When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Heres zbrowns setup. Has inlet and outlet temps. Pull to 160. This is a cheapie china A2W with good plumbing rule 2k pumping over 20gpm. I believe the video is with no ice. 1000+hp easy. Blue gauge is IC in and out temps.
Perfect would be taking the heated air down to the water temperature, but thats not going to happen. Intercoolers are generally rated in their ability to remove the added heat, so if your ambient water is 50F and compressor out air is 200F, if your cooler can take it down to 100F it is (200-100)/(200-50)*100=67% efficient. Higher is better. 90% is awesome, and 50% is garbage.
I work on big building cooling systems, some with Water to air some air to air some refrigerant to air. Efficiency in any of them is all about lbs of flow on both sides of the exchange.
Things that just happen occasionally:
- Tubes are made too small. The supplier uses wrong spec tub and from the outside you cant tell always.
- Water alone is not the best coolant, at minimum you should use a wetting agent in the liquid, hard to do with ice in the equation though. Ive seen systems with the wrong coolant ratios lose 20 or 30 percent in transfer due to aging of the coolant.
- If you have too much pressure drop on the liquid side the water will cavitate and its ability to carry energy will tank to almost nothing. Same if there is too much back pressure against the pump, the pump cavitate and will fill the system full of bubbles and again trash the exchange capability.
- Bad alloy (Wrong tubes again) on the exchanger can cause it to have too much thermal resistance and it just doesn't exchange heat well.
For comparison,,
You can cool a 800HP+ sprint engines on methanol with a 2'x2'x2" thick radiator with one 2" hose to the pump and 4 5/8 hoses from the heads..
Just thoughts.. no purpose...
BTW there are these little gadgets that are put in piping in building ac water loops called "Petes Ports" they allow you to stab a thermometer or pressure gauge in to the line to take readings.. Might be handy on this kind of a deal..
It's not it's of little concern...BUT...The issue here is that when running 20lbs of ice and near freezing water through a $3,000 all in intercooler combo, it's not unreasonable to think it ought to be able to take 100* inlet temps, keep them at bay on wastegate boost levels on a combo that MIGHT make 700hp at that level. Not every single car has the ability to have the inlet of the turbo forward facing sucking in 40* ambient ram-air everywhere it goes every day.
So while I see your point that I can probably figure out a way to finagle a 5.5" pipe somewhere off my inlet, A) there really isnt THAT much of anywhere to go in my bay that's cool because it's so tight/cramped, and B) an efficient intercooler would laugh at 15psi boost and 100* inlet temps... It just would.
You're right. I'd expect the same.
If you can't fit a solution in there... Just is what it is. If you can, it's counter productive not to.
Focusing back on the main issue, I'm anxious for the results of this weekend. Should have enough information to nail this thing down.
Originally Posted by gtistile
ok, pre-cooler MAT sensor is installed.
What is a good temp drop to see across the core?
I'd hope to see 80% of the difference between the IC water temp and pre IC charge air removed. Given the data you've gathered so far, I'm not going to hold my breath.
If that were the case, working the equation backward with the data you've collected, pre IC temps would be over 500º... possible. However, unlikely.
We'll see what we see and start putting this puzzle together.
You wont find a compressor map for the FI billet wheels. The borg warner wheels flow less than FI wheels.
Yea, exactly. The S484 is made by Jose at FI and I really doubt he has a compressor map for it as they are very labor intensive and expensive to create. The one I put in my spreadsheet is the BW 82mm FMW wheel that should be close to the s484.
SAE gas test stand time is not cheap from what I understand. I have no idea about their wheels but they do a lot of back to back dyno comparisons. Technology evolves all the time especially with compressor wheel designs. The borg 6 blade wheels were beast and now only a few years later they have found improvements in a 7 blade design.
Heres zbrowns setup. Has inlet and outlet temps. Pull to 160. This is a cheapie china A2W with good plumbing rule 2k pumping over 20gpm. I believe the video is with no ice. 1000+hp easy. Blue gauge is IC in and out temps.
The OP is probably gathering the data into a legible format. He's fancy like that.
Originally Posted by SethU
I'd hope to see 80% of the difference between the IC water temp and pre IC charge air removed. Given the data you've gathered so far, I'm not going to hold my breath.
If that were the case, working the equation backward with the data you've collected, pre IC temps would be over 500º... possible. However, unlikely.
We'll see what we see and start putting this puzzle together.
So from what you're saying if the turbo outlet temp was 235 degrees and you are pumping 40 degree water through the cooler, then your post intercooler temps should be about ~80 degrees with a properly functioning core?
So from what you're saying if the turbo outlet temp was 235 degrees and you are pumping 40 degree water through the cooler, then your post intercooler temps should be about ~80 degrees with a properly functioning core?
With those numbers, yes, that would be what I'd hope to see.
To be clear, that's just based on my memory of some internet research I did a couple years ago. I can't say that's what it "should be". However, that is what I'd hope for, based on numbers alone.
It's a crude, but quick and fairly accurate estimate. There is a lot going on that's beyond me. As the delta (temp difference) becomes greater, the thermal transfer increases. And as someone else mentioned, mass flow rate of water vs. mass flow rate of air is a contributing factor. As well as the density of the air (mass per volume)... all contribute.
With those numbers, yes, that would be what I'd hope to see.
To be clear, that's just based on my memory of some internet research I did a couple years ago. I can't say that's what it "should be". However, that is what I'd hope for, based on numbers alone.
It's a crude, but quick and fairly accurate estimate. There is a lot going on that's beyond me. As the delta (temp difference) becomes greater, the thermal transfer increases. And as someone else mentioned, mass flow rate of water vs. mass flow rate of air is a contributing factor. As well as the density of the air (mass per volume)... all contribute.
Pretty anxious to see the new data log.
Gotcha so what is an acceptable efficiency percentage on an air to water core? Compared to say an air to air core? 60,70,80%? Can we get a concensus for accepted efficiency? I've seen 65-75 for air to air, and 75-95 for air to water listed on some websites.
So for this intercooler to be deemed a success or a failure what efficiency percentage threshold needs to be met?
Gotcha so what is an acceptable efficiency percentage on an air to water core? Compared to say an air to air core? 60,70,80%? Can we get a concensus for accepted efficiency? I've seen 65-75 for air to air, and 75-95 for air to water listed on some websites.
So for this intercooler to be deemed a success or a failure what efficiency percentage threshold needs to be met?
I think it came up earlier. There isn't an industry standard. Or, if there is, I'm not aware of it. I'm the type that likes to calculate everything out. When I wanted to know the same thing you're asking, the best I could get was a consensus on a couple people's experience. It seems, not too many people actually measure.
80% is the number I use for my calculations. That's a number I feel is on the conservative side, based only on the few actual results I've been able to source, and it's the minimum I expect to see. My project is still a project, so I can't even offer up my own results yet. But, I am set up to read/log temp and pressure pre and post turbo and intercooler and will be able to plot compressor and intercooler efficiency.
If you guys aren't getting close to 80%, I'd send the unit back and ask them to test it on one of their vehicles. Someone mentioned earlier, that the core could have been made with a substitute material that's less effective. I've received some overseas parts where that was the obvious case. Could be the case here. Or, some other defect in the manufacture.
If they say it checks out and performs as well as they expect, time to shop for another solution.
I respect keeping the results hush hush while you guys figure this out. If you'd like specific feedback drop me a PM.
03-23-2017, 09:34 PM
LOL
