Author Topic: Turbo Versus Roots Net Horsepower  (Read 34453 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jl222

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2963
Re: Turbo Versus Roots Net Horsepower
« Reply #30 on: April 18, 2012, 02:01:36 PM »
In the interest of accuracy I'm challenging Jl222's claim re: WW II engine designers  preferring centrifugals to turbos'

I'll cite ONE case : the Wright Cyclone 3350s powering the B-29

Each of these four engined bombers had TWO turbochargers per engine. (General Electric built).

Couldn't find how many Wright (Curtiss- Wright) built, but DODGE  built 18,000+ of them (which were better engineered that the Wright version).

Oh yeah, and then there was the preceding  B-17. And a BIG,FAST fighter plane called the THUNDERBOLT that had it's turbo back behind and under the pilot with a huge duct running forward to the motor.

As I recall the B-17 and the P-47 had one turbocharger each.

There were probably others with turbos, DONTCHA THINK?
 

   '' In the interest of accuracy'' you left out ''because of thrust hp'' when quoting my statement. You do want to be accurate  DONTCHA THINK?

    
  I guess I should have said '' certain'' engine designers preferred centrifugals over turbo's because of thrust hp.

  I'm well aware of tubo's in WW11, one contractor I did subcontracting for decided to become a B-17 pilot after watching
  It's turbos spin for 20 min or more after shutdown :-o  He said anything built that good was for him.

  During the war he limped home over the Alps? on just 1 engine and dropping the lower gun turrett to lose weight.

  My favorite engine is the wright R 3350 turbo compound engine with main rear mounted centrifugal blowing into 3 turbos
which are geared back to the crank shaft.

  We still have'nt done some of the supercharging that they did 65-70 yrs ago.

     JL222

  
« Last Edit: April 18, 2012, 02:22:49 PM by jl222 »

Offline wheelrdealer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1255
  • D/CBGALT
    • WHEELRDEALER RACING
Re: Turbo Versus Roots Net Horsepower
« Reply #31 on: April 18, 2012, 02:26:20 PM »
Mike, you are correct, but for the sound and nastalgia of the blower.
ECTA    Maxton D/CGALT  Record Holder 167.522
ECTA    Maxton D/CBGALT Record Holder 166.715

WWW.WHEELRDEALER2100.COM

Offline Cajun Kid

  • Rajun Cajun Racing E/CGALT 5690
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3189
  • Venable Rod's & Racing #805 Studebaker, #806 Ford
Re: Turbo Versus Roots Net Horsepower
« Reply #32 on: April 18, 2012, 02:43:33 PM »
Bill,

You are starting to sound like me "old school is cool"

I catch a lot of heat for not using "a power adder" to make certain I get 200MPH..
(but I am sticking to my guns to do it with a  N/A single carb on gas small block)

It is your car, do what you like, go fast , have fun and be safe...

but after my research, I agree with Matt and Mike,,, the "right turbo" is the way to go if you are going the "power adder" route..

Talk to you soon,

Charles
ECTA Record Holder Maxton
E/CBFALT, E/CBGALT, E/CGALT, E/CFALT, A/CGALT, C/CGALT, D/CGALT, C/CBGALT, B/CBGALT, C/CFALT
OHIO
B/CGALT, C/CGALT

LTA Record Holder and 200 Club Member
A/CBFALT, B/CBFALT, C/CBFALT, C/CFALT, C/CGALT,   E/CGALT, E/CFALT

Fastest Standing Mile at Ohio  203.343mph
Fastest Standing Mile at Maxton 196.967mph
Fastest Standing 1.5 Mile at Loring 213.624mph
Fastest Standing Mile at Loring 204.109mph

http://s261.photobucket.com/albums/ii43/cajunkid5690/

Blog    www.venablerodsandracing.com
email   venableracing@gmail.com

Offline wheelrdealer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1255
  • D/CBGALT
    • WHEELRDEALER RACING
Re: Turbo Versus Roots Net Horsepower
« Reply #33 on: April 18, 2012, 03:13:34 PM »
Charles:
I love old school, but you are right.

Have a safe and fast trip to the new ECTA mile. I wish I was going.

Bill
ECTA    Maxton D/CGALT  Record Holder 167.522
ECTA    Maxton D/CBGALT Record Holder 166.715

WWW.WHEELRDEALER2100.COM

Offline 38flattie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2169
    • http://www.flatcadracing.org/
Re: Turbo Versus Roots Net Horsepower
« Reply #34 on: April 18, 2012, 09:25:31 PM »
  My adiabatic efficiency charts for a 70 deg day and 14lbs boost show  45% efficient  315 deg  roots type
                                                                                                 65%              240 deg 
                                                                                                                           turbo or centrifugal
                                                                                                 75%              217 deg

  Cooler air allows for denser air [or more of it] and if it is cooled by an intercooler or water injection the air shrinks even more so you end up with more molecules to compress ignite and expand.

