetic.  I might try the Alysin.  Unfortunately I bought a box of other oil about an hour ago before logging onto the forum.

The oil I was using was a 15W-50 made for NASCAR racing.  Most bike oils are going away from using zinc and phosphorous and I was using the car oil to make sure there was a lot of it.  Maybe this is a bad idea.

The tuning shop where I booked the dyno session sold a French oil I do not know much about.  Some rocket-science reasoning told me this might work.  Most of the bikes in that place were higher performance than mine.  So, I did some research on the I-net and the company recommends a specific 10W-40 racing oil for my bike.  Somewhere I recalled seeing that oil's name.  They carry it in the closest bike shop to my house.  So, a case was bought there at racer discount.  The tech data sheet with the oil makes a big deal about it working with wet clutches.  Things will be better this year, for sure.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 07, 2018, 02:04:30 AM
A London taxi in the jungle on the far end of Maui.  This is a few hundred yards from where Charles Lindburgh the aviator is buried.  The world is an odd place and full of unexpected things.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 02, 2018, 12:50:59 AM
This old iron gate was bought in 1996.  It is time to install it and I made some posts out of the iron in the scrap pile.  It was good welding practice and the scrap heap is a few inches shorter. The desert race bike needed some welding type repairs to the rear hub, a tune up, and new stainless steel spokes and tires on both ends.  This and a trip to Hawaii kept me busy and away from the build.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 02, 2018, 01:03:01 AM
The cases are bolted together with the transmission and crank in them in the cellar.  The cylinders, rods and pistons are installed there, too.  That is all I can carry up the stairs and into the bike shed.  Otherwise the engine will be too heavy.

The clutch and everything else is installed in the bike shed and the motor is dragged into the center of the bike bench.  The upper frame with new wiring harness is brought in from the boat shed.  It is lowered down over the motor and bolted to it.

The frame and engine are lifted up onto blocks and the lower frame tubes are bolted on.  Then, the entire bike is assembled on the bike bench.

It is sort of an odd ritual.  It is the only way the bike can be built.  It would require King Kong to pick up the engine and place it into the frame like on a normal bike.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 10, 2018, 11:56:05 PM
This build appears to be dormant.  This is a competitive sport and it is time to "hold my cards close to my vest' as they say.

The FIM physical exam is comprehensive and hard to pass when one gets older... unless some attention is paid to conditioning.  I tried these regimes and diets recommended by my doctor and offered by my health plan and other popular US sources.  All were too strict and unrealistic for a guy like me.  I failed.  Drinking is a no-no and the food tastes like cardboard.  Dying of a heart attack is much better. 

The BBC had an article about weight loss.  Then I did some research on the NHS website and asked some local experts in town.  It is possible to lose weight and improve health without evangelical fanaticism.  A plan was developed and two pints a day at the locals are part of it. Now I have something I can realistically do and it is working.  This is a UK based plan so I need to lose two stones 7 pounds according to their on-line calculator.

Two and a half stones is a 35 lbs weight loss.  I am halfway there and I took the FIM physical exam on Tuesday.  Blood tests are real good.  I passed that part no problem.  The treadmill test is on Monday.  I have been walking 10 to 15 miles a week to get ready for it. 

One unexpected side effect of all of this is a major change in attitude.  In my youth I was known as a "hungry" racer that could win in all sorts of conditions on the crappy equipment I had.  This was nothing special and it was typical for all racers where I was from.  I lost that.  That focused attitude is coming back and it might be just what I need.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on May 11, 2018, 01:00:32 AM
Those physical exams!!!!!!.
Got offered job overseas which involved just that but running rifle in hand for a mile and a half.
I said stuff it!. you guys can run, I'll just stand and fight. :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on May 11, 2018, 11:12:43 PM
The 2-pint diet has worked for me..........down about 35-lbs and trying for another 5 or so..........might need smaller leathers :lol: :lol:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 04, 2018, 04:59:58 PM
Rosa and I are in this funky hotel on the bank of the Arno in Florence.  It is a steamy hot night.  Rosa was tired so I went out on my own for a few beers and dinner.  The streets are real narrow and paved with stone blocks.  There are some red lights on door entrances.  This is odd.  I found this cafe place that looked sorta OK.  There wuz a hookah pipe with several tentacles on a nearby table.  The menu was in Italian and word "buffet" was it.  I chose that and it was a good decision.  I got what I wanted by looking at it on the buffet and removing it from the various pots and pans.  There was no need for fluency in Italian.

The waitress offered me a "special drink" for 50 Euro.  I am not sure what this is.  A few days ago we were looking at the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel and there are graphic illustrations about what happens when a fellow makes a bad decision.  So, I did not order the special drink.  I will be in this place for a few days so there is still an opportunity.   



  .     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on June 04, 2018, 05:48:07 PM
Lots of great places to eat in Florence, skip the places that are large with waiters in fancy clothes.  The best spots we found were little places with 3 or 4 tables on the sidewalk and about the same inside.  You need to try the local wines... it will be red (rosso) or white (bianca), order a mezzo litro... that's a half liter, should run about 3 euros.... their wine was much more drinkable than their beer.
Always look up... most ceilings are better than the walls  :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on June 04, 2018, 05:50:57 PM
WW;

I suspect that "special drink" comes with a few "extras".  :-D

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 07, 2018, 04:55:34 PM
The locals do not know, either.  They do not go into that district.  The big plan was to go back there with Rose and see if they continued to make the same offer.  Rose did not like that idea. 

The traffic signs and road markings are strictly for decoration purposes only.  It is easy to get flattened so I drink beer, only.  The wine is good.  Thanks for the advice about the ceilings.

Anyone reading this build diary knows I am a total loss with respect to electrical things.  There is this temple to Volta here in Como.  I went inside and rubbed my hand on the plinth that holds the sculpture of him.  Hopefully this has the potential to rectify my problems with electricity. 
Title: Re:
Post by: Frank06 on June 08, 2018, 06:00:44 AM
I see what you did there... "potential" to "rectify"...very nice!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 10, 2018, 01:46:41 AM
Yesterday we rode a bus up from venice to Cortina in the Dolomites.  My previous experience with Cortina was rebuilding an engine for one of them.  It was a a 1600cc push rod 4 cylinder in a ford Pinto, as I recall.  Rose and me took this fine opportunity to get sick with colds.  Al least the view from the room is good.

The Italians are doing quite a bit of work on the modern Triumph Bonneville.  Note the supercharger on the magazine cover bike.  Today I will do some I-net research.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 11, 2018, 08:57:52 AM
For some reason I cannot attach this link from Italy.  It is "www.quadrovehicles.com"  You need to type it in.

We see these things on the road here.  Mostly in northern Italy.  Sorta looks like big confusion to figure out a class to race them in.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 15, 2018, 10:20:08 AM
We are back from Italy.  It was a trip I did not want to do and it was something Rose always talked about, so, I did it while I was still working and could afford it.  I was wrong.  It was the best vacation I ever had.

The Italians have resisted the "buy everything from China" habit and they have some remaining capability for manufacturing.  They show a strong preference for buying things they make.  Some of the smaller machine tools look good.  One of my projects is to look there, as well as for one made here, for a small vertical mill. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 19, 2018, 11:38:18 PM
The bike had a tendency to be stable under full throttle and to go into a speed wobble during deceleration.  The reduction in trail when the front end drops causes this, I think.  There are a few ways to prevent trail from droping below the critical value.  One is to limit the suspension travel.  This will reduce the dive and reduction in trail.  Current rough salt conditions mean that suspension travel is a good thing.  This is not an option.

Another solution is to add a few degrees of rake to the front end.  The steering head is a big forging that connects to the upper frame, engine, and lower frame tubes.  The first foto shows this.  It will require a rocket science nuclear physicist to figure out how to rake this thing.  This is not an option.

Another fix is to reduce the triple clamp offset.  This was done a few years ago and it was a big help.  Unfortunately, I did not reduce it enough.  The old clamps are shown along with some new ones I made.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 19, 2018, 11:46:28 PM
The reduction in offset is shown in the first pix.  It is about 14 mm at the clamp.  This is a trail increase of 16 mm on the ground when fork rake is considered.  The clamps are shown on the bike in the second foto.

I was hoping the mice would do this fix while I was gone to Italy.  The little slackers did not do anything.  I had to do it myself.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 19, 2018, 11:59:10 PM
Type "triple clamp offset" into Google and select "Images."  All sorts of diagrams appear and there is a little movie, too.  This explains offset and trail better than I can.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 25, 2018, 01:30:28 AM
The new triple clamps are on the bike.  The zener diode clamps to the middle of the lower triple clamp below the headlight.  The headlight was moved back when the offset was changed and the diode had to be relocated.  The wiring is done and the smoke stayed inside the wires when the key was turned on.  This is a miracle when my electrical skills are considered.  Rubbing the Volta statue was a good idea.

There is some idiotic federal requirement that motorcycle lights turn on when the ignition is turned on.  The poor battery has to deal with the wattage of the lights, ignition, and starter motor at the same time.  The previous version of the wiring had a UK light switch I got in London.  That allowed me to turn off the lights when starting the engine.  The new wiring harness is changed so that fix cannot be done.  Another problem to figure out.  Maybe some low wattage LED headlight and taillight bulbs will be enough.

Progress is being made.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 08, 2018, 06:29:30 PM
Today the bike was rum through the usual test loop in the Cascade foothills.  The break in oil was in the engine and only the outer valve springs.

The new triple clamps with less offset do not hurt straight line stability.  They make the front wheel feel more "planted" on the pavement.  The steering felt a bit vague and light with the old clamps.

The new cam timing does not produce noticeable reversion effects at street rpm (under 4,000).  This is very nice considering the cam lift and duration.  Credit the computer based wave action design for this.  The PC did the hard thinking.

The lack of counterbalancers with the 270-450 crank does not make the the bike vibrate enough to be unpleasant on the street.  The blur on images in the mirror shows that all of the vibration is sideways and not up to down.  Intensity is between an old Meridan Bonneville and a Norton Atlas.

Long term plans are to race again in Straightliner events.  The bike would be used for transportation while in the UK and I want to ride through Cheddar Gorge, the Lake District, the Peak District, across the Pennines, and up to Edinburgh.  The bike has enough street manners to do this.  This was something I was worried about.           
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 09, 2018, 09:46:45 PM
The clutch slipped during the 2017 meet and that might have cost me a record.  There was plenty of power in the engine to go fast enough.  The oil I was using for both break in and racing was a car oil with friction modifiers.  They did not have JASO MA-2 certifications and that is what is needed for an engine with a wet clutch.  Also, I was told that clutch plates contaminated with friction modifiers might be permanently affected.

My preference and experience says to use a break in oil with a good zinc-phosphorous package.  I cannot find any with a MA-2 rating.  What I did was to use the old contaminated clutch initially with the non MA-2 rated break in oil.  That was used for the break in loop through the mountains.  Then the engine and filter were drained and a MA-2 rated mineral oil was put in.  A loop was made down to the local for Sunday steak dinner and a few pints.  That flushing oil was drained and a new filter with the MA-2 rated race oil will be installed tonight, along with a new clutch pack.  What a pita this is.  I am not taking any chances this year.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 14, 2018, 01:35:40 AM
The head was pulled off and the inner springs and shims were put in place.  The clutch was replaced with a new one and synthetic race oil is in the engine.  The pump gas was drained and replaced with race gas.  Lots of mickey mouse little problems were fixed.  The trailer is serviced and ready to go.  Everything is prepared for tomorrow's dyno appointment.  Except the flippin' truck.  Rose borrowed it for something and it is not here.  It is always something...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on July 14, 2018, 01:50:37 AM
-> Willamette Valley Yellow Cab -> U-Haul -> F-150 -> home to get the trailer -> dyno session  :cheers:

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 15, 2018, 10:39:29 AM
Rose brought the truck back late at night.  She told me what she was going to do and when she would be back before she left and I did not listen to her.

The dyno session went OK.  It was with a new tuner in Beaverton on a Dynojet rear wheel dyno.  This is similar to the setup we used for the last 12 years.  Just like the last setup, the exhaust went out of the bike into the dyno booth air before it was sucked out of the room and blown into the neighborhood.  This was one reason why I stopped using leaded gas and it looks like I will continue to use unleaded in the future.

The late model OEM headers have a large diameter and a cross-over pipe under the engine in the correct place to reflect the third harmonic.  They were wrapped with insulating tape and two Predator glass-pak style slip ons were installed.  That was the first setup.
The 2 into 1 header and collector I designed and built was the second setup.

Both systems have similar power and torque and the jetting used for one can be used for the other.  The predators made a couple of more horsepower in the midrange and lost a couple on top end compared to my system.  The predators are the best choice for runway racing and my pipes for land speed.  The predators are much quieter.  They might be the best choice for the Yorkshire mile in the UK.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 16, 2018, 11:40:18 AM
The previous dyno curves are shown.  The cluster of curves are 2017 pulls with different jetting.  The blue 2014 curve is printed and the 2016 curve is drawn in pencil.

The 2017 curves show a big drop in torque at 6,000 rpm.  It could not be smoothed out by jet changes.  It is suspected to be reversion.  The peak torque in 2014 was 72 pounds-feet.  It was substantially greater than the peak torque of 69 pounds-feet in 2017.  Two projects for last winter were getting rid of the midrange dip and restoring the lost torque.  Also, the 2017 horsepower peaks past redline.  It was desired that the peak be pushed back to just before redline.

The latest dyno curves are shown, too.  The only difference between 2017 and 2018 is a lobe center timing shift and going from a 360-360 firing order to a 270-450 degree sequence.

The two peaks are smoothed out and the torque curve is much flatter.  This was done using the computer model.  The lobe center angles are the widest that gave decent virtual power in the model.  The intent was to reduce the overlap window and the reversion.  It worked.

The peak torque dropped a bit compared to 2017.  It is normal for the peak torque to drop when the torque curve is smoothed out in my experience with other engines when cam timing shifts are the only change.  No worries about this.

The 2014 engine made the most torque.  It was one of my best efforts in this respect and it gave a personal best speed of 146 mph.  It fell flat on top end and that is the reason for further development in 2017 and 2018.

The power peak was moved back where I wanted it by advancing the cams.

This is the end of engine development.  The motor is as good as I can get.  Now it is the time to do something with it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on July 17, 2018, 07:37:12 AM
Just out of curiosity. Did you use the same rear tire (brand and model) on all pulls?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 17, 2018, 03:18:49 PM
Yes.  They are two different dynos and operators. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 18, 2018, 01:19:25 AM
That post with the dyno curves is incorrect.  I reviewed my notes.  The 2107 cam timing used lobe center angles of 112 intake and 111 exhaust having a 35 degree overlap at 0050 lift.

The 2018 cam timing used 106 intake and 116 exhaust with 36 degrees overlap.  The intake cam was advance 6 degrees and the exhaust was advanced 5 degrees.

Most racers wind these engines up to 10,000 rpm or more and the 2017 cam timing was optimal for that.  They blow them apart occasionally, too.  I cannot afford to take big chances on my tiny budget.  The redline is at 9,000 rpm which is relatively safe.  My cam timing goal was to bring the power peak down to 8,700 rpm, so the cams were advanced. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 06, 2018, 10:58:46 AM
This will be a "data collecting" year at the BMST.  There is not enough power to get a record. There was a second engine that was virtually designed last winter.  It is the same as the one to be used this year with one exception.  The cams are set at maximum overlap with the their lobe center angled governed by clearances between the valve heads and piston crowns.  This was the way many Triumphs were set up decades ago.  The computer model shows it having substantially more power and torque than the current engine.

This clearances engine has two issues.  First, it is a 10,000 rpm motor.  This winter I need to take apart the engine and check the rod big end bearings and crankcase bolt tightness to see if the problems are solved in these aspects.  Then the ignition module rev limit can be raised another 1000 rpm if everything is OK. 

The second issue is intake/exhaust tuning for big overlap.  These engines are very sensitive to this in my experience and there is no certain way to figure out what works except trial and error.  This takes a lot of time and I do not have it this year.  The conservative cam timing I am using is best for now.

The virtual model of the clearances motor shows that if that motor functions as the tables and graphs show, more power is needed for a record and I see no way to get it.  Aerodynamics is the only other option.  A two hour test is scheduled at the A2 wind tunnel in North Carolina on the 18th of September.  The prep for this long trip involves upgrades to the trailer and lots of servicing and repair for the truck.  Progress is made in these areas.

The FIM rules changed and a lot of sheet metal mayhem is needed to comply and to take advantage of the newer permitted shape.  This is major work.  This build is not dormant.  Right now I am too stressed out and thrashed to make frequent posts about the project.   

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 07, 2018, 07:53:58 PM
The engine made 87.3 rear wheel HP on the dyno in 2014 adjusted to SAE standard environment.  The timeslip climatic data is available for the 146 mph run at 2014 BMST.  The "on the salt" horsepower is 73.2 using an SAE correction based on timeslip data.  Overcoming friction drag used 17.8 HP.  The remaining 55.4 HP went to overcoming aero drag.  The aero drag equation was used with the air density, frontal area, and velocity to back calculate the aero drag coefficient.  It was 0.427

The aero drag is calculated for typical salt flat climate using this drag coefficient at 5 MPH increments between 145 and 175 mph.  Friction drag is calculated for the same speeds.  Both are combined to make a total drag vs speed curve for 145 to 175 MPH.

The new engine is expected to make 87.8 HP on the salt using a SAE correction based on typical Bonneville climatic data.  This gives 155 MPH based on the 0.427 aero drag coefficient.  A 170 mph average speed is needed to break the record.

The gearing will use a 19 tooth front and 42 tooth rear sprocket.  This gives 8,570 rpm at 155 MPH with no wheel slip.  It provides 8,740 RPM with 2 percent wheel slip.  This is right at peak power and below the rev limiter at 8,900 rpm.  It should give a solid 155 MPH.

The bike might work better than expected and "shoot ducks" through the measured mile when it hits the limiter.  In this case another run will be made with a 40-tooth rear sprocket.

"Target 155" is this year's goal.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on August 07, 2018, 10:06:22 PM
+1 on the 40 rear sprocket.  Sometimes, an ever so slight over gear is good for a couple mph.

I notice no calculation on tire growth...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 07, 2018, 11:58:50 PM
It is a steel belted radial.  Do they grow?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 08, 2018, 11:52:09 PM
A 2017 FIM rule change limits the height of the hump behind the seat to 150 mm above the lowest portion of the seat base.  The photo shows the height of the old hump and the lowered hump.  It was not enough to lower the hump, only.  The seat base is raised, too.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 08, 2018, 11:54:25 PM
The total change from lowing the hump and raising the seat makes the hump less than 150 mm high.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on August 09, 2018, 08:21:12 AM
It is a steel belted radial.  Do they grow?

I thought they did .... I show a 2% variation in my gearing calculations versus actual speed.  I've only checked closely at speeds above 200 on hard surfaces. I just assumed it was growth, it could be another factor.  I currently run a Michelin RS with 40 psi (heated tire).
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 12, 2018, 03:36:11 PM
The tachometers and speedmeters we use are almost always inaccurate according to the dyno operator.  That is whereI would look first if those instrument readings are used in the figuring.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 12, 2018, 04:20:03 PM
There are changes to the FIM partial streamlining rules since 2014.  Changes are made to conform to these.  Also, some aspects of the 2014 streamlining were very hillbilly.  These are upgraded to something respectable.  The wind tunnel guys need to evaluate my best work.

The rules say "No part of any streamlining may exceed below the visible inner circle of the tyre rim at its lowest position."  The tail could be lowered this far.  It seemed counterproductive to drop it lower than the bottom of the engine belly pan.  The fresh aluminum shows what is added.  It has a nice rounded edge on both sides.  The new metal also shows some added tail length.

Some school kids in Kelso, Washington, saved up their lunch money and gave it to me for gas to get to B'ville.  Somehow I need to bring the bike up there during the skool year so they can see it. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 12, 2018, 04:25:42 PM
The top of the tail was lowered and seat pan raised to get less than 150 mm of height difference between the two.  Elevating my arse will help to level out my back.  This change might help the aero.  The tail was not lengthened out to the full 400 mm.  Some room is needed to account for chain adjustment and fitting a new or slightly larger rear tire.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 14, 2018, 12:46:15 AM
The Triumph Bonnevilles have a main frame that connects the steering head to the engine and has the supports for the seat and rear fender.  There are two down tubes under the engine that bolt to this main frame and they also connect to the engine.   The swing arm connects directly to the back of the motor.  There are some brackets called outriggers that connect the swing arm pivot to the frame.  All of this bolts together and it must be properly aligned so the bike goes straight and true.

The first step is to tie the front of the bike to the work bench with four tie downs.  They will hold the bike upright during the alignment.  The nearside tie downs are shown in the photos.  One tie down connects lower nearside triple clamp to the far forward nearside corner of the work bench.  The other tie down attaches the nearside of the frame neck to an eyelet midway on the nearside of the work bench.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 14, 2018, 12:51:32 AM
These fotos show the two offside tie downs.  The result is the front end of the bike is tied down to the workbench.  The back of the bike is not tied down. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 14, 2018, 12:56:43 AM
A level is clamped to the side of the main frame tube near the steering head.  The tie downs are adjusted so the bubble is in the middle of the sight glass.  Now the front end of the bike is plumb. (The side of the main tube goes straight up-and-down.)

Tomorrow this procedure will continue. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 15, 2018, 10:48:45 AM
Now a bottle jack is placed under the engine, a vertical bar is clamped onto the rear wheel, and another level is attached to the vertical bar.  These bolts are loosened:  the swing arm pivot, the three outrigger bolts on each side, the two front and rear upper engine mount bolts, the two cylinder head stay bolts, the lower rear engine mount bolt with its the two stay plate bolts on each side, the lower front engine mount bolt, the four bolts holding the lower frame tube bracket to the tubes (in front of the engine), and the eight bolts holding the lower frame tubes to the main frame.  There are 29 bolts, total, to be loosened.

All of these bolts go through holes that are larger diameter than their shanks.  The rear wheel can be tilted from side to side when all are loose.  There is enough slop in the system to allow this.  The important thing is to tighten all of the bolts when the rear tire and the side of the main frame tube near the steering head are plumb.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 15, 2018, 11:05:14 AM
Some sort of way to hold the rear wheel in plumb is needed.  Two ratchet straps are used with the top ends connected to the top of the vertical bar and the lower ends attached to eye loops on either side of the work bench.  The straps holding the front of the bike to the bench and the straps to the bar are adjusted until the bubbles are centered on both levels.  Nw all 29 bolts are tightened in the sequence described in the Triumph shop manual.

The Bonneville has a square frame tube near the steering head that makes this trick possible.  Most frames do not have anything like this.  When I have a bent frame straightened I ask for a leveling plate to be welded on near the steering head do this operation.  It is easy weld it on in the correct alignment when the frame is in the jig.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 16, 2018, 10:20:51 AM
A carpenter's stringline is wrapped around the front wheel and staked to the back of the work bench as shown in the pix.  The string should touch the tires, only, and be stretched tight.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 16, 2018, 10:27:40 AM
The front wheel should be turned so the gaps between the tire outer edges at the back of the tire and the string are the same on both sides.  The string should just touch the forward edges of the rear tire.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 16, 2018, 10:50:54 AM
The rear tire is moved in the chain slack adjusters until the gaps between the rear edges and the string are the same on both sides.  Some fiddling is needed.  The gaps between the rear edges of the front tire and the string should also be the same on each side, the string should touch the forward edges of the back tire, and the string on each side of the bike should be unbent.

Measure the distances between the ends of the swing arm and somewhere on the chain adjusters on both sides of the swingarm.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 16, 2018, 10:58:25 AM
The end product is a drawing like this.  This procedure needs to be repeated every time the bike is put together.  The gap will change slightly.

This leveling plate near the steering head, two levels, and string procedure was developed so bikes could be aligned in locations without a frame building table, such as transit vans, parking lots, paddocks, etc.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 18, 2018, 01:11:04 AM
The FIM rules say "No part of any streamlining may exceed below the inner circle of the tyre rim at its lowest position."

The rear wheel covers are streamlining.  They extended down to the outer face of the wheel rim and they were taped to it.  The edge of the cover was lower than the inner circle of the wheel rim.  Now the edges are trimmed so they do not go lower than the inner edge of the rim and the outside edges are reinforced.

The new rules also say "With the rider in racing position, no part of the streamlining shall cover the front wheel rim when viewed perpendicular from the side."  There was a small portion of the rim that was below the fender and hidden from view by the fairing.  The lower fairing leading edges are being trimmed back so the rim below the fender is clearly visible from the side.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 19, 2018, 01:19:32 PM
Lots of aluminum and a zillion pop rivets later...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 19, 2018, 01:25:15 PM
The bike meets the new 2018 FIM rules as wells those listed for 2019.  The last tasks were to cut crescents out of the leading edges of the fairing  The rim below the fender needs to be visible from the sides when the rider is on the bike.  The bike is not loaded now so it looks like too much is removed.  Actually, just enough of the fairing was taken off to meet the new regs.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: stay`tee on August 19, 2018, 06:40:04 PM
Wobbley you state from the FIM rules that, "No part of any streamlining may exceed below the inner circle of the tyre rim at its lowest position"

I am looking at the FIM Technical Appendices for FIM World Records as supplied and used at out FIM Australian Speed Trials this year at Gairdner, cannot find any reference to this rueling  :?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 20, 2018, 01:18:59 PM
Ours is issued after the FIM international congress.  Maybe they made the changes?  The full rules are on the BMST website.
 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 20, 2018, 04:46:11 PM
The wind tunnel folks have some options to use during testing.  The smoke looks like a good idea.  Pressure transducers under the wheels will give me valuable information about lift at speed.  Are there any other options that are useful to a bike guy?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: stay`tee on August 20, 2018, 05:39:28 PM
Thankyou Wobbley for bringing that to my attention,, I am reading from the rules dated July 20, 2017, I notice the ones you have posted are dated July 2, 2018,,

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on August 21, 2018, 09:08:20 AM
The wind tunnel folks have some options to use during testing.  The smoke looks like a good idea.  Pressure transducers under the wheels will give me valuable information about lift at speed.  Are there any other options that are useful to a bike guy?

Don't over-tuft it WW!  :-o :-o :-D
https://a2wt.com/AeroInfo.html
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 21, 2018, 10:08:37 AM
Woody, the time I set aside to research this aero stuff I spent beating metal into something that might pass the rules and I leave on Thursday AM.  Unfortunately, I am as sharp as a marble on this subject.  Do you mean to make sure I do this, or to minimize it?  Also, what should I get for data to use in digital modeling this winter?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on August 21, 2018, 11:42:37 AM
The example shown has about 2~3 times more tufting than you will need.  :-o
This will show more than the smoke. It will show what happens when the smoke gets fuzzy and it will!  :x
Wind tunnels are pit stops - mount everything major that you can - it is quicker to remove stuff than to mount it! Take lots of tape and cardboard! :lol:
Something I think might be interesting is to wrap your fairing with shrink wrap to smooth out all your pop rivet turbulators.  :roll:
Two most common comments in the wind tunnel: "Wow, look at that!" and "I have no idea!" What you need is somewhere in between!  :cheers:
They will give you a spreadsheet with all the run data but they do not chart it. Let me know if you need help with that. Enjoy A2. Ask for a look-see next doors!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 21, 2018, 12:04:29 PM
Thanks for the help.  I arrive at the campsite near the tunnel a few days early.  At camp, using duck tape and styrofoam and cardboard I will add what I think I need.  Then it is easily removed during the test.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 21, 2018, 12:21:21 PM
What are the tufts made from?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Marcroux on August 21, 2018, 12:43:22 PM
Yarn, use a contrasting color. May be your wife has some she can spare. If not try a place that sells knitting supplies. That what I used.

  
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 22, 2018, 01:25:48 AM
Macroux, your location is Chico.  That was where I did my last 3 years in engineering skool.  They had a flume in the hydraulics engineering lab and that is where we did "water tunnel" modeling.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Marcroux on August 22, 2018, 12:51:17 PM
I used the farm roads, a pickup truck , two of my buddies and camera to do my aero testing. Why the cops never trouble us I don't know. Funny writing this I am in the mood for a Grad burger sadly the Graduate close a few year back. I went to Chico State never finish my degree.    
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 22, 2018, 04:40:52 PM
That looks good.  Your back is level which is very important.  Make sure you can keep it level and see ahead with your helmet on.  I needed to use a Shoei X-14 helmet with the optional thicker front pad and thinner rear pad to get the proper view while tucked.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 25, 2018, 08:04:54 PM
The bike is together and it is in the Winnemucca KOA.  The 104 horsepower at the rear wheel is all I can get this year.  It is not enough.  So, work was done on the aero.  Note the lower tail hump, longer tail length, and higher seat.  I knew I needed more than the power I could get last year.  So, I lost 35 pounds and did six months of yoga.  Now I can painlessly flop down and hug the tank like young Macroux.  My mechanic son is coming up from Camp Pendleton and he will meet me here.  Then we go on to the speed trials.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 02, 2018, 12:54:30 AM
The bike is transported with the tail and fairing on it.  There is a 152 mph record for a naked 1000cc twin in FIM.  It was set many years ago by Alan Cathcart, the UK journalist, on a Bonneville Thruxton.  We got to Wendover on Sunday and spent the evening and Monday switching the bike to naked class and getting it through tech.  My middle son, Josef, took leave from Camp Pendleton to help with it.  The job was too big for me, alone.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: TheBaron on September 02, 2018, 11:12:46 AM
i just love the hammered alloy and rivets of your streamlining, great effort...

What speed numbers did you get as an "open" bike ???

I rode one of these new Bonnies for a few years and liked it, however they sit up so high, making such a big hole in the air, that
140 mph would be a great number to hit I'm guessing....

Robert in California
Red Baron Race Team

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 03, 2018, 11:34:36 AM
The bike ran naked on Tuesday.  No one was ahead of me in the line so I made the first run of the day with a choice of track.  There was a strong wind from the mountain side.  If I got blown off of the track on the short course I could hit the timing tower. If this happened on the long course I would be out in the crunchies with much less danger.  So I chose the long track.

The launch and crossing the underground river was OK.  Then a gust of wind came through the slot and almost blew me off of the track.  I kept on the throttle and heeled it over toward the mountains and the run went OK.  The bike could not gain any rpm after the shift into 5th.  The frontal area and aero drag coefficient are much increased during a side wind so this might be part of the problem.  Timed speed was 127 mph.

It was time to make a calibration run.  The bike was ran a second time while shooting ducks through the entire timed mile.  Runs on two different dynos show that this happens at 8,900 rpm.  The time slip said 129 mph.  Some calculations gave me the slip factor.

The gearing was examined using the slip factor.  The 19 - 42 combo would hit the rev limiter at the 155 mph target speed.  This was against a 152 mph record.  The gearing was perfect.  The bike does not have enough power.  The naked record was out of reach for the meet.  Right then I gave up on FIM record chasing.  The objective now was to get a 150 mph medal.  We went back to camp and started to put on the streamlining.

Josef and I went to the Legends dinner and the ladies in town made this great banquet.  Good food and it was free.  Any day that a guy learns something and goes to bed on a full stomach is a nice one. 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on September 03, 2018, 12:38:04 PM
WW;

I think it was Jack Costella, who said "Add gears until it goes slower, then add horsepower."

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: TheBaron on September 03, 2018, 07:40:18 PM
Sounds like you had a fine time of it, all things considered...

You are so right about crosswinds slowing you down....

My little pushrod 350 will lose 5+ mph if it just sees a flag move anywhere in the area....

Man, that is a LOT of slippage you had,,,, 20% or so,,, that backend would have been fishtailing all over the place, and the tire should have been all chewed up...

DO you think some of it could have been clutch slippage?  I had that problem and I had to shim the clutch springs to get it to stop...and then, of course, the dang clutch cable failed from all the extra strain....on the starting line and with no spare on-hand...that's racing

It will often only show up in High Gear and after the oil get good and warm.....You are ,after all, making a lot more horsepower than an oem motor....

Good fortune and hope to see you on the track sometime..

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 04, 2018, 10:03:15 AM
The calibration run was in 4th gear.  The slippage was a percent above or below 5%.  I do not remember exactly.  It is in my notes in the truck.

There is a Motul oil that I am using that prevents clutch slippage.  I cannot remember the designation.  It is on a bottle of it in the truck.

Last night I tried to sleep in a truck stop in Woodward Oklahoma.  Big trucks were near me.  One was a cattle truck that needed an engine rebuild.  Those guys and gals do not turn those rigs off at night.  It was hella smelly and noisy.  It took a lot of beer for me to go to sleep.  I woke up groggy with a hangover.  Now I am in the diner drinking coffee until my eyeballs vibrate.  Then it will be time to hit the road.

We spent Tuesday evening and Wednesday morning at the KOA rebuilding the bike to partial streamliner.  Then it went through tech in the late afternoon.  Thursday was the last day of the meet and they were doing down runs till noon.  I was one of the first to be staged and ready to go.  There was an 8 mph headwind so I waited.  About 11:45 it died down to around 3 to 4 mph so I made the run.

The bike is always spooky on the shutdown.  It is either about to go into a speed wobble or in one.  It was well behaved this time.  Dropping 35 pounds of weight and reducing the fork offset did the trick.

Speed was 149.7 mph.  0.4 mph slow from a 150 medal.  We will be back again next year.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on September 04, 2018, 10:24:47 AM
WW, you are such a tease! :-o :-D :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on September 04, 2018, 06:20:49 PM
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOh.........so close!  You beat me by 1.9 mph :wink: :wink:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: TheBaron on September 04, 2018, 08:22:25 PM
Wow ! your aero package gained you a full 20 mph....

That is a real good job you did on the aero package.....

When a fairing is added to a lot of bikes, only a 6 to 9 mph increase is seen,,,till they do some aligning and tweaking anyway...

Robert

PS: 4th gear makes a lot more sense on the slippage
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 04, 2018, 10:52:52 PM
My little four cylinder truck with all of the camping gear, bike, trailer, air compressor, EZ up, generator, etc, is too slow for the interstate.  I take a lot of back roads like in the pictures.  This gives me a lot of time to think about aero.  Right now I am in Wellington, Kansas.  At night in camp I have a few beers and look at the bike.  What I need to do is lower the top of the tank and fairing so I am looking over the top of the triple clamp to see the track.  This will make a big reduction in frontal area.
 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on September 05, 2018, 09:59:47 AM
WW... if you are on the way home from Bonneville you may have turned right when you should have turned left....  :-D
The second pic looks like you are on my road, except for the pavement and trees  :roll: 
Enjoy your trip on the back roads... best way too see America   :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 05, 2018, 10:07:59 PM
The Oklahoma state parks have excellent camping facilities.  There was no need to go to the truck stop.  Of course, I learned this after I spent the night with the big trucks.

My pa showed me how to drive his F-100 Ford using a vacuum gauge hooked to the manifold.  High manifold vacuum = good fuel mileage.  The little truck will pull the load at 75 to 80 mph on the freeway, no problem.  Unfortunately I am using a lot of throttle and manifold vacuum is low.  I am assuming this means the gas mileage will also be low.  The 2008 Toyota is fuel injected.  I do not know if the manifold vacuum of driving is valid for EFI engines.  It worked great on carb engines.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 09, 2018, 12:17:18 PM
It has been raining off and on since I entered New Mexico.  Last night I visited relatives in Kentucky.  I was sleeping in the truck and the EZ-up was covering the bike, tools, and other things I took out of the truck to sleep in it.  It rained for hours, then it rained extremely hard for a few minutes.  The EZ-up collapsed onto the bike and trailer under the force from the falling water.  These are the after effects from Gordon.  A big hurricane is scheduled to hit North Carolina the day I was going to arrive.  So, I will be getting there a few days early to sit it out in the KOA during the hurricane. Then the task will be to get ready for the wind tunnel test.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on September 09, 2018, 12:29:02 PM
You are in my parts.  Welcome to Kentucky!   This is where you can get blizzard conditions in the winter, tropical conditions in the summer, and very little true spring or fall conditions.  Hope you didn't see any damage with the rains.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 09, 2018, 08:57:24 PM
I am on Hicks Pike between Georgetown and Cynthiana.  The EZ-up has been replaced.  The country around here is nice and we bury my father's ashes tomorrow. 

The wind tunnel fellow wants me to do all mods to the streamlining that I think I need before the test.  A 3-foot by 3-foot sheet of 0.025 aluminum is $27 at the local Lowes.  That is too expensive.  There is no shortage of empty beer cans around here so the mods will be done using those and I will do them correctly when I get back to Oregon.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 11, 2018, 10:45:44 PM
The ol' walrus has Plan A to deal with the hurricane.  Right now I am between Kingsport and Bristol Tennessee.  It is a day's drive to Statesville N.C. where a KOA cabin is rented throughout the wind tunnel test.  Tomorrow I will snake down the mountains and get to Statesville in the late afternoon.  Then the camping gear and assorted tools will be dragged into the cabin.  A short trip to Home Depot, the grocery store, and the liquor store will provide the items needed for a prolonged stay in the cabin.  All this will happen before the first rain bands hit Statesville.  During the storm I will be snug in the cabin and pounding metal.  The sun will come out, the birds chirp, and I will tuft the bike.  Then it is a short drive to the wind tunnel for the test.  What can go wrong?  Nothing.  There is no need for a Plan B.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on September 12, 2018, 09:12:18 AM
WW, Plan B: Once you have it tufted just wait for the 145 mph winds - save big $$$!  :-o :-D :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: ggl205 on September 12, 2018, 10:22:52 AM
WW, Plan B: Once you have it tufted just wait for the 145 mph winds - save big $$$!  :-o :-D :cheers:


Dang, Woody, I was thinking the same thing!

John
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 12, 2018, 10:30:29 PM
Right now I am in the KOA in Statesville.  The wind tunnel is in nearby Mooresville.  The owners let me park Bonnie on its trailer under a steel canopy over a picnic area.  It is a clear and calm night.  The campground is packed with folks fleeing the coast.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 14, 2018, 12:37:44 PM
This weekend we get the rain.  Right now it is starting to be quite windy.  Hopefully these cabins are bolted down to the foundations.

An end panel was made yesterday from flattened beer cans sandwiched between two layers of aluminum roof flashing.  Trials will be made with and without the end piece.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 14, 2018, 12:42:31 PM
The "new" panels were made yesterday to block off the gap under the offside foot peg.  The bike is being tufted during the short periods when the wind dies down.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Bookfla on September 14, 2018, 01:38:43 PM
I was at A2 with my APS bike last week. Gained a lot of good information. As everyone has said, be prepared to do as much upgrades/changes as possible. The one area they will focus on is under the front end triple trees and any gap between fender and fairing. I actually brought along another MPS bike we have thinking if I had time I would put my son up on that bike. After running a 2 hour gauntlet on the APS bike it was clear to me there were many upgrades I could do on the smaller MPS bike. Without these changes being implemented prior to testing I would really be wasting my money. All in all $990 dollar tunnel visit which enabled me to gain 40HP. In my opinion well worth it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 14, 2018, 08:38:38 PM
Folks in the South sure are friendly.  Many folks in this campground are not certain if they have a house to return to.  You would not know this by how they act.  They are calm, upbeat, polite and courteous despite the horrible trouble.

This morning I went to town for supplies like an additional water jug, food, pop rivets, duck tape, and beer.  Then I set to work.  The back end is tufted and the gap under the nearside foot peg is starting to be closed.

Thanks for the advice.  The A2 expert and me discussed the critical area at the front end.  It is an air cooled motor and it is hard to do much there.  We will look at in detail during the test.

Some of the beer I got was Island Lager from Lakeland.  It tastes pretty good.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 15, 2018, 08:28:55 PM
This place reminds me of Gilligan's Island.  Most of the folks are stranded here 'cause the highways are impassable to their homes.  I might be the only exception.  The wind tunnel test is on Tuesday morning so I need to stick around.  Last night I was invited to a nice southern dinner in a trailer.  Tonight I cooked for the group.  Hobo stew was what I made.  They liked it.

It has been windy here for days.  About noon the rains came.  The locals call these "bands."  Two to three inches are predicted tonight, four inches tomorrow, and 2 to 3 inches tomorrow night.  The hard rains in the bands are scary.  Living in Oregon, I thought i was an expert on rain.  Not so.  This is new to me.

The shiny metal shows the additions to the nearside streamlining.  The upper section is made from three layers of roof flashing.  The lower section needed to be beat into a compound curve.  This could not be done using flashing so I went into town and spent an outrageous amount of money for some 0.025 sheet.  It is shown with the slot for the side stand.  It took some major figuring to get the side stand hole just the right size.      .   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on September 15, 2018, 08:44:25 PM
It's going to be very interesting to see the effect of the closed versus open tail.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 16, 2018, 08:11:32 AM
The tail end removal is the only thing that is planned to be changed during the test, at this time.  Any other changes and retests will be what they suggest.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 16, 2018, 08:39:34 AM
It rained all last night and today it is raining with the wind blowing harder.  The building in the picture is protecting the bike so I can work on it.  These wind is predicted to change direction this evening and it will blow the rain under the canopy.  It looks like I have six to eight hours to finish the tufting and metal work.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Frank06 on September 16, 2018, 12:29:29 PM
Good luck getting it done in time Bo.  Looking forward to your report from the wind tunnel!  This is a great thread BTW...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 16, 2018, 09:09:26 PM
It looks like I will be done on time and have a few hours to visit the NASCAR museum in Mooresville. 

This first picture shows the lower edge of the nearside tail as it was at the BMST.  It was reworked this morning to give smoother air flow as shown in the second pix.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 16, 2018, 09:13:05 PM
The seat cover blew off the bike somewhere in Missouri.  A new temporary one was made using a piece of rug and duck tape.  The nose was tasseled.  That was all I could do today.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 16, 2018, 09:17:26 PM
All the cockroaches I have known scampered away when the room light was turned on.  The ones around here have no fear of light or people.  This guy kept messing around with my foot.  A shot of carb cleaner calmed him down.  Now I keep the can within reach for self defense.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 18, 2018, 09:23:17 PM
There are two wind tunnels in the complex.  The Aerodyn tunnel is the biggest.  It can swivel cars to check the aero in yaw, has jacks to adjust ride height, and can spin the tires during the test.  Big dollar factory teams use this tunnel.  Private people can too if they can afford it.

Motorcycles, bobsleds, bicycles, and other smaller vehicles are tested in the A2 wind tunnel.  It does not have yaw capability, jacks, or tire spinners.  It costs less.  $495 an hour with a 2 hour minimum.  Today I am in it and the US olympic bobsled team will be using the tunnel tomorrow.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 18, 2018, 09:25:52 PM
The tunnel.  Note the huge fans.  The control room.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 18, 2018, 09:28:39 PM
The Bonneville as seen through tunnel side windows.  All tests were done with me on the bike.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on September 18, 2018, 09:37:55 PM
Bo, i've never seen anyone put more into a project than you.
You blow my mind. And now you're in all that bad weather to boot!!!!.
You deserve all the success you desire.  :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stan Back on September 18, 2018, 09:47:57 PM
. . . so how was your blow job?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 19, 2018, 09:57:56 PM
Hi Mike.  The weather fiasco was not anticipated when I left Bonneville to go back east.  It is quite an adventure. 

Actually Stan, I was sucked.

The tunnel was operated by Geoff Eaker, the son of the firm's founder, Gary Eaker.  The streamlining has as close to a NACA shape as I could get and it provides plenty of clearance around the sides of the engine for future turbos, intercoolers, supercharger, etc, I explained to Geoff.

The first trial established a baseline to compare against during the future tests.  The tufts were analyzed along with a smoke test.  I looked through the center of the windshield like I do at Bonneville, with some clearance between my chest and the top of the tank.  About half to 3/4 of my helmet sticks out above the windshield.  Aero drag coefficient was 0.494.

