johnpate01

iTrader: (3)

I am considering going to forced induction from my current H/C/I setup. I am strongly leaning toward fabricating my own single or twin turbo kit. I am currently looking at piping routing and I had an idea. Now, forgive me, it's been years since I had my last fluid dynamics course, but here is my train of thought: It is popular to use 2.5 or 3.0" round piping, but why could a person not use rectangular piping of an equivalent hydraulic diameter? Assuming all other factors could be accounted for such as cost, workability, and availability, what would I need to consider? Do you know of anyone that has tried this?

3.4camaro

iTrader: (1)

A person would not use rectangular piping because of the unnecessary frictional losses associated with 90 degree sharp bends you'd likely see when using rectangular piping.

Why rob yourself of horsepower for no good reason?

johnpate01

iTrader: (3)

Maybe this will illustrate my idea better. Shaped and formed smoothly. No the preview is not fancy, but I only spent 30 seconds on it.
I do plan to do some analysis using Solidworks Simulation once I get some routing decided to see some numbers.

1320

iTrader: (6)

I ve done sections before on some custom builds. I ve thought about ordering up the mandrels for my mandrel bender just for doing such work. I ve talked to them, and they are available, I just havnt wanted to invest the funds for the risk of rarely using it. The stuffs not cheap....

JBarron

Well, there are plenty of cylinder heads which use rectangular ports. I think you need to look at whether it will be laminar or turbulent at the velocities that it would need to have, but that is a little over my head.
I think to really take advantage of it, it may need to be extruded.

danetp

Remember however that cylinder heads are designed to create turbulence at the intake valve for better atomization. also any flow through a turbo system will be turbulent 9 times outta 10

1320

iTrader: (6)

you actually dont want turbulence before the fuel is introduced. Thats why heads and chambers are turbulent, is for fuel distribution. More then friction....or turbulence its really just a size thing....in the given space. The reason we use round tube is because of its ease/cost/coupling etc etc etc..

1 FMF

iTrader: (1)

i agree with 1320, round is used because of it's ease and cost of manufacture and installation especially with coupling pieces together, and with bending. But there's little reason why you can't use another cross sectional shape, and thinking about it there may be times where a round pipe takes up too much space or won't fit and an ideal solution is to use a flatten pipe like the picture you posted. And isn't that exactly what GM did with the driver's side exhaust pipe on the F-body?
The stuff about turbulence and friction loss are kind of irrelevant, such as if a 2" round pipe is sufficient or let's say ideal even and that has a cross section of 6.28"; you fab up a rectangular-ish pipe that's 4" x 1.5" which is almost same cross sectional area but for example and easy math say it's also 6.28". So you have some extra loss because of the shape and the bends or extra bends needed, then you simply need 4.1" x 1.6". that would be no different than needing a 3.1" round pipe over a 3". And don't forget after all this piping is the throttle body with a big ol' throttle plate blocking airflow.

Wnts2Go10O

iTrader: (12)

couldnt you use an ovoid shape as a good compromise?