  This is why roots blowers on gas don't go any faster at Bville than the unblown guys. [non vintage anyhow]

   In 1991 or 92 [222 Camaro] we had an exit speed of 275 mph with 12 lbs of boost [Bville news thought I was lying and terminated the interview] :roll: We had set the record at 229 + at El Mirage and upped the gearing to 1.85 from 2.39  the rpm was only about 6200. We finally figured out the blowers had to be geared up also.

  In 2010 we had a time of 294 mph in the 1st mile boost temps at 14 lbs was 104 deg and 132 deg at 24 lbs

  We run a 55 gal min water pump for intercooler ice water and we also inject water.
 
   And the main thing; a 139 Procharger centrifugal blower that enable us to make 2300+ rear wheel hp.

   One reason WW11 aircraft engine designers used centrifugals over turbos was of the thrust hp.

   Also centrifugals don't sound like bloodless cyefers :-D


                     JL222


JL222, Thanks for the info! This is exactly the sort of thing I was looking for!


[/quote]

38flattie- 1st off good luck with your project.
1 thing you need to understand is that all boost pressure is NOT equal. You can make 100 hp or 1500 hp at 14.2 psi.
 If you are shooting for a particular hp # so as not to over strain your engine you need to pick a turbo that will get you there in the most efficient manner and then comes the hard part( don't turn it up as there will be a whole lot more power there just waiting and tempting you) You need to deal with a specialist when deciding on a turbo for your set up as they can be tailored to do just about anything you like but if you deal with the wrong person they can make your car an under performing not fun to drive pile.
The rite turbo will make more power and be easier on your engine at the same time.

P.S.-I thought this was SPEED week not a car show.
Do you want to go fast, or look cool ( a blowwer sticking through the hood= cool, not so good for aero though.
                         Mike Reichen
[/quote]

Mike, please explain "all boost pressure is NOT equal". Other than the parasitic drag, what is the difference? It seems to me, that 14.2 psi at a set temp, in a 366CID engine, would always be the same. Can you please expound on this?

As for looking cool, or going fast-well, we hope to do both! Yes, I realize that a procharger, tucked neatly under the hood, would be a way better option for all out speed.

I wanted a vintage car, that looked vintage, and that's what I have. If you've read my build thread though, then you know we are new to Bonneville, and just getting our feet wet. In the thread, we've discussed better aero options, blower options, etc. After we run this year, we'll go back to the dyno this winter, with changes. We'll then decide, based on this years performance, and the new dyno numbers, on running this car again, or partnering up to get the engine in another car.

You might say it's a work in progress! :-D
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead. -- RFC 1925

You can't make a race horse out of a pig. But if you work hard enough at it you can make a mighty fast pig. - Bob Akin

http://www.flatcadracing.org/
http://youtu.be/89rVb497_4c

Offline Dynoroom

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2192
Re: Turbo Versus Roots Net Horsepower
« Reply #35 on: April 18, 2012, 09:43:13 PM »
So, if you had a t-3 & TV-91 turbo both making 14.2 psi boost would they be flowing the same amount of air? Think mass flow...

Or how about something easier to show Drury, not picking on you Bob just an example. You have a 4-71 & a 14-71 both making 14.2 psi of boost. Why does the bigger blower make more power? It should have more drag to rotate? Maybe it's not all about boost pressure? Huummm.......   :-D


Michael LeFevers
Kugel and LeFevers Pontiac Firebird

Without Data You're Just Another Guy With An Opinion!

Racing is just a series of "Problem Solving" events that allow you to spend money & make noise...

Offline 38flattie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2169
    • http://www.flatcadracing.org/
Re: Turbo Versus Roots Net Horsepower
« Reply #36 on: April 18, 2012, 09:45:47 PM »
Duh-now the bulbs lit!

Thanks Mike!
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead. -- RFC 1925

You can't make a race horse out of a pig. But if you work hard enough at it you can make a mighty fast pig. - Bob Akin

http://www.flatcadracing.org/
http://youtu.be/89rVb497_4c

Offline 38flattie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2169
    • http://www.flatcadracing.org/
Re: Turbo Versus Roots Net Horsepower
« Reply #37 on: April 18, 2012, 10:46:19 PM »
Quote
This makes me think I can gain HP, without adding stress from higher boost, or higher RPM's.