I asked Geoff about the shape of the streamlining.  He said it is OK, except the top of the tail should be higher behind my butt.  It was higher until this year and I had to lower it 'cause of a rule change, I told him.

My plan is to get rid of those Stegosaurus plates and smooth out the finish, I said.  He said it works just great like it is and that effort is not needed.  Later this was discussed with Gary, too.  He said the plate and rivet texture is OK and gave me some sort of scientific explanation I could not comprehend.

Conclusion:  Do not monkey with the shape and leave the riveted plates as is.

I was going to cut aluminum from the top of the fairing and lower the windshield to reduce frontal area, I told Geoff.  The windshield is far more streamlined than me, he said, and it is best to leave it like it is.  Geoff said I need to lower my head.  My chest was on the tank and I just peeked at the horizon through the lowest part of the windshield for another trial.  Aero drag coefficient dropped down to 0.457.  My chest was on the tank for the next trials.

Conclusion:  Keep head down and behind windshield.  Tomorrow or the next day I will post something about the other trials.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stan Back on September 20, 2018, 11:34:23 AM
Very interesting.

It came as a surprise to me as well that some of our long-held assumptions don't hold up.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 21, 2018, 09:45:59 AM
The fans were behind me and pulling air out of the tunnel.  This make sense 'cause it pulls a more uniform mass of air past the bike.  There would be lots of turbulence and non-uniform flow around the scoot if the fans blew into the bike.

The session was the minimum 2 hours.  Eight trials were made.  This involved for each trial 3 minutes of sitting on the bike in a racing crouch perfectly still and 3 minutes with the fans blowing.  In addition, there is the time needed to make changes between the trials.  After the session my leathers weighed about double what they normally do and I was drenched in sweat.  The 2 hour session was all that I could handle physically and I am in good shape for a codger.   Conclusion, schedule two hour sessions on consecutive days if a lot of testing is needed.

The shape was refined to its present by 12 years of work, looking at time slips, and lots of data crunching.  The tunnel was used as a verification of what was done, what is planned, and for calibration of the aero drag coefficient to be used in field calculation.  Conclusion, it might be much more quicker and effective to use virtual modeling to get the bike to the stage where wind tunnel work is productive.

It seems the most potential improvement is based on the rider doing something different.  This is consistent with experience in all of my past racing.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on September 21, 2018, 11:45:56 AM
WW, small things make big differences some times.
I'll share a wind tunnel experience with a high $$ team. Two riders - same road race bike. One rider bigger than the other rider. Bigger rider would cock his feet on the pegs into the wind and the Cd would go down a few points - smaller rider opposite effect - Cd would go up.  :x :-o :x :-o Bigger rider would put his elbows level to the ground - the Cd would go up - smaller rider - the Cd would go down!  :x :-o :x :-o Who knew?  :? :?
I had a 1979 CB750 Honda street bike that would go 4~5 mph faster with a luggage box on the luggage rack when riding two up! Made the closing air happier!  :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: stay`tee on September 21, 2018, 05:03:02 PM
Yes, as Wood stated, small changes make a difference,, back in the day I drag raced a H2 Kawasaki (the original 2stroke version), by sitting back on the pillion seat from half track on, saw a 5mph improvement in trap speed  :-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 23, 2018, 01:52:18 PM
The 500cc H1 was too scary for me.  The 750cc H2 must have been a beast to ride.

The baseline Cd was 0.494 with me sitting where I looked through the center of the windshield.  Lowering my head dropped the Cd to 0.457

My leathers were a bit loose before I lost 35 pounds and they are really loose now.  Tape was wrapped around my legs and midsection to make  them fit tighter.  My head was down like during the 0.457 run.  Cd dropped to 0.445  This was the lowest it got.  Conclusion - get leathers taken in so they will fit tighter.

A speed hump was taped onto the leathers behind my head.  My head was down and my leathers were taped.  Cd rose to 0.463.  Conclusion - do not use a speed hump.

The tail was closed at its far end by a flat metal plate.  It was removed.  My head was down, leathers taped, and no speed hump.  Cd rose to 0.453  Conclusion - close the tail end with a flat plate.  The plate was off for the next two tests.

There is a 1'' by 3'' slot at the front of the windshield at its base.  Air flowing into it reduces turbulence around my head.  It was taped shut.  My head wad down, leathers taped, no speed hump, and the end plate was removed. Cd was 0.454  Conclusion - the slot in the front of the windshield does not reduce Cd. 

There is an open area in the belly streamlining to allow the side stand to be deployed.  It was taped shut.  My head was down, leathers taped, no speed hump, with an open windshield slot and an open tail.  Cd was 0.452  Conclusion - the open space for the side stand has an insignificant effect on aero.

Wind speed was 60 mph and data was extrapolated to 175 mph for all tests.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Frank06 on September 23, 2018, 05:47:07 PM
There is a 1'' by 3'' slot at the front of the windshield at its base.  Air flowing into it reduces turbulence around my head.  It was taped shut.  My head wad down, leathers taped, no speed hump, and the end plate was removed. Cd was 0.454  Conclusion - the slot in the front of the windshield does not reduce Cd. 

This is something I've often wondered about: thanks for testing.  It sounds like there's no real penalty for having a slot either.  I've also found that a slot in this area reduces turbulence in street riding.

Bo, was frontal area recalculated for the times when your head was down or is this insignificant? 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on September 23, 2018, 06:16:41 PM
Wobbly, what profile was used to determine the frontal area?  That is, what area was used to calculate the Cd?
Were there any comments about the tuft behavior?  Any tufts on the back of your leathers?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: stay`tee on September 23, 2018, 08:06:27 PM
This is interesting stuff Wobbles, thankyou for shareing  :cheers:

Yes, I would also be interested to know how the turf behaved,,

Regards the slot in front of the screen reducing turbulence,, on my 200+ passes (no slot) I have experienced slight pain in my ears, "vacume"
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 23, 2018, 08:36:44 PM
The slot allows some air to go into the front of the fairing and it reduces turbulence behind the windshield.  It might reduce vacuum, too.

There is a picture of bike 7497 on Scooter's 2018 BMST website.  It is the faired version.  Bike 7498 is the naked version.  I am not sure if there are copyright issues with links so they are not attached.  Smoke tests showed power robbing eddy currents behind my lower back.  My back was not tufted so there is no verification from watching their behavior.  The higher tail top allowed by the earlier rules would have helped reduce turbulence in this area.

Frontal area is 6.45 feet and it is based on measuring a photograph of the front of the bike with me on it.  My helmet is at a typical position in the photo I measured.

My chest is on the tank and my head down in my dreams and in static situations.  In reality, the track edge marking has never been easy for me to see when my chest is on the tank.  I need to sit up like shown in Scooter's photos to get a clear view.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on September 25, 2018, 12:15:58 AM
The CBR1000RR goes 4-mph faster when vents are added to the screen.............
Title: Re: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Frank06 on September 25, 2018, 03:28:53 AM
The CBR1000RR goes 4-mph faster when vents are added to the screen.............
Do you have any pictures or other information you could share about these?  It's something I've thought about trying but never gotten around to

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 25, 2018, 06:33:08 AM
There are movies for the tuft testing and smoke with an excel data printout.  Possibly there is a way I can share these big files.  Maybe putting them somewhere and providing a link?  My next stop is Covington Indiana where my youngest boy is stationed.  Hopefully he or his wife will show me how to do it.

The staggered firing order crank with no counterbalancers worked great.  There was no excessive vibration up to the 8,900 rpm rev limit.  The same cam lobe profile was used last year and this year.  The peak power was at 10,000 rpm with a big dip in the middle of the power band last year.  The peak power was at 8,800 rpm this year with minimal dip in the middle of the power.  Plans are to split the differences in the cam timing and to raise the rev limit 500 rpm to 9,400.  This will give more power and have a power band with a dip in the middle, but not a big one.  This change, and adding a tooth to the rear sprocket to increase tractive effort, should optimize the engine.  Tightening up the leathers and lowering and narrowing the seat pan so I sit lower and tighter will help with streamlining.  The 150 mph goal seems realistic for next year.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on September 25, 2018, 11:31:36 AM
WW, does the motor pull well past peak power?  I have found that running closer to the engine rev limit in the lower gears places you closer to the powerband in the next gear and ultimately allows you to go faster. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 26, 2018, 09:24:18 PM
It pulls good up to the rev limit.  The engine was kept at full throttle in 4th until it hit the rev limit and then it was shifted into 5th.  This seemed to work best.  Like you say, the late shift resulted in placing the shift into 5th gear higher in the power band.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on September 26, 2018, 11:15:10 PM
I would "late shift" them all... the faster you get through the front part the faster you will finish
We generally shift near the rev limit in all but first gear, first will generally break traction at peak power and zoom to the rev limit.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on September 27, 2018, 06:40:33 AM
WW, does the motor pull well past peak power?  I have found that running closer to the engine rev limit in the lower gears places you closer to the powerband in the next gear and ultimately allows you to go faster. 

It pulls good up to the rev limit.  The engine was kept at full throttle in 4th until it hit the rev limit and then it was shifted into 5th.  This seemed to work best.  Like you say, the late shift resulted in placing the shift into 5th gear higher in the power band.

I would "late shift" them all... the faster you get through the front part the faster you will finish
We generally shift near the rev limit in all but first gear, first will generally break traction at peak power and zoom to the rev limit.

OK, here are some visual graphics on why this works . . . . .

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4604/26203940578_646219f86e_c.jpg)

A/   It is the AREA under the portion of the bhp curve BEING USED, that determines how quickly a vehicle can be accelerated,

2/   Every vehicle requires some "range" of useable rpm, say 1500 to 2000 or so, rpm.   This range can be "less" when the gear splits are closer together.    But it is the "width" of the power band requirement, that defines the area under the curve for that particular engine or "tune",

d/   IF, the engine can be safely and reliably operated several hundred rpm above the peak power rpm, the above graph illustrates how a net "power under the curve" increase can be achieved.   By shifting beyond the power peak, the resulting rpm drop then is higher on the power curve, resulting in faster acceleration, AND, potentially higher speed.   UNTIL, power available = drag power being expended.   Ie, drag hp in all forms.

z/   Obviously, taller, wider power bands should always be the goal.    It's called "flattening the aspect ratio".   Sometimes it is easy, mostly though, it is a challenge on reasonably well developed racing engines.

Bhp increases produced, are roughly equal to to the square of dollars spent.   Early bhp gains are always the most cost effective.   Later expenditures can become very expensive per bhp produced.   Just the way it is . . . . . .

 :cheers:
F/b
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: ggl205 on September 27, 2018, 09:58:10 AM
"Bhp increases produced, are roughly equal to the square of dollars spent."

Man, I need to take a closer look at how I do things. My bhp increases have been equal to the cube of dollars spent.

John
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on September 27, 2018, 10:07:58 AM
"Bhp increases produced, are roughly equal to the square of dollars spent."

Man, I need to take a closer look at how I do things. My bhp increases have been equal to the cube of dollars spent.

John

I think that is part of the ways to make more power.... cubic inches and cubic dollars  :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on September 27, 2018, 01:08:43 PM
Well . . . . yeah, it can be a "cubic function".

Sometimes though, costs can be "somewhat" contained by good planning, ie, not having to have the pistons (or other expensive parts . . ) made twice, because someone "overlooked" some small, but important detail . . . . .

 :cheers:  :dhorse:  :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on September 27, 2018, 01:14:41 PM
Another example.   Stage of tune . . . . .   Cam & cam timing change . . . . .

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/850/29931257738_ffa71b1406_b.jpg)

Should make you think . . . . . .

 :cheers:  :dhorse:  :cheers:
F/b
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Frank06 on September 27, 2018, 01:38:40 PM
WW: do you log speed versus time?  And I'm curious which course you typically use.  I wasn't there this year but I seem to remember options of about 1 mile or 3 miles last year that most folks used.  Do you use the shortest track because of your air cooling?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 27, 2018, 09:27:27 PM
Bikes like mine that do not go 175 mph use a five mile course with two miles to get up to speed, a timed mile, and two miles to slow down.  We can run on either the 5-mile long mountain course or the longer international course.  Usually I can pick a course if the FIM has qualified it.  A day with side winds will make me choose a course with less to hit if I get blown off of it.  Also, some courses are in better shape than others.  Naturally, the best one is chosen.

Thanks for posting all of those graphs and other info.  This is a big help.  It gives me something to think about when I get back home.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 27, 2018, 09:50:57 PM
This morning I drove east across Assateague Island and this is what I saw.  The Atlantic Ocean.  The end of the road for WW.  Now it is time to turn around and head west. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Frank06 on September 28, 2018, 12:41:15 PM
Bikes like mine that do not go 175 mph use a five mile course with two miles to get up to speed...

Thanks for clarifying.  I was curious because with more run-up optimum shift points will (presumably) be less important, except for perhaps the last one...  Logging speed is the only way to tell for sure if you're still accelerating.

Have a safe trip home!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 07, 2018, 08:13:48 PM
This is a movie my son and I watched a few minutes ago.  It has footage of the race on Pendine Sands.  The red haired fellow that rides their bikes was very helpful when planning the trip to the UK for the race.  The title is "Salt Bike: a year with the Baron"   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 09, 2018, 07:02:36 PM
Tomorrow I leave Indiana and go to San Clemente to see more grandkids.  Note the descriptive highway sign.  This is a Route 66 shirt I bought.  It does not say that.  Maybe this is the road I am on.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on October 11, 2018, 01:31:48 AM
Enjoy the trip Bo.
God knows you deserve it.
Thanks for all the posts.
You always keep me coming back for more. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 11, 2018, 08:07:10 AM
Seeing Chicago was a goal.  A plan was figured out after discussion with my family in Indiana.  We drove up to the overlook at Indiana Dunes.  In front of us was Lake Michigan, to the left was a steel mill in Gary, and to the right was another mill in Michigan City.  Across the lake to the left was Chi-town.  I got a good look at it through some bird watching binoculars.  All was done from a safe distance and without driving through the south side during rush hour.  That is one huge lake.

The normal operating procedure is to use the computer to figure out a day's drive between 225 and 275 miles on the freeway.  That gives me the end point for the day.  America is pretty much the same in towns along the major highways so there is no adventure there.  So, the drive to the end is done on one and two lane roads.  Regional differences are seen there.  Planning is for nerds so I limited it to scheduling the dyno session, only.  Everything else is on the day-to-day basis.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on October 11, 2018, 09:57:22 AM
WW, it's always more interesting just following your nose and yakking with the locals!  :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Frank06 on October 11, 2018, 05:50:33 PM
Yup.  The adventures always happen on the side roads.

Sent from my MotoE2(4G-LTE) using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 12, 2018, 10:48:30 AM
The afternoon the day before yesterday the St Louie public works guys were raising the flood walls around the city.  Lots of birds are flying overhead going south.  It is time to move fast in a southwest direction.  Right now I am in Joplin Missouri and headed toward Oklahoma.  Yesterday an older local guy told me where to find a section of Route 66 on original condition.  It was way high up in the Ozarks and I took some pictures.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 21, 2018, 10:19:33 AM
Weather in the Rockies was bad so a route west was chosen that went south along the border.  This is a view over the wall at Cuidad Jaurez. It looks like a war zone in Mexico.  Unfortunately, things are not much better on the USA side.  Rural america is changed.  Folks buy things at the big box stores like Walmart or order items through Amazon.  The downtown merchants go out of business.  Nothing is happening socially in the city core anymore so the younger people leave.  The town where my mother spent part of her youth is Hamlin Texas.  It was 30,000 population in the 1910's and 1920's.  Now it has only a few thousand people.   This is happening in small towns almost everywhere I went.  It was also occurring where I went in Britain and Europe, too.  Big cities are growing.  Some areas "on the wrong side of the tracks" where we did not go in my youth are now safe and thriving neighborhoods.

Weather got real good after I drove into the Tucson Arizona basin.  Sun, low humidity, and no wind.  It was really nice there.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 21, 2018, 10:33:27 AM
Now I am in Camp Pendleton on the California coast with Rose, my middle son, and two grandchildren.  My son is a mechanic and he did a full diagnostic scan of my truck.  A bunch of issues were found and we are fixing them.  He does the mental part and I do the menial stuff.  This is his pocket single channel oscilloscope.  It comes with probes, a paddle, and other items in the drawer.  It is real useful for all sorts of diagnostics.  One of these will be a perfect addition to the Bonneville Salt Flats toolbox.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 26, 2018, 12:00:21 AM
Tomorrow I drive north through Los Angeles.  Some trailer axle parts might be bought there so I do not need to pay for shipping to Oregon.  The trailer axle spindles will be upgraded to #84 size.  The inside ends of the spindles will be square shaped and 1.75 inch by 1.75 inch.  They will fit inside an axle made if 2.00 by 2.00 square tubing with 1.25 wall thickness.

The spindles are carbon steel.  The axle tube will be 300 series stainless steel, preferably.   Is there a problem with GMAW welding carbon steel spindles into a stainless steel axle?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on October 26, 2018, 12:38:30 AM
My choice would definitely be to stick with as high a grade carbon steel as you can find, probably 1020. There are all sorts of issues as soon as you start mixing metals, especially in a high stress situation like an axle.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RidgeRunner on October 26, 2018, 09:41:02 AM
     If you haven't already, now might be a good time to evaluate the total underneath combination including the wheel/tire diameter.  Significantly smaller than the tow rig's they will be rolling much faster than the speedometer indicates leading to higher heat, more rapid wear, and more frequent maintenance or replacement of the bearings than otherwise might be expected.

     Maybe just me but I go on high alert when I'm about to overtake a combination with real small trailer wheels spinning like crazy out on the open road.  Especially boat trailers given the environment their bearings get exposed to on a regular basis and not knowing when the owner last inspected and repacked them.

             Ed
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on October 26, 2018, 11:45:30 AM
I'll second RR's comment!!!  :-o :-o :-o
There are a lot of pretty scary rigs out on the road.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on October 27, 2018, 09:47:33 AM
Tomorrow I drive north through Los Angeles.  Some trailer axle parts might be bought there so I do not need to pay for shipping to Oregon.  The trailer axle spindles will be upgraded to #84 size.  The inside ends of the spindles will be square shaped and 1.75 inch by 1.75 inch.  They will fit inside an axle made if 2.00 by 2.00 square tubing with 1.25 wall thickness.

The spindles are carbon steel.  The axle tube will be 300 series stainless steel, preferably.   Is there a problem with GMAW welding carbon steel spindles into a stainless steel axle?

Not a world champion welder but if you could tig weld those parts you could use special arc rods for the dissimilar metals. Just remove the flux and polish the rods. Great filler material.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 30, 2018, 02:54:00 AM
Thanks for the advice.  A local welding supply can order those mixed metal rods.  My depth perception wearing a welding helmet is not good enough for TIG so I figgered out a different approach.  The axle will be made out of 2-inch 1.2 wall thickness square stainless with stainless plates welded on each end.  The spindles will be #84 size made from carbon steel with plates on their inside ends.  The spindles will be bolted to the axle with their centerlines 1.5 inches above the axle centerline.  This makes a drop axle so I can use bigger tires.  New 5-lug rims will replace the 4-lug ones.  Larger Carlisle USA Trail american made tires will be used.  In fact, everything used will be made here.  This will lower the tire rotational speed and maintain the same trailer deck height.  The spindle to axle joints will be dissimilar metals bolted together rather than welded.

The town I am in is Placerville California.  It was a gold rush town in the 1850's.  John Studebaker came out west to mine gold.  That was problematic so he learned how to build high quality wheelbarrows.  The miners liked them.  He moved back to Indiana and started the wagon and carriage business that evolved to the car factory.  This was the 70th year for the "John Studebaker International Wheelbarrow Race"     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on October 31, 2018, 12:37:36 AM
Bo, I bought spectacles much stronger than I need.
Those I use only for Tig. Like a magnifying glass for welding. :-D
I try not looking around at other stuff after.
It's an age thing. When I had my eyes tested I was whining about
the PC ruining my eyesight. The optician said No it's your age!!!!.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on October 31, 2018, 09:29:08 AM
Bo, I bought spectacles much stronger than I need.
Those I use only for Tig. Like a magnifying glass for welding. :-D
I try not looking around at other stuff after.

Yep, me too... I have a dollar store set of 3.0 I use only to weld.  Broke one side at the cheap hinge, so I used a little epoxy to fix it, had some left so I epoxied the other side to keep it from breaking. 
Yea, I should just go to the dollar store and get another pair  :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Lemming Motors on October 31, 2018, 09:32:22 AM
What................

Why has nobody ever told me that if I get some stronger glasses I will be able to weld? I thought it was complete lack of skill causing the variability.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 01, 2018, 02:15:17 AM
The Miller welding helmet I have has a magnifying lens.  That helps a lot.  The problem with one dominant eye for close-up work is the lack of parallax input from two eyes to give good depth perception.  Fortunately someone invented MIG welding.  It is something I can sort of do.

Tomorrow I will be home.  It has been a long trip.  The Mexican border in all states, the Atlantic Ocean at Assateague Island in Virginia, the Pacific Ocean at San Diego, Lake Michigan at Indiana Dunes, and all sorts of places in-between.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RidgeRunner on November 01, 2018, 07:26:36 AM
     Trailer plans look good from here, hope they all work out well for you.  I like your thoughts on keeping the center of gravity low, everything in good combination helps stave off unwanted incidents and white knuckle tows.

                  Ed
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Ron Gibson on November 01, 2018, 07:50:25 PM
John  McKichan used (I think late 60's early 70's) AMC front spindles on the trailer he built for the liner. They were readily available then but might be a little tough to find now. They bolted on with 4 bolts. One advantage was you could carry a spare spindle and hub, 5x4.5 pattern. We smoked a bearing one trip and it only took about 20 minutes to change it.

Ron
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 02, 2018, 07:01:56 PM
Thanks for that idea.  It makes sense to carry a spare spindle and hub along with a spare tire and wheel.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 03, 2018, 11:35:53 PM
This is a picture my son sent me this afternoon.  This is from a Triumph Bonneville.  It shows the spark voltage during the compression stroke on the left and the waste spark during the intake/exhaust stroke on the right.  It takes more voltage to jump the gap during the comp stroke.  This makes the higher spike.  A cylinder that cannot compress makes a lower spike.  He uses the scope for quick detection of suspected dead cylinders.  It takes a fraction of the time that would be needed to use a compression gauge. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on November 04, 2018, 12:24:53 PM
WW;

Interesting display, it is the same type waveform that I used to see on an old surplus Bendix aircraft ignition analyzer that I bought years ago. It came with a manual that explained the waveforms so I learned something about what it was telling me.

The initial voltage spike happens before the plug fires, once the gas (fuel vapor/air) between the electrodes is ionized, which takes a few microseconds, the spark jumps the gap and conducts current. This causes the voltage to fall and it is fairly constant until the spark goes out and the gas is de-ionized. Since there is no current through the plug the voltage jumps up and then decays until the next firing.

A high pressure causes the gas to be harder to ionize so it takes a higher voltage as you pointed out. Once the plug fires it shows that the discharge also occurs at a higher voltage in the pressurized cylinder.

The Bendix manual also showed the effects of a bad condenser in a points ignition. The tail of the waveform showed a large ringing that gradually died out.

A 'scope is a very useful instrument for diagnosing ignition problems.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 04, 2018, 11:54:02 PM
There is a little paddle shaped sensor thing for his scope.  It can get a trace of a wire it is near without touching it.  He says this is great for finding intermittent faults.  He says pulling wires or moving them to hook up a multi tester can alter the system's behavior so it is different than it was when the customer brought the car into the shop.  He likes to "scope out" undisturbed wiring. 

Josef signed up for the Marines when he graduated from high skool.  His MOS is heavy machine gunner.  Then he worked up through the ranks to be a mid level sergeant.  Now he is applying to the program to become an officer.  This means he needs to get a college degree.  His goal is to get a degree in electrical engineering.  He was taking an on-line advanced engineering statistics course when I was visiting him.  In addition, he had to run up and down a mountain and lift ammunition cans to stay in shape for some periodic physical exam, take care of his troops and family, prepare for a deployment to Okinawa, and goof around with his father.  He was a very busy guy.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on November 05, 2018, 09:25:44 AM
Hmmmm, sounds a little like someone else we know!   :-o :-D
Looks like you taught him well!  :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 07, 2018, 10:59:03 AM
No credit goes to me.  He left home as a skinny kid with long greasy hair, a D grade average in high school, and his main skill was breaking skateboards.  The Marine Corps worked wonders.

The problem with road trips is they end and it is time to get back to business.  Leaves are inches deep in the yard and firewood needs to be stacked, chimney cleaned, etc.  Rose is in the UK for a visit so I can "spread out" bike manuals, printouts and stuff over the kitchen table.  And leave it there.  Calibrating the Dynomation computer model to match measured dyno data is the first task.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 07, 2018, 12:05:13 PM
It starts in elementary school.  The are girl's achievement rewards pinned up on the walls.  Special recognition days for people of color, handicaps, etc.  Nothing for white boys with no big issues.  This continues as the boys go through the entire Oregon education system.  The Disney flicks lionize everyone except white males.  This societal "shunning" does not let the white boys develop normally.  The two daughters did well in school.  Both were honor roll students.  The three sons all struggled, or more realistically, did not apply themselves.  The military built up the son's confidence in them selves and all three boys excelled.

The public schools had class rooms for auto repair, machine tool operation, sheet metal fabrication, drafting, etc. in my time.  Shop class was the only thing I liked in school.  It kept me there and gave me something to be interested in besides drugs.  The local high school turned the auto shop into a day care for student mothers.  The other shop classes were discontinued.

It was difficult for Rose and me.  We knew the local police officers on a first name basis thanks to the boys.  One needed his record expunged so he could enlist.  It was a major effort to get all three graduated from high school.  One big challenge was trying to bolster the boys self confidence without encouraging them to be racial bigots or sexist.  Dealing with children is like jacking up a car.  Raising one wheel higher lowers another one unless all the wheels are supported. 



 



 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 19, 2018, 11:14:12 PM
The 2018 engine was modeled in Dynomation 5.  From the user's manual:  "Dynomation-5 incorporates two distinct engine-simulation mathematical models: 1) A Filling-And-Emptying simulation that provides extremely fast mathematical solutions to engine physics, including port- and- induction flow calculations and simplified intake and exhaust-manifold/runner modeling, making the  Filling-And-Emptying model a fast and powerful way to "ballpark" engine design with very good accuracy, and 2) A full Wave-Action simulation that accurately predicts the complex pressure-wave dynamics and particle flow in intake and exhaust ducting.  The Wave-Action model picks up where the Filling-And-Emptying model leaves off and "homes in" on the best port sizes, runner lengths, header-tubing sizes, cam timing, valve motion, and much more, providing unprecedented accuracy for detailed engine analysis."  The next posts show where the modeling was before the bike was ran at the speed trials.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 19, 2018, 11:30:33 PM
The dyno data is approximate.  The pull was done and the session was finished with recommendations to raise the needles a notch and drop the main jets one size.  No verification run was made after those changes were made.  The filling/emptying (FE) model results are shown.  The exhaust system was modeled as a generic "Large-Tube Headers, Mufflers WO/Cat."  In reality it is a large tubed step header with collector and muffler and no catalytic converter.  The modeled and actual systems are slightly different.

The F/E model assumes correct mixture and no reversion.  The drop in torque and power between six and seven grand may be due to one or both.  The model curves do not show this and this is expected.  The rev limiter was set at 8,900 rpm and the model was extended to ten grand.

The F/E model has a good match to actual power if reversion or mixture issues are resolved.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 19, 2018, 11:39:44 PM
The Wave-Action (W-A) model is next.  It does not model mufflers.  Data for the stepped headers, collector, and a megaphone were entered.  The W-A model is a poor approximation of the dyno data.  This is likely caused by it's inability to model mufflers.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 19, 2018, 11:50:06 PM
The Dynomation 6 user's manual says "In cases where you have sufficient test data for the Wave-Action model, but you would like to test a restrictive exhaust system (which requires the FE sim), you can select the Hybrid-Sim model that runs both simulations and combines the results to emphasize the strengths of each model.  That is what I did using the Dynomation 5 model as shown.  It gives a better match between predicted and actual torque and power.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 20, 2018, 12:46:18 AM
The exhaust and intake systems were designed using W-A modeling and a 6-inch long megaphone with a 1.4 degree taper.  This megga looked good in the computer design and the bike ran awful on the dyno.  A muffler was installed and the bike ran great.  This was during the 2017 season, a year before.  So, I knew the W-A model was flakey during the 2018 development.  The F/E model was used for the 2018 tuning.  This shows a comparison of different cam timings using the F/A model.  The intake lobe centers were from 106 to 116 degrees.  The exhaust centers were from 106.5 to 116 degrees.  The 106-116 degree timing was used for the 2018 dyno work and at Bonneville. 

Now the Dynomation 5 model is being updated to Dynomation 6.  Various megga configurations will be tried in an effort to match the W-A predictions to the dyno data.  Then it can be assumed the performance of the megga used for data entry sort of matches the muffler on the bike. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 21, 2018, 03:38:42 PM
Rose is back in town.  She was visiting in the UK, or more specific, Cornwall, England, and Wales.  My computer, dynomation stuff, tech manuals, etc were spread out all over the kitchen table.  "This morning these things will go back into the shed" I said.  My "office" is a nook under the stairs to the loft and it is cramped, dark, there is no room for a printer, and it has no internet.  She says "Gretchen's school desk and bookshelf is not being used.  I cleaned the place up.  Move everything up there."  Gretchen moved out and is in the UK.  Now the "office" is well lit and spacious in an upstairs room. It has internet, too. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 22, 2018, 07:42:02 PM
The Dynomation 5 model was polished up using guidance in the Dynomation 6 user manual.  The inside of the muffler starts out at the 2.5 inch diameter of the downstream collector end.  It expands through a series of tapers and straight sections to a 3-inch diameter immediately upstream from the diffuser and baffle in the muffler.  The length between the two sections is 13.8 inches.  Dynomation wave-action option does not model mufflers.  It does analyze megaphones, so this was entered as a megaphone in the wave-action (W-A) model.

The exhaust system has large diameter tapered headers going into a collector and into the muffler.  One filling/emptying (F/E) model was made that assumes the exhaust system is the "Large Stepped-Tube Headers - Open Exhaust" option.  This is partially appropriate.  Another model assumed the exhaust was "Large-Tube Headers, Mufflers W/O Cat."  This is also applicable.
     
Two hybrid-simulation models were made.  One combined the Large Stepped Tube Headers - Open Exhaust F/E model with the Stepped Header, Collector, Megaphone W/A model.

I smell burning turkey.  This post will be finished later this evening.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 22, 2018, 11:05:05 PM
The other model had the Large-Tube Headers, Mufflers W/O Cat F/E model combined with the Stepped Header, Collector, Megaphone W/A model.  What I am doing is following Dynomation's recommendations as described as per reply 3214.

The results are plotted and they describe two arcs as shown on the attached.  The actual dyno results fit between the curves pretty well.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 22, 2018, 11:54:46 PM
Calculations from a run on Tuesday during the meet show a slip factor of 0.964, or just under 5 percent.  The slip factor is assumed to be between 0 to 5 percent during the 149.6 mph pass on Thursday.  This is 8,392 rpm and 8,705 rpm, respectively.  The rev limiter is set at 8,900 rpm.  The engine was very close to its rpm limit.

The orange power curve band shows the engine should rev higher than it is.  Setting the rev limit at 9,400 rpm should provide 161.5 to 167.5 mph at 5 and 0 percent slip, respectively.  A goal for this year is to send the head to Kibblewhite to make sure the valve train will be able to handle that 500 rpm increase.  Another objective is to have an additional 500 rpm programmed into the ignition module rev limit.  Then the engine needs to be checked to make sure the rod bearings and other critical parts are OK. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on November 23, 2018, 02:15:43 AM
Bo, have you ever considered moving to South Africa?.
We could really benefit from your research. :wink:

You inspire me. You leave no stone unturned. Thanks man. :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on November 24, 2018, 11:15:00 AM
The graphs are great!
My only comment is that the dyno results won't truly reflect the computer models unless the AFR is dead on.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 30, 2018, 01:43:06 PM
MIke, it has been several days since your post and I was thinking about the time between retirement and the final croak.  It was only today when a reply can be made.  The problem with the final stage in life is it is so unpredictable.  There is a likely chance Rose and I, and our children will be better off if we are nearby and in familiar surroundings.  The next move for me will be to the local old folks home or the boneyard.  That does not mean I will not visit various places.

The Dynomation program should work in South Africa.  It is easy enough to use that the average guy or gal can figure out what they need to do.  There might be a model for a Cleveland in it and it does analyze turbo and supercharger addition.

Ransom, the next dyno session will focus on the AFR, only.  Fight now the Dynomation 6 model is being made.  Then, wave action will be looked at closely.  There might be reversion issues at midrange that cannot be corrected by jetting.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 09, 2018, 10:17:51 AM
Two short lengths of aluminum rod, a 1947 Logan lathe, and a confused old guy are the four actors in this drama.  Is there a reference that shows how to turn an elliptical shaped bell mouth on a lathe?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on December 09, 2018, 10:51:15 AM
Bo, you may want to look for articles on metal spinning. That looks like an ideal application.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on December 09, 2018, 11:08:19 AM
WW, were your ears burning on Friday? Mike Perry and I were talking about you at PRI!  :? :-D

http://www.profblairandassociates.com/pdfs/RET_Bellmouth_Sept.pdf

Tracer attachment for your Logan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEyvheENhdI

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 10, 2018, 10:21:43 AM
The spinning looks to be the most efficient method.  There are two 5.5 inch diameter by 2 inch long aluminum rods that cost $58 waiting to be mauled and mutilated into stacks so I am "invested into" the cutting from billet procedure.

My old engineering graphics textbook from college shows how to draw an ellipse.  This afternoon I will draw the stack cross-section on graph paper and then draw where each cut will go.

An e-mail was made to Arias that included the job number for the pistons.  I asked them for the maximum average piston speed the slugs can handle before accelerated wear becomes an issue.  They were also asked the maximum acceleration the pistons can have before ring flutter is a problem.  Right now the rev limiter is set at 4,000 feet per minute average piston speed.  That is a limit we used in the 1970's and it might be slow when considering modern materials.

Tractive force calculations show an advantage to using gearing with a high numerical ratio and lots of rpm from the engine.  The elliptical stacks with plenums can be modeled in Dynomation 6.  Use of them shows an increase in power at horsepower peak rpm and more power in the decay portion of the power band beyond the peak.
   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 11, 2018, 12:42:42 AM
I was thinking about both of you on Friday.  That tracer idea reminds me of something I did back in hi-school metal shop to make a complex shape.

There is a formula in Harold Bette's book "Engine Airflow."  It empirically equates intake flow to horsepower.  Intake flow tops out at 230 cfm at 28 inches water for the complete system using valves, port, manifold, carb, and air filter.  There are two cylinders.  The "Coefficient for Estimating Horsepower" is 0.257 (See Page 82).  2 x 0.257 x 230 = 118 HP at the flywheel at 60 degrees F, 29.92 inches pressure, and 0 percent humidity.  This corrects out to 117 flywheel HP in the Dynojet Standard atmosphere of 68 degrees F, 29.92 inches pressure, and 0 percent humidity.  A traditional wild guess at drivetrain loss is 10 percent.  117 x 0.9 + 105 HP  This is almost exactly what the dyno read during the tests last summer.

Peak power RPM is also calculated empirically based on a formula in Bette's book.  "Coefficient for RPM" 1196 (See Page 83).  Displacement is 30.35 cubic inches per cylinder.  Air flow is 230 CFM, as in the previous equation.  Peak power RPM is (1196 / 30.35) x 230 = 9,063 RPM.  This is almost exactly what the dyno says.

The preceding formulae predict performance from a fully developed engine.  This is an air cooled twin with side draft ports.  There likely is not a lot more performance to be had - unless intake air flow is boosted.  A successful tuner of these things told me ten years ago I would need to go to a bell mouths on the carbs like I am designing now.  It was something I never had time to do, until now.  He also said the motors needed to be spun up to ten grand.  This was something I could not do until now.  My motor building skills needed to be developed.

It is a long road from dreaming about going fast to actually doing it.           
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on December 11, 2018, 09:07:49 AM
Wobbly,
It might be easier to turn a (wooden) plug mold and then lay up fiberglas bells around it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on December 11, 2018, 04:09:41 PM
What size is the ID on those venturis Bo?.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on December 11, 2018, 07:54:48 PM
I was thinking about both of you on Friday.  That tracer idea reminds me of something I did back in hi-school metal shop to make a complex shape.

There is a formula in Harold Bette's book "Engine Airflow."  It empirically equates intake flow to horsepower.  Intake flow tops out at 230 cfm at 28 inches water for the complete system using valves, port, manifold, carb, and air filter.  There are two cylinders.  The "Coefficient for Estimating Horsepower" is 0.257 (See Page 82).  2 x 0.257 x 230 = 118 HP at the flywheel at 60 degrees F, 29.92 inches pressure, and 0 percent humidity.  This corrects out to 117 flywheel HP in the Dynojet Standard atmosphere of 68 degrees F, 29.92 inches pressure, and 0 percent humidity.  A traditional wild guess at drivetrain loss is 10 percent.  117 x 0.9 + 105 HP  This is almost exactly what the dyno read during the tests last summer.

Peak power RPM is also calculated empirically based on a formula in Bette's book.  "Coefficient for RPM" 1196 (See Page 83).  Displacement is 30.35 cubic inches per cylinder.  Air flow is 230 CFM, as in the previous equation.  Peak power RPM is (1196 / 30.35) x 230 = 9,063 RPM.  This is almost exactly what the dyno says.

The preceding formulae predict performance from a fully developed engine.  This is an air cooled twin with side draft ports.  There likely is not a lot more performance to be had - unless intake air flow is boosted.  A successful tuner of these things told me ten years ago I would need to go to a bell mouths on the carbs like I am designing now.  It was something I never had time to do, until now.  He also said the motors needed to be spun up to ten grand.  This was something I could not do until now.  My motor building skills needed to be developed.

It is a long road from dreaming about going fast to actually doing it.           

Motorcycle loss is closer to 7.5%...that figure can be lowered to about 7% with fancy super slick chain lube and ceramic wheel and transmission bearings.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 12, 2018, 11:58:31 AM
Thanks for the help with this.

IO, thanks for the idea.  It might be a good method and I will remember to consider using it.

Ransom, the old factors I remember from about 45 yeas ago are 10% for a bike, 15% for a 2-wheel drive car, and 20% for a four wheel drive car.  I have no idea how those factors were derived.  My guess is the 10% loss was derived from bikes with primary chains and gearboxes full of heavy oil, like Harleys and British bikes.  This bike has only four straight cut gears between the crank and the countershaft sprocket and all run in synthetic engine oil.  That 7.5 percent drivetrain loss makes sense and I will use it.  The Dynomation 6 program allows manual input of this value.

MIke, the spigots are 55mm OD, 51mm ID, and 8mm long.  The wave-action model will be used to determine optimum spigot length.  The bell diameter will be determined by packaging issues.  There is a big square main frame tube near those bell mouths.  Handling might suffer if chunks of it are sawed out to make room for stacks.  It will take a couple of days for me to figger out the stack length and bell diameter.

The ideal intake and exhaust system tuned length is calculated for an rpm halfway between the peak torque rpm and peak power rpm.  Does this seem to be a good choice?   







 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 12, 2018, 01:53:35 PM
Another interesting article.https://www.performancebyie.com/blog/the-right-bellmouth/ (https://www.performancebyie.com/blog/the-right-bellmouth/)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: thecarfarmer on December 12, 2018, 03:13:49 PM
Wow, I just spent the last few days reading through the last 216 pages...

At various points, I found myself wanting to post a reply "you need to join the Speedtalk forum...", "you don't *need* to buy a mig gun, your oxy torch and Solar flux Will weld SS", and so many others - and remembered that the topic was years old...

But now I've caught up, I'd recommend cutting a few sets of bells out of some inexpensive plastic.  PE oughta be cheap.  Fuel cells are made of it, so gas shouldn't hurt it.  TAP Plastics has stores in PDX and Tigard; is one of those close?

I expect you might find an advantage to being able to tune that intake length to track conditions, changes in cam timing, etc...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on December 12, 2018, 04:04:01 PM
Thanks for the help with this.

IO, thanks for the idea.  It might be a good method and I will remember to consider using it.

Ransom, the old factors I remember from about 45 yeas ago are 10% for a bike, 15% for a 2-wheel drive car, and 20% for a four wheel drive car.  I have no idea how those factors were derived.  My guess is the 10% loss was derived from bikes with primary chains and gearboxes full of heavy oil, like Harleys and British bikes.  This bike has only four straight cut gears between the crank and the countershaft sprocket and all run in synthetic engine oil.  That 7.5 percent drivetrain loss makes sense and I will use it.  The Dynomation 6 program allows manual input of this value.

MIke, the spigots are 55mm OD, 51mm ID, and 8mm long.  The wave-action model will be used to determine optimum spigot length.  The bell diameter will be determined by packaging issues.  There is a big square main frame tube near those bell mouths.  Handling might suffer if chunks of it are sawed out to make room for stacks.  It will take a couple of days for me to figger out the stack length and bell diameter.

The ideal intake and exhaust system tuned length is calculated for an rpm halfway between the peak torque rpm and peak power rpm.  Does this seem to be a good choice?   







 


I'll measure mine in the AM and let you know.👍👍👍
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on December 13, 2018, 06:34:37 PM
Bo I measured my Venturis.

ID is 60mm.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 14, 2018, 01:46:11 AM
That is a lot of pages to read.  As per trackside tuning, I did it for a few years.  By the time the changes were made and after standing in line to make the run the track changed to something different than the one I anticipated when I changed things.  Now I sorta know what to expect when setting the thing up beforehand.  Trackside changes are limited to correcting things I did wrong in the setup or putting on a different sprocket.  The bike does have sand racing pipes, cams, etc.

The highest piston speed according to Vizard in "How to Build Horsepower" is "A good cast-steel crank and a decent set of rods should be good for a mean piston speed of 4,500 feet per minute."  That equates to just over 10,000 RPM.  The rev limiter will be set for that and it is 1,000 RPM higher than it is now.

The article in reply 3225 is a good one.  It tells about the best bell design and it also gives enough information to make a good compromised design in less than optimum situations.  That big black frame tube in the photo limits the bell length and width from the ideal.  The compromised bell shape is shown in the picture.  The dimensions were entered into the computer model and the bells are calculated give to up to five more HP at high RPM.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 14, 2018, 11:22:59 AM
Municipal water demand is quite variable.  It is very low around midnight and extremely high at other times - such as when lots of toilet are flushed during Super Bowl halftime.  It would be very expensive and impractical for the city to size the water supply pumps for this maximum flow.  Instead, they use smaller pumps to fill a water tower or a tank on a hill with a much lower steady flow.  Demand surges are supplied by the water stored in the tower or tank.

Engine air demand is unsteady, too.  The intake valve is open and passing mixture for only a small part of the engine cycle.  The rest of the time it is shut.  The air filter is mounted directly to the carb now.  This is a lousy setup.  Their is a very small reservoir of air beyond the air intake for the engine to draw from.  It is the inside volume of the filter.  The filter is subject to pulsing flow demands.  These can be quite large.  It is a filter on a 500cc single cylinder engine turning 10,000 rpm, in reality.

A plenum will be made along with the new stack and it will be sized to provide a reservoir of air in front of the filter.  The minimum volume will be the cylinder volume x the maximum volumetric efficiency.  It will store at least one gulp of air between the bell mouth and the filter.  This will reduce peak flow loads on the filter and reduce any restriction the filter might provide during those peaks.  In addition, the two plenums will be connected so the reservoir is larger.

One thing governing the stack size is the need to keep it at least 1/4 inch from and plenum wall.  This will promote more a more even inflow rate around the stack perimeter.  This is a problem with this bike I have known about for a decade.  Right now I am finding the time to fix it. 


 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on December 14, 2018, 11:26:20 AM

The highest piston speed according to Vizard in "How to Build Horsepower" is "A good cast-steel crank and a decent set of rods should be good for a mean piston speed of 4,500 feet per minute."  That equates to just over 10,000 RPM.  The rev limiter will be set for that and it is 1,000 RPM higher than it is now.


Just for reference: The newer factory Kawasaki ZX10r has a piston speed at redline of 8050 feet per minute, peak HP occurs in the 7500 feet per minute range.

I've found that there are more issues to be addressed with valve train harmonics/weight than piston speed.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 16, 2018, 10:54:12 PM
Those are incredibly high piston speeds.  There is no way I can come close to matching factory technology and performance.  My goal is to go over 150 mph without crashing or breaking the motor.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on December 17, 2018, 10:54:35 AM
Bo, what filter do you use?.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 18, 2018, 12:24:16 AM
Two big K and N oiled gauze filters with a mesh sock over each.

There will be plenum chambers between each carb and filter.  Does anyone have any good design guidance on these things?  I have what Harold Bettes has in "Engine Airflow."
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: stay`tee on December 18, 2018, 05:14:10 AM
Municipal water demand is quite variable.  It is very low around midnight and extremely high at other times - such as when lots of toilet are flushed during Super Bowl halftime.  It would be very expensive and impractical for the city to size the water supply pumps for this maximum flow.  Instead, they use smaller pumps to fill a water tower or a tank on a hill with a much lower steady flow.  Demand surges are supplied by the water stored in the tower or tank.

Engine air demand is unsteady, too.  The intake valve is open and passing mixture for only a small part of the engine cycle.  The rest of the time it is shut.  The air filter is mounted directly to the carb now.  This is a lousy setup.  Their is a very small reservoir of air beyond the air intake for the engine to draw from.  It is the inside volume of the filter.  The filter is subject to pulsing flow demands.  These can be quite large.  It is a filter on a 500cc single cylinder engine turning 10,000 rpm, in reality.

A plenum will be made along with the new stack and it will be sized to provide a reservoir of air in front of the filter.  The minimum volume will be the cylinder volume x the maximum volumetric efficiency.  It will store at least one gulp of air between the bell mouth and the filter.  This will reduce peak flow loads on the filter and reduce any restriction the filter might provide during those peaks.  In addition, the two plenums will be connected so the reservoir is larger.

One thing governing the stack size is the need to keep it at least 1/4 inch from and plenum wall.  This will promote more a more even inflow rate around the stack perimeter.  This is a problem with this bike I have known about for a decade.  Right now I am finding the time to fix it. 


 
Wobbley,  calculations tell me that at 160mph one would see about .44 psi in plenum if ram air is used,, your considerations ??
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 18, 2018, 10:55:59 AM
My first bike was a new '69 Yamaha 250 DT-1 and I was 17 or 18 years old during Projekt Ram Air.  The engine had Yamaha GYT kit internals with a Schwerma expansion chamber.  My buddies and me made a ram air system and could not make it work.  The problem was the main jet size.  It needed to be larger than it would be without a pressurized air box.  The exact size was variable.  It would be different when the bike was topped out in third, fourth, or fifth 'cause ram air pressure differed at varying speeds.  Also, ram air pressure changed drastically when running against or with the wind.  A hole in the piston due to a lean mixture put an end to that project.  What I learned was, it is cheapest to figure things out on a single cylinder engine and to stay away from ram air with a carb fed motor.  Maybe the folks with EFI have figured out a way to get the mixture correct.  It was prehistoric times back then.  Carbs was all we had.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on December 18, 2018, 11:59:23 AM
My 2c. The airbox and filter I designed for my Harley worked so well
when we tested it (on Lefty's bike) that we had to go up three jet sizes.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: stay`tee on December 18, 2018, 04:51:05 PM
My first bike was a new '69 Yamaha 250 DT-1 and I was 17 or 18 years old during Projekt Ram Air.  The engine had Yamaha GYT kit internals with a Schwerma expansion chamber.  My buddies and me made a ram air system and could not make it work.  The problem was the main jet size.  It needed to be larger than it would be without a pressurized air box.  The exact size was variable.  It would be different when the bike was topped out in third, fourth, or fifth 'cause ram air pressure differed at varying speeds.  Also, ram air pressure changed drastically when running against or with the wind.  A hole in the piston due to a lean mixture put an end to that project.  What I learned was, it is cheapest to figure things out on a single cylinder engine and to stay away from ram air with a carb fed motor.  Maybe the folks with EFI have figured out a way to get the mixture correct.  It was prehistoric times back then.  Carbs was all we had.     

My experience with ram air has only been with the efi bikes where the ecu compensates for a/f demands,, I had overlooked the fact that your bike is carburated,,

my thoughts with carbies and ram air would be that you would control the fuel demands with the needle,,

 as you were sir  :-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 21, 2018, 12:33:26 AM
The plenum bases are turned from aluminum round stock.  The many hours to do this was not considered in the project planning.  These are "pancake" plenums.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 21, 2018, 09:58:03 AM
The Harley carb sticks out into the wind along the side of the bike.  Did the air box collect air like a ram air system? 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on December 21, 2018, 10:21:40 AM
I made one. Want a pic?. :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 23, 2018, 07:06:08 PM
Yes, Mike.  It might give me some ideas.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 24, 2018, 12:33:55 AM
Merry Christmas to everyone from here in Oregon. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on December 26, 2018, 12:04:24 AM
and Merry Christmas to you :-)

I run ram-air with carbs on my CB750...........it works :wink:...........the bowl-vents have to be connected to the air-box for balanced internal pressure. The science is simple............at speed you are likely to be losing some amount of available air due to the sweeping vacuum effect of the passing air. The ram-air merely provides 100% or very slightly more.............but you need a large volume air-box between the filter and carb-intake.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on December 26, 2018, 06:15:29 PM
Another benefit from ram-air is the somewhat cooler and 'clean' air obtained at the front of the bike. Pssst!......flat-sided air-ways flow better than round, and also allow more air to enter the inlet, therefore; smaller runners with square corners will flow more air than a round tube......and much, much more than a corrigated tube.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 03, 2019, 01:00:14 AM
The ram air concept will be looked at.

This is how the ellipse was cut.  First, it was drawn out on graph paper at a 10:1 scale.  Ten inches on the paper equaled an inch on the part.  The book that showed me how to do this is "Engineering Graphics" ISBN 0-02-342720-5.  It is a good reference for a fabricator to have.  Type "draw ellipse trammel method" into Google and references showing it will appear.  That was how I drew it.

A cut schedule was made using the drawing, protractor, and scale.  Each cut was plotted out and so I knew the angle of the cut and its width.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 03, 2019, 01:06:52 AM
The cut area was coated with machinist dye and the cut was made at the same width as indicated by the drawing.  A decimal machinist scale made this easy.  A 0.75 inch wide cut scaled on the drawing was a 0.075 inch wide cut on the part.  The part was roughed out on the lathe by many cuts using the tool bit and it was sanded down to final size using emery cloth.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 03, 2019, 01:13:32 AM
Experience tell me to rubber mount the carbs.  The front ends of the carbs are in rubber manifolds.  The carbs are supported by a rubber mounted stay.  Nice big fat juicy o-rings are installed in the bell mouth ends to isolate the carbs from them and the plenum chambers.

This is a bell mouth in place on the carb end.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 03, 2019, 11:30:11 AM
This is the bell mouth in the plenum.  The flow into the bell is less influenced by the nearby plenum wall if it projects.  There is 1/4 inch clearance between the outer edge of the bell and the wall.  This is the minimum I wanted and it dictated the bell size and shape.  The bell would be about a 1/4 inch taller and wider if it was not constrained by the wall.

This engine is not sensitive to runner lengths in relation to power output.  It is very particular about the shape of the inlet ends.  Most of the computer modeling programs and book equations address length much more than they analyze shape.  Dyno testing will be done with both the old and new intake systems.  This trial and error method is the only way I can do it.  The new system will help, hurt, or not change the power curve is my best prediction at this time   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 07, 2019, 12:04:49 PM
The engine design relies on four things and none are used exclusivly.  They are track experience, dyno work, equations and guidance from folks and references, and computer analysis.  All four say the intake tuned length is OK or close to it.  This is where I am very lucky.  The length cannot be increased and have at least 1/4 inch between the bell ends and nearby plenum walls.  The length cannot be shortened and have the big carbs fit behind the engine mount stays.  The intake length is dictated by geometry and it would be a big problem if it was too long or short.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 12, 2019, 10:10:53 AM
The plenum volume calculations require some precise measurements of port dimensions that cannot be done with the cylinder head on the bike.  The head must be off to make those.  The head needs to be in place for the intake design and construction.  The plan is to design and build the entire intake system with the head on the bike with one exception.  The plenum volume.  That can be increased or decreased after it is calculated. The head does not need to be on the engine to do this.

The air filter flange is shown on the plenum back.  Will the plenum volume also include air filter volume if a big single hole is cut in the back side of the plenum to match the flange?  The inside face of the flange is slightly elliptical with a 2.75 inch minor diameter.  The hole would match that. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on January 13, 2019, 12:20:39 AM
Assuming sufficient intake-air is available at maximum rpms..............you could effectively double the available plenum-air volume for each intake stroke by cross-connecting the air-chambers :wink:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 13, 2019, 10:38:06 AM
The air filters arrive on Tuesday.  They will be attached to their flanges.  The filters and flanges will be held on the backs of the plenums.  Ellipses will be scribed on the back of the plenums to show where the intake holes will go.  The holes will not be cut.

The head will be taken off and the intake port volumes, lengths, minimum diameters, and other measurements will be made.  The plenum volumes will be calculated by different methods to determine the optimum size.  This is based on Helmholz resonance principles.

The plenum volume calculation on Page 111 in "Engine Airflow" is rearranged to give plenum volume.  It is VP = Z / [(1 + j) x F] where VP is plenum volume, Z = impedance, j = the square root of -1, and F = frequency

The square root of -1 is an imaginary number.  It was sometime in college in the early eighties when I did some sort of figuring with an imaginary number.  I cannot remember how to do it.  Also, I have no idea of the desired impedance.  Can anyone help me figure this out?     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Harold Bettes on January 14, 2019, 11:47:06 PM
Mr. WW and those that like to follow this kind of stuff,  :-D

In the formula you listed that is used in my book, Engine Airflow, there is indeed a wispy old imaginary number which is the sq rt of -1. Z denotes the impedance.
Probably not a "do it this way" application that fits all.

What Engleman was trying to produce there is an acknowledgement of the oscillation of a wave that simulates an Alternating Current wave of electricity. The impedance of a circuit is simply its ratio of resistance to the capacitance oscillation. He had likened the intake system to that of a resistor and a capacitor where a circuit will oscillate as in DC circuits.

One can also look at the intake manifold (including any plenum) as a Helmholtz resonator and the ratio of the inflow resistance to the outflow that can be damped by using a plenum volume (perhaps variable) giving a boost in intake supercharging across a wider range of rpm than the normal approach of a fixed length inlet path. :roll:

Remember that intake oscillations are more pronounced with fewer cylinders than greater. That is another way of stating the pulsations on the intake of a single cylinder are greater than the pulses on a group of cylinders joined by a plenum. Plenum volume typically damps those pulses. :-o

You two stroke guys probably remember the "boost bottle" approaches from years ago. The same kind of application can be done for a 4 stroke. :lol:

Bo, I will send you a PM to perhaps sort out the process which I hope will be of some benefit.

Regards to All,
HB2 :-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 15, 2019, 10:45:07 AM
Thanks, Harold.  Any advice is appreciated.  This Helmholz tuning pretty mental for the ol' walrus.  The traditional british parallel twin has pistons that move up and down their bores at the same time and the firing occurs at opposite cycles.  The wave action and pressure and vacuum in a cylinder can be used to enhance the intake performance of its mate.  This engine has a staggered firing order caused by the rod journals being 90 degrees offset.  The wave actions in the intake are nor synchronous and this is why the plenums are being kept separate and it will be tuned like two 500 cc singles.  This was something explained to me years ago by a Harley tuner when I asked him why he always used two Mikuni carbs on separate manifolds for his race motors.  He said "with a staggered firing order one cylinder is at the last tit on the hog" or something like that.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 15, 2019, 11:03:43 AM
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-england-devon-46824931/saunton-sands-hosts-giant-hercules-transport-plane-landing


This shows how the beaches in the UK are wide and fat and can be raced upon.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Lemming Motors on January 15, 2019, 12:18:26 PM
Pendine Sands (historic LSR venue) is still used by some groups for speed runs; notably The Straightliners who are primarily motorcyclists but they are very tolerant of other wheeled craft at their events, maybe not Hercules though. :-o
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 16, 2019, 12:14:17 AM
Pages 136 - 138 of this build diary are about Pendine.

Some expert advice in a PM, a phone call a few weeks ago, plus some references suggest the starting point for plenum sizing is 1 to 1.5 times the cylinder displacement at half stroke + port volume + external plenum volume, or the cylinder displacement, or 1.2 times the cylinder displacement.  The plenum volume must exclude the air filter volume if any of these criteria will be met.

There is a filter and a resonance chamber in the air box that Triumph made for this bike.  They are separated by a plate having a round edged slot in it.  This concept will be used on these plenums to isolate the filter.  Does anyone have flow data for different sizes of these orifi in cfm at at 28 inches of water?  The plan is to use the smallest one that will provide decent air flow.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 16, 2019, 11:38:01 AM
This calculation is for a round edged circular orifice.  The current filter opening is 2.825 inches in diameter with a 6.27 square inch area.  The restrictor orifice will have a 1.437 inch diameter with a 1.621 square inch area.  This is a big decrease and it should help to reduce the intake plenum volume to the needed size.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on January 17, 2019, 10:53:29 PM
Why build anything smaller than the maximum airbox for high-altitude speed at maximum rpm? Most of the 'books' were written for sea-level air.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 21, 2019, 03:03:53 AM
The design is for sea level.  That is plenty difficult to do.  Hopefully it will work on the salt flats.  A fellow forum member is kind enough to give me some expert help.  Google "The acoustics of racing engine intake systems."  Links will appear to the paper by Harrison and Dunkley.  The paper can be read from some links, like the one from Cranfield in the UK.  That paper is what I am trying to figure out now.

The predominant wave action at high rpm is the harmonic resonance within the intake runners.  Helmholz resonance effects from the plenii are minor in comparison.  The reverse is true at lower rpm.  The drivability might be increased by helmholz tuning.  Not much performance increase is expected at high rpm.

The air filter spigots are 2.75 inches inside diameter.  They will be welded onto the backs of the plenii.  Holes 2.385 inches diameter will be cut out of the plenii backs within the spigots.  Plenty of air will flow through these holes from the filters to the plenii.  The helmholz resonance frequency will be relatively low for this large volume.  A dyno run will be made with this arrangement.

The walrus valves will be installed in these holes.  They have only 1.45 inches inside diameter.  They isolate the plenii from the filters.  The helmholz resonance frequencies are expected to be higher within these smaller volumes.  Another dyno rum will be made with this setup.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 21, 2019, 03:10:13 AM
The elliptically shaped walrus valve side facing the filter is very efficient at passing air.  The other side facing the plenum is sharp edged.  It is very inefficient, flow wise.  The valve effect comes from it being much easier to get air into the plenum from the filter than to blow it back out the other way.  Hopefully this will help to reduce power loss from reversion at lower RPM. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on January 21, 2019, 02:14:02 PM
Bo, I've sent you a PM.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 22, 2019, 12:54:07 PM
Pete, can you show a sketch or picture of the modification described in your PM?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on January 22, 2019, 02:40:49 PM
I'll try to figure out how to do that. I used to have fax which worked really well for that sort of thing but I'm not sure how to put a drawing on here. Computers tend to be a challenge for me and windows 10 has just completed the job.  :? :? :?

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Rex Schimmer on January 22, 2019, 02:58:46 PM
Harold Bettes said: "You two stroke guys probably remember the "boost bottle" approaches from years ago. The same kind of application can be done for a 4 stroke." These were actual canisters that were connected to the inlet down stream from the carb and before the engine inlet port. Their function, as I understand it, was to help eliminate dips and flat spots in the torque curve. I have a 84 Yamaha YZ490 that has one. Their resonate frequency is dependent upon their volume, the diameter and length of the connecting hose or tube connecting to the inlet tract and is independent of the plenum or inlet tract frequencies. The " theory" is to have the Helmolz chamber have a resonate frequency close to the intake tract frequency at the rpm of the engine that you are interested in improving. The combining of the engine inlet pulsations along with the Helmolz chamber resonance causes a rise in intake pressure and therefore an increase in air flow to the engine i.e. more power. I have also seen these chambers used on exhaust systems, probably for the same reasons. It does work as all of the high performance I4 motorcycle engines use Helmolz chambers for power improvement.

We have all driven with one window open and at one speed had the air pressure in the car pulsate, that is Helmolz.

Rex

Rex
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 22, 2019, 10:07:52 PM
Pete, I scan them in as a picture and reduce its size using Paint.  Rex, you have more courage than me, for sure.  Tuning those things for Baja and the Mojive was one of my side jobs in the mid 80's.  Those bikes are animals.  They can go over 100 mph across the dez.  Half throttle was about all I could do.  Either lack of guts or brains was my throttle limiter.

Google "Intake plenum volume and its influence on the engine performance, cyclic variability and emissions" by M.C. Civiz.  That is what I am reading now.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 23, 2019, 10:27:38 AM
Publication titles, authors, and sources are listed rather than links to them.  Links often disappear but the other information can always be used to find the references.

Helmholtz effects at the intake runner ends were ignored during engine development until now.  The air filters were attached to the carb ends.  There was little plenum resonance effect from them.  The sides were pleated oiled fabric and metal screens.  This is very good at wave absorption rather than reflection and Helmholtz resonance was negligible.

Bell mouths are on the carb ends now.  Packaging considerations require some sort of enclosures around those bell mouths ends if air cleaners will be used.  The centerlines of the filters and bells are offset and the enclosures are the transitions between the two.  The transitions are plenums and Helmholtz resonance will occur in those cavities.  This could hurt, help, or do nothing for performance.  At the minimum, I need to learn enough about the process to verify that the resonance is not causing problems.  Better yet will be using it to improve performance.

The Helmholtz design process is described in American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Paper 73-WA/DEP-2, by H.W. Engleman, "Design of a Tuned Intake Manifold"  Manifold design using this method is described in International Journal of Scientific Technology Research , Issue 5, May 2014, by Shirinath Potul, Rohan Nachokar, Sagar Bheve "Analysis of Change in Intake Manifold Length and Development of Variable intake System."

That last publication describes software to figure out this stuff from Lotus Engineering in the UK.  This might be helpful.  The boost bottle concept is something I know about and have used.  It will be the subject of a future post.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on January 23, 2019, 11:14:40 AM
And let me through something else at you...having the honor of tuning many hundreds of race motorcycle, I've come to realize as you change the intake path it also effects the exhaust tuning.  I've seen custom air boxes that picked up significant usable HP in the upper RPM range on one 1 motorcycle that did the opposite on a other motorcycle that was identical except for the exhaust. Both of those bikes made within 2 HP before installing the air boxes. Switching the exhaust system saw the HP improve to mirror the first bike.  I've seen it time and again, folks purchase aftermarket velocity stacks and loose HP.  It's not that the shorter radius stock don't work, it's the exhaust side doesn't match.  It's about the total package working together.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 24, 2019, 01:45:18 AM
The stack length is what it was before and it works OK.  It matches what computer programs say it should be.  The engine is insensitive to intake length based on past experience.  The performance is very, very, sensitive to the configuration of the intake inlet edge.  It makes a big difference if I get this right.  That is what I am monkeying around with now rather than tuned length.

These engines flow well at low valve lifts during the overlap.  The valves are in rows next to each other.  There is no piston dome separating the combustion chamber intake side from the exhaust side.  It is very easy to design an exhaust that over or under scavenges.  Either makes a big power loss.

The exhaust has tapers and transitions that are deliberately designed to kick back softer waves that are less likely to over or under scavenge and that are useful over a wider rpm range.  The elliptical bell is designed to do the same thing.  It is intended to reflect softer waves that will have less tendency to over or under scavenge.  This, combined with the increased flow capacity of the elliptical bell will hopefully increase the spread in rpm between the peak torque and power curves. 

The intake helmholtz resonance will be an unavoidable factor in performance.  Hopefully the Lotus program will provide the tools to make this resonance do beneficial work.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 25, 2019, 05:29:29 PM
The Lotus Engineering software website is www.lesoft.co/ (http://www.lesoft.co/)  They have a freeware version to make a simplified model of a single cylinder engine.  The engine will be a 500cc single cylinder for the freeware model.  The more complex program will be ordered if I can figure out the simple version.  Then there will be models in EnginePro, Dynomations 5 and 6, and Lotus.  This will be a big help.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 27, 2019, 12:09:08 PM
Lots of research and conversations with experts say that a plenum volume between 100 and 120 percent of the cylinder swept area is a good starting point.  The volume can then be refined based on dyno work or more detailed calculations.

The narrower part of the bell mouth that acts like the inlet runner for harmonics is filled with rubber.  The amount filled is a best guess on my part.  The plenum is filled with ATF up to the plate.  Volume is 104 percent of cylinder swept area.  That is plenty good for now. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 29, 2019, 08:29:25 PM
Some expert help and fancy computer programs will be the key to making this bike go faster.  Castings are needed for the ports and combustion chamber.  The old ones are obsolete.

Urethane with Shore Hardness 20 is used for the ports and combustion chamber.  There is better filling and less chance of bubbles if the cylinder head and rubber are around 75 degrees for the pouring.  In this house during the morning the only warm place is near the stove.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 29, 2019, 08:34:42 PM
A release agent is always sprayed in the port before casting.  It is never enough.  Submerging the part in soapy water while pushing out the rubber helps a lot.  This darker rubber is Shore Hardness  30 urethane.  It works OK on manifolds but is to hard for ports.  It cannot be pushed out. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 30, 2019, 12:44:06 AM
Note the black dot in the bell mouth.  The tuned length and runner entrance width are based on the assumption that everything downstream from it is a runner for harmonic design.  The back of the air filters are shown.  They are resting on the backs of the plenums now.  Tomorrow I will weld them on.

The Lotus engine design package is intended for the auto industry and it costs big, big money.  They offer a month of its use for free.  November is pretty quiet around here.  The plan is to use the program for that month and to see if it shows where improvements can be made.  In the meantime the single cylinder freeware program will be what I use in addition to engine pro and dynomation.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 30, 2019, 12:53:34 AM
This is the combustion chamber area.  The common practice is to use valves 5 and 6 mm oversize.  The intake is 2 mm oversize and the exhaust 1mm bigger than standard.  The inlet mach level is between 5 and 5.5 at 10,000 rpm based the formula used to calculate it.  That is plenty good and there appears to be no need to use bigger valves.  The milling required to install those big valve seats in will drop the compression ratio a lot so it seems to be a good idea to avoid them.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 30, 2019, 12:58:12 AM
The rubber for the manifold plug is dark brown.  The lighter rubber is for combustion chamber and ports.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on January 30, 2019, 02:22:37 AM
I see you doing my job there Bo?. Nice rubber work.
You should be getting paid by Triumph for all the R&D.

You blow me away.  :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: gowing on January 30, 2019, 11:36:21 AM
Excellent thread!
Great Pics!
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 30, 2019, 08:42:44 PM
Thanks for the compliments.  This guy on a pension can afford to keep beating the old warhorse for a few more mph.  A proper race bike seems like a good idea.  Chances are I would be too old to ride it by the time I saved the money to buy it and got it sorted out.  More things will be posted when I get them done.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 30, 2019, 10:40:40 PM
This jeweler's loupe is used to inspect parts.  It has a lens on the top and an added lens on the bottom.  Sometimes things are seen with it that I do not want to see.  I need to get rid of it.  This is the back of the piston skirt.  Both skirts of both pistons have this mark.  It looks like a crack.  This would be a big setback.  The pistons surely would break apart at ten grand of they crack at nine.  Fortunately there is a new set of pistons in the junk pile.  Both of them have the same marks on each shirt.  It looks like a tooling mark instead of a crack.  These are stress risers so all four will be polished off.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on January 31, 2019, 11:18:09 AM
WW;

Zyglo those pistons to be sure if it is a crack or not.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 31, 2019, 11:11:42 PM
That zyglo sounds interesting.  I will see what it is.  The used and unused pistons all have exactly the same scratches.  Here is a close-up using crop.

The first is a report for the virgin oil from the bottle.  It is a top grade oil made for motorcycle race use.  What I looked for is viscosity.  It tests to be the viscosity it says on the bottle.  Also, it has zinc and phosphorous.  This is good.  It is a synthetic made from ester base stock.

The second report is for the used oil.  It has been through the dyno work and three runs down the salt.  It is starting to collect a little bit of copper and lead.  This indicates a potential, but minor, problem with the bearing shells.  Lead and copper were 0 before.  Now they are 8 and 10 ppm, respectively.

This oil lubes the engine, clutch, and transmission.  Shear from the gears and the resultant loss of viscosity are something I worry about.  The oil has lost some viscosity, but not enough to be worried about.  SUS viscosity was 70.7 and now it is 67.3. Minimum is 64.  cSt viscosity was 13.15 and now it is 12.23.  Minimum is 11.6

Rod big end bearing fatigue has been an issue.  Fuel contamination of the oil can alter the fatigue resistance of the shells.  There appears to be only a small bit of contamination.  This is good.  It was zero before.  Now it is <0.5%  Max is 2.0 %     

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on February 01, 2019, 09:10:10 AM
WW, your lead might be coming from your race gas... that was the case with ours
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: ggl205 on February 01, 2019, 10:07:38 AM
"Rod big end bearing fatigue has been an issue.  Fuel contamination of the oil can alter the fatigue resistance of the shells.  There appears to be only a small bit of contamination.  This is good.  It was zero before.  Now it is <0.5%  Max is 2.0 %"

WW, aside from any abnormal contamination, your engine does not develop near enough pressure or RPM to stress a modern day racing bearing. So, any bearing failure comes down to incorrect bearing fit, inadequate oil delivery/supply or inferior oil. In my opinion, King bearing has taken the lead in engine racing bearings, mostly at the hands of Dr. Dmitri Kopeliovich. If you have any further issues with bearing failure, don't hesitate to contact King Bearing. Dr. Kopeliovich used to be accessible but it has been a few years since I last had contact with him.

John   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 01, 2019, 10:56:56 AM
The problem has persisted for years.  The gas is unleaded.  This much I am confident in based on prior research.  The shells are more than adequate for the load if lubrication and fit are correct.  The oil is OK.  Fuel dilution is not an issue.  Rod side to crank clearances are OK.  There is a lot more I know and it will be posted tonight with a picture of the shell.

Thanks for helping me with this.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: ggl205 on February 01, 2019, 03:17:24 PM
The problem has persisted for years.  The gas is unleaded.  This much I am confident in based on prior research.  The shells are more than adequate for the load if lubrication and fit are correct.  The oil is OK.  Fuel dilution is not an issue.  Rod side to crank clearances are OK.  There is a lot more I know and it will be posted tonight with a picture of the shell.

Thanks for helping me with this.       

WW, persistent bearing failure is a solvable problem. through very careful reading of bearing shells, many rod related issues can be avoided. One question; are you using high eccentricity rod bearings?

John
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Rex Schimmer on February 01, 2019, 03:57:18 PM
The oil test that you show are from a "mass spectrometer" test which provides the percentage information that you see, have you ever had your oil particle count done? This is where a small amount of oil is ran through a very high level filter and the captured actual particles are counted according to their size in microns. This analysis will tell you if the copper and lead that you see are dissolved solids or actual particles. Particles can be addressed with proper filtration.

One additional note: "New" oil right out of the can or container can be amazingly contaminated. Refineries have pretty poor final filtration before filling the containers that we buy it in. One of the things you can do to eliminate some of this included contamination is to not pour the final few ccs of oil out of the can. The contamination that is usually found in new oil is usually scale and welding slag from the refineries piping and it settles to the
 bottom of the container.

Rex
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 06, 2019, 11:50:24 PM
The shells fit tight and I could not find any oversize ones.  I tried reducing the journal size by a few tenths by hand polishing with fine emery paper and careful measuring with a micrometer during the process.  The clearances were marginally tight when I was done.

The upper shell half should show wear on 2/3 to 3/4 of its wearing surface.  Both shells show more than that.  This is an indication they are tight.  One shell shows babbitt transfer due to wiping.  This is another indicator they are tight.  The shell with the wiping shows a score that lines up with the center of the oil hole in the crank.  There might be some contamination issues in the oil flowing to the journal.

I get another opinion.  A call was made to an engine builder.  He makes the motors for the Triumph factory flat track team.  They run up to 10,500 rpm for many more miles than mine will go.  He knows how to make them stay together.

There is no pattern of more lubrication problems on one side than the other, he says.  Also, he said the front oil pump needs to be in perfect condition.  My crank is balanced using a 53 percent factor.  He recommends having it rebalanced to 65%.  He gave me the name of a good expert on these cranks and recommended that I ship the crank, cases, case bolts, and rods to him so he can check everything and make sure all is OK.  I will do this and toss the pistons and pins into the box so the crank can be rebalanced.

The plastic OEM oil pump gears tend to fracture and explode at over 10,000 rpm.  He told me where I can get some steel gears.  They were ordered and are the last set of the batch.  I am lucky to get them.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on February 07, 2019, 08:32:22 AM
If you send your stuff off, have them check crank journal roundness.... hand work on a crank usually makes it worse.
 :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: ggl205 on February 07, 2019, 09:59:51 AM
WW, no bearing pinch at the parting line so your rods are doing their job keeping things round at rpm. It does indeed look like too little clearance between bearing and journal. What clearance did you measure? What clearances did your engine guy recommend? If you have to, there are several very good crank shops that can restore your journals to standard (if required) and grind to desires journal size. They hold a tenth or less for round, straight and size.

John
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on February 07, 2019, 10:01:54 PM
Yep, my personal favorite is Crankshaft Dave at Mile High Crankshaft in Denver.  Have had several in there to get them back to usable.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 08, 2019, 11:51:40 AM
Desired clearances are as recommended by Bill Mc Knight at Mahle.  He looked at the shells and I gave him all sorts of technical info to help him make good recommendations.  This was a few years ago.  Recommended clearances are .00075 to .0010 per inch of shaft diameter + .0005 extra clearance for racing.

This is .0017 to .0021 for the rods and .0016 to .0020 for the mains.  The mains were installed at .0015 and the rods at .0017.  The rods were originally at .0015 and I used hand polishing to increase the clearance to .0017.

Marine Crankshaft has been recommended to me as a resource with experience helping the flat track team.  That is where I will start.  If that does not work out I will try the folks in Denver.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: charlie101 on February 08, 2019, 02:11:26 PM
A good idea is to take a photo of every part before shipping, AND the parcel on site at the post office or where you send it from... Just saying it saved me a lot of BS from...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: ggl205 on February 08, 2019, 02:54:39 PM
Bill Mc Knight was unquestionably the man to talk to about bearings. Before he retired, Bill was intimately involved in all genre of race and performance engine building and very approachable. But Bill is now retired and doing other things so we are left with his legacy and other highly qualified people still active in our industry.

After looking at your clearances, WW, you were most definitely on the tight side for rods and mains.   

John
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 12, 2019, 11:23:51 PM
This build diary shows how to do basic things.  This is ordering flow bench testing.  The standard suction for flow bench data in most applications is 28 inches of water.  It is possible to use a bench with as little as 10 inches of suck and to convert it to 28 inches using equations.  This is adequate for most situations with non complex air flow.  The plenums may have complex internal flow patterns with turbulence losses.  A flow bench that can pull a full 28 inches is chosen to do the work.

The flows are measured at various valve lifts.  There is little chance a lift over 0.45 inches will be used on this engine due to geometric limitations like the cam lobes being to big for the lifters.  Tests will be done up to 0.45 lift with 0.025 increments.

The exhaust port is often fitted with a little stub to resemble  an exhaust system like shown in the first foto.  Port flow data for the head, only, is used in many computer programs.  The additional losses in the intake system are calculated by other methods.  Flow data for the entire intake system is what I am currently using in the programs.  Intake losses in the manifold, carb, filter, etc are being "double counted" at present.  Flow data for the cylinder head, alone, will be ordered.  The second pix shows the intake side of the head.  The valves will be in place during the testing.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 12, 2019, 11:33:52 PM
The first picture shows the carb and manifold.  The throttle is wide open during flow testing in most applications.  There needs to be a way to make this happen.  The intake system used last year is shown in the second photo.  It is a filter attached to the carb end.  Tests will be done with this to make a baseline for comparison.  The engine put out over 100 horsepower which is not bad for one of these dogs.  More is needed.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 13, 2019, 12:36:25 AM
Potential horsepower from a well developed engine can be estimated based on flow bench data using an empirically derived equation.  This is from Page 50 of Harold Bettes' "Engine Airflow."  hp/cyl = Cpwr x test flow, where hp/cyl = horsepower per cylinder, Cpwr = coefficient of power, and test flow = cfm flow at the same test pressure that Cpwr is applied.  This is a two cylinder engine, Cpwr = .26 at 28 inches test pressure, and test flow at maximum lift = 230 cfm.  It is assumed that 92 percent of the power is reaching the rear wheel.

Rear wheel hp = 2 x .26 x 230 x .92 = 110  This is a realistic estimate.  It shows that any increase in intake flow can result in more power.  A higher lift cam is worth investigation.  Flow data shows that it is not an option.  Flow at .425 and .450 lift is only 231 cfm.  This is intentional.  The bench data for flow through the entire intake system shows that the flow curve flattens at around 231 cfm above .4 lift.  A cam with .4 lift was chosen.  More lift would not do much good.

The air is drawn into the filter across a sharp edge where the screen meets the black plastic thing that is clamped onto the carb end.  That is an inefficient situation and it leads to high inlet flow energy loss.  Much less energy is lost if the intake end has an elliptical shape.  This is hidden inside the plenum shown in the pictures.  It is described in recent posts to this build diary.

The dominant wave effect characteristic at full throttle and high rpm is the resonant harmonics between the bell mouth end and the inlet valve inner face.  Chrysler did a lot of research on this and I call it the "Chrysler effect."  Much guidance is available on the tuned length for optimum performance.  Much less research has been done on the shape of the bell mouth and the tapers leading to it.  There is a research report on this I read very late at night a few months ago.  I could not find it the next day and I should have saved it on the computer.  This shape is more dominant than tuned length for a four valve engine with substantial cam overlap, in my experience.  The elliptical bell with the rounded edge worked best for me in the past.  It will be used for this plenum inlet system.

The first flow test with the plenum will be with an unobstructed entry from the filter.  See the first pix.  The test will be on the complete system shown in the second picture.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 13, 2019, 12:49:14 AM
The average demand for air into the bell mouth, not including fluctuations based on valve opening and closing, is lower than the peak demand.  The peak demand when the inlet port is filling can be up to 6.25 times as high as the average demand.  This is well explained on pages 50 and 51 in Don Terrill's "Horsepower Chain."  This factor is for a single cylinder like the intake on one side of this two cylinder engine.  This peak pull is trying to jerk the flow through the filter screen without the intake plenum.  The plenum provides a reservoir of air upstream from the bell mouth that can be pulled in during the peak demand.  This reduces peak flow demands on the filter screen.  This is called plenum effect.  The plenum volume is 1.25 times the 500 cc swept volume.  This extra allows for the volume of the combustion chamber and 110 percent increase in volumetric efficiency.  The plenum is sized to provide one gulp of air.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 13, 2019, 01:13:14 AM
The acoustic vibrations within the plenum can enhance or screw up the intake harmonics.  This is often called the Helmholtz effect.  There is a lot of variance in opinions in the literature about this phenomenon.  My feeling is that it is a weak force compared to the Chrysler effect when the intake tract harmonic resonant length is near optimal.  This would be at low midrange and at high midrange and top end of the rpm band of this engine.  The harmonic resonance is off key at midrange and the power suffers.  There is a dip in the power curve.  The Helmholz waves can be a benefit in this midrange dip area, is my feeling.

The plenum is acoustically isolated from the filter using the walrus valve.  Without the valve the volume is the inside of the filter and the plenum.  The valve reduces the plenum volume and it increases the Helmholtz resonance frequency.  It also increases the intensity.  It is hoped this will reduce the dip in the power band at midrange.  This will make the bike easier to ride and faster on loose surfaces like the sand at Pendine.  This last picture shows the valve in place and the complete system.  Flow tests will be done with the valve in place, too.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 18, 2019, 12:37:19 AM
The loading ramp for the trailer is a 6-inch wide aluminum channel.  It is too narrow for the rear tire.  It was sawed right down the middle.  The two halves were spread 1.75 inches apart and four 1/4 inch thick gusset plates were lap welded onto the bottom side to hold the rails in position.  A 1/4 inch thick plate was sawed out to fit in the gap.  The channel web is thinner than the plate.  It is .180 thick.  One inch long welds were made on each side of the plate 4 inches apart.  The welds overlap each other so the top side welds are directly over the bottom side welds.  Some of the middle welds cracked completely through while the ramp cooled after welding.  Any help is appreciated.  I have no clue about what caused them or the best fix. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 18, 2019, 12:38:36 AM
More crack fotos.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 18, 2019, 10:01:23 AM
The extrusion (channel) is 6061 -T6.  The wire is ER 4043.  These appear to be compatible.  The plate can be either 6061 or 5356.  The supplier stocks both alloys.  I will check with them today.  The plate finish is very shiny.  I have never seen this on 6061.

Weldability and hot cracking are a concern.  The lap joints seem OK and both materials are welded together there.  All problems are in butt joints.

Decades ago I watched a guy make something like this out of aluminum.  He welded a 1/4 inch length of each of the many welds on the thing.  The welds cooled from the earlier addition before he made the next one.  He said this reduced the stresses in the structure due to heat related distortion.  I did not do this.  Maybe I should have.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on February 18, 2019, 11:04:44 AM
I would use a prep where you're making the welds and then use a good preheat so the whole area is well warmed. Short welds might certainly help. You say the material is shiny, is it anodized? 6061 material will definitely work better than a 5 thousand series alloy. PM me or email me if you want to discuss it further.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 18, 2019, 12:07:01 PM
Thanks, Pete.  The welding shed is cold and often I can see my breath when I am working.  The heater is turned on in the shop.  The ramp can be set on the wood stove in the parlor so it can preheat.  Then I can grab it and run out to the shed and weld it while it is still hot.

The steel yard says the plate is 5052 or 6061.  It is shiny and I will sand it to remove any anodizing.  The welding shop said to switch to ER 5356 wire if there is a chance the plate is 5052.  So, I bought a spool and will try it.

There are a few pieces of 6061 plate in the scrap pile.  They will be used for the more critical parts of the trailer rebuild.  The welding shop said to use similar materials if I can.

Go ahead and send me a PM.  My experience is mostly with steel so I do not know much about welding aluminum.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on February 18, 2019, 01:00:06 PM
Bo, for preheat I'd be tempted to get a propane torch similar to Harbor Freight #91033 and a 20# propane cylinder. This will allow you to add more heat if needed and you won't risk doing acrobatics carrying around hot metal. The advise you've been given sounds solid. I'd stay away from the 5356 wire unless you have to use it. It's much more brittle and subject to cracking. 5356 is much nicer to use if you have to do any machining as it has much less tendency to clog the tooling. It's much easier to grind with a carbide burr.

When you're not using the 20# cylinder store it outside or under a well ventilated lean to. Propane is nasty stuff if it leaks indoors.

Good luck.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 18, 2019, 07:39:49 PM
The torch would need me to have four eyes and three hands to hold it and to weld.  A camp stove was deployed to provide heat and a piece of train track to hold down the ramp.  5356 wire was used to tack.  Note the cracks in the tacks. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 18, 2019, 07:41:23 PM
More pictures of cracks. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on February 18, 2019, 10:11:20 PM
The propane torch allows you to apply the heat directly to the area you're about to weld and taking the time to shut off the torch and putting it a little away from the welding area gives the heat time to spread a little which never hurts. 4043 is much more malleable than 5356 so stands a much better chance of not cracking. Your camp stove probably doesn't get enough heat into the ramp and it scares the bejesus out of me to see that fuel tank sitting right below where you're welding. Before you ever start to weld take that thing outside the shop or at least well away from the welding. A much wider and deeper prep would really help the whole procedure. You should ideally push the weld right through although I know that can be a little hard to control. A good solid preheat is going to be your best friend.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on February 18, 2019, 11:18:26 PM
Is there an aluminum scrapper in the area with a XRF tester... I watched the guy at the Yard here pull this big meter looking thing out of a case and sort out the types of aluminum a guy brought to the front to buy.  He only wanted 6061... but he had some 2024 in there....
If you are sure what aluminum you have then OK, but if you are not sure, one of those testers will tell you.  Hopefully you are not trying to weld a 2024 plate to your 6061 ramp.
 :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 19, 2019, 12:07:39 AM
The plates are an unknown type.  They were cut off ends from some project at a fab shop in West Salem.  The guys were tired of tripping over the stack of them.  They are 4 inches wide, 6 feet long, 1/4 inch thick, and I paid $10 for four of them.  The lap welds are working just great for some reason.  The project will be redesigned so it uses lap welds, only, for the unknown plate.

Our scrap guys basically know the metal is aluminum and not much more.  This is Oregon...

A torch will be used for pre-heat.  That tank looked safe to me, but I'm from Oregon...     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 19, 2019, 04:59:56 PM
The local scrap guy told me about another scrap yard on the north end of town.  They do not have 8-inch channel, either.  The local metal supplier tells me I need to order 25 feet of channel or no channel.  So, it is time to figure out how to work with what I have.

The strongest and easiest to weld joints will be with 6000 series aluminum and 4000 series wire.  The scrap guy tells me to assume all plate is 5000 series unless it is stamped different and 6000 series plate is very scarce.  He showed me some 6000 series bar stock that is wide and flat.  He also said the 6000 stuff is marked with alloy designation and temper.  Several pieces of 6000 bar were bought for a reasonable price.

My welding settings are for the thickness of the metal and wire as based on the chart on the underside of the welder cover.  Evidently there are many different ways to weld the same joint with completely different settings and the guy that put the info on the chart does not know which one I am using.  Methods differ as to chamfering, welds on one or both sides, etc.  The weld method with the lowest amps and wire feed might be best if heat distortion is a problem.  Looking up the joint in a welding book and figuring out exactly what to do is recommended, as per chamfering, wire and gas feed, etc.  I was hoping this project would not be intellectual.  Maybe not.  Some thinking is needed.

The annealing was cleaned off before I welded.  The scrap guy said to clean all that off and oxidation too.  He said the weld area should be bright and shiny throughout.  He welds with MIG and a spool gun like I do.  He uses a "stack of dimes" method.  I do not know how to do this.  Maybe there is something helpful on U-tube.  Progress is being made.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on February 19, 2019, 07:07:24 PM
WW, you can rivet or bolt together stuff without worrying about alloys.... :-)

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 19, 2019, 11:52:30 PM
Nuts and bolts are my usual solution.  New skills are what I am trying to learn and there is no better victim for this than the loading ramp.  Heck, if there is a problem with it I can go to the lumber yard and get a 2x12 to replace it.  Some serious education is happening in the fab shed.  By the end of tomorrow morning I should be where I progressed to a couple of days ago. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on February 20, 2019, 11:00:06 AM
"By the end of tomorrow morning I should be where I progressed to a couple of days ago."