It all depends on the thermal efficiency of the blower/turbo, ie how much of the work input to the supercharger gets turned into useful manifold pressure.

The problem is not all manufactures are willing to give you useful information regarding the thermal efficiency of their blower/supercharger.

If you look on a turbocharge compressor map it shows you the thermal efficiency at certain pressure ratios and flow rates.

http://www.automotivearticles.com/uploads/flow_map.jpg

As you can see in the above (for this particular turbo) there is a sweet spot in the map ranging from a pressure ratio of 1.5 - 2.0 and flow rates from 15 - 22 pounds of air per minute flow rate where the turbo is operating at its maximum thermal efficiency of about 73%. If you can size the turbo to operate near its sweet spot at your design boost pressure and the cfm air flow demand of your engine at that rpm it will usually give you more boost for the cost in power it takes to drive the turbo (or centrifugal blower) than a roots blower.

http://www.automotivearticles.com/Turbo_Selection.shtml

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roots-type_supercharger
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Roots_Supercharger_efficiency_map.jpg

Roots blowers at high boost typically only manage about 50% - 60% thermal efficiency where a centrifugal/turbo can if properly sized hit thermal efficiencies of about 70%. You have to simply work through the numbers for your particular combination to determine which combination will give you the best total cylinder pressure.

In the two compressor maps above the roots will deliver air at a pressure ratio of 2:1 but only at a thermal efficiency of 58% where if sized properly the turbo map shows you could get the same pressure ratio of 2:1 at about 73% thermal efficiency for the right sized engine/turbo combination.

Due to how internal combustion engines work not all pressure is useful. Horsepower goes up almost in direct proportion to absolute manifold pressure if the air temperature is held constant. Unfortunately power varies at one over the square root of the absolute temperature. (cooler temps give more power)

Some of the boost pressure in a real compressor is due to heating of the air charge by the work of compressing the air, so bottom line the blower/turbo/centrifugal supercharger that delivers the coolest air at the boost pressure you need at the flow rate you need will be doing the least wasted work heating the air charge and will use the least power.

You can recover part of that power by force cooling the air charge with a heat exchanger but you are still losing the excess power wasted heating the air, and you are losing boost pressure as the air cools so your initial boost pressure has to be higher to compensate for this cooling pressure loss. Intercoolers also cause their own pressure loss due to their inlet restriction to the flow. The final manifold pressure you see in the engine will always be lower than the actual outlet air pressure from the supercharger before intercooling.

Look for the setup that will deliver the coolest air charge at the blower discharge for the boost and flow rate you need.

http://www.stealth316.com/0-frames.htm
http://www.stealth316.com/2-adiabat1.htm

Larry

Larry, I finally had time to go to all the links. That info is invaluable-Thank you! :cheers:
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead. -- RFC 1925

You can't make a race horse out of a pig. But if you work hard enough at it you can make a mighty fast pig. - Bob Akin

http://www.flatcadracing.org/
http://youtu.be/89rVb497_4c

Offline Interested Observer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 433
Re: Turbo Versus Roots Net Horsepower
« Reply #38 on: April 18, 2012, 10:53:48 PM »
If an engine inlet plenum is at a particular air pressure and temperature, how that pressure and temperature came to be is of no concern to the engine.  The engine would produce the same power output regardless of how the inlet conditions were created.  Since the air consumption rate is controlled by the engine (at the given conditions), not the blower, a large blower would have to be turning slower than a small one to provide the same inlet conditions.  For an engine-driven blower, any net power improvement provided by a larger blower would likely be due to decreased running friction and possibly improved efficiency at the slower driven speed.

A “bigger blower makes more power” because it probably is creating more boost.

Offline hotrod

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
    • Black Horse photo
Re: Turbo Versus Roots Net Horsepower
« Reply #39 on: April 18, 2012, 11:03:09 PM »
Quote
Mike, please explain "all boost pressure is NOT equal". Other than the parasitic drag, what is the difference? It seems to me, that 14.2 psi at a set temp, in a 366CID engine, would always be the same. Can you please expound on this?

Turbos are interesting critters. Lets suppose you have two turbos. Your engine needs 600 cfm of air flow at 14.7 psi. One turbo has its sweet spot at 450 cfm at that boost pressure and the other has a sweet spot of 600 cfm at 14.7 psi.

The first might deliver 600 cfm of air at 14.7 psi but its discharge temp is 250 deg F, the second delivers the same 600 cfm at 14.7 psi but its discharge temp is 150 deg F.  That difference in discharge temp is wasted power that came from the exhaust flow of the engine.