WW, we all know that feeling!  :-P 


Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on February 20, 2019, 01:14:47 PM
"By the end of tomorrow morning I should be where I progressed to a couple of days ago."

WW, we all know that feeling!  :-P 


Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ

Around here we call that feeling, "optimism". 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on February 21, 2019, 09:34:23 AM
Progress in spite of our efforts is always encouraging!  :-o :-D :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 22, 2019, 10:17:49 AM
This is the first time I am making a large aluminum structure.  Jobs done before were little aluminum items.

The two plates are 1/4 inch thick suspected 5000 series and 3/16 inch thick 6061 T6.  Both edges were cut with a sawzall and there were some gaps between them, maybe 1/32 inch on average.  Both plates were locked in place by previous welds.  Some I-net and book reading says the parts expanded toward each other when heated during the weld and then contracted back into place after cooling.  The strain of the contraction cracked the weld.  The solution is to have no gap between the parts before welding.  Is my thinking correct?

There was some localized distortion at the welds.  Heat was applied to relax the joints and force was used at the same time to straighten the areas.  This was something I did as an apprentice machinist.  It brought back memories.

The ramp as a whole had some distortion.  It was set on blocks in the cellar.  A datsun jack, post, and the big beam that holds up the house completed the setup.  The ramp was straightened.  Then, a big Harley Davidson Electra Glide size downward force was applied to the center of the ramp.  A weld snapped.   

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on February 22, 2019, 10:30:16 AM
You need a generous prep and good preheat. It's difficult to get penetration in aluminum. When I'm welding up a tank I weld with a keyhole at the point of the weld to ensure penetration. Don't overthink the process.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 22, 2019, 10:38:40 AM
The welds that held all showed some small linear lump in the metal on the opposite side of the weld.  Sorta like the mound left in a lawn after a gopher digs its long hole under the surface.  The weld that broke showed none of this.  It was ground out and there was not enough penetration.  It was redone.

There are four cross members between the rails.  The load test was done with them to see if there were big problems with material compatibility.  Only four cross members meant they would be streamed hard and problems would show up.  They are suspected 5000 series plate pieces welded against the 6061 webs with ER4043 or ER 5356 wires.  All welds held if they had adequate penetration.

The finished ramp will have three more cross members.  They are added using 3/16 bar stock against 3/16 channel web.  All are 6061 T6 and welded with ER 4043 wire.  This combination is much easier to weld.  What I am learning is to design the project using similar alloys and metal thicknesses as much as possible.  This makes fabrication easier.  The weld shown uses ER 4043 and the 6061 alloys.

What does a key hole look like?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on February 22, 2019, 11:05:38 AM
Like an old fashion key hole.... circular top, slot bottom.... Can't say I've seen on using MIG, but I don't MIG that much. 
See it all the time with TIG... tells you it is time to fill and move  :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on February 22, 2019, 03:46:06 PM
Good description Stainless. I do as little mig as possible on aluminum and to be honest I don't use a keyhole intentionally. I just pour the weld as hard as I can into a good prep with generous preheat. The penetration on the backside isn't always pretty but it means you have good penetration. Practice with good manipulation definitely helps.  :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 24, 2019, 01:34:49 PM
Progress was being made.  This morning there was a bang sound while I was welding and then there was no power to the welder.  The circuit breaker was tripped.  Power to the outlet resumed after it was reset.  The welder has a reset button on it and pushing it would not restore power to the welder.  It appears there is something wrong inside the welder.

The welder is a millermatic 211 running on 240 volts.  It is right near its capacity to do this aluminum work.  The duty cycle has not been exceeded.  The welds are a few inches long and some cooling time is provided between the welding.

The project is 1/3 done and lots more welding is in the near future.  There are two things I might do.  One is to get the welder fixed as needed and to continue to use it.  Another is to get it fixed and send it to one of my boys and to upgrade welders.  The least expensive upgrade is to a Miller 212.  It would be nice to get an opinion from you'all before the welder salesman talks to me tomorrow.

The 212 suggested retail is $2205.  The fancy MIG pulse welder is $2745. Maybe the $500 is worth the extra ability?  I do not know.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on February 24, 2019, 01:43:19 PM
WW;

Everything I weld is with a torch so I'm not the person to give advice.  :-)

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Rex Schimmer on February 24, 2019, 02:07:01 PM
WW,
I am VERY biased on this subject. Buy a TIG!!! If you can gas weld you can TIG. Get rid of the "mud gun", I know that that there are many race cars built with MIG welders but get a TIG, learn to use it and enjoy the extra quality of your welding.

Rex
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 24, 2019, 02:30:03 PM
My close-in depth perception and fine motor coordination are flaky.  Some effort was made to learn to TIG weld with no good results.  MIG seems to work for me.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on February 24, 2019, 06:15:53 PM
I tend to agree with Rex with the caveat that the sort of thing he's attempting to do right now would best be done with a water cooled torch which adds significantly to the expense. You can never go wrong with a bigger welding machine. I think practice would make a tig work well for you. It's not a skill to be learned in an afternoon. If you really feel you want to stick with the mig go with a stronger machine and make sure you have adequate power to run it.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on February 24, 2019, 08:47:33 PM
Yep I agree with PJ... I've practiced TIG for 30 years and occasionally I can make a good looking weld...  :roll:

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 25, 2019, 01:06:55 PM
The MIG is making good welds when I take the time to do some practice welds to get the correct settings.  Maybe after I fully understand MIG I will try to learn TIG.

The Miller 211 is an inexpensive hobby type welder.  The aluminum welding was right at or near its capacity.  It is in the shop on a warranty claim and it will go to one of my boys when it is fixed.  The local welding supply gave me a very good deal on a Miller 212 with spool gun.  It was their floor display model and they gave me a snowy day discount.  Today the ramp welding will be finished.

The 211 welder was plugged into the most remote outlet in the system.  There might be a voltage drop there under the heavy current demands of welding.  If so, the current would be higher to supply the desired wattage.  This extra current might be what blew up the welder, is my best guess.  The 212 will be plugged into a much less remote outlet.  There will be less voltage drop and a reduced need for current.     . 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on February 25, 2019, 01:16:24 PM
Good luck Bo. You're definitely on the right track.  :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 28, 2019, 11:31:06 AM
The ramp is done.  Butt joints are problematic.  It was redesigned so that all joints are lap. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 01, 2019, 12:57:01 PM
This is the loading ramp on the parlor floor.  The middle is resting on the wood.  The ends are higher and the closepins under them show this.  The ramp warped when the cross braces were installed.  This is no problem for the ramp.

The second picture shows the rail that will go on the trailer.  It is in its jig and ready to be welded.  It would be a problem if it warped upward like the loading ramp.  A small amount of warpage is OK.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 01, 2019, 01:03:23 PM
This is setup #1.  The middle of the ramp is held up by an unplanned block of wood 2 inches thick.  The ramp is held flat in its jig.

The next picture shows setup #2.  The middle of the ramp is tightened down on a planed wood piece and it is 1.5 inches thick.  The ramp has a reverse curvature from the direction it will warp.  The intent is to preload it so it will be straighter when it is removed from the jig.  Any recommendations about this are welcome.  It is time to take a break and go down to the local for a pint and sandwich.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on March 01, 2019, 03:30:59 PM
That's a never ending battle Bo. A preset helps some and if you were doing the same job over and over you could probably get it sorted but for most of us we learn to do a little post welding work to get things totally straight. Tig is a little easier to control. Moving around on the project can also help some.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 03, 2019, 03:18:49 PM
What an awful day it is.  The cross braces were welded on.  Then the rail was uncinched from the planks.  I was hoping the preload wold counteract the weld shrinkage and the part would be sorta straight after it was untied.  Unfortunately I had the preload going the wrong way.  Now the rascal had a lot of arch.  Like an inch and a half in the middle.

Yesterday the Triumph club met for breakfast.  My buddies got into a discussion about how to make some toe-in on a trailer axle.  Laying some weld beads on the side of the axle to shrink one side was mentioned.  Now I am welding some beads on each side of the flange at 6-inch intervals to shrink it and to straighten the rail.  It seems to be working.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on March 03, 2019, 11:40:19 PM
Bo, how was it with the bike on the ramp... after all, that is what it is for right....  If it works that is all that matters.... roll the bike on it... if it works, go have another pint... if  not, go have a pint and think about what you need to  do  :-D
 :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 03, 2019, 11:59:04 PM
The ramp is done.  The middle is a half inch higher than the ends when it is laid on a flat surface.  It is OK for a ramp and it is plenty strong.  The rail on the trailer is what I am working on.  The bike sits on it after it is loaded.  The rail is straight now.  Tomorrow I will post what I did to make that happen.

The goal was to make decent welds during the ramp build.  That was figured out.  Now the objective with the rail is to figure out how to deal with warp and shrinkage.  This is a learning project.  Maybe someday I will build a frame and swingarm.

There is no shortage of pints.  There are eleven breweries in this dinky town.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 06, 2019, 01:12:24 AM
These beads were laid on both sides of each flange.  They shrank them and straightened the rail out.  There were craters at the end of each bead where they ended.  The sooty welds are where I went back after the flange cooled and tried to fill the craters with more weld metal.  The beads were ground flat and some holes showed that I did not completely fill the craters.  They are quite deep.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 06, 2019, 01:13:40 AM
This is another crater.  What causes this?  How is it prevented?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on March 06, 2019, 09:11:22 AM
If you were using TIG at the end of a weld I would back off the pedal a little and add filler...
MIG... did you stop moving and let it fill... were you pushing or pulling... did you pull the torch back at the end of the weld losing the gas envelope

Disclaimer... I am not a Weldor.... but I weld a little....  :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 06, 2019, 10:46:49 AM
It seems that the temperature in the metal affects penetration with deeper penetration in hotter aluminum.  The weld blew through the aluminum at the end of the joint so I made a tack at the end before the weld to act as a backstop.  The bead ended at the tack rather than at the edge of the part.  This kept the weld from blowing a notch through the metal.  It seems the heat from welding makes the metal hot and terminating the weld tricky.  A push weld works best.  There are bubbles in the bead when a pull weld is made.  I did not pause at the end of the weld.  I will try that method this this morning.  Thanks for the advice.  This is a big help.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on March 06, 2019, 11:22:56 AM
Go with Bob.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 06, 2019, 01:18:33 PM
A pause was tried at the end of the first weld using this method.  It just made a bigger crater than the welds done earlier this morning with no pause.  A longer pause was tried for the second weld.  It blew a hole through the metal.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on March 06, 2019, 04:34:51 PM
Bo, heat builds up in aluminum as you move toward the end of the weld. When you get close to the end of the weld take your finger off the trigger and pause in place for just a second. then give it a quick blast as you move forward with the puddle cooling. Repeat as required to get to the end of the weld. As long as you do this quickly enough the weld will be high quality and won't blow through. Adding heat to an area that's already fragile is just going to result in large holes and a lot of aluminum on the floor. A short rest followed by a short blast right into the center of the weld puddle will solve your problems.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 07, 2019, 12:54:41 AM
Thanks Pete.  I will do what you suggest.

The center section was welded onto the cross braces.  It is 2 inch wide x 3/16 thick aluminum bar stock.  There are two pieces, one for each end, and the welding started at the middle and proceeded outward toward each end, one weld after another.

The inner line is the edge of the cross brace before any welding.  The outer line is the cross-brace edge just before the last weld is done.  The distance between the two is about a millimeter.  This shows how aluminum shrinks during welding.

The ramp was made in a similar way except the center bar was welded onto each end first.  The middle welds were done second.  This produced tension stress in the middle bar due to shrinkage and it contributed to warping the ramp.  The ramp middle is bowed upwards.

It is important to pay attention to weld sequence to prevent stresses from shrinkage.

The ramp was held down with blocks under the center and each end was unsupported and tied down.  The ramp was bowed under tension in the opposite way it would shrink due to the welding of the center piece.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 07, 2019, 12:58:11 AM
This is a blurry picture of the rail on its side after welding on the center pieces.  It is straight.  Pre-tension and welding sequence helped to make this good thing happen.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 11, 2019, 12:45:31 AM
Thanks for the advice on filling the crater when finishing the weld.  It solved the problem.

This is the ramp, rail, and wheel chock.  It is the old ramp widened out.  All aluminum work on the trailer is done.  It was very frustrating and it took a long time with lots of redo until things got to be OK.  A very educational project, for sure.  Now I will see how it holds up in service.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 11, 2019, 12:51:55 AM
The next part is to restore and add braces to the frame.  There is a lot of saline related distress throughout.  Many trips out onto the flats have taken their toll.  Use stainless steel fasteners is one thing I learned when taking this thing apart.  Lots of bolts were rusted together and heat and force were needed.  All replacements will be brass or stainless depending on the stress loads.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 27, 2019, 12:32:23 AM
The trailer was originally bought from K-Mart in 1986.  The bearings and spindles were typical for a 2000# axle.  Both had a 1-1/16 ID.  They were replaced a few times due to wear.  The axle was bent and very rusty.  So, a new axle was made with spindles and bearings for a 3,500# axle capacity.  The trailer capacity will stay at 2000# like it was before.  Hopefully these beefier bearings will last longer.  Unfortunately there seems to be no reputable name brand bearings made in the US available anymore.  All is red Chinese crap now.  This makes me upset but there seems to be no other choice.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 27, 2019, 12:50:21 AM
A leaf spring broke a few years ago while the bike was being towed to Bonneville.  It was one of the original K-Mart 500# springs.  Some 750# springs were ordered on the internet and they arrived at the West Wendover KOA.  They were installed.  Both springs were made by different manufacturers.  One sacked out during the next few years and one did not.  The good spring had an identification tag on it.  It was sold by Rockwell American.  Two new 1000# springs were purchased from them to bring the spring capacity up to a ton.  American made springs could not be found.  These springs are imported.

The 500# springs I really liked.  They would flex and the suspension would bottom out often.  This gave a smooth ride.  This concept of soft springs may have worked OK with the coil springs I was familiar with.  Unfortunately leaf springs cannot flex as much and often as coil springs without fatigue failure issues.  Hopefully these 1000# capacity springs will not flex enough to fail prematurely and still provide a sorta smooth ride.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on March 27, 2019, 10:45:05 PM
Shocks????
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 29, 2019, 11:05:25 PM
Maybe some shocks will go on the trailer.  There is a pair of good triumph rear shocks in the junk pile.

The old 2K hubs had four lugs.  The new 3.5 K hubs are made with five or six lugs and not four.  These are Dexter and are made in the USA.  New wheels were needed.  These are Dexstar ones made in the US.  They painted them gloss black in a custom order for me.  Their service was fast with a reasonable cost.

The old tires were Carlisle USA Trail 4.80 x 12 with a 990# load rating and a 62 mph speed rating.  Two delaminated on my big trip back east.  We typically do not use our car tires at the maximum recommended cold inflation pressure.  We use a bit less so the ride is smoother and the tire wear more is more evenly spread across the face.  This is what I was doing.  This caused the delams along with using the tires at higher speeds than rated according to the Carlisle tech guy.  He said to run the tires with the maximum recommended pressure and the tires are designed for this.

The tires and bearings are felt for heat when I stop for rest breaks.  The tires are pinched to check for delams.  The delaminations were noted early and in both cases and I was able to put on the spare before the distressed tire blew out.

The new tires are 5.30 x 12 Carlisle USA Trail with 1050# and 87 mph load and speed ratings.  They are made in America.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 29, 2019, 11:15:02 PM
This is the sleeve that the hub grease seal rubs on.  The seals wear grooves in these after lots of miles and they do not seal well after that.  These sleeves are a press fit and can be replaced as needed.

There can be water in the lake at Bonneville.  These are bearing buddies.  They have a spring loaded diaphragm so there is positive pressure on the grease and this keeps water from entering the hub when it is submerged.  Usually I squirt in some extra grease in the hubs at camp in the morning before going out onto the lake if there is water in it.  This makes sure there is positive internal pressure.  This is standard operating practice for a boat trailer.  These bearing buddies are made in the US.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 29, 2019, 11:27:04 PM
In rare cases the bearing buddies will fall off if the road is real rough.  A band of duck tape around the buddy is used to prevent this.  The black cover is a bearing buddy bra.  It keeps water and dirt out of the buddy.

The new tires are taller than the old ones.  The new axle is thicker than the previous one.  The new spring packs have added leaf.  The bottom of the bike rail is thicker.  All of this raises the rail surface 1.25 inches.  It was hard to push the bike up onto the trailer before and the added height will make it impossible.  The springs sat on top of the axle before.  The axle will sit on top of the springs now.  This will lower the rail about an inch and a half from where it was previously.  It will be easier to push the bike on and off. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 03, 2019, 12:53:39 AM
This black POR 15 coating works better than any paint I have used.  It also lasts much longer than any locally applied powder coat.  The spring and axle assembly shown in the previous post is painted with it.  The stuff is pretty toxic and I am afraid to spray it.  The ventilation and safety gear around here is third world.  It is brushed on.  All is covered by clear coat to provide ultraviolet radiation resistance.  This is from a spray can and it is top professional grade stuff from an auto paint store.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on April 03, 2019, 08:49:44 PM
Looking real good.............but maybe place some tape over the open slots in the square tube before your travel on the salt :wink:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 04, 2019, 11:28:22 PM
Dennis, the axle will be turned over so salt will not collect in it.  I am glad you saw this.  I did not think about it.  This is a link to the galvanic scale.    https://www.corrosion-doctors.org/Definitions/galvanic-series.htm (https://www.corrosion-doctors.org/Definitions/galvanic-series.htm)

Local corrosion of mild steel clamped by stainless steel fasteners, in the presence of salt water electrolyte, is a problem.  The stainless steel is a more noble metal than steel.  The galvanic action corrodes the less noble mild steel.  Painting the bolts and nuts to prevent contact with the electrolyte is a solution.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 04, 2019, 11:33:11 PM
Magnesium or aluminum are less noble than either stainless steel or carbon steel.  It is easy to make nice thick washers out of plate with a hole saw.  Putting a "sacrificial" washer between the stainless items and the carbon steel is the idea.  It will corrode rather than the two other more noble metals and it is easily monitored and replaced.  Any thoughts about this?   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on April 05, 2019, 01:44:19 AM
Bo, I have had good luck with "Zink-It" cold galvanizing paint (93% zink).

Basically painting on an anode.

It can be used as a primer.

 Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on April 05, 2019, 08:40:52 AM
Bo,
With the “square holes” on the bottom of the axle they have significantly cut into the material on the “tension” side of the beam and provided multiple stress concentration locations.
Is this the orientation that the axle was intended/designed for?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 05, 2019, 11:02:39 AM
The original K-mart axle worked OK and it was a "U" shaped channel 1.5 inches tall and 1.25 inches wide.  Two 2000# spindles with 1" wide round ends were welded into it.  It worked OK from a bending strength perspective for over 30 years.  The wall thickness was 1/8 inches.

The 3500# spindles are used for the purpose of upgrading the bearings.  The trailer will continue to have a 2000# gross weight limit.  The 3500# spindles had 1.5 inch wide square ends that fit inside 2" square tubing with 1/4 inch walls.  That axle was massively heavy.  Some beam loading calculations said that the tube could be lightened and still have the strength of the original axle.  So, it was hacked up with a Sawzall to the configuration shown.

Thanks for the suggestion about the galvanized paint.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 06, 2019, 12:48:23 AM
This is sorta interesting.  I never met this guy when I was there.https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-47814044
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 06, 2019, 01:08:36 AM
Another article.www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-guernsey-44107860 (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-guernsey-44107860)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 08, 2019, 12:38:53 AM
About a couple of weeks ago I looked for something in the top drawer of a tall roll-around tool box.  Then I looked in the bottom drawer for something else and stood up and hit my head against the bottom of the top drawer.  A day or two later I was having a hard time focusing on a weld at about 11:30 AM.  Then I took the dog for a walk in the park at noon.  One eye was starting to go blind.  Immediately I went to the eye doctor.  It is a delaminated retina and they did surgery two days later.  Part of the process was draining the goo outta the eyeball and going inside with lasers.  Then the orb was filled with nitrous oxide.

One eyed welding is awful.  All I can do now is to tack things together.  The gas inside the eye messes up the focus and I cannot run a decent bead.  Now the eye is half full of water and I can see fine through it.  It is like being a frog with half the vision below water and the other half above.  The eye is getting better and maybe it will be back to normal in a week or so.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 17, 2019, 12:15:49 AM
The surgery worked and now I can see out of both eyes.  The pupil on the surgery eye is dilated by some medicine and I cannot weld until it returns to normal size in a week or so.

The eye delamination might have saved me from some serious medical issues.  It got me out of the shop.  I was not feeling well lately and the doc did some blood tests.  The iron level in my blood is alarmingly high.  There is the possibility I might have gotten this from the metal dust during the fabrication this winter.  The shop was not ventilated very well.  Tomorrow some chest x-rays will be done to see if I am full of metal.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on April 18, 2019, 04:48:40 PM
Bo.....Take care of yourself :-o    You may have sent a message to all of us about 'shop-safety' :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 19, 2019, 12:22:41 AM
Iron can be absorbed into the bloodstream by way of the lungs.  I was using a disc sander to remove rust and mill scale from lots of things as well as making new parts.  Now I wear a mask with air filter cartridges.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on April 19, 2019, 09:39:45 AM
Life's uncertain; eat dessert first and go fast now!  Get better soon, Bo!

It is a wonder that so many of us have survived this long when we think of all the stupid stuff we've done.  Washing parts off in gasoline, riding without helmets,  grinding and cutting without safety glasses, weld flashes, no hearing protection, no hard hats on the job, hanging off ladders and trees, dui, and did I mention driving way too fast?

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: fordboy628 on April 21, 2019, 07:26:48 AM
Life's uncertain; eat dessert first and go fast now!  Get better soon, Bo!

It is a wonder that so many of us have survived this long when we think of all the stupid stuff we've done.  Washing parts off in gasoline, riding without helmets,  grinding and cutting without safety glasses, weld flashes, no hearing protection, no hard hats on the job, hanging off ladders and trees, dui, and did I mention driving way too fast?

Tom

Bo,

Get well soon!!


Tom,

If we all live "sensibly" what will we do for "fun"? ? ? ?


 :cheers:  guys
Mark
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: ggl205 on April 21, 2019, 08:50:58 AM
About a couple of weeks ago I looked for something in the top drawer of a tall roll-around tool box.  Then I looked in the bottom drawer for something else and stood up and hit my head against the bottom of the top drawer.  A day or two later I was having a hard time focusing on a weld at about 11:30 AM.  Then I took the dog for a walk in the park at noon.  One eye was starting to go blind.  Immediately I went to the eye doctor.  It is a delaminated retina and they did surgery two days later.  Part of the process was draining the goo outta the eyeball and going inside with lasers.  Then the orb was filled with nitrous oxide.

One eyed welding is awful.  All I can do now is to tack things together.  The gas inside the eye messes up the focus and I cannot run a decent bead.  Now the eye is half full of water and I can see fine through it.  It is like being a frog with half the vision below water and the other half above.  The eye is getting better and maybe it will be back to normal in a week or so.       

Bo, from one retina separation sufferer to another, it ain't no fun. I had that gas proceedure too and was supposed to keep my head tilted so the bubble could put pressure on the damaged area. I felt like a walking bubble level. Again, no fun. Prior to the separation, I had both retinas welded more times than it took to build my car. I asked the doc if blows to the head (I had several really bad ones) caused the detachment. He said no, I just have thin retinas. Who knows when it will happen again. I feel for you, man.

John
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 22, 2019, 10:57:46 AM
Thanks for the kind thoughts.  Now I am back to abnormal.  The doc did more tests and an x-ray.  The excess iron in my blood is due to drinking too much beer.  A respirator is a good thing to wear while grinding and welding.  A simple mask is not good enough according to folks who know about the subject.  This is what was recommended.  The filters have activated charcoal inside them and they last about a month under normal use.  The big mistake people make with these is using the same set of filters for everything.  The filters on the example shown here are for particulates.  Different one are needed for other things such as paint fumes.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 23, 2019, 11:45:03 PM
Some stainless steel nuts and bolts were drilled with holes for safety wire this afternoon.  Normally I use some sort of fancy machinist's oil to lube the drill bit.  I was too lazy to look for it and I grabbed the nearest thing that might do the job.  It was Dri Slide Bike-Aid Dry Moly Lubricant.  www.drislide.com (http://www.drislide.com)  The stuff works very well and better than the machinist's oil.  The little 4 oz bottle I bought years ago cost $20.69 so the oil is not cheap.  It probably paid for itself in the number of drill bits I did not dull or break.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 29, 2019, 12:39:45 AM
The trailer was put together in its rusty state to see how everything fit.  There are some minor changes I need to make.  The parts are at the sandblaster for rust removal.  Then they will be painted and the trailer will be put back together.  The truck has lots of little problems and corrosion from years of towing the bike to and from the lake and driving on the salt.  Also, there is wear and tear from that crazy trip to the east coast.  This take a lot of time, money, and patience to fix.  All of this work is keeping me from building the race bike.  It looks like the bike will be on the salt in 2020.  There is too much for me to do to race it this year.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 03, 2019, 01:33:12 AM
A lot of paint systems and powder coatings have been tried over the years.  This is what has evolved to be the current method 'cause it works best.

The trailer frame had lots of rust and it was sandblasted.  Not all of the rust could be removed.  Some remained in the deeper pits.   This treatment was used to chemically neutralize the remaining rust.  There are many brands of treatment available that do similar work.  This stuff is the easiest to use and it gives the best results of the different products I have tried.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 03, 2019, 01:38:57 AM
The product is applied as per directions on the bottle.  The frame is covered with this nasty looking surface.  This is what is desired.  The can contains what will be used for the first coat of paint.  This stuff makes a hard and durable surface.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 03, 2019, 01:47:30 AM
The frame is painted black.  These big Q-tips are used to paint the insides of the holes in the frame where a brush does not fit.  They are made for cleaning the insides of dog's ears and they are available at pet stores.
Acetone is used to clean the brush.  The paint does not keep well and it starts to harden quickly.  Two tablespoons are poured into a Dixie Cup and I quickly shut the can.  The small amount in the cup is brushed on until the cup is empty.  The cup is tossed into the trash and the process is repeated. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on July 03, 2019, 03:31:32 PM
Some stainless steel nuts and bolts were drilled with holes for safety wire this afternoon.  Normally I use some sort of fancy machinist's oil to lube the drill bit.  I was too lazy to look for it and I grabbed the nearest thing that might do the job.  It was Dri Slide Bike-Aid Dry Moly Lubricant.  www.drislide.com (http://www.drislide.com)  The stuff works very well and better than the machinist's oil.  The little 4 oz bottle I bought years ago cost $20.69 so the oil is not cheap.  It probably paid for itself in the number of drill bits I did not dull or break.   

WW;

When the M16 rifle was first introduced in Vietnam, they had a bad tendency to jam. It was found that Dri-Slide was the trick to keeping an M16 functioning in that environment. Since GIs couldn't get it through their regular supply channels, the Dri-Slide company shipped cases of it to the troops in Vietnam free of charge!

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 09, 2019, 02:02:24 AM
The USMC sleeping bags were "upgraded" recently to a poor design that does not keep the soldier warm like the old ones did.  Tomorrow my uncle's WWII down paratrooper's bag will be sent to one of my boys so he has a warm place to sleep.

The undercoat comes in different colors.  Gloss black and grey are what I use with the first coat being black and the second coat grey.  This helps to see if the second coat has full coverage.  This is hard to tell if both coats have the same color.

The grey undercoat was brushed on with full coverage.  The black spots are where the paint receded.  This is sorta like what happens when water beads on glass.  This is a very annoying aspect of this paint.  Two undercoats are needed to get full coverage.  Phosphate treatment, black undercoat, grey undercoat, first topcoat, second topcoat, and third topcoat are what I do in that order.  The paint from one coat dries overnight  before the subsequent coat is applied.  The paint is sanded between coats If I feel energetic.

A mask with filters for organic fumes is necessary. 
       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 09, 2019, 02:09:21 AM
The parts are hung outside for a few days.  This keeps the fumes from the drying paint out of the shed.  This is important if a person will be working in the shed without a respirator.  Breathing low level fumes for a long time when the parts are drying can be just as bad as not using a mask during painting.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 09, 2019, 08:06:16 PM
An earlier post mentions that two tablespoons of paint are poured into a Dixie cup and applied.  Then the empty cup is tossed and another filled and painting resumes.  The brush is completely cleaned at each cup refill.  The tendency of this paint to quickly set up and lose viscosity makes me hesitate to try to spray it.

The brush is cleaned in acetone.  There is a lot of exposure to this chemical during a painting session.  Acetone goes right through common latex and nitrile gloves.  Butyl gloves are needed.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on July 09, 2019, 09:09:19 PM
WW;

Down sleeping bags and parkas are great in a cold dry climate. If it rains and they get wet, the down turns into a wet goo with no insulating value at all. Something like a HolloFill filling is much better.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 03, 2019, 02:50:08 AM
Thanks for the advice about the down bag.  It probably will be used for family camping trips where it will be dry.

A skinnier me is lighter and more aerodynamic and this means more speed.  My weight was between 205 and 215 pounds.  Now it is in the 160's and I am able to keep from gaining it back.  This is what I do.  The entire plan is on the back of a street map used in Florence Italy so I could find my way around town.  It shows the Tuscan version of the food pyramid and it is a lot different than the American one.  Florence is in Tuscany.

The title says "Eat Well, Eat Healthy, Eat Tuscan."

Food Group 6 at the top is "Meat, Cold Cuts, Desserts"  Group 5 is "Cheese, Eggs, Potatoes."  Group 4 is "Fish, Poultry."  Group 3 is "Legumes, Dried Fruit, Milk."  Group 2 is "Cereal, Extra Virgin Olive Oil."  Group 1 is "Fruit, Vegetables."

Under the pyramid it says "Six steps to a healthy and balanced diet.  The PAT - Tuscan Diet Pyramid suggests a few sure-fire steps:  consume all food without any exclusions.  Most often those at the bottom that represent the basis of our diet.  More rarely those expensive foods at the top.  Wine with meals in moderation.  And at the base of everything, water for drinking and physical activity.  With some care and lots of flavor, hearth is served."

 

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 03, 2019, 02:55:01 AM
This is a typical meal before it goes into the oven.  Lots of veggies is the key.  The other foto shows a bowl of soup.  It is almost impossible to stay fat when following the Tuscan guidelines.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 07, 2019, 12:04:17 AM
Today was the first time to use these fancy and very expensive wire connectors.  They are shown on the video.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Wh5gM8GM70 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Wh5gM8GM70)

Unlike in the video, it takes a very long time with the heat gun to melt the solder ring so it liquifies and flows into the joint.  The shrink tubing melts and vaporizes away before the joint gets hot enough to melt the solder.  Has anyone figured a way to avoid this issue? 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on August 07, 2019, 09:57:09 PM
Today was the first time to use these fancy and very expensive wire connectors.  They are shown on the video.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Wh5gM8GM70 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Wh5gM8GM70)

Unlike in the video, it takes a very long time with the heat gun to melt the solder ring so it liquifies and flows into the joint.  The shrink tubing melts and vaporizes away before the joint gets hot enough to melt the solder.  Has anyone figured a way to avoid this issue?

WW;

I've used solder sleeves before without problems but they were US military surplus ones , not the NTE Chinese (?) ones from Summit. If you heat the sleeve with a heat gun on "medium" heat it should shrink the sleeve, melt the adhesive, and then melt the solder. My key to success was to not use a high concentrated heat. I haven't tried the Summit NTE sleeves, though.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 10, 2019, 11:30:51 AM
These connectors are made here, as best as I can tell.  There are several different brands.  Grainger sells several of them.  The solder ring shrinks around the wires when heated.  Continued heating melts the ring into the wires.  The rink shrinks down onto the wires.  Then, more heat makes the ring melt completely and the insulation melts, too.  Melting the ring halfway or 3/4 way into the wires, but leaving some of the ring intact around the wires seems to be working.

A guy was shot and killed in a city park within eyesight of my house early this week.  Another fellow was gunned down on the sidewalk three blocks from my house a few days ago.  I heard the shooting.  There were a lot of rounds fired fast in uneven sequence, like more than one shooter.  It seems these were innocent folks like me are the victims who were in the wrong place at the right time.  A lot of the work I am doing is outside on my truck and trailer where I am an easy target.  Its hard to concentrate on fabrication when one has to worry about some clowns walking up and murdering you.  I wish I was at speedweek.  lts crazy around here. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 11, 2019, 01:09:29 AM
This is a wiring connector with the ring partially melted into the wires.  The insulation is not melted at the lower temperatures that are used to do this.

Experience is showing me that it would have been a good idea to use stainless steel for brackets, etc years ago.  That little extra money spent on metal then would save me a lot of work today.  The new light bracket is stainless steel. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 11, 2019, 01:32:40 AM
Some parts like the conduit clamps could be purchased in stainless steel.  The rubber parts of the cable clamps were reused and new metal parts were made from stainless steel sheet.

Connectors are watertight and are made by Delphi.  Pins and sockets were crimped onto the wires then soldered to them.  This makes a durable connection.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 11, 2019, 01:35:49 AM
This is a Delphi connector that is closed up and ready to use.

Dialectric grease was applied to all terminal pins ad sockets.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 11, 2019, 01:42:13 AM
A galvanic cell is created between metals of differing galvanic potential in an electrolyte like salt water.  This results in corrosion of one metal and the deposition of its corrosion salts onto the other metal.  Blue Loctite is used on connections between different metals.  It fills the voids within the threaded section and it prevents the entrance of electrolyte.  This eliminates galvanic based corrosion.  This is a connection between a stainless steel cable clamp and screw and a carbon steel frame.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 13, 2019, 11:01:22 AM
Products are shown and mentioned here.  They are not necessarily the best.  Comparison testing is not done.  They are what I am using and nothing more.

The wiring harness is made longer than needed and it is doubled over at the connections.  This way, the connectors are not stressed if the harness is pulled.  Also there is some added harness length.  This might be handy in the future if the trailer is modified or something is added that requires a longer harness.

There is a big performance difference between the common electrical tape in the home improvement stores and professional quality tape.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 13, 2019, 11:09:01 AM
Newer wire coverings make harness building easier.  The harness can be assembled fitted, and adjusted before the wires are covered.  This could not be done with the old style coverings.

This is Techflex Flexo Overexpanded.  It is smaller diameter than the end connector.  It expands like a boa constrictor and can be moved over the large connector to go into its final location in another part of the harness.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on August 13, 2019, 11:10:42 AM
WW;

3M electrical tape 33+ is good stuff.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on August 13, 2019, 11:15:04 AM
WW;

I used similar woven sheath for my wiring harness, too. Mine was made by Thermofit. It makes adding or removing additional wires later an easy task. Looks neater, too.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 13, 2019, 11:39:29 AM
There is an older fellow in town who has a small electronics supply store.  I select the old school stuff and bring it up to the counter to buy.  He shows me the new age things that work better.  Guys like him in little electronics stores are hard to find these days.

This is a thick wrap that can be opened up to fit over the wires and it closes again.  It is Techflex Grip Wrap.  Wires subject to abrasion like the lead connecting the trailer to the truck are wrapped with this and covered with the overexpanded mesh wrap.

The wood deck is held down by stainless steel carriage bolts.  Almost always the bolt spins with the nut when they need to be unscrewed after years of use.  The square hole in the wood no longer is able to restrain the bolt from twisting.  The bolt heads are slotted prior to installation as a pre-emptive measure.  That way a screwdriver can be used to keep them from turning upon removal.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 13, 2019, 11:46:35 AM
The bolt heads are slotted by the chop saw using this fixture.  It is a piece of channel with a hole drilled in it.  The bolt is put through the hole and a nut is put on the exposed end and it is tightened up against the channel.  The bolt cannot move while the slot is cut.

The trailer is done.  It will be taken down from the blocks and be hitched up to Rose's truck.  The street bike, EZ-UP, and loading ramp will be tied on and I will drive up to Beaverton to pick up the race tires for use at B-ville next year.  This is a practice run to see if the trailer works OK.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 19, 2019, 01:34:59 AM
The battlax tires have worked great in the past.  There was a set of model 023 tires on the bike and it is time for some new ones.  These are T31, the best that I could find, and they supersede the 023's.  They are (W) rated for over 169 mph and steel belted.  Those strong belts might hold the tire together if something bad happens to it during a run, is my thought.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 24, 2019, 01:26:49 AM
There are a lot of bolted connections holding the bike chassis together.  Each bolt hole is a little bit larger than the bolt that fits through it.  It is possible, and has happened, that the wheels are out of alignment when the chassis is assembled due to the cumulative slop in the many connections.  An assembly jig can be used to keep things in alignment.  The next posts show how one is made.

The start is a 25-foot long piece of 6-inch wide and 2.5-inch tall aluminum channel.  Two 8-foot, 6-inch long main rails are cut along with two 1-foot long sections.  The remaining channel is diced into 9-inch lengths.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 24, 2019, 01:30:23 AM
A chop saw helps a lot.  These are the cut-up channel parts before machining.  The little bike is used for illustration.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 24, 2019, 01:32:00 AM
Close-ups of the cut parts at the front and back.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 29, 2019, 11:29:31 AM
The nights are warm and I take advantage of that to work in the sheds with the doors open for good ventilation.  There are many dubious characters wandering around here and local shootings so personal safety is a concern.  "Gypsy" is a ten month old black labrador.  Her first day here was yesterday.  She keeps a good watch over me and I am much safer.  It was hard to get a decent picture of her.  She does not stand still.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on August 29, 2019, 11:32:10 AM
That looks like a nice dog, WW.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: ggl205 on August 29, 2019, 11:41:40 AM
Strap some ordinance on her in case you need it, WW.

John
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 30, 2019, 01:24:55 AM
She is bred and partially trained to be a national champion field trial dog.  The fellow that owned her is 81 and he had to downsize his commitments so he sold her.  All she knew was a concrete floored kennel with chain link walls.  She is learning how to swim, walk up and down stairs, chase squirrels, sit outside the pub, and other basic dog skills since we got her.  She will be a full size old school labrador, which is a big and burly dog. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Lemming Motors on August 30, 2019, 07:28:20 AM
Shame she can't visit the UK - she could learn to sit inside the pub.
All of our local establishments have dog biscuits at the bar. My fave are the bone shaped ones made with oats and cheese at the Yew Tree - they go really nicely with a pint of IPA, Nonu our labradoodle likes those biscuits too.

Rebellion is a local brewery - snapped this recently outside a pub - most civilized.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 02, 2019, 01:57:31 AM
The barmaids at our local are taking a liking to her.  They bring her a bowl of water and some treats.  She gets faster and better service than we do.  She is adjusting well to the shop.

The frame and wheel alignment jig is finished.  It is something I designed in my head and built from my imagination.  I was too lazy to use pencil and paper or computer aided design.  It has not been used.  One of my friends wants to check his bike for straightness on Wednesday.  Some pictures will be posted.

     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on September 02, 2019, 09:45:41 AM
Don't be surprised if the front and rear centerlines are .060 or so out from each other...
 :cheers:

I thought all the breweries up there were Gypsy friendly...  :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on September 02, 2019, 11:39:47 AM
Don't be surprised if the front and rear centerlines are .060 or so out from each other...
 :cheers:

I believe the flat track boys used to intentionally offset the rear wheel to make the bikes turn left, and I was thinking about trying that just before I quit roadracing, depending on whether the track was clockwise or anti-clockwise, but never got to do so (the BSA B50 didn't seem to like left hand turns, although it was probably just me)

I wonder if it would help to do so to counter a steady crosswind?

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 06, 2019, 01:53:42 AM
Anyone is welcome in the pubs here is they have had a recent bath, are over 21, and they pay for their beer.  Gypsy just got spayed and she is stumbling around the house with a cone on her head.  An Elizabethan Collar is what the vet calls it.

Offset will be addressed in a forthcoming post.  This tool will work when aligning an offset bike if the offset and its direction are known.

The tool is made for the bikes my friends and I ride.  None are over 1000cc and all are normal bikes.  No choppers.  The longest one is my Triumph Bonneville with a 3-inch swingarm extension.  It has a 62 inch wheelbase.  Two 102 inch by 6 inch by 2.5 inch aluminum channels are long enough for the rails.  One flange of each is not drilled.  The other flanges are, with 20 holes per channel end, for 120 holes, total. The hole row starts one inch from the end and is 1 inch inside of the outer flange edge as shown in the foto.  The holes are 2 inches apart and are the pilot drill size for a 10 x 1.25 bolt hole.  THis is a 11/32 inch drill.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 06, 2019, 01:59:37 AM
A drill press makes the tapping quicker and in better alignment.  A spiral tap is shown.  The drill press motor power can be used to screw the spiral tap into the part.  There is no need to demean yourself by use of hand labor to turn the tap.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 06, 2019, 02:01:27 AM
Cutting oil is essential to get good quality threads.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 09, 2019, 01:44:19 AM
These are the end plates.  One is on each end and they hold the rails in alignment.  The widest tire any of us use is 150 mm.  A 7-inch spacing between the rails will accommodate this size tire.  The most accurate alignment is done with the rims between the rails without tires.  A 2-inch minimum width within the rails will work for this.  The end plates shown provide this 2 to 7 inch spacing.

There are several ways to use the alignment jig.  One is to clamp the wheels in place in correct alignment with the chassis loosely bolted together.  Then, the chassis bolts are tightened.  It takes considerable downward clamping force from the end plates onto the rails to make sure the rails do not spread apart during the bolt tightening process.  Experience has shown that the six bolts per plate provide enough clamping force. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 12, 2019, 12:20:33 AM
This is the end shoe.  There are four of them with one on each corner.  They hold the tires in place and they are made from the same channel as the rails.  A chunk of the channel is cut away to make a shoe.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 12, 2019, 12:24:26 AM
This is the top of an end shoe.  It has threaded holes to retain a brace.  The next foto is the bottom of the shoe.  It has 11 mm holes an inch apart.   These holes in combination with the 2-inch spaced holes in the rails allow the shoes to be placed at any inch interval on the rail.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 12, 2019, 12:30:12 AM
Three 10 x 1.25 bolts hold the shoe to the rail.

This new puppy is an ANIMAL.  The dog grabs her water bowl, full of water, in her jaws and flings it up in the air.  So, the water bowl is bolted to a chunk of 2x12 plank.  She flips the bowl, water, and plank up in the air.  Finally, a piece of mainline railroad track is deployed to use gravity to attach the bowl the floor.  This works. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 14, 2019, 01:25:14 AM
This is the brace plate that is attached to the top of the end shoe.   There are braces on both pars of end shoes.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 16, 2019, 02:20:39 AM
These are the inner shoes.  There are four of them.  The holes are drilled at one-inch soaking just like the end shoes.  The entire alignment fixture, except for the bolts, can be made from the 25-foot long channel.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 16, 2019, 02:34:32 AM
The rear wheel is wider than the front on most motorcycles.  These plywood wheel shim plates are used.  The front wheel width plus the thickness of the two shim plates should be close to the same as the rear wheel width.  Offset alignment is done by using a thicker shim plate on one side of the front wheel.  The difference in the thickness of the two shim plates is equal to the offset.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 18, 2019, 12:17:07 AM
An interesting article about making an air scoop.https://www.millerwelds.com/resources/article-library/welding-project-making-a-formed-aluminum-air-scoop-for-a-carburetor?utm_source=enewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=diy (https://www.millerwelds.com/resources/article-library/welding-project-making-a-formed-aluminum-air-scoop-for-a-carburetor?utm_source=enewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=diy)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 03, 2019, 03:46:58 PM
An article about bias in decision making and its consequences.  This is something I will think about when deciding what to do when building and racing.https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20191001-the-bias-behind-the-worlds-greatest-catastrophes (https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20191001-the-bias-behind-the-worlds-greatest-catastrophes)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 10, 2019, 12:24:47 AM
Cast aluminum wheels from the chain drive version of the Triumph Tiger 800 use the same size tires as the spoked wheels my Bonnie.  A used pair with small dents in the rims were given to me.  They were sent to a repair shop in Ohio that specializes in wheel repair.  They will be fixed up as good as new for about $1,000 including shipping.  This includes the replacement of the 90 degree angled OEM valve stems with straight no-angle racing grade valve stems.  Costwise, fixing up these used wheels saves a few hundred dollars as opposed to buying new ones.

A sprocket carrier is the thing that the rear chainwheel bolts onto.  It connects into the rubber cushions in the rear wheel.  Neither the sprocket, its carrier, or the cush drive rubbers came with the wheel.  A new one needs to be ordered from Triumph.  The wheels are from a 2014 Tiger 800 and the carrier costs $490.34 for that model.  The same carrier in a slightly different color is used on the 2018 models.  It costs $290.58 from Triumph.  The later model one was ordered.  It is black rather than the dark silver of the 2014 model.  This is no big deal.  It will work fine.

It pays to check the prices for parts shared by different years and models of bikes, I learned.  The prices vary.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Lemming Motors on October 10, 2019, 08:21:27 AM
You made my day.

I was flicking through the detail and pics and got to the dog bowl and lmao.  :-D

Thanks for the article on Outcome Bias too - probably why we take risks - we are programmed to consider the outcome; that woolly mammoth is going down and I have some Stilton sauce in the back of the cave that will go nicely with a back steak, rather than the risk; damn that woolly mammoth has big tusks - that is going to hurt in the morning.

John
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 14, 2019, 01:06:20 AM
Rational thinking is something I am not familiar with.  The thought of sizzling mammoth with stilton sauce would be enough motivation to make me take any risk in the past.  The American Eagle and Carbliner incidents have a lot to do with a change in attitude.  Us bike guys have zero roll cage, just like Ms Coombs.  Rob Freyvogel was a lot smarter than me and he got into trouble.  It is time for me to engage the frontal lobes in the decision making process.  The outcome bias article came along at the right time.

The outcome bias was discussed when I was in engineering skool about 35 yeas ago.  What I remember the professor saying is "When you roll the dice the chances of a double six are always the same regardless of what you rolled before."  That lesson I remembered.  I never really understood it or used it until now.

In the past with a loose and wet track the bike was run with reduced tire pressures.  This increased the tire footprint and it worked.  The results were reduced wheelspin with no apparent tire damage like delamination.  Now I need to reevaluate this strategy without biasing my thinking from past experience.  "What will be different now?" I ask myself.  Back then I was in the 120 to 130 mph range.  Now speeds between 150 and 160 are possible.  It make no sense now to base my decisions on what worked back then.   This is how I am trying to make decisions with out outcome bias.

In the past my philosophy was to run V rated tires for speeds under 150 and ZR rated tires for anything over that.  Now I am looking at the issue in more detail.  Tire calculations are attached.  A load rating chart is also attached.  This is originally from the Motorcycle Safety Foundation and I downloaded it from the Bike Bandit website.

These load ratings are based on tires inflated to the manufacturer's maximum recommended cold pressure.  Lower pressures result in lower ratings than those published.  In the future I will use the 42 psi maximum recommended cold pressure. 
       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 14, 2019, 01:18:52 AM
This table is from an out-of-print handbook from the Japanese Automobile Tire Manufacturers Association.  It shows how load  capacity decreases with speeds over 150 mph.  An expert in the tire industry sent me this.  It shows the need to keep weight down to get good tire life at high speeds.  The other table is some kilometers per hour to miles per hour conversions.  This makes it easier to understand the JATMA chart.

Two things are obvious.  One is wheelspin needs to be controlled, in some cases, to keep tires together.  Second, adding ballast weight may be a bad idea.  Electronic traction control seems to be a much better solution.



   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on October 14, 2019, 11:29:31 AM
Wobbly, a couple of considerations:
The tire ratings are predicated on what duration and temperature of exposures?
Are the ratings for a powered tire or just a roller?
Does your rear tire loading include aero drag weight transfer to the rear?  At 160 mph it might be significant--or not, and would likely be of short duration.

Probably not going to find answers to the above questions, but at least what you have is a reasonable stab at it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on October 16, 2019, 01:32:42 PM
I fill my tires at the salt to  150-lbs. BTs and Avon Speedmaster with no problems up to 147-mph. No ballast should be needed with suspension on the rear.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 17, 2019, 09:02:37 PM
An article about how the speed test is done.https://www.lesschwab.com/article/tire-speed-rating-and-why-it-matters.html (https://www.lesschwab.com/article/tire-speed-rating-and-why-it-matters.html)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 17, 2019, 09:10:13 PM
Another publication.  It looks like an SAE standard applies.  See 3.8 https://wenku.baidu.com/view/b024f568a98271fe910ef92a.html (https://wenku.baidu.com/view/b024f568a98271fe910ef92a.html)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 22, 2019, 11:48:20 PM
150 psi!  That tactic requires more gonadal volume than I have.

The rear tire is the critical one.  It has a 537# load capacity with the 25% reduction due to the 168 mph speed.  The static load is 410#.  537 - 410 = 127# This is probably enough extra to account for weight transfer.  The tire has 8 mph extra speed capacity and 127# reserve load capacity at 160 mph.  It should be OK at 160 mph.  Also, the tire manufacturer was consulted about how to do these calculations and they are aware of what I am doing.

The purpose of all of this is to give some documentation to justify the tire choice if the subject is discussed with the tech inspector.  These calculations should suffice for that. 

A 43 tooth rear sprocket will be used with a 19 tooth front sprocket.  The tire speed is 168 mph at the 9,500 rpm rev limit.  It will be impossible to spin the tire faster than the rated speed. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 23, 2019, 12:43:31 AM
The documentation for the last post.  It will be in the notebook I bring to the race.  Next year if salt conditions are OK I will run in the BMST.  If the salt is bad I will stay in Wendover and run in the World of Speed.  WOS tech inspection is something I have not been through so I am making sure everything they may want will be available.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on October 23, 2019, 10:24:03 PM
Bo.........think about your bike weight at speed..........not on your foot :wink:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 07, 2019, 02:54:19 PM
Folks are using those battleaxe tires on Hayabusas.  Those big bikes cannot unpeel them so they should work good on my turtle-speed wonder.  This is documentation to get through tech if I am asked about the tires.  I do include an allowance for weight transfer.

This is how my build is organized.  The Triumph shop manual has chapters on everything and exploded diagrams showing the parts covered in each.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 07, 2019, 02:58:05 PM
The parts boxes are labeled as per the chapter headings and they contain parts shown in the exploded diagrams.  The notebook is also organized with this method.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 07, 2019, 03:27:31 PM
This next series of posts deals with issues in the "Electrical & Ignition Systems" chapter.

The flywheel has the alternator rotor coils in it and it is on the crankshaft end.  The engine can be rebuilt with the alternator on the crank if no shaft work is needed.  Some work will be done on this engine's crank so the rotor must come off.  The factory rotor removal tool has a zero chance of success based on past experience.  This is the removal method I have developed.

A high-grade M22 x 1.5 bolt is purchased.  The end is turned down to a stub and a brass bushing is turned on a lathe to fit over the stub.  Anti-sieze is spread around the stub and bushing.  This tool is threaded into the rotor and it is tightened with an impact wrench.  The tightening compresses the tool and it pops the rotor off of the tapered crankshaft end.  Sometimes.

The impact wrench imparts energy to the tool.  Some of that energy is used to overcome friction between the tool and rotor threads.  More energy is lost to spin the tool end on the crank end.  The remaining energy compresses the tool against the crank by turning it in the rotor threads. 

Anti-sieze is used on the threads to reduce friction based energy loss.  The rotating tool pushes on the lubricated face of the brass bushing rather than the crank end and this reduces energy loss due to friction at the tool end.  This leaves more energy to compress the tool.  This home made tool will remove rotors that the factory tool cannot.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 07, 2019, 03:30:47 PM
Tools to remove the rotor include a heat gun, impact wrench, strap wrench, and a strip of sheet aluminum.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 07, 2019, 03:40:23 PM
The tool is threaded into the rotor and tightened with the air gun.  Sometimes this is all that is needed to remove the rotor.  The next step is done with the tool screwed into the rotor.

The sheet aluminum is bent and put inside the rotor.  It is a heat shield to keep the rotor coils from being overheated.  The center of the rotor is heated with the heat gun.  It is heated until the center is hot to the touch.  Sometimes the rotor pops off during the heating process.

Another burst from the impact gun is made when the rotor center is hot.  Usually this pops off the flywheel.  If not, the flywheel and crank are taken to a machine shop and an arbor press is used to separate the parts.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Jim Phelps on November 12, 2019, 02:35:50 PM
150 psi!  That tactic requires more gonadal volume than I have.

The rear tire is the critical one.  It has a 537# load capacity with the 25% reduction due to the 168 mph speed.  The static load is 410#.  537 - 410 = 127# This is probably enough extra to account for weight transfer.  The tire has 8 mph extra speed capacity and 127# reserve load capacity at 160 mph.  It should be OK at 160 mph.  Also, the tire manufacturer was consulted about how to do these calculations and they are aware of what I am doing.

The purpose of all of this is to give some documentation to justify the tire choice if the subject is discussed with the tech inspector.  These calculations should suffice for that. 

A 43 tooth rear sprocket will be used with a 19 tooth front sprocket.  The tire speed is 168 mph at the 9,500 rpm rev limit.  It will be impossible to spin the tire faster than the rated speed.

From your wind tunnel test you can calculate the front and rear lift values at 160 mph and add that to your static measurements. You might find you have positive lift at the front wheel and additional down force at the rear. Also, torque has to be applied to the driven axle to match the forces of aerodynamic drag and rolling resistance. The reaction to that torque causes a load transfer from the front to rear, again causing additional load to the rear tire. I believe that it would be better to combine these forces and then show in your log book that you still have excess load capacity.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 15, 2019, 12:18:00 PM
Thanks for the advice, Jim.  When I find where I put the wind tunnel data I will post it and then I need help with doing the calculations.  Traditionally weight transfer is not considered when inspectors evaluate tire speed rating vs potential motorcycle speeds.  I might be overthinking this issue.

Nuts and bolts on race engines are all tightened to specified values.  Disassembly is done by hand rather than an air wrench.  Fasteners that take much less torque to remove than to install are noted.  Problems might be occurring.

The eight large bolts holding the cases together around the crankshaft have been problematic.  They have loosened and there has been fretting at the joint between the crankcase halves.  This issue needs to be addressed before the engine is developed further.

The old crankshaft rod journals were at the same location on the crank, degree wise.  Both pistons went up and down together.  The inertial forces of this created large tugging forces at the crankcase joint.  The new crank has journals 90 degrees apart.  This spreads the inertial forces out over a longer duration of the rotational cycle and it reduces the peak tugging force.

The counterbalancers were used with the old crankshaft.  They were located in the upper case half and the pulled in the opposite direction of the crank inertia forces.  This increased tension stresses at the crankcase joint when the pistons were traveling through bottom dead center .  The counterbalancers are not used with the new crank.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 15, 2019, 12:31:17 PM
Triumph made two changes to the big crankcase bolts and tightening procedures.  The latest bolts are used with a modified version of the most recent tightening procedure.  The newer bolts are more substantial due to some dimensional changes.

The bolts are tightened in stages as per the shop manual.  The bolts are tightened for each stage.  Then, each bolt is checked to make sure it is sufficiently tight before proceeding to the next stage.  Some may need a little bit more tightening.  This is an additional step that is not listed in the manual.

The standard Triumph bolt comes with a torx head that is easily striped during assembly and disassembly.  Stainless steel bolt heads are welded onto each bolt to replace the cheap and cheesy torx heads.  This is a big help.   

All of this works.  The crankcase bolts stayed tight after the most recent race.  Problem solved.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on November 15, 2019, 12:45:34 PM
A member of the Peanut Gallery asks: doesn't welding a stainless head to the crankcase bolts affect the strength and elasticity of  those bolts?

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 16, 2019, 01:27:13 AM
The bolts are stainless along with the added heads.  Stainless steel is a poor conductor of heat.  One advantage to MIG is its speed.  The welds were zapped on so fast that there was not a lot of heat transfer to the adjacent bolt.  I saw no evidence that the bolts were annealed from weld heat. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 17, 2019, 01:23:03 AM
As per the bolts, they were quenched after welding.  I did this so they would be cool and easier to handle.  That might have prevented annealing.  I do not remember very well.  That was in Spring 2018.

The crank, rods, and rod shells were sent to Marine Crankshafts in Santa Ana.  They work on the cranks for the Triumph flat track team.  Three sets of shells were sent.  One is the used 2018 set with wear from salt flat runs and dyno tests.  An evaluation of these is requested along with recommendations about any work needed on the crank.  Another set is four new shells intended for use in 2020.  Clearance measurements are requested for these.  I am not sure if my plastigage method is accurate.  Some professional measuring will be a big help.  The last set is two coated top shells.  There might be an advantage to using these.

An explanation was provided about how and why I removed 0.0002 inches diameter from the rod journals to get looser racing clearances in 2018.  This was done by hand using emery paper.  Is this mickey-mouse modification OK, I ask.

The graph shows dyno and computer model horsepower.  The rpm limit will be raised from 9,000 to 9,500 or 10,000 if the crank will withstand it.  I ask about this.  The engine should give more power if this is done.

The rod big end shells are the last reliability issue.  Once this is sorted the rev limit will be raised and the engine will be fully done in its naturally aspirated form.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RidgeRunner on November 17, 2019, 08:23:21 AM
        ".......the engine will be fully done in its naturally aspirated form."   An indication of long range plans beyond 2020?   :wink:

                       Ed
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 17, 2019, 04:10:27 PM
Forced induction.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 23, 2019, 12:00:07 PM
Various flow tests of different complete intake systems were done in the recent past.  Flow through the head, alone, was of no interest.  The engine would not be used without some form of induction.

That was a mistake.  Most computer programs use bare head flow values and add the induction system restriction to this by calculation.  Using complete induction system flow values in the programs often double-counts intake losses when this is done.

The design of other intake systems is also an issue.  Evaluating a blower, for example, requires bare head flow data.

This are bare head corrected flow data for the Triumph intake at 28 inches with the addition of a radius made from clay at the entrance to the inlet.  The cylinder size is just under 500 cc.

The flow data I use is done on the same flow bench by the same person over a period of many years.  This helps a lot when comparing port and valve modifications from year-to-year.  The flow differences are often subtle and it is good to have that consistency in operator and equipment.  This way, the differences can be attributed to physical changes in the intake rather than changes in operator procedure or test equipment.

The cam lift is just under 0.400 inches and the flow curve flattens out at that value.  The cam lift and port flow are a good match.

 .   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 26, 2019, 11:43:20 PM
The table and graph have the corrected flow data for the intake tract at 28 inches based on Kibblewhite's flow bench.  The valves are 2mm oversize.  Test 1 is the bare head with clay shaped in a radius around the entry.   Test 2 is the head with carb and a long K and N filter with sock bolted directly onto the carb end.  Test 3 is the head, carb, a bellmouth, a plenum 1.2 times the cylinder volume, and a shorter K and N air filter with a sock.  Test 4 is the same as Test 3 except the walrus valve, a sort of anti-reversion valve, is between the filter and the plenum.

The two intake arrangements in Test 2 and 3 will be tested on the dyno.  The walrus valve goes into the recycle metal bin.

As per the equations in Harold Bettes' Engine Airflow book on pp 82 and 83, with an 8 percent HP loss between the engine and rear wheel added to the formula, the engine is estimated to make 114 HP at the rear wheel at 9,350 rpm.  This is a very reasonable estimate based on past experience.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 28, 2019, 02:50:59 PM
Happy Thanksgiving to everyone.  Turkey time here is 5 hours away.  It is on the stove.  Stay safe when driving around. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on November 28, 2019, 07:37:34 PM
We cooked our holiday meal using the waste heat from the generator*.  The power is out over lots of the U P thanks to the 2 feet of heavy snow we got overnight Tuesday and we've been running the generator since.  I guess we'll be w/o commercial elect. 'til this weekend.

* Not really, but it sounded cool.

Happy Thanksgiving, everyone.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 11, 2019, 12:02:26 PM
The original OEM rev limit was 7,400 rpm when racing started in 2007.  The engine was ran near that rpm on the salt and taken apart.  Attempts were made to correct all seen problems.  That rev limit was used in subsequent years until I was confident all issues were fixed.  Then the rev limit was raised to 8,000 and the process was repeated.  This was done again with a 9,000 rpm limit in 2018.  This was the last year the engine was run and it went through many miles at 9,000 rpm.

Race tuners tell me these engines will go up to 10,500 rpm.  Folks have blown these motors to bits while doing this.  Some caution is warranted on my part.  An amateur builder, I am.

The Carillo rods recommended for the bike and sold to me in 2008 were "top loaders."  The bolt heads face up so the big end shells can be replaced when the top end is removed.  There is no need to take the engine out and to split the cases.  The rod big end shell problem was a known issue at that time, is my guess.

The staggered firing order crank used in 2018 was scrounged from a wrecked engine.  It was sent to Marine Crankshafts in Santa Anna, California for inspection and recommended modifications.  They have experience with these cranks in race use.  It was magnafluxed and deemed to be showing signs of use but still serviceable.  The journals were polished and the champhers on the oil holes were reshaped.

The big end rod bearing shells were inspected.  They were distressed.  "Too much rpm" was the verdict.  This is problematic.  More rpm is needed to be competitive.  The plan is to boost the rev limit to only 9,500 this year and see how the shells wear.  It appears that annual shell replacement will be the only viable solution to the issue.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 12, 2019, 10:49:38 PM
A pair of one-piece wheels will replace the spoked ones.  Some internal spacers are needed between the wheel bearings and the wheel and sprocket carrier bearings.  They are internal parts so exposure to chlorides is less than with an external part.

Usually 304 stainless alloy is what I use for this.  It is a pain in the arse to machine on my primitive equipment.  These round bars are annealed 303 stainless.  It does not have as much corrosion resistance as 304 but it should be easier to machine based on the literature.  Does anyone have advice about this alloy?  A lathe will be he only tool used.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on December 13, 2019, 01:20:22 PM
WW, the only advice I have for machining 303 is the same for any stainless or titanium alloy is  "slow speed, heavy feed".
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 17, 2019, 02:13:09 PM
The 303 annealed stainless is a lot easier to machine.  The carbide inserts used were Dorian CCGT-21.51-UEU-DUP35RT for all but the finish cuts.  The finish bits were Dorian CCGT-21.51-UEU-DUP35VT.  Both types can be used dry.  Some Joe Gibbs oil was used and it helped a little.  The Dorian catalog gives feed and speed info.  A faster turning rpm was used for the finish cuts.  This bit combination is very versatile and I use it for all sorts of different metals.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 20, 2019, 09:55:24 PM
The rods are sent to Carrillo for reconditioning.  These attached are some calculations to figure out rod bolt loading.  The tech experts at Carillo are helping me with this issue.  The general rule is that the stress should not be higher than 80 percent of the bolt steel yield strength.  That would be yield strengths of 62 and 69 ksi at 9,500 and 10,000 rpm respectively.  It takes some strong metal and lots of bolt preload to handle those loads.

Piston acceleration is another issue.  A maximum of 150,000 feet per second squared is mentioned in John Baechtel's "Engine Math" book.  The 162,000 value at 10,000 rpm is well above this.  CP Pistons is part of the same company as Carrillo and I have asked for help with this matter, too.

Math is a good thing.  It shows me what I need to worry about.  Any comments on these two values, bolt stress and piston acceleration, are welcome.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 23, 2019, 02:44:42 PM
This series of posts give background info so the ones that follow will make sense. 

The wheel alignment jig was shown a few months ago.  Now it is on a couple of saw horses in the cellar.  The rear wheel is clamped in.  The front wheel is also there with four plywood spacers.  They make the front wheel wider so it matches the rear and the rails are parallel.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 23, 2019, 02:49:58 PM
The swingarm is attached to the wheel using the rear axle.  The bottom engine case is attached to the swinging arm by way of its spindle.  The spindle is a close clearance fit in its holes in the case.  There is not a lot of slop there.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 23, 2019, 03:12:42 PM
The screwdriver points to where the spindle goes through needle bearings in the swingarm.  There is no slop here.  It is essential for purposes of frame alignment to realize that the rear wheel, swingarm, and engine are a single rigid unit.  Everything else comprises the other unit.  Chassis alignment is done at the interface between the two.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 23, 2019, 03:22:05 PM
These pictures show the bushings at the spindle ends.  In one picture I am pushing up on the bushing.  In the other foto the bushing is dropped down.  There is a lot of clearance between the inner diameters of these bushings and the spindle.  These bushings are not part of the rear wheel-swingarm-engine rigid assembly.  They are part of the "everything else" unit.  Chassis alignment is done by loosening the swingarm spindle and all engine mount bolts.  The two assemblies are forced into alignment.  The swingarm spindle and engine mounting bolts are tightened.  Now the chassis is aligned. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 23, 2019, 03:27:00 PM
The outriggers attach the frame to the swingarm bushings.  The pictures show one alone and attached to the swingarm.  All bolts attaching the outriggers are also loose for chassis alignment.  They are tightened after the assemblies are in position. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 23, 2019, 05:02:04 PM
These are alignment buttons.  Two stick in the rear axle ends and the other two go in the swingarm spindle ends.  They are different lengths so measurements between them are parallel to the bike centerline.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 23, 2019, 05:12:14 PM
The chain adjusters on the rear axle are used to pull the wheel back an equal distance from the swingarm spindle on both sides.  A trammel is used to measure this distance using the dimples in the adjustment button ends.  Now the axle and swingarm spindle are parallel.  Do not use the chain adjustment marks on the swingarm to do this.  They might not be stamped in the correct locations. 

A straight edge is placed against the rear sprocket.  Note how the rear sprocket is about a quarter inch to the right of where it should be.  This offset causes a power loss in the chain drive system and more rapid chain and sprocket wear. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 23, 2019, 05:23:28 PM
This photo shows the offset.  This was with the short swingarm.  The next photo shows the straightedge against the front sprocket with the lengthened swingarm.  The sprockets are in line like they should be.

Throughout the decades I have checked the sprocket alignment on many bikes.  It is more common than not for them to be out of alignment.  It is important to check this and make corrections to minimize drive train power losses.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: tauruck on December 23, 2019, 11:11:24 PM
Bo, not always easy to get the straight edge into position to measure alignment.

This kid I used to help with his kart was a gear cutter by trade. He had a 14 second lead and tossed the chain. Next heat same thing.
Eventually I asked how he aligned the sprockets?. "OH, I just Eyeballed it". 😂😂😂😂😂. 20mm offset. We won the third heat.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 24, 2019, 10:20:07 PM
You would think that a guy who machined gears would be fussy about almost everything...

This is wheel alignment for the typical bike.  It is a friend's Bonneville that handled funny.  It would be hard to drop into corners when going left and it liked to flop into the corners going right.  A typical wheel alignment issue and we fixed it.

The chiropractic table was leveled by putting different thickness wood pieces under each leg.  The front of the bike was tied down in four directions so it would not roll.  The back was left free.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 24, 2019, 10:24:10 PM
The width of the front and back tires are measured.  As a sidenote, the front is a bias ply tire and the rear is a radial.  Triumph sold the bikes with this combination.  Both of my riding buddies like the setup so much that they renew the tires with OEM replacements.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 24, 2019, 10:29:32 PM
The alignment jig and spacer plates are taken out of storage.  The spacer plate thickness is as close as possible to:  (back tire width - front tire width) / 2  The same number of spacer plates are used on each side of the front tire.

The sidestand spring hit the top of the jig rail.  The tires needed to be raised.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 24, 2019, 10:32:49 PM
This is a block under the tire to hold the bike up for clearance over the rail.  The jig is bolted up around the front wheel.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 24, 2019, 10:40:01 PM
A plumb bob is hung down from the center of the frame.  The bolt hole where the horn goes is halfway between the downtube mounts and it is in the center of the frame.  The bob was hung from there.  The wood piece over the jig rails shows a line halfway between the rails.  The four tie downs holding the front of the bike are adjusted so the bob hangs halfway between the rails.  The front wheel is manipulated until it is plumb and the bob is centered.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 24, 2019, 10:46:24 PM
The swingarm spindle is loosened.  The rear axle, too.  The wheel is twisted until it is plumb.  The chain adjusters are used to make all four corners of the rear wheel touch the jig rails.  The swingarm spindle and axle nuts are tightened.  Everything is rechecked to make sure the wheels are plumb, the bob is centered between the frame rails, and the wheels are aligned within the jig.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 24, 2019, 10:54:38 PM
Measurements are made as shown.  These are used when adjusting the chain.  The distances change every time the bike is disassembled and rebuilt, so these measurements are valid until then.

Of course, the steering head, wheel, and swingarm bearings should be in good shape before this is done.  Also, the rims need to be true and the tires need to be correctly seated on the rims with no bulges in the sidewalls.

A series of posts in a few months will show another way to do this.  I miss the days when I did not have time to do something like this on Christmas Eve.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 25, 2019, 11:36:23 AM
The chain adjustment distance is always larger on the left.  It was 0.050 inches larger in 2017 and 0.021 inches larger in 2018.  It is different every time the bike is put together.  The attached is made from the setup in Reply 3467 when the axle and swingarm spindle are parallel.  The adjustment distance is 0.030 larger on the left.  What this means is in both 2017 and 2018 the wheels were in alignment but not the sprockets.  The sprockets need to be in line to get the most efficiency from the drive train.

The problem is the alignment of the upper frame, engine, swingarm and axle when everything is bolted together.  This is the method I am working on.  First, loosen all bolts holding the outriggers to the frame and swingarm spindle.  Second, loosen the swingarm spindle and all engine mount bolts.  Third, loosen all bolts holding the upper to lower frame.

Now, the rear axle is adjusted to the 0.030 inch offset as shown on the attached and the axle bolt is tightened.  The chassis is jacked around until the wheels are plumb and in alignment.  Then all bolts are tightened.  The goal is to have everything in alignment when the job is done.  The details of how to do this are being figured out.

Folks tell me that the alignment issues I am dealing with are common to many modern bikes.  The multi piece frames like on the Triumph are more suited to robotic and semi-robotic assembly.  It takes lots of manual labor to install the heavy modern engines in full cradle frames.  Those old one piece style frames did not have this issue.
 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on December 26, 2019, 12:59:09 AM
Merry Christmas, Bo................I use a frame-jig and a laser to get the wheels aligned........then put the laser on the sprockets and machine or space the carrier as needed, along with proper axle spacers. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 27, 2019, 12:34:58 AM
Dennis, can you show us how to use that laser?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 27, 2019, 01:03:01 AM
The concern Mike mentioned in reply 3469 is valid.  It is hard or impossible to check the sprocket alignment with a straightedge on most bikes.  A string strung tight against the sprocket faces was what I used for years.  These pages are from the owner's manual for my original BSA.  A version of the wheel alignment tool shown can be made for the sprockets in many instances.

Imagine planes across each sprocket's face.  The sprockets are in line if both faces are in the same plane.  The sprockets can be adjusted to be in line if the planes of both faces are parallel to each other.  A dished sprocket of modified sprocket mounts can be used to do this.

Life gets worse if the planes cross at an angle.  That can be a symptom of a bowed frame and is most likely the result of a wreck.  It is always a good idea to keep this in mind when trying to align the wheels and sprockets.  Sometimes a new frame, or straightening the old one, is the only cure.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on December 27, 2019, 09:35:52 PM
Bo......Be sure the bike and table are level and the wheels have been centered to the frame.....the laser is a simple table-top unit that must be leveled.  The beam can be raised or lowered.......so just set it on the bench behind and beneath the center of the rear wheel and aim it along the bottom of the rear wheel at its center and at the center of the front wheel......mark the rim centers on the bench....then move a little to the right and do the same, then to the left of center and make the marks..........all should be parallel.....check it with a straight-edge.....then set the laser behind and beneath the rear sprocket....center it along the bottom edge of the sprocket and aim to the center of the output sprocket.........make your marks and check for parallel lines with the wheel marks.

Dave Murre showed me how to do this and uses a lathe to machine the necessary parts. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Bookfla on December 30, 2019, 04:38:18 PM
Lasers are not too bad but it is hard to get finite definition under say .060". If you have a clear pathway a newer style Florescent T5 lamp at 5/8" diameter can get you a cheap straight edge to align from. It also works great for wheel and swing arm alignment.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: charlie101 on December 30, 2019, 05:56:16 PM
Have you tried to stress the mounts for the swingarm and then measure the alignment? There's a tremendous pulling force at the chain when going full speed on the salt. A loop wire with a turnbuckle, between the sprockets, would somewhat indicate how flexible the frame is. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 30, 2019, 11:52:54 PM
Figuring out the flexure at the swingarm to frame junction is mental.  That disqualfies me from taking that approach.  Some bracing will be designed so I can be confident that there will be minimal flex.

Spoked wheels were used with inner tubes.  One piece wheels will be used to eliminate the inner tube and to get a more desirable rim width at the back wheel.  The bike shop that helps me, Cascade Moto Classics, had this pair of rims.  They were dented where someone ran over a curb.  They gave them to me and they are for a 2014 Triumph Tiger. 

The rims were sent to AccuTru in Kettering, Ohio.  They were recommended to me.  They were told about what I plan to do with the bike.  They said the repaired rims should be good for over 200 mph.  The bike will never go anywhere near this fast so the fixed rims should be OK.  They did a good job.  I cannot tell that they were dented.  Fixing up these old rims saved about $500 compared to buying new ones.   

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 01, 2020, 12:06:06 PM
Folks that design a lot of this new stuff never worked as mechanics.  The inner spacer between the wheel bearings has close to same inside diameter as the bearings.  Expandable bearing removers cannot get a good grip on the inside face of the inner race for removal.  The wheel was heated so the aluminum bearing housing would expand more than the steel bearing.  This reduced the grip from the interference fit between the wheel and the bearing.  The bearing puller is this thing I call the "foot."  It is wedged in the spacer and pushed sideways so there is friction between the foot and the inner spacer.  Then the slide hammer is used with the foot to shift the bearing slightly outwards.  Now there is a small radial gap between the spacer end and the bearing.  Conventional expanding pullers can be used to finish the bearing removal. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 01, 2020, 12:29:42 PM
Ceramic wheel bearings were investigated.  Literature from companies that specialized in ceramic bearings was ignored.  They have a big financial stake in what they say.  This could make the recommendations suspect.  Engineering data was reviewed from big established bearing companies such as Timkin, Toyo, GMN, NSK, NTN, and others.  They often sold ceramic and many other bearing types.  Their guidance would be more impartial, is my hope.

Wheel bearings are sealed low speed deep groove radial ball type.  Lifespan is not an issue with a seldom used race bike.  There was very little, if any, advantage for ceramic bearings in that use based on the literature.

Then, some investigation was done on the top of the line performance bikes from major manufacturers.  The four cylinder BMW1000SS would be a example.  All appear to use conventional steel bearings.  So, I decided to use steel bearings, too.

The Tiger 800 bearings removed are Japanese NSK 6204DU and they are replaced with Polish NSK 63030DU with the same width and outer diameter.  The inner diameter is smaller to match the Triumph Bonneville axle.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 03, 2020, 08:50:44 PM
Quite a lot of fabrication is needed to make this wheel swap and the problems are common to the typical job.  Lots of lathe work will be done on a 1947 belt drive Logan lathe.  It has a hard time machining the common 304 stainless steel alloy.  Very light cuts are needed so the belt will not slip.  Unfortunately, the shallow cut depths are within the work hardening zone and tool life suffers.  This problem is bypassed by using 303 annealed stainless.  Parts in direct contact with salty water will continue to use 304 alloy 'cause of its superior corrosion resistance.   https://www.clintonaluminum.com/stainless-steel-303-verses-304/ (https://www.clintonaluminum.com/stainless-steel-303-verses-304/)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 03, 2020, 09:35:03 PM
A spacer spreads apart the inner races of the wheel bearings.  Flanges in the hub separate the outer races.  It is important that the inner races are the same distance apart as the outer races so the balls in the bearings will be centered in their grooves.  The Tiger 800 spacer is shown between the bearings in the picture.  It cannot be used.  The Bonneville axle and bearings have the same widths but their inner diameters are smaller, so new spacers are needed.  A new rear wheel spacer is made from 304 stainless and the last operation is to cut it off at the proper length. 
 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 03, 2020, 09:43:51 PM
The cutoff bit is easy to select based on the info on the back of the pack with the bits.  There is an "X" in the "Cut-off" box covered by my thumb.  Some precise measurements are needed so the tools and parts are put in a room with a temperature around 68 to 70 degrees.  They are there for an hour to warm up. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 05, 2020, 01:09:53 PM
The new stainless steel spacer should keep the wheel bearings the same distance apart as the aluminum Tiger 800 spacer.  The spacers are made from different materials and they fit axles of different diameters and bolt torques.  This is a typical problem during a wheel swap and the next few posts will have the calculations.

Stainless steel is a lot heavier than aluminum.  A new spacer made to the same dimensions as the aluminum one would weigh more than necessary.  Fortunately stainless steel is much more rigid than aluminum.  The two spacers can be considered to be springs under axial loading.  The modulus of elasticity is a measure of the stiffness.  It is 28,000,000 pounds per inch for annealed 303 and 10,000,000 psi for the aluminum.  The steel is a stiffer spring.

The desire is to have both spacers deform the same amount under identical axial loads.  The spacer lengths will be close to the same so the moduli of elasticity and cross-sectional areas are the only variables to be considered.  Cross-sectional area of steel spacer x modulus of elasticity of steel should equal cross-sectional area of aluminum spacer x modulus of elasticity of aluminum.  The aluminum spacer has 0.560 square inch area.

Area steel spacer = 0.560 x 10,000,000 / 28,000,000 = 0.200 square inch
 
A hole is drilled to 0.692 inches diameter in the steel piece to fit the smaller diameter Bonneville axle.  Some basic math says the outer diameter of the steel spacer needs to be 0.857 inches.  This is considerably less than the 1.170 inch aluminum spacer diameter.  Some weight savings can be had by considering the higher strength of steel in the design calculations.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 05, 2020, 03:27:30 PM
Now the spacer design has progressed to this.  Both spacers are 5 inches long.  One is annealed 303 stainless steel with an outside diameter of .857 inches with an inner diameter of .692 inches.  The other is aluminum of indeterminate alloy with an outer diameter of 1.170 inches and an inner diameter of .810 inches.  Both spacers have equal resistance to compression deflection.  This assumes the compression pressures are below the yield stresses of the materials.

Normally I do a yield stress and column buckling design of the original part and the designed replacement.  The attached shows the horrendous differences in yield strengths of different aluminum alloys and tempers.  No design or analysis can be done on an unknown piece of aluminum.
https://www.amesweb.info/Materials/Aluminum-Yield-Tensile-Strength.aspx (https://www.amesweb.info/Materials/Aluminum-Yield-Tensile-Strength.aspx) 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 07, 2020, 01:03:39 AM
Disregard posts about stainless steel spacer.  I made a big design error.

The axle bolt is always tightened with a torque wrench having a fairly recent calibration certificate.  The torque is 65 Newton meters or in imperial measurements, 752 pound inches.  The nut is supposed to have clean and dry threads and a typical 0.20 thread friction coefficient would apply.  This would give 5,970 pounds tension for the 16 mm diameter axle bolt threads.  The axle is in a greasy environment and it is very possible there could be some chain lube on the threads.  A lower 0.15 thread friction coefficient would apply.  This produces a much greater 7,960 pounds bolt tension.  The greater bolt tension will be used in the spacer redesign.

This was the step that I forgot to do when designing and machining the stainless steel spacer.  It was designed for the 5,970 pound bolt tension and it would have collapsed and buckled under the 7,960 pound lubed thread tension. 

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 07, 2020, 01:41:34 AM
The spacer in the Tiger 800 wheel is shown.  It is indented where it contacted the bearing inner race.  This is what I want to avoid.

The old Tiger 800 wheel bearing is on the right and the new Bonneville one is on the left.  The thrust face on the inner race is what contacts the spacer and the pointer shows it on the Tiger bearing.  The thrust face area is 0.352 square inches on the Bonneville bearing.

The 7,960 pound bolt tension is on this 0.352 square inch face.  7,960 / 0.352 = 22,600 pounds per square inch.  A rod of 6164 aluminum alloy with T6511 temper is in the scrap pile.  It has a 34,800 psi yield strength and it will be more than adequate.  The factor of safety is 34,800 / 22,600 = 1.5.  As seen from the reference a few posts previous, many aluminum alloys would not have yield strengths above 22,600 psi.  Alloy 6061 is relatively easy to machine and corrosion resistant when compared to other aluminum alloys.  This is an added bonus.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 07, 2020, 03:03:44 PM
This is a link to the buckling calculator. https://www.amesweb.info/Beam/Column-Buckling-Calculator.aspx (ftp://www.amesweb.info/Beam/Column-Buckling-Calculator.aspx)

We did hand calculations for column design when I worked for the highway department.  This was done so someone could see how the answer was calculated.  This program is what I used to check my hand calcs.

Cut and paste versions of the section properties table and the buckling output are attached.  The 0.58 safety factor is less than 1.0.   The spacer would have crumpled when an oily axle nut was tightened.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 07, 2020, 03:11:44 PM
These are the results of the buckling analysis for the aluminum axle spacer with an oily axle nut.  The safety factor is 1.19.  The spacer will not collapse.

The metal yield strength is a critical input.  Always use the 2 percent elongation value for yield.  Some manufacturers will post a different elongation, such as 10 percent.  This gives a higher value and it makes their product appear to be stronger.  The 2 percent yield value is the best one to use.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 08, 2020, 12:14:42 AM
One thing I forgot to mention about that column buckling program.  It is tempting to download the results when you are done.  Do not do this.  The download file package has all sorts of bad stuff in it besides the printout.  Printing the results without saving or downloading has not given me any trouble.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 10, 2020, 03:45:06 PM
This is how the wheel bearings are installed.  The object is to pull them in straight so as to not distort or damage the housing, have the top races positioned over the bottom races, and to have the bearings in the correct alignment when the central spacer between the bearings is compressed.

Some round things are made for this.  The holes in the centers are close clearance fits over the axle.  The outside diameters of the things are about 1/32 inches smaller than the outside diameters of the bearings, and the lengths are one inch.  Care is used in machining to assure that the faces are at right angles to the holes.

The bearings are pulled into the warm wheel using the axle and axle bolt.  Washers and other stuff are used as spacers to occupy the distance along the axle between the nut and the outside face of the bearing.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 10, 2020, 03:50:17 PM
The axle nut is tightened to the manufacturer's recommended value.  These are 60 and 85 Newton-meters for the front and rear axles, respectively.  The nut torque is checked a second time after the wheel cools and the axle and spacers are removed.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: charlie101 on January 10, 2020, 05:25:45 PM
Timken has a nice brochure about setting tapered roller bearings.
https://www.timken.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/5556_Bearing-Setting-Brochure-1.pdf
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 12, 2020, 04:11:17 PM
That is a good article about tapered roller wheel bearings.  My Matchless had them.  The Triumph has ball bearings so getting the inner races centered under the outer races are important.

Tapered roller bearing hubs cost more to produce but have more load capacity than ball bearings.  They handle side loads better.  The old British bikes would haul around sidecars.  Maybe that is why they used them. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 12, 2020, 06:57:27 PM
Now it is time to design the outer wheel spacers.  There is one on each side of the wheel for four, total.  The design force is the axle tension with lubed threads having a 0.015 coefficient.  There are two faces for each spacer for eight, total.  The inside faces push against the bearing inner races and the calculations for the internal spacer will work for those.  Alloy 6061 T6511 aluminum will work OK.

One spacer is trapped between a die case aluminum fork leg and the wheel bearing.  The outer face of the spacer is larger to reduce the pressure on the softer fork leg material.  The calculations are similar to those recently posted.

The story is different for the spacer on the other side of the wheel.  The outside end of the spacer bears on the shoulder of a widened section of the axle.  There is not much load bearing area and design pressure is 32,400 psi.  Yield strength of alloy 303 annealed stainless steel is 34,800 psi.  34,800 / 32,400 = 1.07  That is a very low factor of safety.  It is like getting a D- in school.  Passing, yes, but barely.  Aluminum 6061 T6511 has a 35,000 psi yield strength with a 1.08 safety factor.  That is not good enough.  Triumph uses steel for these spacers on all of their bikes I have worked on, so there is a clue to what I need.  Steel rusts and is inappropriate.  Structural titanium has a 141,000 psi compressive yield strength with a 4.35 safety factor.  The spacer is made from that and another problem is solved.

Structural titanium is often called Ti-Al-4V due to its primary alloying constituents, aluminum and titanium.  In many ways it is easier to machine than the stronger stainless alloys and it resists corrosion, is lighter, and much stronger.  It is very easy to get a much smoother finish than stainless.  The finish on the spacer is cut with roughing bits.  It is better than I can get on stainless with finishing bits.  It is my "go-to" metal for a steel substitute when making bolts, spacers, and other small items.           
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 17, 2020, 12:12:58 PM
These posts are about doing basic things for folks that are not familiar with the details.  Machining, unfortunately, is becoming a lost art.  None of the equipment or materials in these posts, except a rod from India and some other small bits, were purchased new.  Folks with used machine tools are selling to a very limited market and the prices of the equipment is low.  Sort of like trying to sell used racing parts.  A lot of things were given to me just because I had interest in using them.

Ten aluminum bolts are needed with metric threads and holes for safety wire.  These are not available here unless I order a box of them and wait awhile for delivery.  Then I need to drill them for safety wire.  It makes sense to spend a few hours and turn them from rod stock.

Most of the new metal in this area of Oregon is of foreign manufacture and it is imported 'cause it is cheap.  This rod is an example.   It is sold as 1/2 inch but it a few thousanths of an inch too big to fit in a collet.  It is an aluminum alloy of unknown pedigree and I tried to make a bolt from it once.  The shank twisted off during threading.  The metal was weak.  The other rod is from a used metal scrapyard.  The alloy is printed on the rod and it is the correct one for bolts.  The diameter is correct so it will fit in a collet.

When I find good metal I buy it if the price is right and stash it away for future projects.  The 12-foot rod cost $10 so it goes into the scrap pile for future use.

       

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 17, 2020, 12:25:42 PM
This is an Ellis indexing head.  It is in the horizontal position and it can also be set for vertical and any angle between.  This would be a good tool to own if one has a drill press or vertical mill.  They come with collets and a chuck.  A collet is used to make these bolts.  The rod is clamped in different positions in the collet to mill all of the hexes for the heads.  The head is bolted to the drill press table and a mill bit is clamped in the drill chuck.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 17, 2020, 12:30:36 PM
The rod is clamped in the collet and the drill press table is slowly rotated under the cutter to cut the head.  This is a manual operation and it takes a bit of practice to get the feel of it.  Hex heads for all ten bolts are cut into the rod.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 18, 2020, 02:13:36 PM
The rod is put in the lathe collet.  A punch mark is made 1/16 of an inch out from the hex.  This is the shoulder and it will not be cut.  Another mark is punched an inch out from that.  It marks the end of the bolt.  The rod is pushed into the collet and clamped.  This shorter projecting length reduces chatter during the cutoff.  The excess rod is cut off using a parting tool.