The turbo that has the 250 deg F discharge temp might have an exhaust back pressure of 1.8x boost pressure so it is fighting an exhaust pressure of 26.46 psi when the cam is in overlap as it is trying to stuff air in the cylinder at 14.7 psi. Needless to say the exhaust burps back into the cylinder until the exhaust valve is closed contaminating the intake charge. This is why most turbo engines have different cam timing than the same engine with no blower or a mechanical blower, often a rapid closing of the exhaust valves and little overlap.

The properly sized turbocharge might only have an exhaust back pressure of 1.2x boost pressure, putting exhaust pressure at 17.64 psi. This means less blow back into the cylinder as the exhaust valve closes and the engine has to do less work pushing the exhaust out of the cylinder against the turbo back pressure in the exhaust system.

Not only that, if your run both turbos through an ice over water intercooler tank, the very hot turbocharger will lose more pressure due to cooling of the hot air charge, so it will really have to do the work to make perhaps 17 psi at the discharge outlet to actually deliver 14.7 psi at the intake manifold, where the properly sized turbocharger might only need to make 15.2 psi to overcome intercooler losses and still deliver 14.7 psi at the intake manifold.

(these are all just wild guess numbers but illustrate the trade offs you must make as you size the turbocharger.)

Your real power gain is due to the total increase in useful mixture in the cylinder when the valves close, and how much power you can make burning it, minus the power you will use up getting the mixture in there.

In a belt or crank driven blower the energy cost is directly from the crank power output. In a turbo there are still power losses but they are hidden in things like exhaust gas back pressure and the work the engine needs to do pushing the exhaust gases out against that back pressure, and the need to use a short overlap cam to keep from getting excessive exhaust gas contamination in the cylinder due to high pressure exhaust gas back flowing into the cylinder before the exhaust valve closes.

In a mechanical blower you can throw away mixture with over lap and get great scavanging so all the mixture in the cylinder is uncontaminated. In the turbo not always true, although a turbocharger with a huge hotside might have very low backpressure but the trade off is it spools slowly and may be lazy to come on boost. A smaller hotside that spools fast might come into boost violently when the engine comes under load.

In the real world you need to find a middle ground between those extremes. Fast enough spool so you have good and predictable throttle response, but low enough exhaust gas back pressure that you don't throw away too much of your power overcoming that restriction.

That is where the art of turbocharger setup is. Picking the right turbo size and compressor trim to get the right airflow and boost pressure with good throttle response, and a hot side sized to give reasonable spool up and low back pressure.

Then you throw in a few tuning tricks to manage boost by juggling fuel mixtures and ignition timing to bring on boost or soften boost onset at critical rpm ranges then keep all those balls in the air so everything works together in harmony.

Larry
« Last Edit: April 18, 2012, 11:06:09 PM by hotrod »

Offline 38flattie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2169
    • http://www.flatcadracing.org/
Re: Turbo Versus Roots Net Horsepower
« Reply #40 on: April 18, 2012, 11:15:28 PM »
Larry, that explanation really helped clarify things-thank you.

I've been on Garrett's site crunching numbers, and I plan on calling them.

One thing that you pointed out, was a smaller overlap on turbo engines. My chambers are based on the old Harley KR chambers, and like the KR's, I have a fair amount of overlap-270@.050. It seems to have worked pretty good with the roots, and I had hoped the long overlap would allow some escaping fuel/air to cool the exhaust ports.

I've got another cam blank, that I was going to have Dema Elgin grind. I assume that the turbo grind will have considerably less overlap than the 270?
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead. -- RFC 1925

You can't make a race horse out of a pig. But if you work hard enough at it you can make a mighty fast pig. - Bob Akin

http://www.flatcadracing.org/
http://youtu.be/89rVb497_4c

Offline Interested Observer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 433
Re: Turbo Versus Roots Net Horsepower
« Reply #41 on: April 18, 2012, 11:25:31 PM »
Ref.  Reply #13  -- “...you are losing boost pressure as the air cools so your initial boost pressure has to be higher to compensate for this cooling pressure loss.”

Hotrod,
Certainly there are pressure losses due to friction going through piping and the intercooler, but you may want to reconsider this statement. 

The cooled air is denser, but that doesn’t mean there is a pressure loss.