The rod is pulled out of the collet so the hex is exposed.  The parting tool is used to mark where the end of the bolt will be.  The cut is only deep enough to mark the end.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 18, 2020, 02:28:29 PM
The rod is pushed into the collet until 1/32 of its 1/16 length is exposed and the other 1/32 is clamped.  The clamped portion of the shoulder gives support for the rod during subsequent operations.

The tool bit is positioned at the punch mark.  The carriage stop is clamped so the tool bit cannot move beyond the punch mark.  The threaded portion is cut to the major diameter.  This is 8.00 mm for this bolt.  Some tough metals will deflect while being cut and the far end of the cut portion, at the bolt end, will be wider than the cut portion near the collet.  The cut portion diameter should be measured and additional passes may be needed to get the same diameter at both ends.  A very sharp finishing bit with higher turning speed is needed with some types of stainless steel to get the desired diameter at the unsupported end.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 18, 2020, 02:42:43 PM
A 45 degree champher is put on the end with a file.

This is an 8 x 1.25 metric thread.  The top of the thread is flat with a 0.16 mm width as shown on the page from the machinist's manual.  A die will be used to cut the threads.  A die cuts and deforms many tough metals so they grow in diameter inside the tap while cutting.  Instead of a flat thread top, the top is sharp and pointed.  This jams the tap, reduces its life, and a lot of force is needed to cut the threads.  Often, cutting the threaded portion to a slightly smaller major diameter before using the die will produce a thread with the desired flat crests.  This is much easier to cut with the die.  This I do by trail and error to figure out the best reduced major diameter.  Titanium is a metal that almost always requires this.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 25, 2020, 01:23:09 AM
Eight millimeter diameter bolts are being made.  Eight millimeters are equal to 0.315 inches.  The rod to be threaded would be turned to this diameter in the past.  Now I measure the diameters of the threaded parts of several new 8 mm bolts.  The diameters range from 0.304 to 0.310 inches.  The target diameter for the new bolt will be 0.308 inches, or sorta midway within that range.

The rod is turned to 0.308 inches for the first trial.  Some threads are cut with the die.  The thread crests are sharp edged and the diameter is 0.312 inches.  This is too big.  The alloy is deforming while it is being cut and the threaded diameter is too large.  A new bolt is turned with a 0.300 inch diameter for the section to be threaded.  It is 0.308 inches diameter after the threads are cut and the threads have flats on the crests.  All of the remaining bolts are turned to 0.300 before thread cutting.

This method has saved me all sorts of struggle when threading lots of alloys and especially titanium and the gummier stainless steels.

The first picture shows the rod pulled out of the collet so the flats are exposed for the bolt head.  A wrench will be put there in a future step.  The wrench is shown in the picture.

The second picture shows the die.  Adjustable dies were used on some tough alloys and they spread apart while threading and the bolt diameter was too big.  Now I use one piece dies for the tough metals.  The dies are used to cut a particular metal, only.  A die used to cut ti will not be used to thread brass, as an example.

Lube helps.  The stuff shown in the picture works good for most metals.   



Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 25, 2020, 01:33:43 AM
The die is started by turning the collet by hand and using the center as a brace as shown in the first picture.  This keeps the die square to the shaft.

Now the center is slid back and the die is turned by hand to make the threads.  Rods made from the tougher metals would turn in the collets or chucks when threading.  The wrench-on-flats restraint prevents the rod from turning.     

The threads are made and the hex sides are punched for the safety wire holes.  The partial cut that marks the bolt end makes it easier to center the punch mark on the flat.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 25, 2020, 01:37:01 AM
The safety wire holes are drilled and the bolt is cut off using the parting tool.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 25, 2020, 01:44:39 AM
A lot of short bolts are cut in this project.  They are an alloy and size that I cannot get here with a reasonable cost and delivery time.  So, I made them.

Lets say a longer bolt is needed with the head where my finger is.  Flats and a flange would be milled in the rod just up from the threaded portion.  The flange would be support during the threading and a wrench would be put on the flats to keep the bolt from turning.  The flats and flange would be cut off when the bolt shank is turned. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 27, 2020, 01:56:42 AM
This is where the brake disk bolts onto the wheel.  Five bolts with threads on their entire length were drilled for safety wire and ready to be installed.  Then I noticed that the threads were recessed in the wheel.  It seems these partially threaded bolts are more appropriate.  Five of these were drilled for wire.  The unthreaded part of the bolt goes through the disk and it fills the recess.  The unthreaded shank has more cross-sectional area than the threaded part.  This provides extra metal in the shear plane between the disk and the wheel and it makes a stronger connection.

The center of the bolt was drilled just deep enough to intersect the future safety wire holes.  Then the six wire holes were drilled in from each side of the hex.  A lot less drill bits are broken doing this as compared to drilling the wire holes through the entire bolt end.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 27, 2020, 02:09:49 AM
This is the finished wheel on the street bike.  The new wheel will be used on the race bike without the disk.  It is three pounds 8 ounces lighter than the OEM Triumph spoked wheel with its steel rim.  It is 2 pounds eight ounces lighter than the OEM spoked wheel with an alloy rim that I have used for the last twelve years.

Tires with tubes on spoked rims deflate almost instantly when punctured.  The air can quickly go out of all of the spoke holes.  Tubeless tires on one-piece rims usually deflate at a much slower rate.  There are fewer places where air can escape.  These new wheels provide safety advantages as well as reducing weight. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 30, 2020, 11:55:36 PM
It is time to work on the rear wheel.  The bike is making substantially more power than the 900cc Tiger that the wheel was designed for.  An aluminum ring will be made to reinforce the outside of the cushion damper assembly.  Previous experience with drag bikes says if there is a weak point in the drive system it might be here.

An aluminum strap is cut to length and welded to make a hoop. The ring is deliberately made a bit small to fit over the hub.  It will be enlarged to exactly the right size using the heat and beat method.

Soap is rubbed on the outside of the ring.  Heat is applied from the inside and the ring is heated until the soap is a chocolate brown color.  This anneals the ring so it will deform under the hammer.  The ring in the picture has not gotten hot enough to toast the soap to the darker color.  The annealed ring will make a dull sound when it is dropped onto the anvil and it has little strength.
     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 31, 2020, 12:03:44 AM
The annealed ring is placed on a drain pipe and beat all along its periphery.  This stretches the metal to increase the ring's diameter.  It also work hardens the metal and makes it stronger and stiffer.  It took four heat and beat cycles to make the ring just the right size.   This is slightly smaller than the hub.  The work hardened ring makes a sharp pinging sound when dropped on the anvil.

The ring is heated on the stove.  It is not heated hot enough to anneal the work hardening.  This is important.  The ring in place on the wheel must not be in the weak annealed condition. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 31, 2020, 12:08:37 AM
The ring should be sanded smooth on the inside before installation.  I got the pictures in the wrong order.  Here is the ring being heated and installed.  The installation needs to be fraction-of-a-second quick.  The objective is for the ring to cool and shrink onto the hub.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 31, 2020, 12:12:08 AM
The ring is shrunk fit tightly against the hub.  Nothing is perfect and there is a slight gap in places.  Loctite 290, the wickable green stuff, is used to fill the gap.  It also helps to lock the ring on extra tight.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 31, 2020, 12:35:16 AM
We had three hour long lab sessions every day in machinist school.  A fellow only needed to attend an hour of that to pass the class.  The teacher and his assistant left at the end of that hour.  No supervision for the last two hours.  I was there all three hours and I made some spending money doing machining for hire and making race parts for my Honda 350.  One job was to cut down the diameter of a two-stroke crankshaft flywheel to the minimum needed to provide strength around the crank pin.  This was done on a lathe and the outside diameter was about a quarter inch away from the crankpin.

A titanium ring was made for each flywheel half.  The inside diameter was a few thou less than the outside diameter of the crank.  The ring was a bit wider than the flywheel and the outside diameter was slightly too large.  The flywheel half was frozen in the freezer in the reefer in the break room.  The ring was heated in the forge.  The hot ring was placed over the cold flywheel and both were set aside to reach room temperature.  The ring was solidly locked onto the flywheel.  It was machined to final dimensions.

Ti was used for the ring 'cause it expands less at elevated temperatures than steel.  It locks on tighter when the engine heats up to running temperature.  Also it is lighter than steel.  This helps performance.  The final diameter and width of the ring were bigger and wider than the flywheel steel it replaced.  This was done to reduce the crankcase volume.  A two stroke performance tuning trick.  The crank was for a Suzuki 500 Titan, as I remember.  This was in 1972 or 73 so my memory is a bit vague.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Lemming Motors on January 31, 2020, 08:35:23 AM
Sharp intake of breath moment then I realized the pup was not nosing a hot band being fitted - I was going to ask why the pup did not have a leather muzzle like your gloves to protect him from the heat.

More pictures of the dog please.  :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 01, 2020, 01:08:46 AM
She ran across the room and tried to take the mallet.  Her nose did not get burned.  Her name is Ruby and she is Rose's pup.  The older dog is Gypsy and she is mine.  They are distant cousins.

The post said I heated up a titanium ring in the shop forge.  I was an idiot.  Fortunately the ring did not get hot enough to ignite.  That would have made that story much more interesting.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on February 08, 2020, 01:16:29 PM
Just returned from breakfast at McQueen's on River Road in Oak Grove.

(https://i.imgur.com/HqrQSZ9.jpg)

Just sayin'.   :cheers:

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on February 08, 2020, 01:58:47 PM
Just returned from breakfast at McQueen's on River Road in Oak Grove.

(https://i.imgur.com/HqrQSZ9.jpg)

Just sayin'.   :cheers:

Mike


Did you have "green eggs and ham"?    :-D
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 09, 2020, 11:36:32 PM
That labrador pup will be the rider.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 10, 2020, 10:18:16 PM
This is the rear wheel.  The Bonneville has a smaller diameter axle than the Tiger 800.  The Tiger bearing is replaced with a Bonneville bearing.  Both bearings have the same OD and width.  This is the brake side.

The other picture shows the bearing spacer and sprocket side bearing.  The front wheel bearing spacer was made from aluminum alloy 6061-T651 having a 31,200 psi tensile yield strength.  The rear axle is under more tension and it carries heavier loads.  Alloy 2024-T351 with a 47,000 psi tensile yield strength was used for this more highly stressed part.  This alloy has poor corrosion resistance so it would be OK for a protected internal piece like this spacer.  It would not be used for an external part.

The part is in compression so the tensile yield strength is not valid except for comparing metals.  Often this is the only data we have so it is frequently used.  The bearing yield strength is published for the 2020-T351.  This compressive yield is 64,000 psi.  It is much higher than the tensile yield.  It is a safe assumption to use tensile yield in compressed part design, but not the other way.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 10, 2020, 10:27:12 PM
The cush drive is narrowed 0.400 inches to move the wheel centerline closer to the swingarm centerline.  The sprocket carrier vanes are cut down 0.400 inches on the lathe.  A new spacer was made to go inside the Tiger sprocket carrier bearing so it will fit over the Bonnie axle.

The wheel is to big for the lathe.  The vanes are cut down 0.400 inches using burrs held in an electric drill.  This job took 2.5 days and it drove me to drink several times.  Note the reinforcing band on the hub. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 10, 2020, 10:39:28 PM
The shorter spacer in the first foto is one I made for the standard Bonnie wheel on the brake side.  The longer spacer is a new one for adapting the Tiger wheel to the Bonnie.  Both are structural titanium

The second foto shows the wheel hub bearing spacers.  The rusty one is a standard Bonnie spacer.  The new one has Tiger dimensions except for the smaller inner diameter.  Annealed 304 stainless was used for the new spacer.

The newer Triumph rear wheels have two bearings per wheel and an extra bearing for the sprocket carrier.  This is a good and stronger design compared to many rear hubs that have only two wheel bearings. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 10, 2020, 10:53:45 PM
This is the chain side wheel spacer.  The longer aluminum spacer is standard issue Bonneville.  The new titanium spacer is 0.055 inches shorter to move the wheel centerline closer to the swingarm centerline.

These are the Tiger cush drive rubbers on the trimmed sprocket carrier.  Normally the vanes are as tall as the rubbers.  This shows how much depth was removed from the cush drive.  The cush drive narrowing and the wheel spacer shortening moved the wheel 0.455 inches toward the swingarm centerline.  Now it is 1/16 of an inch away from the center.  It is close enough.  I did not want to remove any more depth from the cush drive.  A design compromise is what engineers call this little imperfection.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 10, 2020, 10:57:44 PM
Both new wheels are in the wheel alignment jig.  Precise measurements are made to make sure the rear axle and swingarm spindle are parallel.  A straightedge is clamped against the countershaft sprocket.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 10, 2020, 11:07:07 PM
The straight edge goes alongside the sprocket carrier.  The gap is exactly the width of a new sprocket.  Primo.  What a good and lucky day it is.  A new sprocket can be simply bolted on.  It is time to go to the pub and celebrate.

Here is a useful link.http://www.hagon-shocks.co.uk/common/pdf/wheels2011.pdf (http://www.hagon-shocks.co.uk/common/pdf/wheels2011.pdf)

The chart in this catalog shows the preferred rim sizes for different tires.  The original Bonneville rim was an "alternative rim" on the narrow side.  Now the rim will be the ideal size.  The Tiger rim is one size wider than the Bonnie rim. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 13, 2020, 01:04:31 AM
This is a custom made sprocket for the Tiger 800 hub.  The order was received at the factory at 1:36 PM on Monday of this week.  It is Wednesday and the chainwheel arrived in this morning's mail.  The price was $77.10 including shipping.  That is some fast service, for sure.  The Tiger 800 and the Bonneville have a 525 width chain and this sprocket is cut for a narrower and lighter 520 width.  This should reduce friction and increase power to the rear wheel.  It is a common thing to do for race bikes.  This 44 tooth sprocket is for the last race of my career at RAF Elvington in the UK.   

 

     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 14, 2020, 12:29:21 AM
This is the countershaft sprocket for the 520 chain conversion.  A company called "Sprocket Center" has these things and it was ordered through the i-net.  "Use the largest countershaft sprocket possible" was something I learned years ago while building desert race bikes.  The chain is bent at less of an angle when it goes around the bigger sprocket and the load is shared among more teeth.  This lengthens chain life.  This 19 tooth one is the biggest that will fit.  Of course, the back sprocket has to be bigger, too, to get the correct drive ratio.  Pages 90 and 91 of the attached gie some useful info.  https://www.diamondchain.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/TechnicalEngineering.pdf (https://www.diamondchain.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/TechnicalEngineering.pdf) 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RidgeRunner on February 14, 2020, 07:49:51 AM
     A big thanks for posting that link! 

     I've been messing with chain drives on and off for more years than I care to remember and thought I had learned and knew a lot about them.  After a quick scan I learned how much more there is for me to learn and have saved the pdf for further study and reference.

           Ed
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 14, 2020, 01:11:12 PM
It is nice that that info is a help.  There are a few on-line chain drive design calculators.  No answers from them when the sprocket rpm and torque are entered.  It seems land speed demands are "off the chart" for these industrial based design aids.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 23, 2020, 02:16:12 AM
The Wilder vs Fury fight was on the screen at one of the locals this evening.  The gypsy was the crowd favorite based on the cheering volume...     

Wheel swaps almost always require adapter rings for the brakes and sprocket.  This ring moves the rear brake disk 0.653 inches outward.  The foto shows the outward face of the ring and a rear brake disk.

In the old days Triumph would make minor changes to parts and it was easy to use the wrong combinations of bits to build a bike with poor results.  Times do not change.  These are different bolts to hold the Bonneville brake disk on.  The shoulders under the heads are of different lengths.  Use the shoulder length that holds the disk fixed onto the wheel with no free play if that is desired, or the other way if a floating disk is what you want.  Problems occur if both fixed and floating bolts are used on the same disk.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 23, 2020, 02:20:15 AM
This is the side of the adapter that faces the wheel.  The raised outer flange supports the sheet metal disk that covers the wheel spokes.  The other picture shows the adapter ring in situ on the wheel.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 27, 2020, 07:21:53 PM
Six safety wired nuts are needed to retain the sprocket.  Six blind holes are drilled for the safety wire.  Then the big hole is drilled through the nut for the threads.  The little wire holes daylight into this big hole.  The small wire hole drill bit does not break when this method is used.  The safety wires cross through the nuts over the tops of the studs as shown.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 27, 2020, 07:49:16 PM
All of my stainless steel bar stock is some type of austenitic alloy.  Parts with cut threads in this metal have a tendency to gall and friction weld to other stainless steel fasteners.  Structural titanium fasteners have the same issue when they are used with others made from the same alloy.   The combination of structural titanium and austenitic fasteners does not have this problem.  The big engine mount bolts are titanium with stainless steel nuts, as an example.

The studs in the hub are stainless steel so the nuts are made from structural titanium.  This eliminates the potential for galling.  Ti is a very noble metal on the galvanic scale and stainless steels are less so.  Wicking grade Type 290 loctite, the green stuff, is applied to the threads after the bolts are tightened.  It coats the fastener threads and it prevents galvanic corrosion between the dissimilar metals.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 29, 2020, 01:00:55 AM
This has been mentioned in some earlier posts.  Tonight I was able to get some better pictures so here it is again.  The three essentials for die cutting threads in structural titanium.  First, threading the stuff takes a lot of force and round bar slips in the chuck.  The hex is cut first so a wrench can be used to turn the bolt while the threads are cut.  Second, cutting lube is essential.  There are all sorts of proprietary cutting fluids in this shop made for ti and other exotic metals.  None work for this.  Basic anti-sieze is the only lube that works for threading, in my experience.  Last, the uncut tops of the threads are barely visible on the threaded shaft.  It takes some trial and error to figger out the right diameter.  The shaft dia is 0.300 inches for this M8x1.25 bolt.  This is a bit smaller than it would be for other metals.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 29, 2020, 01:01:46 AM
The threads...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 03, 2020, 03:01:29 PM
This link is to a reference for the following series of posts.  https://mechanicalc.com/reference/bolted-joint-analysis#internal-thread-dimensions (https://mechanicalc.com/reference/bolted-joint-analysis#internal-thread-dimensions)

The short bolts attach the brake disk to the adapter ring.  The materials and use are the same as before the ring was installed.  The factory recommended torque can be used for them.  The long bolts are custom made from titanium to fit the adapter.  The installation torque needs to be calculated.  The bolts will be tightened down to provide the maximum clamping force the threads can withstand.

There are three ways the fastener can fail.  One is to strip the internal threads in the wheel.  Another is to strip the external threads on the bolt.  The last is to break the bolt from tensile stress.  This usually occurs across the bolt where the threads meet the unthreaded shank.  All three failure types will be calculated.  The first will be stripping the internal threads in the wheel.

These are M8 x 1.25 threads and the bolt has an 8 millimeter nominal diameter.

The engagement length will be determined.  This is the length of the portion of the threaded hole that is expected to carry the load.  According to the reference for a bolt going into a blind hole, the ENGAGEMENT LENGTH = BOLT NOMINAL DIAMETER = 8mm

The thread height, is what it says.  The thread pitch is the distance between the threads along the bolt axis.  It is 1.25mm

THREAD HEIGHT  = [(SQUARE ROOT OF 3)/2] x THREAD PITCH = 1.73 / 2 x 1.25 = 1.08mm

The internal thread pitch diameter needs to be figgered.  INTERNAL THREAD PITCH DIAMETER = BOLT NOMINAL DIAMETER - (0.75 x THREAD HEIGHT) = 8 - (0.75 x 1.08) = 7.19mm

It will be assumed the internal threads will tear out at their roots by shear from the bolt.  The area of this shear needs to be calculated.  INTERNAL THREAD SHEAR AREA = 3/4 x pi x INTERNAL THREAD PITCH DIAMETER x ENGAGEMENT LENGTH = 3/4 x 3.14 x 7.19 x 8 = 135 square mm or 0.210 square inches

The wheel is assumed to be cast from T6 AlSi7Mg0.3 alloy with a minimum tensile yield stress of 200 MPa or 29,000 psi.  This yield stress is also applicable to similar alloys used to make wheels.  The failure will be in shear and the tensile yield stress will not be appropriate.  The tensile yield stress will be multiplied by 0.577 to get the shear yield stress.  See reference.  SHEAR YIELD STRESS = 0.577 x TENSILE YIELD STRESS = 0.577 x 29,000 = 16,700 psi.

The preload force is the tension applied to the bolt during installation.  The maximum allowable preload stress will be 0.64 percent of the shear yield stress on these wheel threads as per the reference.  MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE PRELOAD FORCE = 0.64 x SHEAR YIELD STRESS x INTERNAL SHEAR AREA = 0.64 x 16,700 x 0.210 = 2,240 lbs

This is not much.  Some thread inserts might be needed in the wheel if there are any indications the threads are stripping.  The inserts increase the internal shear area dramatically with a resultant tolerance for increased bolt preload.  The next post will be about external thread shear failure.       

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 04, 2020, 11:47:53 AM
Coarse threads are most commonly used in soft materials like aluminum.  They are a little bit stronger than fine threads.  The M8 x 1.25 is a coarse thread.

The last post addressed stripping in the internal threads in the aluminum wheel.  This post covers stripping of the external threads on the bolt.  The external thread pitch diameter is 7.19 mm as calculated in the previous post.  The engagement length is 8 mm as mentioned in the earlier post, too.

The external thread shear area is smaller than the corresponding internal area.  This is 'cause the shear is assumed to occur at the base, often called root, of the thread.  The external thread root diameter is considerably smaller than the internal root diameter, hence the difference in shear areas.

The external thread shear area is calculated as follows:  EXTERNAL THREAD SHEAR AREA = 5/8 x pi x EXTERNAL THREAD PITCH DIAMETER X ENGAGEMENT LENGTH = 5/8 x 3.14 x 7.19 x 8 = 113 square mm or 0.175 square inches

The titanium is 6Al4V alloy which is often called structural titanium.  Its tensile yield stress is 128,000 psi.  The shear yield stress, calculated using the factor in the previous post, is SHEAR YIELD STRESS = 0.577 x 128,000 = 66,200 psi.  An ultimate shear stress of 79,800 psi is listed in a reputable publication.  This is 83 percent higher than the calculated yield stress.  It is typical for the yield stress to be this much lower than the ultimate stress so the 0.577 factor, although an approximation, is likely to be a good one.  The calculations will use SHEAR YIELD STRESS = 66,200 psi 

Using the preload factor and formula in the previous post, MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE PRELOAD FORCE = 0.64 x 66,200 x 0.175 = 7,410 pounds.  This is more than the 2,240 pounds the internal threads will withstand.  The wheel threads will strip before the bolt threads if too much force is applied.  The next post will be about tensile failure in the bolt.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Lemming Motors on March 04, 2020, 12:00:33 PM
This mechanical analysis makes me feel inadequate. Seriously impressed with the knowledge and application of same on this forum.

I liked it when the dog was helping  :laugh:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 05, 2020, 01:07:25 PM
The yard looks like the surface of the moon.  The dogs are busy.

This fastener business is obscure stuff.  It is totally normal for a person to not understand the details.  Hopefully these attachments and posts will make it easier to comprehend.

The bolt is inserted through the adapter ring and into the threaded hole until the end hits the threads.  Some prussian blue has been spread onto the bolt and the corner of the scale is used to make a mark on the dye at the surface of the adapter. 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 05, 2020, 01:23:24 PM
The distance between the mark and the bolt head is measured with calipers.  The calipers are moved down to the pointy end of the bolt.  The span within the calipers are the embedded threads.  The length of this embedded thread distance should always be at least the width of the bolt.  My preference is that or a minimum of ten threads, whichever is longer.

Here is a reference attachment. https://www.fastenal.com/en/78/screw-thread-design (https://www.fastenal.com/en/78/screw-thread-design)

The attachment shows how forces are distributed along the embedded length.  Note the number of threads it takes to transfer the load.  Often when we thread a plate and put a bolt through it we do not have the full embedment length depth that is needed and this concentrates the stresses onto a smaller area.  Sometimes the threads are overloaded when we do this.  There are plenty of threads in the wheel to carry the loads in this project.

The punch in the last picture shows the most heavily loaded thread.  The bolt will break here is there is a tensile or fatigue failure.  The tensile force capacity of the bolt will be calculated here.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 05, 2020, 01:56:39 PM
The external thread tensile stress area is used for the load calculations and it is discussed in the Bolted Joint Analysis reference cited a few posts previous. It is calculated like this:  EXTERNAL THREAD TENSILE STRESS AREA = (pi/4) x {[BOLT NOMINAL DIAMETER - (0.982 x THREAD PITCH)] SQUARED]} = (pi/4 x {[8 - (0.9382 x 1.25)] SQUARED} = 36.6 square mm = 0.0567 square inches

Considering tensile force, the maximum allowable preload is based on the 128,000 psi tensile yield stress for the titanium alloy.  A 0.64 multiplier is used as per the previous calculations.  MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE PRELOAD FORCE = 0.64 x TENSILE YIELD STRESS x EXTERNAL THREAD TENSILE AREA = 0.64 x 128,000 x 0.0567 = 4,640 pounds

Now we have the three forces:  internal stripping, wheel = 2240 lbs, external stripping, bolt = 7,410 lbs, and tensile yield = 4,640 lbs.  The wheel threads are the weak link in this connection system and they will govern the bolt tension.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on March 05, 2020, 03:07:02 PM
Coarse threads are most commonly used in soft materials like aluminum.  They are a little bit stronger than fine threads.


Bo, is this specific to a bolt in soft material?

I was under the impression that fine thread bolts were stronger in both tension and shear.

  Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on March 06, 2020, 10:32:03 AM
Bo is right, Don.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on March 06, 2020, 10:44:35 AM
I think both of them are right.... at least from what I have learned....
When threading into soft material use course threads, they are deeper... harder to strip
When threading into hard material use fine threads...
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Rex Schimmer on March 06, 2020, 12:52:10 PM
The ROT (Rule of Thumb) that Stainless use is correct, soft material (aluminum, mag) use coarse threads hard material (steel) use fine threads. Any threaded bolt joint in a soft material that will be dis-assembled should be coarse threads or you will regret it.
If you decide to use a thread insert in a soft material, which I highly recommend for any highly stressed bolt applications, only use the keyed insert style, not the Helicoil style. The keyed insert will allow you to use a fine thread fastener in a soft material  and do not require a special tap for installation as the Helicoil system does.  Helicoils are good for replacing spark plug threads but I would use the keyed insert for everything else.

Rex
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 06, 2020, 03:14:31 PM
Hooke's Law is credited to a guy named Hooke.  See page 572 of the attached reference. https://books.google.com/books?id=NaZwZK2xm-QC&pg=PA572&lpg=PA572&dq=developed+length+hookes+law+stretched+bolts&source=bl&ots=1EddqZVK-J&sig=ACfU3U2YvTJLcIiOoVal8kCF-uaA8GtfOg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi6-pzy3oToAhXzGzQIHffbAsUQ6AEwCnoECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=developed%20length%20hookes%20law%20stretched%20bolts&f=false (https://books.google.com/books?id=NaZwZK2xm-QC&pg=PA572&lpg=PA572&dq=developed+length+hookes+law+stretched+bolts&source=bl&ots=1EddqZVK-J&sig=ACfU3U2YvTJLcIiOoVal8kCF-uaA8GtfOg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi6-pzy3oToAhXzGzQIHffbAsUQ6AEwCnoECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=developed%20length%20hookes%20law%20stretched%20bolts&f=false)

This titanium flanged shoulder bolt has a clamping force vs bolt stretch relationship that is not on any reference chart I can find.  This needs to be calculated before the torque vs clamping force curve can be derived.

For this calculation, Hooke's Law will be used as follows.  Bolt Stretch = Force x (A + B + C + D)

"A" is the portion of the force multiplier that considers stretch within the bolt head.  Input are:  BOLT SHANK DIAMETER = 0.386 inches, BOLT SHANK AREA = (pi / 4) x 0.386 = 0.117 square inches, and for structural ti MODULUS OF ELASTICITY = 16,500 ksi

HEAD STRETCH PORTION OF MULTIPLIER = (0.4 x BOLT SHANK DIAMETER) / (MODULUS OF ELASTICITY x BOLT SHANK AREA) = (0.4 x 0.386) / (16,500 x 0.117) = 0.000080 inches per kip

"B" is the part of the force multiplier for the stretch in the bolt shank.  Input are SHANK LENGTH = 0.838 inches.  Modulus of elasticity and shank diameter are same as before.

SHANK STRETCH PORTION OF MULTIPLIER = SHANK LENGTH / (MODULUS OF ELASTICITY x SHANK DIAMETER) = 0.838 / (16,500 x 0.117) = 0.000434 inches per kip

"C" is the part of the force multiplier for the exposed threaded portion between the shank and the spacer ring.  Input are EXPOSED THREAD LENGTH = 0.209 inches.  EXTERNAL THREAD TENSILE STRESS AREA was calculated for the previous stripping analysis.  It is (pi / 4) x {[8 - (0.9382 x THREAD PITCH)] squared} = (pi / 4) x {[8 - (0.9382 x 1.25) squared =  36.6 square millimeters = 0.0567 square inches.  Modulus of elasticity is unchanged.

EXPOSED THREAD PORTION OF MULTIPLIER = EXPOSED THREAD LENGTH / (MODULUS OF ELASTICITY x EXTERNAL THREAD TENSILE STRESS AREA) = 0.209 / (16,500 x 0.0567) = 0.000223 inches per kip

"D" is the portion of the force multiplier for the embedded threads and the material that surrounds them.  Input is NOMINAL BOLT DIAMETER = 8 mm = 0.315 inches, NOMINAL BOLT AREA = (pi / 4) x 8 squared = 50.3 square mm = 0.0779 square inches, and MODULUS OF ELASTICITY = 10,000 ksi for the wheel.

EMBEDDED THREAD AND SURROUNDINGS PORTION OF FORCE MULTIPLIER = (0.4 x NOMINAL BOLT DIAMETER) / (MODULUS OF ELASTICITY x NOMINAL BOLT AREA) = (0.4 x 0.315) / (10,000 x 0.0779) = 0.000162 inches per kip

Added together, the force multiplier = 0.000080 + 0.000434 + 0.000223 + 0.000162 = 0.000899 inches per kip

BOLT STRETCH = FORCE x 0.0899 inches per kip  A kip is 1000 pounds force.  The bolt will be stretched in the next post and the torque vs stretch relationship will be figgered.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Rex Schimmer on March 06, 2020, 06:38:48 PM
I did this experiment with a couple of young Boeing engineers at Van Dyne Engineering, in Huntington Beach. Stu Van Dyne wanted to show the difference between the most accurate way to preload a bolt, measuring the stretch, compared to using a torque wrench. One of the most important things you need to be accurate with a torque wrench is a hardened washer and good lube under the bolt head. Done correctly it was almost as accurate as measuring the stretch. There are lots of situations that you cannot measure stretch so you have to depend on a torque wrench, done properly it can be pretty reliable and accurate.

Rex
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Interested Observer on March 06, 2020, 08:11:47 PM
Wobbly, not that it makes any significant difference, but I believe in part D you have gone astray by using the aluminum modulus instead of the bolt modulus.  You may want to check on that.  That part D calc is just an approximation of stretch in the bolt at that section, and as you pointed out, the load distribution into the bolt via the threads is varied--ergo, the calc is an approximation.  Besides, what would the modulus of the surrounding material have to do with the amount of load applied to the bolt?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 06, 2020, 11:59:11 PM
You are correct.  I fixed the calculations.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Speed Limit 1000 on March 07, 2020, 01:11:29 PM

If you decide to use a thread insert in a soft material, which I highly recommend for any highly stressed bolt applications, only use the keyed insert style, not the Helicoil style. The keyed insert will allow you to use a fine thread fastener in a soft material  and do not require a special tap for installation as the Helicoil system does.

Rex

You do use a standard tap but with slightly larger drill. For a 1/2-13 tap you use the drill size for the 1/2-20 tap
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 07, 2020, 11:41:08 PM
Rex needs to answer that one...

The bolts are prepared for measurement.  A central hole is drilled in the head to make it easier to drill for safety wire.  The hole is champhered after it is drilled.  The hole size and chamfer are deliberately sized to accommodate the measuring ball.  The ball is part of a micrometer anvil attachment kit made by Swiss Precision.

A dimple is made in the screwy end of the bolt.  It accommodates the pointy anvil attachment.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 08, 2020, 12:01:27 AM
The anvil attachments are attached and ready to go.  An aluminum sample is drilled and threaded to resemble the wheel.  The bolt is screwed into it with the spacer in its grip.  My most accurate torque wrench is used to increase tension in increments.  The bolt length is measured at the start with no tension, measured at each increment, and remeasured with no tension at the end of the session.  An increase in untensioned bolt length says that the bolt has been tightened beyond its yield point.

The correction suggested by Interested Observer was made.  Previously posted calculations say the maximum preload force for the bolt is 4,640 pounds or 4.640 kips.  Deflection stretch vs force calculates to be 0.000835 inches per kip.  4.64 x 0.000835 = 0.0038 4 inches.  The test should be stopped before stretch reaches 0.0038 inches so as to make sure the bolt is not permanently stretched.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 08, 2020, 12:33:38 AM
The threads in the aluminum wheel will strip before the bolt will break, is my guess, and the maximum allowable bolt preload is 2,240 pounds force.  This was previously posted.  This equates to 0.00187 inches bolt stretch.

A 0.64 safety factor was used to get the 2,240 pounds.  2,240 / 0.64 = 3,500 pounds.  It is expected the wheel threads will strip at this force.  This equals 0.00029 inches of stretch.   

Let's look at the results.  The stretch vs torque curve starts out at a flat and gentle slope.  This is typical.  The clamped pieces and bolt head are snuggling down together.  The curve gets steeper and is linear.  This is the elastic region where everything is stretching and there is no yielding.  It goes from 6 to 12 pound-feet of torque.  The maximum allowable preload is in this area.  It looks like 9 pound-feet of torque is needed.  The curve starts to flatten out after 12 pounds-feet of torque.  This is above 0.00029 inches stretch and it indicates that threads are yielding.

Note the small amount of torque needed to get clamping force with a ti bolt.  It would be much larger with a steel bolt.  That is because the titanium surface is very smooth and there is a low friction coefficient.

A second test was done to make sure the results are consistent.  It was made with another bolt and aluminum sample.  The confusion starts with it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 08, 2020, 10:59:36 PM
The first test used an unknown alloy for the sample with internal threads.  A second test was made on a piece of threaded 6061 T5611 alloy.  The internal threads stripped at a very low pulling force.  The bumps in the line on the graph are the threads breaking.  The first to go is the one nearest to the bolt head.  The second hump is the adjacent thread.

The proper tap drill is 6.70 mm diameter.  The next larger fractional size drill was used 'cause it seemed to be close enough.  The previous day's test was done on a hole tapped with a "G" size drill which is slightly smaller than 6.70 mm.  Methinks the larger tap drill did not provide adequate internal thread height and engagement area.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 09, 2020, 01:38:36 AM
This is the third test with the smaller size "G" tap drill.  The threads start to strip at higher stretch values like they should.  The desired bolt stretch is 0.0019 and there is a reasonable safety margin beyond that.  The 0019 value was reached at 9 lbs-ft in the first test with the unknown aluminum alloy.  It was reached at 13 to 14 lbs-ft with the 6061 T6511 in the third test.

Some metal to metal friction coefficients are real sensitive to surface cleanliness and oxidation.  Often a thread lube makes the torque vs clamping force relationship more consistent.  A delayed setting threadlocker that has some thread lube properties might be what I need.  Permatex or Loctite surface insensitive blue threadlockers work OK but they set up within seconds with this ti-aluminum combination.  This prevents me from developing these curves for design purposes.  Any suggestions are welcome.     






     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 09, 2020, 02:22:18 AM
One of these thread sealants might work best for lubing the threads, curing and providing threadlocking, and filling the gap between the threads to prevent corrosion.  https://www.vibra-tite.com/wp-content/uploads/Vibra-Tite-Catalog.pdf (https://www.vibra-tite.com/wp-content/uploads/Vibra-Tite-Catalog.pdf) 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 09, 2020, 10:27:24 PM
The titanium bolt in aluminum threads is problematic and hardly the desired way to attach a brake disc to a wheel.  Threaded inserts will be installed.  The internal threads are M8 x 1.25.  This is a coarse thread.  The outer threads should also be coarse M12 x 1.5.  They would need to be ordered in and I want to finish this danged wheel now.  So, my hand reached into the box on the store shelf and pulled out a box of M8x 1.25 inside with M12 x 1.25 outside threads.  These fine threads are not optimal but they should work.  The inserts are passivated stainless steel.

These solid wall inserts have been more reliable for me than the coil type.  Also, the outside threads are drilled and tapped with standard M12 x 1.25 items.  An old M8 x 1.25 bolt is the installation tool and drift punch is used to hammer down the four little keys.  No special tools are needed.  After installation a drop of wicking Loctite is used to seal behind the threads. 

https://www.hfsindustrial.com/keensert-solid-inserts.html (https://www.hfsindustrial.com/keensert-solid-inserts.html)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 10, 2020, 02:09:06 PM
The typical blue threadlocking liquids set up within seconds or minutes.  This is a big problem if there is a delay, like some adjustment is needed or other fasteners need to be installed before the final torquing.  Torque that is needed to overcome the locking compound resistance is not making clamping force.

The ideal threadlocker would work with inert metals like ti and stainless steel, provide some thread lubrication, have locking properties, have a delayed setting time, and fill the gaps between the threads enough to prevent corrosion.  This is what I bought yesterday and used on a bolt in a stripping test today.  So far, the stuff does all five of the ideal things.

https://tdsna.henkel.com/americas/na/adhesives/hnauttds.nsf/web/DF25E134F03D909B882571870000D81B/$File/567-EN.pdf (https://tdsna.henkel.com/americas/na/adhesives/hnauttds.nsf/web/DF25E134F03D909B882571870000D81B/$File/567-EN.pdf)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 10, 2020, 02:45:41 PM
The 567 threadlock was applied last night to the bolt flange and threads.  The bolt was installed and tightened down.  It was removed this morning and more effort was needed to do this than to install it.  The 567 locks the threads sorta not a much as blue threadlocker but more than none at all.  That is what I want.

The threads were wiped clean, more 567 was spread on the threads and flange, and a stripping test was done.  The test was stopped before anything yielded.  The potential clamping force this bolt can provide is far more than what I need.

The insert provides more external thread area in the aluminum wheel to resist shear as well as a longer engagement length.  Maximum preload force for internal thread shear was 2,240 pounds using the 0.64 safety factor.  Now it is 5,240 pounds in the wheel using the same factor.

Internal shear in the insert along the titanium bolt is increased, too.  This is 'cause the yield strength of the steel insert is much more than the aluminum.  Max preload was 2,240 pounds and it is now 4,610 pounds.

A persuasive argument is made for using a 0.5 multiplier, instead of 0.64, in the article with the Hooke's Law formula previously posted.  The maximum recommended preload for the bolt in tensile load changes to (0.5 / 0.64) x 4,640 = 3,620 pounds using this formula.  That is the force that will be used for this bolt.  Stretch is 3.62 x 0.000835 = 0.0030 inches at this load.  That is well within the capacity of this connection and it equals between 15 and 16 lbs-ft torque.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 11, 2020, 12:45:34 AM
The little pup is growing very fast.  She is noticeably bigger week by week.

This is the Bonneville hub.  Note the amount of metal surrounding the wheel bearing.  It is well supported.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 11, 2020, 12:50:10 AM
This is the Tiger hub.  Note the lack of metal and support around the bearing.

The skinny bearing is for a Tiger.  A wider double row one will be installed.  This will reduce the stress on the bearing housing to just over half of what it was with the Tiger bearing. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 18, 2020, 12:11:03 AM
This is the brake side of the rear wheel with threaded steel inserts in the bolt holes.  The inside face of the spacer that holds the brake disk is shown.  The brake side wheel shroud fits onto the inside face of this spacer.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 18, 2020, 12:15:30 AM
This is the outer face of the spacer showing the brake disk attached.  The next picture shows the spacer and disk on the wheel with the titanium bolts.  These are the bolts that gave me so much work trying to solve the thread stripping problem.  That is cured now.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 18, 2020, 12:22:38 AM
This is the outside face of the brake side wheel shroud.  The parts were coated with ACF 50 anticorrosion spray before being riveted together.  This prevents corrosion between the pieces.  The next picture shows the inside face of the shroud.  It is reinforced around both edges.  A 1/4 inch thick spacer is riveted to the outside face of wheel shroud.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 18, 2020, 12:27:38 AM
This is the retaining ring that will be attached to the inside face of the shroud.  This is the ring bolted in place to hold the shroud to the brake disk spacer.  The retaining ring and shroud can be removed in instances when I do not want to use a covered rear wheel. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 18, 2020, 12:31:02 AM
The brake disk, spacer, shroud, and retaining ring are on the wheel.  Some space is provided between the shroud and the rim so clean water can be sprayed in there to remove any corrosive salt.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 18, 2020, 12:34:25 AM
The shroud needs to be far enough in to miss hitting the back of the brake caliper.  The scale laying on the shroud shows where it is close to the caliper.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 24, 2020, 01:09:46 AM
The brake side shroud is installed.  These five spindles connect the sprocket side shroud to it.  The spindles connected to the brake side shroud are shown.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 24, 2020, 01:15:52 AM
The spindles are located about an eighth of an inch from the spokes.  A small piece of closed cell foam is put between the spoke and the spindle.  It is held in place by a zip tie.  The sprocket side shroud is attached to the spindles.  The rear wheel shroud is finished.  This is almost identical to the one on the bike during the wind tunnel tests.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Lemming Motors on March 24, 2020, 05:05:42 AM
The brake disc in #3570 - you should ask for your money back - it is not round!   :-o  :clap
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on March 24, 2020, 09:17:40 AM
The only question I have is how easily are you going to be able to fit balance weights? With the amount of work you're doing, some of it biased to one side or location, that is going to be critical. At the speeds you're planning it won't take very much speed to create serious wheel balance issues.

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 24, 2020, 10:27:17 AM
It is an EBC superbike style disk with some thickness reduction at the center by me.  It is the first time I have tried the wavy pattern.  They use them on race bikes so they should work on this one.  On the salt we do not use the brakes much.  Most slowing down is by sitting up into the wind and rolling off on the throttle.

The spindle screws are loosened, the shroud is pulled back, and the weight is pasted onto the wheel.  We are under a police enforced lockdown here. I need to convince the officer that taking my wheel out for dynamic balancing is a life critical activity.  Not much chance of that so it will be statically balanced at home.  Some pictures will be posted.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 24, 2020, 09:59:29 PM
Old engine oil from the Triumphs is in that smoke.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrxPpKzsDn8&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrxPpKzsDn8&feature=youtu.be)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Peter Jack on March 24, 2020, 10:17:58 PM
Steam locomotives are still magic. When I was a kid we used to go to the lake every year in a train pulled by a steam locomotive. The magic disappeared when the steamers were replaced by diesel.

Thanks Wobbly!!!

Pete
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 25, 2020, 01:36:54 AM
Do they still have the Royal Hudson near Vancouver?  That is a very nice Canadian steamer.