Offline Dynoroom

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2192
Re: Turbo Versus Roots Net Horsepower
« Reply #42 on: April 19, 2012, 12:43:12 AM »
If an engine inlet plenum is at a particular air pressure and temperature, how that pressure and temperature came to be is of no concern to the engine.  The engine would produce the same power output regardless of how the inlet conditions were created.  Since the air consumption rate is controlled by the engine (at the given conditions), not the blower, a large blower would have to be turning slower than a small one to provide the same inlet conditions.  For an engine-driven blower, any net power improvement provided by a larger blower would likely be due to decreased running friction and possibly improved efficiency at the slower driven speed.

A “bigger blower makes more power” because it probably is creating more boost.


But the statment clearly say's boost pressure was the same. Maybe we should have said the pressure ratio was the same, but the mass flow in lbs/min. were not...   :-)

Or are you saying that Alan Johnson could use a 4-71 on his top fuel cars to save a few bucks? I mean surly a 4-71 could make 40+ lbs of boost.....  :-o

I don't feel we need to get into adiabatic efficiency of compressors or the differences in positive displacment blowers to get the "basic" concept across for the conversation.  :cheers:
Michael LeFevers
Kugel and LeFevers Pontiac Firebird

Without Data You're Just Another Guy With An Opinion!

Racing is just a series of "Problem Solving" events that allow you to spend money & make noise...

Offline hotrod

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
    • Black Horse photo
Re: Turbo Versus Roots Net Horsepower
« Reply #43 on: April 19, 2012, 01:48:43 AM »
Quote
The cooled air is denser, but that doesn’t mean there is a pressure loss.

Unless you violate one of the most fundamental gas laws once equilibrium flow is established (flow in equals flow out) there MUST be a pressure loss if you reduce discharge temperature.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_gas_law

A turbocharger is a "volume device" it moves a certain volume of gas based on its inlet density and increases its pressure and temperature at the outlet at the expense of volume.
At a given rotor rpm and inlet density the mass flow is fixed, therefore any change in temperature causes an equal change in pressure. Double the absolute temperature of the discharge and the pressure doubles, cut the absolute temperature of the discharge by 10% and the pressure will drop 10%. It is basic physics.

The turbo compressor only sees the inlet air density and flow rate, and at a given compressor rpm the outlet flow rate will always be exactly the same only the pressure and temperature changes. It is no different than a fuel pump. If you are taking in 10 gallons per minute on the inlet side you must push 10 gallons a minute out the outlet.

What typically happens is the inlet air pressure is 14.7 psi, you spin the turbo compressor at the necessary rpm to create a pressure rise  (pressure ratio) of 2:1 so your outlet pressure will be 29.4 psi but your outlet temperature will be hundreds of degrees hotter than the inlet air temp. The mass flow out will be the same as the mass flow in, so you have a fixed supply of air at the specified inlet pressure and compressor rpm. That means that as the compressed air passes through the inter cooler you get two different pressure losses. A dynamic pressure loss due to friction, and a thermodynamic pressure loss due to the cooling of the air flow. The mass flow is the same but the volume has now dropped due to the cooling and along with it so has the pressure so that the perfect gas law is satisfied, that law says that the product of the volume and pressure must equal a constant times the temperature.

PV=nRT

the nR values are constants n being equal to the amount of gas flowing through the system, in this case the flow rate measured in any appropriate units such as mass or moles or standard cubic ft/sec, and R is the universal gas constant that is specific to the gas being compressed.

The only way to avoid a pressure loss during cooling is to increase mass flow at the same rate you lose pressure due to cooling. You can't do that because the flow through the compressor for a given pressure ratio and compressor rpm is fixed, the only other option is to jack up the initial pressure in front of the intercooler at the turbo discharge so that after the pressure drop due to cooling you are back to your intended manifold pressure.

That means that for a 14.7 psi boost in the intake manifold and a 2.5 psi pressure drop in the intercooler the turbo must actually deliver air at 17.2 psi at its discharge port. You can't get something for nothing, as you cool the air its density increases but its pressure drops exactly the same amount.

Larry


« Last Edit: April 19, 2012, 01:52:01 AM by hotrod »

Offline wheelrdealer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1255
  • D/CBGALT
    • WHEELRDEALER RACING
Re: Turbo Versus Roots Net Horsepower
« Reply #44 on: April 19, 2012, 08:39:25 AM »
Larry,

Great explanation...even I can understand it. Going back to your explanation of the hot side size or efficiency and whether the boost comes on slowly or violently. In an LSR application, considering the lack of traction and distance run, I would guess that boost coming on slower, i.e. a larger hot side would be a better LSR application versus a set up ment for 1/4 mile.

Bill
ECTA    Maxton D/CGALT  Record Holder 167.522
ECTA    Maxton D/CBGALT Record Holder 166.715

WWW.WHEELRDEALER2100.COM