That Southern Pacific engine hauled freight at the end of its life and was painted black.  It sat rusting away in a park in east Oakland and I played on it when I was a child.  It was given or sold to the City of Portland and it was restored.  It ran by our house every few years between 1986 and 1996 when Southern Pacific owned the tracks.  The sound of its whistle and horn were distinctive.  In the video it ran north out of Portland on BNSF tracks, alongside the Columbia River on the north bank in Washington, and up alongside the Deschutes River in Oregon to Bend on BNSF rails.  The Deschutes is the littler river.  It never ran on these rails during its working career.  The folks at BNSF are a nice bunch and they help make all of this possible.           
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on March 25, 2020, 08:29:27 AM
When I was a little pup [and yes I was] the Pennsylvania RR still ran one or two steamers. All the town kids would pedal their little keisters off to get downtown because they would slow down and we could see and hear all the steam and mechanical wang-dang-doodle!  :cheers:
Now where did I put those squashed pennies??????????????
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: ggl205 on March 25, 2020, 10:50:30 AM
Had a similar experience, Woody. I grew up in San Gabriel, Ca. Trains ran right through our town and slowed considerably before picking up steam again. During the slow period, we would throw rocks at hobos sitting on top of coal cars and they would throw coal back at us. Easy way to bring back coal for our heaters.

John
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 26, 2020, 11:13:24 AM
Working steam trains was a lot of years ago.  There was a steamer working near Ely Nevada years ago that we saw on the way back from Bonneville.  It was coal fired.  The Southern Pacific engine in the video uses old motor oil.

It is hard to balance wheels when they pivot around the wheel bearings.  There is friction from the grease in the bearings and the seals on them.  The axle and some dry unsealed bearings in good condition are used for balancing.  There is low friction and it is easy to get the wheel in balance.  The wheel spins freely.  A straight axle is critical when this is done.

The wheel alignment jig is up on saw horses during this wheel work.  The end brackets were removed and it was used to support the wheel for balancing as shown.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on March 26, 2020, 11:39:05 AM
The balance weights are correct for the case when the shrouds are on the wheel.  They are pinned to the shrouds so they are removed when the shrouds are.  The wheel will be rebalanced if it is used naked.  These are those lightweight ecology friendly steel weights.  The small amount of weight shows that the tire is pretty much in balance as made.  The wheel is spun and the tire is very true.  This is my experience with these Battleaxes.  They are very well made.  Plus, they make front tires with (W) rating in 19 inch rim size and that is my preference for land speed racing.

The attached has a chart for rim vs tire sizes.  The previous rim was acceptable width but not optimal.  Now it is the best width.  The tubes are eliminated which provides some safety benefits in case of a blowout.  The wheels are lighter.  This back wheel is six pounds lighter than the one it replaced.   

http://www.hagon-shocks.co.uk/common/pdf/wheels2011.pdf (http://www.hagon-shocks.co.uk/common/pdf/wheels2011.pdf)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 03, 2020, 12:22:15 AM
One goal with the bike is to reduce weight.  In many instances the different aluminum alloys are the metals of choice.  We are all familiar with them.  One drawback of these are it is hard to design fatigue resistance to cyclic loading and sometimes more strength is needed than they have.  This is where titanium, both the commercially pure (CP) grades or the alloy grades, are the better choice.

One job is to make two engine mounting bracket plates between the cylinder head and the frame.  0.096 inch thick sheet ti should be strong enough.  They need to be bent.  The 6Al4V structural ti alloy I usually use for machined parts does not form well.  There is sheet in the commercially pure (CP) compositions that will form with no problem.  CP Grade 4 is the strongest of them so the 0.096 sheet is ordered in this alloy.

The next project is to make a frame strengthening plate and a chain guard out of 0.125 inch thick ti.  The metal needs to be strong and formable.  Grade 38 is perfect for this.  It is used for ballistic armor so if it stops bullets it can cope with the chain.

The last job is to make two lower engine mounting plates out of 0.200 inch thick ti.  CP Grade 4 will be used for those.

There are several on-line sites that sell titanium bits.  This is the one I use for everything except round stock.   https://tmstitanium.com/ (https://tmstitanium.com/)   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 03, 2020, 12:35:13 AM
Another project is to  make a steering stem and some more of the big 12mm diameter engine mounting bolts.  This is where I get round stock.  The 6Al4V alloy is what I use.  They are nice folks.  https://www.grandis.com/ (https://www.grandis.com/)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 05, 2020, 02:57:13 PM
The conversion from 525 to 520 chain size is complete.  The chain is RK GB520MXZ4 "Premium Motocross Racing Chain."  It is non-O-ring.  These chains without the rings are lighter, have less internal friction, and last much longer than the o-ring chains, in my experience.

The chain is like a conveyor belt and the tire flips salt onto it.  This reduces chain life and it causes a power loss 'cause the stuff needs to be crunched up when it is carried by the chain past the sprocket.  The chain guard is supplemented on the back side to keep the salt off of the chain.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 05, 2020, 02:59:22 PM
This is the back side of the chain guard and the guard on the bike.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 07, 2020, 11:28:56 AM
"That project will get done when the wheels are on the race bike."  That is what I told Rose countless times.  Now the wheels are on and it is time to do other things, like build this dog house out of a wine barrel.  No more posts from me for awhile.  The bike is on hold until I get some other things finished.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 08, 2020, 01:35:28 AM
The whale incident.  This was an old story when I started to work for the highway department in 1985.  It is amazing to see that folks still remember it.https://www.foxnews.com/us/british-town-oregon-exploding-whale-coronavirus-social-distancing (https://www.foxnews.com/us/british-town-oregon-exploding-whale-coronavirus-social-distancing)   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 11, 2020, 12:09:33 AM
This is a hard and durable finish for small steel parts like nuts and bolts and brackets.  It is a procedure I have used and modified over several years.  The piece is cleaned and heavy rust, paint, or spooge are removed.  Zinc coating is applied.  This paint in the can works best although the spray version will also work.  The canned paint has more zinc.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 11, 2020, 12:15:35 AM
Between 20 to 30 minutes after the zinc paint is applied header paint is sprayed on.  The two paints mingle together.  The zinc gives good corrosion resistance while the header paint provides toughness.

There are three heat cycles listed on the header paint can.  I do the first two 'cause the kitchen oven cannot get hot enough for the third cycle.  The paint is dry and the part is ready to install when it cools down.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 18, 2020, 02:03:04 PM
The connecting rods had 5/16 inch diameter bolts.   Some calculations were done assuming the engine speed was 10,000 rpm.  The tensile stresses on the rod bolts were very close to the steel yield strength.  The engineers at Carrillo also did some calculations and said the preload needed to be higher and they gave me a recommendation.  A bolt stress calculation with that preload said it would work, barely.  So, a new set of rods was ordered with larger 3/8 inch diameter bolts.  They arrived yesterday.  Carrillo and Arias are now part of the same company.  They did some calculations on the pistons and they should survive at 10,000 rpm, also. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 21, 2020, 11:56:22 PM
The Triumph "frame" has four parts.  One is the engine-swingarm-rear wheel assembly.  The swingarm spindle goes through a bushing at the back of the engine so the engine and rear wheel act as one unit, alignmentwise.  The second piece is the main frame and it connects the steering head to the engine.  This connection is done by many fasteners and there is slop in each one.  It is pure luck if the engine-swingarm-rear wheel assembly is in correct alignment with the steering head after the bike is assembled.

The third part are the frame downtubes.  They go down from the steering head, under the engine, and they connect to the frame  behind the engine.  They add rigidity to the assembly.

The fourth part are the outriggers that connect the main frame to the ends of the swingarm spindle.  They add rigidity.

Aligning the wheels by cocking the rear wheel in the swingarm was shown in the last series of posts about the alignment jig.  This works as per making the bike go straight.  The sprockets are not in the same plane after the cocking is done.  This makes chains wear out early and creates power-robbing friction in the chain drive.  The following procedure aligns the wheels and keeps the sprockets in line.

First, the axle is adjusted in its slot using the screw adjusters so the axle and swingarm spindle are parallel.  Care needs to be used to assure this is done correctly.  It is a critical step.  My method is to measure the distances between the axle and swingarm pivot bolt centers on each side.  The axle nut is tightened down after this is done.  It will stay tight during the entire alignment process.  Note that the wheel is not cocked in the swingarm.

The workbench is leveled and the alignment jig is loosely assembled around the bike.  The picture shows the front wheel in the jig.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 24, 2020, 11:33:55 PM
This next photo shows the rear wheel with the bars fit loosely against it.  The C-clamp will be used at a later step to tighten the bars against the wheel.  The horn mount bolt is at the center of the frame just behind the steering head.  It is used to hang the plumb bob.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 24, 2020, 11:39:36 PM
The bob hangs down between the rails.  The bike is held by four tie downs, one on each corner, during all of this.  Now the bolts holding the frame together are loosened.  The picture shows the brace in front of the engine.  This is typical of the items that should not be fastened tight.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 24, 2020, 11:49:28 PM
This picture shows typical bolts to be loosened.  The two lower bolts hold the lower frame rails to the main frame.  The big bolt at the top is an engine mounting bolt, and the other two in the middle retain a triangular brace.

The second picture shows an outrigger.  The big bolt is the swingarm pivot bolt and most of the slop in the system is there.  It definitely needs to be loose along with all bolts on the outrigger.  All engine mounts and the stay on top of the engine need to be loose and are not shown.  Also, the clamps holding the headers to the head should be loose.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 24, 2020, 11:57:59 PM
Now the rails are snugged up against the tires and they are clamped to the bench.  There are four horizontal plates with slotted holes connecting the jig frame rails.  They are tightened down onto the rais, too.

The tie downs at the back of the bike are removed.  The front tie downs connect the handlebars to the sides of the work bench.  They are adjusted as needed so the plumb bob is centered between the rails.

A bottle jack is placed under the engine and the motor is raised just enough the take the tension off of the engine mounting bolts.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 25, 2020, 12:20:16 AM
This photo shows how measuring is done to make sure the bob hangs down midway between the rails.  A level is put against the rear brake disk to make sure it is plumb.  The back wheel was not plumb on this example and it was pulled into plumb by pushing on the top of the wheel.

At this stage the wheels should be clamped between the rails.  This puts them in proper alignment.  The plumb bob is midway between the rails.  This makes sure the steering head is in alignment.  The back wheel is plumb.  Also, the chain adjusters are set so the rear axle is parallel to the swingarm pivot bolt.  This was one of the initial steps.

Now everything is aligned to be where it should be.  The swingarm pivot bolt and outrigger bolts are tightened first in the order and to the torque specified in the manual.  Next the frame and engine mounting bolts are tightened as per the shop manual.  The alignment is done.

This is my street bike and it has not been taken apart.  It was out of alignment with the back wheel cocked to one side.  It most likely came from the factory like that.  It is typical of the Triumphs that have been aligned and it handles better now.  Making and using these rails is something I recommend for all land speed bike racers.  The procedures will be different than for the Bonneville but the results will be the same, an aligned chassis. 
           
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 25, 2020, 12:24:30 PM
Selling surplus bike parts on E-bay is an ongoing task.  This is a piston that has been sitting in a box on a shelf for 11 years.  I was taking pictures of it for the auction and I saw this on the skirt.  A crack running from 5 to 11 o'clock and another smaller crack going out from it to the right.  Has anyone seen this distress on a new and unused piston?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: gowing on April 25, 2020, 12:29:57 PM
Are you planning on running the bike this year?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on April 25, 2020, 12:42:33 PM
Selling surplus bike parts on E-bay is an ongoing task.  This is a piston that has been sitting in a box on a shelf for 11 years.  I was taking pictures of it for the auction and I saw this on the skirt.  A crack running from 5 to 11 o'clock and another smaller crack going out from it to the right.  Has anyone seen this distress on a new and unused piston?

Is it a forged or cast piston?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on April 25, 2020, 03:43:22 PM
Lockdown is my fate until this virus disappears, I get sick with it, or a vaccine is developed.  How much fun can I have on the salt if I am worried about getting sick and dying?  Dyno work is planned for this summer.

The piston is cast.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on April 25, 2020, 05:17:23 PM
WW, just drill three small holes at the ends of the crack and label them racing lubrication ports!  :naughty lol8
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stan Back on April 25, 2020, 06:00:13 PM
"Is it a forged or cast piston?"

Naa ? it's just junk.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 13, 2020, 10:50:01 AM
These questions are about the Bay of E.  A set of almost new Bonneville barrels with pistons was put up for auction.  The retail price new was just under $1,000.  They were out to bid for a few weeks and the winning offer was $5.00 plus shipping to their house.  Thew were shipped out to their lucky new owner.  Other items like a crankshaft and swingarm have been on the block for weeks with no offers.  Has the market for used vehicle parts gone away?   Would it be wise to hang onto this stuff for a year or so and relist it?   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: desotoman on May 13, 2020, 12:16:31 PM
With so many people out of work at this time and  having no idea if they will even be re hired, the market for selling non essential items has disappeared.

A month ago I listed some items on Craigslist cheap just to move. Not one reply for those items. Right now I will wait for a couple of months before I try again.

Hope that helps.

Tom G.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Beef Stew on May 13, 2020, 02:33:03 PM
Has the market for used vehicle parts gone away?   Would it be wise to hang onto this stuff for a year or so and relist it?

Times change. The young have different interests than the old. And it's just not auto racing, it effects most hobbies. The kids don't want high end audiophile equipment?they stream Spotify on their phones. The phone's camera has destroyed the non pro camera market. Vegetarians don't buy meat smokers.

I've been cleaning out the garage. Last week I sent a pickup full of valuable (?) stuff to the dump. And I'm planning to do the same again soon. Sell something for $5.00 isn't worth my time or effort.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on May 13, 2020, 03:31:43 PM
... Sell something for $5.00 isn't worth my time or effort.

May I have an Amen! brothers?  :clap

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on May 13, 2020, 04:20:14 PM
BS (Beef Stew)... I find if you put it on the curb will a free sign part of it will disappear... but put it out there with $50 price and all of it will disappear... although sometimes you have to wait till in the morning to see that it's gone...  :-o  :roll:
 :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on May 13, 2020, 05:13:39 PM
I wish the prices of the items I've been watching on E-Bay would come down.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on May 13, 2020, 08:37:52 PM
Maybe you should add a couple rolls of toilet paper?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on May 14, 2020, 10:27:12 AM
Thanks for the advice and the varied viewpoints.  The Bonneville was losing its ability to be a competitive engine in 2006 when I started my build.  Lots of critical custom made performance parts are from the hoards of others who did not toss the things out when logic said they should have.  Almost all of my machine tools and measuring things were gotten for free or next to nothing in price.  Several thousand dollars worth of were pulled from a dumpster by my brother.  It sorta hurts to scrap my parts when I know there are guys like me out there who do not have $$ and can use the stuff.     



Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Beef Stew on May 14, 2020, 07:40:06 PM
BS (Beef Stew)... I find if you put it on the curb will a free sign part of it will disappear... but put it out there with $50 price and all of it will disappear... although sometimes you have to wait till in the morning to see that it's gone...  :-o  :roll:
 :cheers:
If I put it at the curb, I'd get a visit from the local police. This ain't Kansas, Oklahoma or Texas  :-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 16, 2020, 01:31:54 PM
Silicon bronze MIG welding...https://www.millerwelds.com/resources/article-library/silicon-bronze-mig-brazing-basics?utm_source=enewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=diy&utm_content=lo (https://www.millerwelds.com/resources/article-library/silicon-bronze-mig-brazing-basics?utm_source=enewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=diy&utm_content=lo)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 27, 2020, 01:19:55 AM
Engine control modules will be on hand for the dyno session with 9,000, 9,500, and 10,000 rpm rev limits.  The one that lets the engine rev a few hundred rpm past peak power will be used.  It makes no sense to use more rpm than that.  I shift when I feel the misfire caused by the rev limiter.

It also helps to keep the engine above peak torque rpm through the timed mile.  The idiot light on the tach is set for peak torque.  An idiot light on with a misfire indicates rear sprocket with a tooth or two less is needed.  The idiot light off with no misfire tells me the opposite.  A bigger back chainwheel is needed.  The idiot light on with no misfire tells me the gearing is OK.

It is sorta a caveman way of doing things.  The old tach went up to 9,000 rpm and pegged.  This new one goes to 15,000 rpm.  There is no way any Triumph Bonneville can peg this new one.

     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Harold Bettes on June 27, 2020, 05:58:56 PM
Mr. WW, :-D
I am sure you probably know but will make the comment for those that don't: Most electronic tachometers are typically +/- 5% FS devices. Best to verify that number on your own stuff. If you don't have an MSD ignition tester to use for a baseline of real rpm, it is easy to build a signal generator to verify the tachometer AND the shift light. :cheers:
Best to you and yours. How's that Lab doing?
Regards,
HB2  :-)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 28, 2020, 01:22:15 AM
Hopefully the tach on the dyno is accurate.  That is what I usually use for a comparison.

We do not have the young lab anymore.  Just the older one now.  She is one year six months old.  She was raised in a kennel to be trained to be a field trial champion and to be breeding stock.  We got her at ten months old and she never was acclimatized to being a family dog.  She is slowly learning how to interact with people.  It takes two years, from what I hear, to do this.  We are about a third of the way there based on math. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on June 28, 2020, 10:27:26 AM
Any recommendations on a tachometer calibration service?  It is a good idea to have an expert check it before it is used.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on June 28, 2020, 12:01:08 PM
Tangent - about tach calibrating.

Hundreds of yesrs ago my dad was sales manager at Electro-Voice, and they brought out a line of tachometers that were non-contact, non-powered.  They used a signal from a sensor sensing the magnet of the flywheel as it passed (I think).  Each tach was shipped with a calibration device - basically a corrected-length fine wire solidly attached to a hard base (thumbnail sized??), and that base was to be held in contact with the running engine.  The wire would vibrate according to engine speed, and at some speed the wire's movement would let you know that the engine was turning at XXXX RPM.  You'd then adjust the tach's needle to read the speed indicated by the wire -- and viola, your tach was pretty danged close to spot-on (at least at that one speed and you sure hoped throughout the range of the tach.  I had one on my kart - Power Products AH51, it was, with a 4,800 rpm governor.  The 8 grand tach was pinned, I remember seeing, at about the time the rod went south as I was headed north, so I never learned just how fast that big end bushing would go. . .other than not quite as fast as I did. muutt
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: WOODY@DDLLC on June 28, 2020, 12:32:50 PM
So when the rod vibrates at 8 grand that calibrates the crankcase?  :cry:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on June 28, 2020, 12:45:35 PM
Yeah, it calibrated the case to infinity. 8-)  It did teach me a few things about playing with engines, though.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 22, 2020, 06:08:15 PM
The coated main and rod big end shells arrived from PolyDyn.  Usually I start a build from the inside out.  There is no part more "inside" than the crank and its bearings so the new build will start here and now. 

A set of bearing shells were inspected five years ago by a very nice fellow from Mahle Aftermarket, Inc.  He recommends 0.00075 to 0.001 inches clearance per inch of shaft diameter plus 0.005 inches clearance for a race engine.  This is 0.0017 to 0.0021 inches clearance for the 1.6120 inch diameter rod big ends.  It is 0.0016 to 0.0020 for the 1.495 inch diameter crank journals.








     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 26, 2020, 10:57:04 AM
My eyes are old and I need a lot of light and time to inspect things.  This setup is made on the back porch.  It gives magnification, illumination, and a comfortable place to sit for hours. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 26, 2020, 11:01:57 AM
The crank inspection did some good.  This ding in the primary drive gear was found and it was filed down so it would not damage the driven gear.  Metal swarf was found in the end of the iol passages where the chamfer was reground.  A jeweler's file was used to remove it.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 26, 2020, 01:38:56 PM
The crank was from another bike and it was installed the race bike in 2017.  The journals were at the maximum production tolerance diameter.  The loosest "white coded" shells were installed and there was not enough clearance to get the minimum value for racing.  The main journals were ignored.  They had enough clearance for a production bike so I took some risk and did not downsize them.  The rod journals were reduced to minimum racing clearance by hand using fine sandpaper and polish.  It was a Mickey Mouse solution that worked OK for the 9,000 rpm rev limit.

After race inspection showed this idea worked but it is a sketchy proposition for 10,000 rpm.  Several local grinders said the journals would need to be welded up and reground to reduce their size.  I was worried about the effects on crank temper from welding heat and mainly a loss of strength due to annealing.  An expert with these cranks in racing applications was located.  He could polish the journals down to size.  The crank was sent to him for this and to rework the chamfers around the oil holes in the journals.

The journals were measured.  He did a good job.  Now they are near or at the minimum production diameter.  This will give wider racing bearing clearance and allow the room for polymer shell coatings. 

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 28, 2020, 12:18:17 AM
A new use for a old lathe.  A crankshaft holder.

The crank was washed in solvent and soapy water and Q-tips were used to clean and dry the oil passages.  The swabs were used and changed until they came out of the passages in a clean state.  The job was done based on my old standards.

An experiment was tried.  Gun solvent and a brand new cleaning brush were swabbed through the passages.  Another new Q-tip was pushed through.  Note all of the carp that it collected.  It seems that oil and stuff can bake onto the passage walls and it takes some work to dislodge it.  From now on I will use more physical effort to clean those oil passages.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on July 28, 2020, 12:58:12 AM
A new use for a old lathe.  A crankshaft holder.

The crank was washed in solvent and soapy water and Q-tips were used to clean and dry the oil passages.  The swabs were used and changed until they came out of the passages in a clean state.  The job was done based on my old standards.

An experiment was tried.  Gun solvent and a brand new cleaning brush were swabbed through the passages.  Another new Q-tip was pushed through.  Note all of the carp that it collected.  It seems that oil and stuff can bake onto the passage walls and it takes some work to dislodge it.  From now on I will use more physical effort to clean those oil passages.

WW;

I recommend using "Hoppe's Number 9" gun cleaning solvent for crankshaft passages. It is formulated to clean bores of powder residue and loosen debris, just the ticket for what you are doing. The old formulation contained a significant percentage of nitromethane which made it a better solvent so you might add a little of that to the modern over-the-counter Hoppe's Number 9 formulation to make it work better.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 28, 2020, 12:19:54 PM
Thanks for the advice.  I will look for some of that oil when I go up to Portland today.  It was my father's favorite gun oil.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 28, 2020, 12:50:43 PM
The big end shells are measured using a Mitutoyo Model 115-313 tubing micrometer.  The measurements D, E, and F are the most important.  They determine the minimum clearance between the shell and the journal.  These shells are of identical thickness when measurement acccuracy, error, and precision are considered.  There will be no gain by swapping them around to different journals in order to "fine tune" the installation clearances.

The thickness measurements near the parting lines do not mean much - except that a taper is there.  It is hard to get any quantifiable measurements on a tapered section.  There would be alarm and grounds for rejection if no taper was detected.

This looks to be a good batch of shells.  Only four are needed.  The other two are extras to be used if one or two of the other shells had issues.   

There is an oil film between the journal and the shell during operation and there is argument about whether of not a polymer coating is justified.  The old crank was raced with coatings and without.  There was less distress with coated shells.  So, they are used.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on July 28, 2020, 07:27:40 PM
Thanks for the advice.  I will look for some of that oil when I go up to Portland today.  It was my father's favorite gun oil.

If you are going to Portland maybe it would be a good idea to take the gun along with you.  :-(
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 29, 2020, 01:05:34 AM
Today I rode all around the northside, the eastside, the west side, and the southside on a big shopping trip.  Most of the immature idiocy is confined to a fourteen square block downtown, according to the locals I talked to.  It still is a safe city to go to if you avoid the city center.

Nitromethane is available by the gallon from the race fuel suppliers.  That is too much of a quantity for this job.  Nitro is mixed with methanol in model airplane race gas.  I got a bottle and used some to clean the oil passages.  It does a good job.

On the way home I stopped at the newsstand and bought the latest "Cycle World."  The Triumph competes in the 1,000cc class.  Hopefully, after 14 or 15 years of working on the thing, I can get 115 hp at 9,500 rpm.  This new Honda, which anyone can buy who has the money, gets a claimed 214 hp at 13,000 rpm.  It is time to take up a new hobby, like golf.     



Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on July 29, 2020, 11:03:19 AM
It's a safe place to go if you avoid the crime area? O..K..

When I was a kid most everyone mixed their own model airplane fuel which we called "bug juice". Methanol, nitromethane, toluene, oil, and whatever else and in whatever ratio anyone thought best. Those Dooling and McCoy engines put out power!

I'll have to get some model airplane gas to mix with Hoppe's Number Nine. Good idea, WW.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 30, 2020, 07:26:04 PM
Model airplane fuel was my introduction to the wonders of castor oil.

A 0.0020 bearing clearance is what I want on the rod big ends.  The crank is outside of the manufacturer's specified tolerances as per journal diameter.  The maximum allowed production diameter is 1.6126 inches.  Mine are 1.6130 to 1.6131 inches.  They are too big.  The thinnest shells available, the white coded ones with no polymer coating, were fitted in 2017 with the old connecting rods.  They gave 0.0017 clearance, which is the minimum for racing.

Last year the journals were polished by an expert.  I figured there would be some diameter reduction and there was.  Maybe a couple of tenths.  New rods were fitted.  The clearance is 0.0015 with white uncoated shells.  The new rods have a smaller bore diameter is my best guess.  The old rods had over a decade of racing and several hundred dyno pulls.  This probably enlarged them a few tenths so they put less crush on the shells.

The journals need some diameter reduction.  An e-mail was sent to Winberg crankshafts in Colorado.  Maybe they can help with this.

     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: ggl205 on July 31, 2020, 08:47:14 AM
Honing a couple of tenths out of your new rod big ends shouldn?t reduce crush much but could get you to the minimum racing clearance of .0017?. I worry about taking any more diameter out of the crank journals by polishing. Kind of an uncontrolled machining process.

John
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on July 31, 2020, 03:37:40 PM
Good idea.  I will take the rods to the machinist today and get his opinion about honing them.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 09, 2020, 01:27:11 PM
Paul, the machinist, looked at the crank and rods.  Plastigage measurements are what I did.  They are not the most accurate method to measure clearances, he said.  He measured the journals with a micrometer.  Then he put the rods in his Sunnen rod honing machine.  Then he zeroed a dial gage between the micrometer jaws with "0" at the journal diameter.  Then he put the dial gage into the honing machine and he measured the clearances.  Clearance was 0.0022 on one rod and 0.0018 on the other.  What I want is 0.0020 on each so a simple rod swap will make it happen.  He told me to adjust my clearances, if I want to, by changing the shells to ones with different thicknesses.

There were uncoated shells in the rods.  Coated shells can be used and the decrease in clearance due to the coating can be ignored, according to Clevite.  The Clevite coating typically reduces the rod big end inner diameter 0.0005 inches according to their literature.  The Polydyn coating is twice that thick and it would reduce the inner diameter 0.0010 inches.   This seems like too much, so a coated shell will be used on the top, only.   This was discussed with Paul and he said it should work OK.

The final setup is a white coded shell with coating on top and a white coded shell with no coating on the bottom.  Clearance is 0.0015 with 0.0005 being considered sacrificial for a "run-in" clearance of 0.0020.

The main journal clearances were measured with plastigage.  The clearance is 0.0015 on all with uncoated white coded shells.  Coated shells will be used on the bottom, only.  This will give 0.0010 clearance with 0.0005 being sacrificial for a 0.0015 "run-in" clearance. 
   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 24, 2020, 11:12:11 PM
We started lockdown on the last day in February.  The confinement got to be more than I could handle...so I left town a couple of weeks ago and disappeared with Gypsy into the stix.  This is the first day I have i-net coverage so it is time to see how speedweek went.  The fotos show a typical view through the windshield and Gypsy.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 24, 2020, 11:14:24 PM
Two pix from the trip.  Sheep on Steens Mountain and a nighthawk perched on the windowsill at the field station.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on August 24, 2020, 11:56:05 PM
Welcome back to the world... unfortunately it's still a mess
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on August 27, 2020, 09:48:51 PM
Sometimes it is best to follow the example of the great 20th century philosopher Alfred E. Neumann.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on August 28, 2020, 08:32:39 PM
Sometimes it is best to follow the example of the great 20th century philosopher Alfred E. Neumann.

What, me worry?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 14, 2020, 11:27:37 AM
This is a link to good info about the situation here.  https://www.opb.org/article/2020/09/14/live-updates-oregon-northwest-wildfires/
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 26, 2020, 12:29:47 PM
This is the first of three long-winded posts.  It is about the support for steering loads provided by a surface.  The second will be about the vehicle steering dynamics.  The third will be to tie the two together with insight about how it affects the bike's build.

This summer I crossed a big lake in my little boat.  It was a windy day.  The boat was aimed at a point on the shore about a mile upwind from the marina where I wanted to go.  The boat was cocked aside from its direction of travel.  This cannot be done on a land speed bike.  The cycle must be oriented straight down the course.  The side force to keep the bike on the track is provided by the front wheel.  It is slightly cocked so it pulls the front of the bike against the wind so it will stay on the track.  This works if there is sufficient friction between the wheel and the salt surface.

Imagine a 10 pound block resting on a surface.  A 10 pound side load is needed to slide the block.  The frictional coefficient is 1.00  Lets say a five pound load is all it takes.  The friction coefficient is 0.5  This is the static coefficient to friction.  It takes force to keep the block moving across the surface.  This is the dynamic friction coefficient.  It is often less than the static coefficient.

The friction coefficient between steel and ice is large at low pressure loads where the ice is solid under the block.  Higher loads cause the ice to liquify into water.  The friction coefficient between steel and water is low.  This makes ice skating possible.  The skater putting a concentrated load onto the small area under the blades, this liquifies the ice, and the the person is floating across the ice on a film of water.

The above demonstrates why surface friction in dynamic conditions is most important for the racer.  There must be enough friction between the wheel and the surface to provide steering.  The water film under the skater is very thin yet it makes all the difference on whether or not the skates work.  This is the boundary layer and it is the critical factor.

In engineering we look at the loads that cause failure.  Then we compare this to the expected loads.  A factor of safety is figgured.  It is one if the loads to fail the thing are the same as the loads it is designed to withstand.  It is two if the expected loads are half of those that cause failure.

Water in the boundary layer drastically reduces frictional coefficients.  The water must be squeezed out from under the tire in order to provide adequate tire to surface friction.  Major factors are water depth with deep water being the worst.  Velocity is another factor with high speeds the worst.  The water does not have enough time to get squeezed out from under the tire.  Distance is the third.  The water stays under the tire longer if it needs to travel farther to get out from under the tire.  This is why rain grooves are used.  They give escaping water a shorter path to freedom.  Pressure is another factor.  It takes force to squeeze the water out from under the tire.  Dry tire to surface friction is another variable.  Water under the tire, often called hydroplaning, can reduce the contact patch.  Good adhesion within the remaining dry patch is critical.  This is why many racing rain tires have a combination of grooves and softer rubber. 

A spinning wheel drags an atmosphere with it along its surface.  Also, an object traveling through air near, at, or above the speed of sound produces a shock wave ahead of it.  This can affect the surface.  This may have created a dust/air layer ahead of the Bloodhound wheels on the Haskeen pan dust and drastically reduced the coefficient of friction, is my personal opinion.

Management of the tire to surface boundary layer is critical for a wheel steered vehicle.  There is some data about the above between tires and asphalt or concrete surfaces.  There is less about other surfaces and especially if the dynamic aspects are considered, and none I could find when pondering the rotating atmosphere and shock wave effects.
       

      .     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 29, 2020, 06:43:42 PM
The tire to surface interface needs to resist forces from the engine powering the bike, braking, cornering, and wind.  Cornering and braking loads are minimal at the salt flats.  The resistance to sliding is provided by a combination of vertical load multiplied by the friction coefficient.

Tire selection.  Tires need to be up to correct operating temperature to provide grip.  The salt is a relatively cool surface compared to pavement.  Most DOT street tires, flat track tires, and road racing rain tires, and soft slicks grip at these temperatures.  Some street tires, and intermediate or hard race tires will not get hot enough to grip unless spun.

The salt surface is more like a flat track than it resembles pavement.  Some grooving is beneficial.

As per the Triumph.  One piece wheels were fitted this year with a 19-inch front and 17-inch diameter rear.  Bridgestone Battleaxe DOT tires with (W) ratings are fitted.  They grip well at salt flat surface temps and have some tread grooves to provide grip and to evacuate water.

Another tire combination that provides more open tread area and grips at salt flat surface temperature is a flat track front tire with a racing rain rear tire.  They are available in the 19 front and 17 rear sizes.  That is probably a better combo than the battleaxes for anything but the smoothest and hardest salt.

Friction coefficient and speed rating are the primary things I look at during tire selection.   

       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on September 30, 2020, 03:22:06 PM
During my early 20's race tires were tried for street racing by some of my friends.  They almost killed themselves so I did not use them.  The problem was lack of grip.

These videos I am watching during lockdown.  They show and discuss race tire vs track temperature vs performance.  My friends probably did not get the tires hot enough to grip.  These racers pre-heat the tires prior to racing and do a warm up lap to get them ready to race.  Some of these videos are in Spanish and most are in English.  The lady doing the commentary is Suzy Perry.  She was one of the first women that presented the races and has been doing it for over 20 years.   

https://www.tokyvideo.com/series/moto-gp-2020-full-race
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on September 30, 2020, 08:00:45 PM
WW;

When I was drag racing my '65 Pontiac GTO, I used M & H Racemaster slicks but one time I was in a hurry and did not replace them at the track with my street tires. They were great on the street until it started to rain. I drove home at 15 mph.... :?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 02, 2020, 12:24:58 AM
That car must'a been fun to race.  There were a lot of drag strips in the old days.  The tracks were dry in the first five races on those videos and those are what I have watched until now.  They used soft, medium and hard slicks.  Hopefully it will rain for a race and I can see how they set up the tires. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 20, 2020, 12:24:05 AM
The featured bike in this article, the John Player Norton, has a fairing that was developed using extensive wind tunnel testing.  Note how it gives the rider good coverage and the trailing surfaces, just before they end, are parallel to the direction of wind flow.   

https://www.motorcycleclassics.com/classic-british-motorcycles/john-player-norton-monocoque-replicas-zmmz13sozbea
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 20, 2020, 12:39:28 AM
This article shows the current MotoGP fairings.  There is much less coverage and the trailing edges are angled to the wind flow.  This seems like backwards progress from that 1070's Norton.  The new fairings look to be inefficient.  I asked about this during the wind tunnel visit.  The answer was to keep the fairing large so as to give good coverage.  "The fairing is more streamlined then you are" was the answer I remember hearing.

https://www.crash.net/motogp/feature/928481/1/wings-chins-remain-under-stricter-2020-motogp-aero-rules   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 20, 2020, 11:36:21 PM
Surface roughness vs smoothness was discussed at the wind tunnel.  The tail section may have a small area of attached flow with a turbulent boundary layer.  Most or all flow will be detached turbulent flow.  No appreciable benefits will be gained by a smooth surface in these conditions.  The rivited plate surface will be used.  It is easy to make and repair or modify and it is light and strong.

F = ma or force equals mass times acceleration.  Reduction in the force to overcome aero drag allows the bike to go faster and this means the mass of air disturbed by the vehicle must be minimized as well as the acceleration of the disturbed air.  Acceleration is a change in air velocity or in the direction of air flow.  Creating a wake vortex or disturbance accelerates air in both velocity and flow direction.  Wake disturbance needs to be minimized.  Tail shape does this and not tail finish smoothness.

The vehicle from overhead view was designed to conform to a NACA shape.  The vehicle as viewed from ahead and the sides is a "do the best as I can" shape.  The rider is part of the vehicle during the design.  It was developed using years of experience and book learning before it went into the wind tunnel.

The wind tunnel cost big money to use.  Most of us can afford to use it to validate our design and to test easily made modifications, like I did.  It would take mucho dollars to develop a shape in the tunnel.

Tufts of yarn were attached to the bike to show flow direction across the surface.  The first tunnel test was used to photograph the yarn tufts during air flow.  Also, a smoke wand was used.

"The best modification you can make is to get your head and shoulders down and behind the fairing" I was told after the smoke test.  The seat pan was lowered to do this.  It is about a millimeter above the frame tubes and it is an inch or two lower than it was before.  It was narrowed, too, to allow my knees to tuck in better along the bike sides.

Posting pictures with the narrative is problematic after the website crash.  The post following this will be an attempt to post pictures.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 24, 2020, 10:50:33 AM
The first picture shows the old seat pan.  It is higher and wider than the new one.  The new pan is in the second picture.  It is so close to the frame that there is no room underneath the front for bolt heads.  Countersunk head screws are used with acorn nuts on top to hold it together.  The seat pad will prevent nut-to-nut contact between me and the bolts.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on October 24, 2020, 11:04:37 AM
The FIM regulations say the tail upper surface cannot be higher than 150 mm from the seat.  The tail is redone to lower the top.  The aluminum is 0.019 to 0.020 thick and there are either flat surfaces or single radius curves.  A single flat sheet could have been formed to cover the top.  It would be easily dented.  Instead, the sheet is cut up into scales.  Each scale is pounded on an anvil with a hammer on both sides and then flattened with a rubber mallet and then sandwiched between a wood block and the anvil.  The block is pounded down to further flatten the metal.  Then, the piece is bent to curvature of left flat before being riveted on.  The work hardening from the pounding and the overlapping seams make the surface strong and dent resistant while using thin aluminum..
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 09, 2020, 12:02:53 PM
The bike is primarily built to run as an FIM entrant.  Constructing it to meet USFRA and SCTA requirements, too, seems like a good idea.  The SCTA classes page, and bike tech checklist are available on the SCTA website.  The bike rulebook could not be found and I need some help to find it.

It is nice to see that the site is up and functioning and that Bob and Slim are OK.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on November 09, 2020, 01:38:10 PM
The bike is primarily built to run as an FIM entrant.  Constructing it to meet USFRA and SCTA requirements, too, seems like a good idea.  The SCTA classes page, and bike tech checklist are available on the SCTA website.  The bike rulebook could not be found and I need some help to find it.

It is nice to see that the site is up and functioning and that Bob and Slim are OK.   

Bo, just go to the SCTA or USFRA website and order a rule book, same book.

  Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 09, 2020, 11:39:04 PM
The bike was run naked and streamlined in 2018.  It went 129.02 and 149.63 without and with the tin.  The sheet metal helps a lot.  The wind tunnel guy said "Put on as much streamlining as you can before the testing.  It is a lot quicker and easier to take it off than to put it on."   This adding was done after the 149.63 run.  Quite a bit of thin aluminum roof flashing, duck tape, and cardboard was used.  The drag coefficient for the first test with all of this in place was 0.494  The smoke wand showed a lot of power robbing turbulence behind me.  The second test was made with me holding my chest lower down onto the fuel tank.  The drag coefficient dropped to 0.457

It was hard for me to hug the tank and I doubt if I could do it during a race.  So, the seat pan was lowered a little more than an inch, the bum stop was moved back an inch, and the front of the seat pan was narrowed so it is easier to keep my knees against the tank.  This I did last week.

My weight was between 210 and 220 pounds when my leathers were originally made.  Now I weigh a lot less.  The scrotum like folds of the excess cowhide caught the wind.  Duck tape was used to tighten up the leathers during the tunnel work.  The operator mummified me.  The smooth leathers dropped the drag coefficient down from 0.457 to 0.445  Bates remeasuerd the new slimmer version of me and altered the leathers.

A speed hump was made on my leathers behind my head using more cardboard and duck tape.  It raise the drag coefficient from 0.445 to 0.463  A speed hump does not work for me.  The speed hump was removed.
   
The tail end was open during all of my racing including the 149.6 run.  It was closed with roof flashing during the initial tunnel tests.  The drag coefficient went up from 0.445 to 0.453 after the tail was opened.  The tail was closed up with 0.020 thick sheet aluminum this week.

There are power robbing turbulence vortices behind the tail end.  Closing the tail reduced the size of this turbulence, is my best guess.  The next post will have pictures.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 09, 2020, 11:57:06 PM
Roof flashing is great to make mock-up parts and patterns.  It is cheap and easy to work with.  It is far to thin to use for a final product.  This is the end section used for tunnel testing and the final end section in place.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 10, 2020, 12:10:36 AM
Dzuz fasteners were used to hold the fiberglass sidecovers onto my old BSA.  They worked great if I remembered to push them down to lock.  Otherwise the side cover flew off while riding.  Nuts-n-bolts have a similar issue.  They do the job if someone remembers to tighten them down.  Both Dzuz fasteners and screwed ones are not obviously loose during a visual inspection.

Some guy used pin and clip fasteners to hold down the hood on his race car.  I copied the idea and use it for all body panels.  It is obvious from a glance if the connection is complete.  It is more "idiot proof" than other fasteners.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on November 10, 2020, 09:19:44 AM
WW;

Where do you find those?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 10, 2020, 11:23:03 AM
Google "clip and pin hood latches" to see lots of manufactured versions.  My ghetto style version uses pins that are stainless steel bolts with the threads ground off and holes drilled through them, stainless steel washers, and safety pin clips.  All can be got at Ace Hardware.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 14, 2020, 06:37:59 PM
My SCTA rule book is paid for and ordered.  The bike number plates are tonight's project and the rule book is not here yet.  So, a question follows.  The FIM race numbers are 6 inches tall, 3 inches wide, and the writing is 1 inch thick.  They are placed on a background with contrasting colors.  White numbers on a black background are what I use now.  Will this work for SCTA?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on November 14, 2020, 07:59:30 PM
Per the 2020 SCTA rule book. 7.B.1

"Numbers shall be a minimum of 3 inches high by 1 inch wide, class designation characters shall be a minimum of 1 inch high; both must contrast with the background on which they are applied."
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on November 14, 2020, 08:09:37 PM
More,

"Number/class may be applied to a surface on the motorcycle or number plates may be used.
Number plates shall be securely mounted with a minimum dimension of 6 inches by 8 inches and a maximum dimension of 10 inches by 12 inches with a corner minimum radius of 1 inch.
Number plate location is dependent on specific class rules."
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 18, 2020, 02:23:41 PM
Thanx for the help.  It took some juggling to fit 150 mm by 80 mm FIM numbers on a 12-inch long SCTA size number plate.  The rivet lines tell a story.  The almost horizontal and rightmost vertical lines were the edge while running in AMA MPS class.  The vertical line to the left of the MPS line is for the tail with AMA APS.  A piece of metal was spliced onto each side to convert from Modified Partial to Special Partial streamlining.  The AMA APS rules were changed and the bike was illegal for the class.  The mods to make it legal were ones I did not want to do.  The tail was changed to FIM partial streamlined dimensions by adding the extension onto the end.  It is the newer and shinier aluminum.

The SCTA rule book has not arrived, yet.  The goal is to bolt the number plate onto the tail in a location where it will not be disturbed if the tail is cut to SCTA dimensions.  What are SCTA tail dimensions in APS class?     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: salt27 on November 18, 2020, 03:48:11 PM
7.G.11

"The seat/tail section cannot extend further to the rear than 10" beyond the rear edge of the rear tire.

No part of the seat/tail section may be more than 40" above the ground with the rider seated.

No part of the seat/tail section behind the rear axle may be closer than 4" from the ground with the rider seated."

Bo, I'm about 100 miles south of you.
  You are welcome to borrow a rule book if you want.

  Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 19, 2020, 12:44:40 AM
Thanks for the offer of a rule book on loan.  My copy should be arriving by mail, I hope, soon.  I can wait for it.

The tail tip is OK for FIM but not for SCTA.  I will drill out the rivets and remove it after BMST and before World of Speed.  The number plate is in a place where it can remain undisturbed.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 19, 2020, 12:56:49 AM
There was a post by JimL awhile ago.  It mentioned how silicone spray residue can keep paint from adhering to a vehicle.  This method is based on that concept.

An old number sticker needed to be removed from the tail.  It was held down by adhesive on the back of the paper and it was covered by clear packing tape.  Acetone was used as a solvent to soften the glue and make the sticker and tape easier to remove.  The problem was the acetone evaporating away before I could scrape off the glue.  The glue would smear around and it would reattach to the aluminum.

The sticker and tape were soaked with silicon spray.  Then acetone was applied and the sticker and tape were removed.  The silicone film prevented the glue from reattaching to the metal.  This sped up the sticker removal process. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 19, 2020, 06:50:57 PM
Is there a way to attach a .mov file? 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 22, 2020, 02:14:00 AM
This is the smoke test.  It was done before any changes were made, like me crouching in a lower position, taping up the leathers. etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_LW-2f8KUA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_LW-2f8KUA)
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: ggl205 on November 22, 2020, 07:15:51 AM
WW, what were the lift number coming off tunnel tests?

John
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 22, 2020, 01:47:14 PM
Lift was a problem with the first front end on the fairing and it was redesigned to give more downforce.  The later version is what you see in the movie.  These Triumph Bonnevilles have the typical rearward weight bias of bikes built in the older days.  They do not have the forward weight bias of the newer sport bikes.  A full tank of gas helps the weight distribution.  The front end never has a secure and planted feel while racing.

The trail needed to be increased to get steering stability.  It could have been done by raking out the front end or by reducing triple crown offset.  Reducing offset was what I did.  It is a better way to get the needed trail on a bike with a light front end, in my experience.   

The fins and spoilers on F1 cars hang out into the breeze.  They create massive amounts of aero drag and it takes a lot of horsepower to get the downforce when they are used.  Reshaping the front of the fairing gave downforce without significantly increasing rearward turbulence so that is what I did.

I thought I lost the tunnel data forever due to my lack of ability to organize files.  The movies were found a few days ago and I will look for the data printout.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 22, 2020, 08:14:16 PM
This is the first page of tunnel data.  Run #5 is the one I am building to.  This is lower seat position, tighter leathers, closed tail, and no speed hump on the leathers.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 22, 2020, 08:15:33 PM
This is page 2.  The lift data is in the first columns to the left.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 22, 2020, 08:19:53 PM
This is the third page.  I am not sure if 0.27 lift vs drag is a desirable value.  In fact, I do not know much about any of the numbers on this spreadsheet.  My elementary understanding is the goal is get the lowest Cd.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: ggl205 on November 22, 2020, 09:44:53 PM
WW, chart #3 looks like a continuation of chart#2. I saw those C fields from the Darko tunnel as well but told to ignore them.

Good data on chart #1. Appears tucking the helmet as low as possible yielded greatest benefit but I bet you figured that before the test.

One of my tunnel tests was to extend the tail three feet and complete the tapered aero feature. We cut cardboard to kick up the bottom, figuring this would help Cd. It did not but finishing the taper did.

John
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 23, 2020, 12:56:03 AM
A few questions...

Is the data adjusted for a 175 mph speed?  Are the drag coefficients and lift reasonable for this type of bike?

The SCTA rule book arrived a few days ago and the bike was discussed with the tech inspection team.  There are only two cases where it does not comply with the rules for 1000cc APS-F.  The FIM tail is about 4 inches too long.  Also, the class record is well over 200 mph so the rule book says I need road race tires.  The tires are new (W) rated road tires that are rated for faster than the bike can go.  I am allowed to run with these shortcomings.  The run is for "time only" with a safety inspection for the speed the bike can do.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 23, 2020, 09:10:00 AM
Wow! - -"taped leathers" - 2.7% reduction in Cd.  Also, speed hump was worse than none. 

Were your leathers extremely loose, or in what way were they taped that made that difference?

Where did you get wind tunnel tests done?

Were the subsequent tests after # 5 inclusive of the previous changes?  In other words, was the speed hump in addition to head down and taped leathers?  Ditto the last two changes?

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 23, 2020, 11:53:22 AM
The A2 wind tunnel in Mooresville South Carolina was where it was done.

The leathers were very loose.  How loose they were can be seen in the video.

The operator folded the loose parts against my skin and taped the folds down by wrapping duck tape around my arms and legs.

The circuit breaker for the fan tripped during run 1.  It is invalid.

Me sitting in my normal position, with loose leathers, no speed hump, a closed tail, an open hole at the base of the windshield, and an open slot for the side stand is Run 2.  It is the baseline for comparison.

Me crouched down lower, with loose leathers, no speed hump, a closed tail, an open hole at the base of the windshield, and an open slot for the side stand, is Run 3.  Unfortunately I could not see forward from underneath the top edge of the helmet opening in this position.  The seat needed to be lowered so I could see where I where I was going while down and behind the windshield.  This was done a few weeks ago.

The leathers were taped.  A run was made and I crouched about midway down between where I was in Run 2 and 3.  This is Run 4 and it is rejected.

Me crouched down lower like on Run 3, with taped leathers, no speed hump, a closed tail, an open hole at the base of the windshield, and an open slot for the side stand is Run 5.  This is as good as it got.

A speed hump was made from cardboard and duck tape.  It was taped to my leathers behind the helmet.  Me crouched down like on Run 3, with taped leathers, a speed hump, a closed tail, an open hole at the base of the windshield, and an open slot for the side stand is Run 6.

The speed hump did no good and it was removed.  The vertical plate at the end of the tail was removed.  Me crouched down like on Run 3, with taped leathers, no speed hump, an open tail, an open hole at the base of the windshield, and an open slot for the side stand was Run 7.  It can be compared to Run 5.

There is an open slot at the base of the windshield.  It is big enough to stuff a fag pack through on end.  It's intent is to bleed some air into the low pressure area behind the windshield, reduce low pressure there, and consequently to lower the aero drag.  It is an idea I got from a WWII era NACA movie.  Run 8 is me crouched low like on Run 3, with taped leathers, no speed hump, an open tail, a closed hole at the bottom of the windshield, and an open slot for the side stand.  It can be compared to Run 7.

Closing the hole did no good.  The side stand was retracted and the slot for it was taped over.  I do not remember if the hole at the base of the windshield was opened.  Run 9 is me crouched down like on Run 3, with taped leathers, no speed hump, an open tail, an open or closed hole at the base of the windshield, and a taped slot for the side stand.  It can be compared to Runs 7 or 8.

Taping up the side stand slot did no good.  The best combination was during Run 5.                 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 24, 2020, 06:01:59 AM
Thanks, Bo, that is extremely telling  about what is important about partial streamlining.  I'd love to get my bike down there, but not much chance of that as I am stuck in Nova Scotia (safe) while the bikes are in Colorado.
Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 24, 2020, 11:11:52 AM
This is a 1941 movie that explains a lot about wind tunnels.  First, log into You-Tube.  Then in the search function type in "Aerodynamics - Forces Acting on an Airfoil."  The movie will pop up on the selection list as a 1957 military video.

The sensors attached to the bike measured horizontal and vertical loads on the wheels.  All testing was done with the bike unskewed to the relative wind.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 24, 2020, 05:29:23 PM
The tail is long on this bike and a rudder was considered.  Lets say the bike is going 100 mph down the track into still air.  A side wind gust of 20 mph hits the bike as it goes past the slot in the mountains.  The angle of attack is arctan 20/100 = 11.3 degrees.
At 175 mph this would be arctan 20/175  = 6.5 degrees.  This is a worst case scenario.  It does illustrate that the angle of attack into the relative wind can be significant.

The movie shows a flat plate canted into the relative wind.  There is high pressure on the windward side of the plate and low pressure on the other.  A rudder would be a canted plate, too, and these pressures would tend to push the tail into alignment with the relative wind.  The fins on a dart or a weather vane do this.  They point the object they are attached to into the wind.

This self aligning feature is great if there are no side winds.  The tail is flicked around to point me in a direction I do not want to go if a gust of wind hits the bike from the side.  To counteract this, I am trying to steer the bike where I want it to go with a lightly loaded front tire contact patch.  This looks like it will be nothing but a problem.  There will be no rudder on this bike.
 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: stay`tee on November 24, 2020, 07:26:28 PM
rake plays a significant role in correction from the blast of a sidewind,, in that more rake gives slower steering, thus aiding in negating the negative effects of correction,,

 Modern Sportsbikes typically have rake angles in the sub thirtys, great for the backroad Twisties but problematic to sustained high speed wind effected passes on salt
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 24, 2020, 11:21:57 PM
The Triumph's rake angle is 29 degrees static and it goes up a degree or two when the bike rock back due to relative wind pressure.  That seems to work OK.  I have never ridden a modern sportsbike.

Viewed from the side it is almost impossible to get a NACA profile although there are some talented builders who have.  In bird's eye view, a NACA shape is feasible.  There are four numbers to designate NACA shapes.  The ones that are 00XX describe symmetric profiles where both sides have the same shape.  The last two numbers describe the airfoil's width to length ratio.  A 0012 airfoil would be 12 percent as wide as it is long.

A bike's airfoil length is limited by race organization regulations.  The SCTA rules say "there shall be no streamlining forward of the front edge of the rim."  At the back "... the seat/tail section cannot extend further to the rear than 10 inches beyond the rear edge of the rear tire."  The FIM allows a longer tail.

The airfoil width needs to be enough to enclose the rider and bike.  Width at the shoulders was most critical for me.  Rose measured me while I sat on the bike and I transferred this width and other measurements to graff paper.  Several copies were made of this drawing of bike and rider measurements.

Many NACA profiles were plotted over the bike and rider measurements.  The dilemma arose:  a NACA profile with large angles of convergence toward the tail could be fitted.  The tail would be pointed.  Or, a profile with lower angles of convergence could be used with a truncated tail.

There are complex variations in flow characteristics on each side of a pointed tail at different angles of attack, and this is exacerbated by acute angles of convergence.  Nights of hand calculations and watching NACA videos showed this.  In other words, small variations in the angle of attack would result significant changes in the attached vs detached pressure distributions.  The bike would be unstable and hard to ride in a side wind environment.

There are no movies of truncated airfoils that I could find.  It was hand calcs, only.  There is an engineer saying that "a hand job is better than no job" so that is what I did.  A NACA shape with a truncated tail has a less acute angle of convergence and air flow stays attached to it better at reasonably expected angles of attack.  The attached/detached flow patterns on the tail, and the turbulence patterns behind the tail, are much more consistent at varying angles of attack.  The bike's handling in sidewinds, and especially gusty side winds would be much more predictable with a bobtail NACA shape.  This was figgered out over ten years ago and it seems to be working.           
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 24, 2020, 11:45:28 PM
This is the NACA movie that showed me the problems with a pointy tail.  Note the Von Karmann vortices.  The movie needs to be reeled back to the start to see the whole thing.  It is midway through if you use the link without doing this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUhiDctsyfs&t=322s
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 25, 2020, 01:19:25 AM
This recent paper, on Pages 15 and 25, shows with a wind tunnel picture what I was trying to do with the truncated tail.  I wish I would have found this paper back in 2010 when I did my design.  It would have saved me a lot of work.  https://lfgss.microco.sm/api/v1/files/04ab9d14181f94ab35ee081bc22abae99ae72b17.pdf
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Koncretekid on November 25, 2020, 08:22:58 AM
An interesting article, for sure.  Realize, of course, that it is the work of a commercial enterprise (Trek bicycle manufacturer).  The most amazing conclusion is that they were able to get negative drag at yaw angles between 10 and 15 degrees.  This implies that if we were able to replicate the KVF shape that they are hoping to patent, that we could go faster with a head wind at 10-15 degrees off the front of our machines than we can with no head wind.

 "At the core of its low-drag performance is the Kammtail Virtual Foil (KVF) tube shape, which itself is the result of a nine month project dedicated to low-speed airfoil development. The KVF is an unconventional aerodynamic shape proven to have incredibly low drag, with a light, stiff profile. In fact, the Speed Concept?s KVF tubes themselves are proven to have negative drag (thrust) in a wide range of common wind conditions. "

Unconventional?  I believe that the Kamm tail has been around for years. 

However, that KVF shape looks a lot like the profile that we are trying to perfect.

(https://i.postimg.cc/NG9bVxHv/Bonneville-bike-2017.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

Tom
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 25, 2020, 11:46:32 PM
The wind tunnel pictures illustrated what I was attempting to do.  They probably are legit.  It is possible to do calculations that show negative drag.  I have done it.  The problem was that I was using simplified assumptions.  Some research showed that to correctly figure drag out requires at least two of Newton's laws, Bernoulli's equation, and some Euler math.  There is a book by a Boeing Engineer that give details on how to do the calcs correctly.  If you are interested I can find the title and ISBN number.

My work was done 1n 2006, 2007, and 2008.  There was not a lot of info on the i-net at that time.  There is now, and most of it is about wind generator propellers.  The truncated airfoil helps them, and being props there is an angle of attack involved.  The physics is real interesting 'cause the Reynolds number of a prop blade increases with distance out toward the blade tip.  This stuff is 10,000 rpm problems and my brain has a 5000 rpm redline.  I reach for a beer to put into the mental radiator before I figure anything out.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 30, 2020, 12:57:26 AM
This is the tufts test.  Note the attached flow on the front fairing, the detached flow on the tail, and the turbulence behind the rider. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqyDQ_5i9uo
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Lemming Motors on November 30, 2020, 06:48:00 AM
This stuff is 10,000 rpm problems and my brain has a 5000 rpm redline.  I reach for a beer to put into the mental radiator before I figure anything out.     
   :cheers:
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: gowing on November 30, 2020, 03:57:12 PM
Questions from a aero novice:
Looking at the tuft test video, turbulence behind the riders legs seems to be pretty extreme.
Would widening the bodywork behind the riders legs (filling the void) smooth out the turbulence?

I know that there are rules limiting the height of the bodywork to the top of the seat, but it also looks
like the riders butt is the source of a big low pressure area.
How would one address that area?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on November 30, 2020, 06:41:04 PM
The open area for the rider creates turbulence on the tail.  There is no way the tail can be designed to prevent all tuft fluttering.  At best, turbulence can be minimized and not eliminated.  The smoke and tuft tests were done when I was wearing baggy leathers.  Wrinkles at the knees and arse hung out into the breeze.  Hopefully that will not happen now.

The tail cannot be higher than 150 mm above the seat pan.  The area behind my back cannot be enclosed.

There were plates on the sides behind my knees.  There was nothing behind these plates except braces.  Now the voids are boxed in.  This should help to reduce turbulence.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 04, 2020, 12:16:42 AM
These are the layout drawings for the 2010 fairing and tail redesign.  This bike is short in length, tall, and wide.  It is not the ideal starting point for a land speed motorcycle, for sure.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 04, 2020, 02:04:23 AM
The NACA shape is shown.  It sort of resembles the bike below the nose.  Extra room is needed for the nose and it cannot extend forward beyond the front rim.   A rounded shape is chosen.  It allows air to flow off of the nose and directly back to the sides of the tail.  The trailing edges of the nose and windshield are parallel, or nearly parallel to the direction of travel, and this is needed.  Noses with more triangle shapes push air off to the sides and away from the tail.  This reduces the aerodynamic advantages of the tail.

The photo shows the bike from the front.  It was measured to determine the frontal area.  The picture was taken at a distance, enlarged, and cropped.  This reduces the parallax distortion as compared to a closeup shot. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 04, 2020, 11:20:36 PM
This is a side view.  The table is a crude way that I keep track of the aerodynamics on a year-by-year basis.  The rear wheel horsepower reading from the dyno is multiplied by 0.85 to get horsepower at Bonneville.  The rolling resistance loss horsepower is calculated for the speed on the timing slip.  It is subtracted from the rear wheel horsepower.  The remaining horsepower is assumed to be aero drag horsepower.  The formula at the bottom of the page is used to calculate the aero drag coefficient.  The "175281" multiplier is adjusted to account for the thinner air on the salt flats.

The lowest aero drag coefficient was in 2014.  That was when the tail with the higher hump was used and it is shown in the side view photo.  The regulations outlawed the high hump and it was trimmed down to the flat topped tail shown in the wind tunnel movies.  The high hump helped the aero a lot and most of my recent work is getting it back to where it was in 2014.   

As seen on the table, the last few years have been a struggle to get more speed.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 05, 2020, 10:28:18 PM
These next posts are about using the wind tunnel data.  The main reference is "The Racing Motorcycle" by John Bradley, Volume 1.  The first task is to calibrate the rolling resistance curve based on the wind tunnel drag coefficient.

Page 1)  The bike with me on it was weighed in 2017 and it was a hefty 755 pounds.  A diet and some shop work reduces this 57 pounds, to 698 pounds, total.  This weight and the tire pressure are put into a rolling resistance equation refined by Kevin Cooper in the early 1970's.  A 125cc Can-Am was used on the Bonneville Salt Flats to collect data.  The equations were originally developed by a fellow named Hoerner in the 1960's.  The Goldenrod streamliner used the original Hoerner work during its development.  Bradley discusses this and includes references to the older research papers.

Page 2)  The rolling resistances directly from the equations are listed.  Both are on pages 172 and 173 of Bradley's book.  These equations are what I used for the table in yesterday's post.  Experience has shown they are an overestimate of rolling loss.  The Triumph has a very efficient drive system and uses radial tires, rather than the bias ply ones used in the 1970's.  That might be the reason for the high calculated values.

A run was made in 2018 with streamlining similar to Run 2 on the wind tunnel spreadsheet, the "Baseline" run.  Scooter Grubb took a picture of it and I had my head up high just like in the wind tunnel photos.  The speed was 149.61 mph.  No big problems happened during that run so it will be used for curve calibration. 

The 2018 dyno horsepower is converted to atmospheric conditions during that run.  The aero drag for 150 on the spreadsheet is converted, too.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 05, 2020, 10:35:35 PM
Page 3 has the horsepower and drag correction factors.

Page 4 has the wind tunnel aero drag.  The tunnel data spreadsheet that was posted a few days ago has an EXCEL error in calculating drag and some other values.  This sheet shows the correct values.   There is a reason that I do hand calculations.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 05, 2020, 10:54:47 PM
Page 5)  The rolling resistance for the 2018 run is 16.2 horsepower.  The same calculated by Cooper's equation is 18.1 hp.  Dividing the two gives the correction factor.  The tire pressure or bike weight may change in the future.  If so, Cooper's original equation will still be used to calculate rolling resistance with the 0.895 conversion factor.  The factor will be reexamined after 2021 Speed Trials using the 2021 timeslip, dyno results, and bike weight with the tunnel Run 5 aero drag.

Page 6 shows the two rolling resistance drag curves.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 05, 2020, 11:17:30 PM
The safety inspector at World of Speed wants to know how fast I expect to go.  Also, there is the need to figure out the optimum sprocket combination.  Additionally, the tunnel data shows that there are issues I need to address if I go a lot faster than I am now.  The next step will be to figure out how fast I will go at the Speed Trials and World of Speed. 

Page 7)  The bike will be built to tunnel Run 5 configuration.  Spreadsheet Run 5 aero drag values are converted to typical Bonneville atmospheric conditions.  The rolling resistance is added to the aero drag to get the anticipated total drag.

Page 8 shows the conversion factor.  The tunnel uses the Motorsports Standard Atmosphere (MSA) and the dyno uses the Standard Day (STD).  They are not identical but similar.  Some of the newer SAE atmospheres are quite different than either.  Although I could have used a 0.820 factor throughout this work, it is good practice to be careful and to do all of the conversion factors.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 05, 2020, 11:26:31 PM
Page 9)  The graph.

Page 10)  The 2018 engine horsepower is used for a first estimate.  It looks like all of that weight loss and aero work is good for 4 mph more than 2018.  Unless some motor work is done...

Next will be a look at the tunnel data with a 165 mph target speed.  An aerodynamic expert on the forum has been discussing some of this with me and developed some graphs.  This is a big help.  I am not the brightest bulb on the X-mas tree, so any advice is welcome. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on December 06, 2020, 12:52:40 PM
Bo....very informative work your doing for us :-)

The side view in the wind-tunnel tuft video VERY STRONGLY shows that you should be able to lower your hand-grips by several INCHES......thereby lowering your head and reducing frontal area. The edge of the windscreen will likely need to be trimmed to fit your helmet.......remember to push the chin-bar upward to increase the view area. The hands foreward and lower will also move a slight amount of weight for improved frontend bias. Some fairing trim and detail will likely be the hardest work.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 08, 2020, 12:16:44 AM
Thanks, Dennis.  Next winter I will look at lowering the fairing top.  I am making a chin rest so I can keep the helmet viewport tilted up and my head down.

The wind speed is adjusted to 165 mph.  This is maybe 5 or 10 mph higher than the bike will go.  The side loads are shown on the spreadsheet.  Theoretically, there should be no side loads if the bike is perfectly symmetrical and I am centered while sitting on it.

The tunnel test and front view photo were taken before the alignment jig was developed.  The jig was shown four or five months ago on this build diary.  The bike was almost always out of alignment before the jig was used.  Note how it is tilted to one side in the photo.  This can cause side forces in the wind tunnel.

In the jig, both wheels are clamped between the channels and measured with a spirit level to make sure they are vertical.  All bolts holding the bike together are loosened.  A plumb bob is dropped down from the center of the steering head or a central location on the frame near the head.  The bike is twisted around in the jig, as needed, until the plumb bob is exactly halfway between the channels.  Then, the bolts are tightened up and the bike is in alignment.  This should eliminate or reduce side loads.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 09, 2020, 05:19:10 PM
The attached shows the X-14 Shoei helmet that I use in the wind tunnel.  Aerodynamic performance was part of its design objectives.  Note how the top of the airfoil at the back of the helmet is horizontal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjxGEvYQJBI
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 09, 2020, 06:10:03 PM
The top of my X-14 is not horizontal in the wind tunnel movies and my head was higher than optimal.  The duckbill at the back is sticking up and it is creating turbulence.  This tilt gets worse when my head position is low.  I should have foreseen this and brought a round helmet to the tunnel test for comparison.

This Cd comparison chart was made by Woody.  It was nice that he helped me with this.  The biggest drag coefficient differences are due to head position with lower the better.   Rider posture is important for drag measurements and it is impossible for me to sit on the bike exactly the same way during each test.  The measurements with taped leathers, the speed hump, the open tail, and the covered sidestand hole are very similar and a small change in my crouch could influence those results as much as anything.  Really, those tests should have used a dummy like in the Shoei movie rather than a smart guy like me.  The dummy would have a more consistent seating position.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 11, 2020, 01:55:15 AM
There is lift on the front end due to the air drag.  The attached table shows this.  The bike steered OK in 2018 with 46 percent lift.  That was when my head was in a higher position.  With it lower, the same lift occurs at around 165 mph speed.  The fairing is OK, liftwise, for the speeds the bike can go with a naturally aspirated engine.  The front end is almost off of the ground at speeds like 230 mph.  It would lift completely off the salt if I sat up in the seat at the end of the run.

What I learned from the tunnel test.  The bike shape is the most important thing and it is basically OK.  Finish is not important.  I was going to spend a lot of time making the surface smoother so the tunnel work saved me a lot of effort.  Riding posture is critical and the lower the better.  Lift will be an issue if I use forced induction or nitrous to get a lot more speed.  Side force may continue to be problem.  Another wind tunnel test is needed to verify the aero is OK before use of the blower or laughing gas.

In the early years I sat up at the end of the run and used air braking to slow down quickly.  Often that resulted in a massive speed wobble.  Trial and error told me to get below 100 mph before sitting up.  What I learned from the tunnel work is that, by sitting up, I was moving the center of pressure forward and upward.  This resulted in instability. 

The cost and inconvenience of the work was justified.  It gave a bit more speed an a lot more safety. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on December 13, 2020, 03:12:56 PM
We are running at similar speeds.......my best is 147+........I gently apply my 'air-brake' after a few seconds of slowly closing the throttle.....never a handling problem......but my forward weight bias is thought to be several points greater than yours.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 13, 2020, 08:38:19 PM
I sat up pretty quickly and rolled off the throttle fast.  That was when it happened.  These Triumphs can be horribly out of alignment unless it is checked and adjusted properly during assembly.  Alignment may or not have been a factor for all sorts of past handling problems.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 13, 2020, 11:52:29 PM
This is a special gas cap with a fitting on it to vent the tank.  The old cap did not let in the air fast enough to keep up with the fuel use.  The tank had vacuum in it after a long run down the salt.  The cap sticks up and safety regulations do not allow this.  A piece of foam was duck taped to the tank around the cap to make it flush.  This passed tech inspection but looked hokey.

This is a piece of a felt conveyor belt from the printing plant at a box factory where my father worked.  He brought it home when I was a little kid.  It has been waiting over sixty years for this glorious moment when it does something useful again.   

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 13, 2020, 11:57:29 PM
This is a foam pad made from three layers of closed cell foam laminated together with car roof liner cement.  Tomorrow it will go to the upolsterer to be covered with the skin from the blue nauga.  On top of the pad is a plate made from a repurposed old road sign.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 14, 2020, 12:06:54 AM
My father was apprenticed out to a boot and saddle maker during the depression.   He had all of these tools, cord, leather and other stuff.  The cord, brown leather, and copper rivets are from him.  The old belt was laying around the shop.  There are some gaps under the plate.  Tomorrow I will get out the hammers and fine tune the plate on the anvil.  Now the gas cap does not stick up.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on December 14, 2020, 01:20:07 AM
For those un-knewledgibles, especially from the East, who think Oregonians are too U of O Duck football oriented
Quote
duck taped
:

(https://images.salsify.com/image/upload/s--mqkGspz5--/h_1170,w_1170,q_60,cs_srgb/yrm3i6h41h4asogx4w54.jpg)

 :cheers: :friday

Mike
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 14, 2020, 02:53:26 PM
That tape works good.  It can be used to seal quacks and holes.

The fabric for the pad is the stuff on the data sheet.  It has fire and ultraviolet light resistance.  The upolsterer recommended it.  White seemed like a good color 'cause it will heat up less from being in the sun.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: donpearsall on December 14, 2020, 03:19:19 PM
It's a good thing that fabric is antimicrobial. We should all be wearing antimicrobial clothes.

Don
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 21, 2020, 01:33:47 PM
The seat pan is lowered so it is on top of the frame rails.  To go further down requires the frame rails to be chopped off and relocated, the battery and air filters to be moved, and the footpegs to be moved a few feet back so there is room for my legs.  This job takes a lot of work and time.  A new frame and streamlining are likely to be required.  The chances are, at my age the bike would be finished and I would be too old to ride it.

The next logical step is to verify that I am getting down as low as possible using the existing seat pan.  Maybe I need to redo the gas tank to make the top lower.  A reference point is established on the top of the handlebar mount.  A 2x4 is clamped to the front wheel and a level is clamped to the board.  Measurements are made vertically from the leveled level to the top of the handlebar mount.

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 21, 2020, 02:51:08 PM
Trial 1 had a 5.7 inch line-of-sight to clamp top vertical distance.  My chest hit the buckle on the tank strap.  This kept me from getting lower.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 21, 2020, 02:54:36 PM
The buckle was relocated for Trial 2.  The portion of the aluminum plate under the buckle and over the tank pad was removed.  The vertical distance was reduced about an inch.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 21, 2020, 03:01:29 PM
Now the tank is removed completely.  This is trial 3.  I could not get lower than in Trial 2.  The top of the helmet eye port blocked the view if I tried to get my head and chest further down.  There is no advantage to modifying or replacing the tank with a lower one.

Trial 2 was the best and I should be able to see out of the existing fairing with that seating position.  The fairing will not need further work.  The streamlining changes are done except for some mods to the front fender.   Now it is time to put the engine together. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: mc2032 on December 21, 2020, 04:23:37 PM
Bo, Jim Fisher of Grey Ghost fame offered me some sage advice, "Become paint".  That bit of wisdom really helped me at World Finals.  Granted, you don't want to be moving around too much on the bike at speed, but I could feel the pressure of the air and could adjust my position/tuck literally on the fly.  Forward vision is a good thing but realistically you are not looking forward all of the time. You can tuck your head down and see peripherally.  Also, your helmet will steer your head.  if you are going to tuck then lift to look, keep it in line with the bike.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: RansomT on December 21, 2020, 09:49:29 PM
Butt further back = head/shoulders lower.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 25, 2020, 11:32:53 AM
The tail was removed and I got on the bike, crouched down, and moved my arse back and forth along the frame top behind the tank.  The height of my line of sight did not change.  The top of the helmet eyeport was the controlling factor.  Years ago I tried that trick of crouching way down and looking at the signs as they passed by for orientation.  My balance went off and I almost crashed.  Talented folks can use that method, not me.  I need to look forward.  My helmet does not meet FIM approval so there is an opportunity to address the eyeport height issue.

The new FIM approved helmet list has few options in Size XL.  They are specialized race helmets and none are available off of the shelf in the U.S.  I need  to guess at the proper size and order the helmet from the UK.  The local shops cannot get them 'cause the distributors do not stock helmets that do not have DOT or Snell approval.  There are options in XL from manufacturers AGV, Arai, LS2, and Shark.  LS2 is Chinese and us Oregon folks have no experience with Shark.  We do know that AGV and Arai make good lids.  Arai is preferred by most racers here.

Helmet comparison tests say the AGV has a very good unobstructed view when crouched down.  They also say Arai is OK in this respect, too.  The Arai helmet is sold in the US as the Corsair.  It does not have FIM approval.  The plan is to go up to the shop in Portland that has lots of road race helmets and to try on the american versions of the AGV and Arai helmets, find the size that fits, and order the approved helmet from the UK in the correct size.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 25, 2020, 12:30:10 PM
The Shoei XL fits me and this is the same size as a XL in AGV.  This is what I ordered from Spain.  There will be some customs duty above and beyond the stated price.  Another problem is solved.

https://www.motocard.com/en/helmets/agv-pista_gp_rr_scuderia_carbon_white_red_002.aspx?country=US&currency=USD&gclid=Cj0KCQiAuJb_BRDJARIsAKkycUmqsX6drgqO3GNwrvZDzqTcH9QHJRLdr-8ZruTwL3O-VK11g221U-MaAvnPEALw_wcB
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 29, 2020, 11:00:17 AM
The Triumph exhaust system is two three step headers merging into a single collector with a low restriction muffler.  All are heavy gage 304 stainless steel.  Would this system also work for a light to moderately supercharged engine?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on December 29, 2020, 12:14:23 PM
My first question is why does it have a muffler... wouldn't it develop more power with a straight pipe or even a megaphone?
But yes, I think those header pipes would work supercharged... maybe even turbocharged if there is enough room at the collector area for a turbo.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on December 29, 2020, 01:22:55 PM
That is good news.  It took a long time with lots of wire and gas to make those pipes.  The headers, collectors and several end treatments like straight pipe, slash cut straight pipe, megga, and muffler were sized using Dynomation 5 and the designs were verified by PipeMax.  The muff put out 20 to 25% more power than anything else.  That is not a blanket endorsement for mufflers.  There are some special design features in the one I used.  That is typical of what I have experienced throughout my life.  A well done quiet box almost always works best.   If you want, I can give some details.

Turbos are intense and have that manic personality.  This is a staid and dignified British twin...  Actually, having a hot turbo 18 inches from my face with nothing in between but the gas tank is a sobering thought. 



Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 04, 2021, 11:06:12 PM
The AGV helmet arrived today.  It was ordered from Motocard in Catalonia (Spain).  They gave excellent service.  The model is Pista GP RR.  It is made from carbon fiber.  Helmet comparison reviews noted that it has an exceptionally high eye port.  Plus, it was made in Italy and not China.  It was ordered in white 'cause it is a proper color for old guys.

My old helmet is a Shoei X-Fourteen and it will be the basis of comparison.  The X-14 is Shoei's top of the line race helmet.  Some sizes are approved by the FIM, but not XL.  Shoei has no plans to get the XL approved based on a query to their technical advisers.  It is a plastic helmet.

Weight is 3 pounds 10 ounces for the AGV and 3 lbs 13 oz for the Shoei.  Just for fun, my Schuberth street helmet was weighed, too.  It weighs 4 lbs 3 oz.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 04, 2021, 11:18:06 PM
The picture shows the Schuberth.  It is very popular with the police and it is a typical street helmet. 

As for the AGV Pista GP RR, there are no stickers on the helmet or under the padding that say FIM approved.  The little tag on the chin strap has a tiny holographic FIM logo and a bar code.  Not all AGV helmets are FIM approved.  This one is.  It is also DOT and Euro ECE 2205 approved, so it can be used on the streets in the US and FIM, SCTA, and AMA events.  It is not Snell approved.

The X-Fourteen is DOT and Snell approved.  It does not have the Euro ECE or FIM approval.

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 04, 2021, 11:22:12 PM
The AGV helmet came with extra pads to adjust the fit.  The Shoei has an optional pad kit that can be ordered.  There are some instructions on how to fit the pads.  The "full racing" style applies to me, on and off the bike, and all 24 hours of the day.  That is the one I used.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 04, 2021, 11:35:58 PM
There were enough pads to make two additional layers around the entire helmet.  This is what I did:  one more layer on the top on the back and two more on the top in the front.  It was tempting to take the unused back half of layer 2 and make three layers on the front, but I figure the helmet is not designed for more than two, so l did not do that.  I also did this with the Shoei.  Pads were added.

Eyeport height was compared.  The level is at the lowest line of sight with the Shoei helmet.  The Pista has a lot higher eyeport.  The limiting factor is not the eyeport blocking the view, instead it is the upper limits of my eyeballs ability to rotate in my head.  The line of sight dropped down an inch lower than the Shoei and then the chinstrap of the helmet hit the tank strap.  The Pista has a definite advantage as per eyeport height.  This means less drag and more speed.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Old Scrambler on January 05, 2021, 05:52:54 PM
Now you can 'see it'

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 13, 2021, 11:52:54 AM
Hi Dennis.  Hopefully the bike will see somewhere north of 150 mph at BMST.

This build diary shows basic things.  The crank journals are polished and checked for out of roundness and diameters.  They are within tolerances.  The cases are bolted together without the main bearing shells and the housings are checked for out of roundness and diameters.  They are OK.

The main bearing shells are installed with the crank in place.  The bolts holding the cases together are tightened in stages according to the manual.  As per the manual, all are tightened to 10Nm preload.  This following step is not in the manual.  Check and verify that all are tightened to 10Nm after their neighbors are tightened.  This takes an extra circuit or two around the engine to make sure they are all preloaded.  Tighten the big bolts around  the main bearings as per the manual.  This following step is not in the manual.  Check that all remaining bolts are tightened to 32Nm.  Make an extra circuit or two around the engine to make sure all are tightened to 32 Nm after their neighbors are tightened.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 13, 2021, 12:12:05 PM
There are torx heads on the large bolts as supplied by Triumph.  They tend to strip out.  Hex heads are welded onto these case bolts so that will not happen.  The bolts can be annealed from the welding heat if this operation is not done carefully.  I use the zap-n-quench method.  The bolt is zapped with the welder to make a nice deep tack.   Then the bolt is quickly and partially quenched.  The bolt is pulled out of the water quickly so residual water is boiled off of the bolt by the remaining heat.  The bolt is left to cool and then another tack is made.  This is repeated until the head is completely welded on.

The cases are split according to the procedure in the manual.  The bearing shells will be marked.  This is the pressure mark on the back of a main bearing shell.  The pressure mark should go completely around the back of the shell.  This shows that it is making full contact.  Otherwise, oil pressure will be lost through the gap between the housing and the shell.

Triumph has screwed up the journal machining on some crankcases and the engines have failed from lack of oil pressure.  This check will show if this is a problem.         
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 13, 2021, 12:27:17 PM
The housings and shells are wiped clean of oil and other contaminants after the back side marks are checked and any problems are rectified.  The shells are reinstalled and pushed down to make sure they are seated.  The ends need to stick up above the edges of the case on both ends.  A metal block is used to verify this.

A metal block is laid across the top of the shell.  The clearances between the block and the case are measured with a feeler gauge.  This is done at the forward and rearward ends of the shell.  These values are added to get the total projection distance.  This projection is essential to put crush on the shells when the cases are tightened.  The shells can spin in the housings if there is little or no crush.  The housings are within tolerance on this engine.  Insufficient projection would indicate a shell is defective.



Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 13, 2021, 12:35:33 PM
Another way to check projection is with a gauge block and a depth micrometer.  The gauge block is placed on the case.  Depth measurements are made to the tip of the shell.  The thickness of the gauge block - the depth measurement to shell tip = the projection.  That is what I did with this engine.

Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 13, 2021, 12:49:45 PM
The thickness of each shell is measured using a tubing micrometer.  Measurements are made on both sides of the shell in the front, middle, and on the back.  The end measurement are on a tapered section.  No end measurement should be higher than the middle measurement.

This hand written table lists the measurements.  The projections on three of the shells are within the range I would expect based on experience.  One shell has too much projection.  That shell is also 0.001 too thick.

The crank makes marks on the shells, too, when the cases are tightened during the initial step.  These marks are checked and compared.  Any abnormal marks indicate a defective shell or possibly poor installation.  That shell that was too thick had a larger contact mark than its neighbors.  That verified the shell is defective.

The lower shells will be checked in the next posts.   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 14, 2021, 12:24:01 PM
The bike has main bearing housings with small diameters within the manufacturing tolerance range.  The crank is near to the maximum allowed diameter.  The thinnest white coded shells are used.  It is likely the oversize shell is a green or blue shell for a larger diameter crankcase bore.  Some idiot put a white paint code mark on it and put it in a bag labeled for a white coded bearing.
The big shell caused part of the main bearing housing to break off at the edge when the cases were assembled.  This is what I did and my mistake is in bold type.

White shells worked in this bike in the past so I ordered a new set, put them in, laid the crank over them, laid some plastigage on the journals, placed the other case on top, and tightened all of the bolts.  The goal was to split the cases, look at the plastigage, and look at the compression marks on the back sides of all shells.  I ASSUMED all shells were correctly sized white shells and any shell thickness adjustments would be made after looking at the plastigage.

That step when the shell thicknesses and projections are measured should be done first and before the cases are tightened down for the plastigage measurements.     
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 20, 2021, 01:51:24 AM
The shop compressor died a few days ago.  It was an old Sears Craftsman 3 gallon tank with 1.5 horsepower model.  This is what I wanted in a new compressor:  a three to five gallon tank with 1.5 hp motor, minimum, oil bath pump lubrication, a continuous duty cycle, something I could get parts for, and not to be made in Red China.  That last requirement severly reduced the selection.

What I got is a Rolair VT20ST.  It is a 4.2 gallon 2 hp compressor made in Nationalist China.  The thing is quiet for a compressor and it has a low 13.5 amp current draw.  In all ways it is better than the old Craftsman.

That old Craftsman was lugged to Bonneville every year.  That was a bit of work 'cause I sleep in the back of the pickup while on the road and the compressor needed to be taken out and reloaded constantly.  This little guy is what will go to the salt flats in the future.  It is a 1 gallon Senco with a 1/2 hp motor.  It weighs 21 pounds and it is easier to lift and move.  It is also made in Nationalist China.  Both of these models might be good items to consider if you need a new compressor.       
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: manta22 on January 20, 2021, 10:39:59 AM
WW,

Where did you find them?
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 20, 2021, 12:54:17 PM
These guys... https://eaglefastenersplus.com/1/
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on January 22, 2021, 11:51:36 PM
These pictures from a 2021 test at Jerez Spain show the latest in aerodynamic aids.  Note the wings and other contraptions to make downforce and the brake rotor covers.
https://www.motogp.com/en/gallery/2021/01/22/motogp-stars-return-to-action-in-jerez/360426
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 09, 2021, 11:58:24 AM
The engine is done.  The standard 7,300 rev limit was used for a few years until all problems with it were fixed.  The gudgeon pin seizing in the rod small end and cracked pistons were the main issues.  An 8,000 rpm redline was tried after those problems were fixed.  Rod big end shell life was an issue.  Attempts were made to fix that problem with no success.  Annual replacement was the solution.  The redline was raised to 9,000 rpm.  The bolts holding the crankcases together loosened.  A crank with a different firing order was used, the counterbalancers were removed, upgraded case bolts were installed, and the case bolt tightening procedure was revised.  This cured the loosening problem.  The new crank partially cured the rod big end bearing problem.  The redline will be is raised to either 9,500 or 10,000 rpm this year.  It depends on the peak power rpm.  New rods with stronger bolts and caps and polished crank journals are the reliability upgrade changes.  Kibblewhite redid the valve spring setup for the higher rpm.  It took fourteen years to get to this point.  Cranking compression with dry bore was 165 psi on both sides.  It was 210 psi on both with some auto trans fluid lubricating the cylinder walls.

An endemic problem with the federal government, regardless of the party in power, is spending too much money that they do not have.  Those clowns have no ability to live within a budget.  This is especially true of the bunch that is in power now.  My fear is big tax increase or a currency devaluation, or both.  It cannot be avoided.  This is a concern for this  guy who is living on a fixed income.  It will devistate me financially.  The decision is to not build the bike any further with superchargers and other fun stuff.  The goal is simply to race what I have while I can still afford to do it.         

   
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stan Back on February 09, 2021, 01:21:54 PM
I'm glad you recognized that turning more RPM doesn't always make more power.  It's hell to turn nine grand while slowing down and blowing up.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 09, 2021, 01:55:21 PM
The last dyno run was in 2018.  The power was climbing and then the bike hit the rev limiter at 9,000 before the curve flattened out.  The motor has potential for more power with a higher rev limit.  The crank was magnafluxed, balanced, and the oil passages reworked.  The expert who did this said the crank is in good shape for more rpm.  The folks at Arias who made the pistons said they will handle the rpm.  The new rods should be adequate according to Carillo.  These expert opinions along with Kibblewhite's work make a big difference.  I did not trust my own judgement.

A conversation with another tuner revealed that the plastic oil pump gears explode at over 9,000 rpm.  The last new pair for sale was bought and it is in the engine.  I still do not fully trust that thing.  Personal protection is needed.  A titanium jock strap will be the next purchase. 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Stainless1 on February 09, 2021, 04:22:31 PM
Bo, you know what I say... if 9K is good 10 K is better... rev it till the valves float and then set the limiter below that  :roll:
And most of us here are just old guys living on a fixed income... 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: mc2032 on February 09, 2021, 05:43:21 PM
It was cheaper/easier to just clip off the little pin-stop thingie at 8k on the tach and move the red tape rev limit.  Instant increase in performance.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: wobblywalrus on February 10, 2021, 10:51:29 AM
There is no tachometer.  A 1000cc parallel twin with heavy forged pistons and a lightweight crank does not need one.  The vibration and noise tell me the revs per minute.

This is the new Ducati GP bike.  It has lots of little aero features that are unusual.

https://www.motogp.com/en/gallery/2021/02/09/photo-gallery-ducati-lenovo-team-show-off-new-2021-livery/360895 

 
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: Seldom Seen Slim on February 11, 2021, 08:05:54 AM
Bo, go easy on political statements, please.  It's borderline... and Beef Stew's post has been removed.  That much political yammering isn't tolerated on landracing.com.
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: thefrenchowl on February 11, 2021, 09:17:23 AM
Quote
wobblywalrus: This is the new Ducati GP bike.  It has lots of little aero features that are unusual.

Don't know if it is an aerodynamic improvement drive or just the need to find more room for sponsors' stickers???

Bikes and riders are certainly really getting uglier by the day...

Completely lost interest in that circus a long time ago.

Patrick
Title: Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
Post by: 4-barrel Mike on September 13, 2021, 12:38:21 AM
Bo, go easy on political statements, please.  It's borderline... and Beef Stew's post has been removed.  That much political yammering isn't tolerated on landracing.com.

Anyone heard from Bo?  He hasn't logged on since SSS's post.

Come back, Bo!  America NEEDS backwoods Oregon.

Mike