I am saying compared to the blue graph I do not plan on increasing the peek rpm AND I do not plan on increasing the peek tq just adding boost to hold peek tq longer.

Is what I am doing with the red graph a safer way to go faster or would just adding boost across the board be a safer way to add power?

 

the red graph shows hp/tq and boost level for one run. The blue graph shows hp/tq and boost level for a separate run. The blue run I kept the boost flat, the red run I adjusted the boost to keep the tq flat.

I am looking for info on adding boost to keep tq flat technique.

 

Looking at the tq and hp curves from 6000 to 6500, yes the red is producing less stress. >6750, the red is producing more stress.

 

How about the red at 7000 vs the blue at 6200.

the question I am looking to answer is what is the best way to get the most out of a given set of engine parts? More boost over all or ramp up the boost in the higher rpms but keeping peek tq down a little.

 

Look at the area under the curve. More area = better results. Ultimately, you talking about mechanical limits and acceleration results. Run fuel and tune to stay away from detonation and apply all the boost you can to achieve peak acceleration (i.e. trac control - avoid tire spin). Not sure what's out there besides Dragy as an inexpensive tool to test performance and see where your acceleration limits are.

Traction control needed to manage power. Maybe ZBrown will chime in. I think he uses Vbox stuff.

 

Peak torque isn't the only indicator of stress. If it was, then you could remove the cylinder heads and use large electric motor and enough gear reduction to spin the short block to infinity and it wouldn't come apart (it will).
The formula to calculate the overall stress is far too complicated with too many variables to use reliably for a situation like this.
The crank angle spread over which torque is applied is largely based on RPM, regardless of peak torque, so measured torque at a given crank angle will change with RPM even as measured peak torque stays the same.

That being said, the actual parts being stressed change as well.
X amount of cylinder pressure is going to stress the head gasket and fasteners without much relation to RPM.
As RPM increases, at a constant torque, the stress on the rotating assembly will increase from higher inertia.
The stress on the block and pistons will increased from opposing forces from side-loading and rotational inertia.
The stress on the rods will increase from a more rapidly varying load angle.

Detonation on the other hand, will be largely based on peak cylinder pressure (amongst other things like heat).
In most circumstances, you can safely increase timing quite a bit after peak torque without risk of detonation.
This is because the ratio of speeds between the descending piston and the flame front change as the piston speed increases.
You build less cylinder pressure and torque, as the piston is moving so fast that peak combustion happens later in the cycle.
You can actually get away with using timing to help flatten some of that torque curve, and its more reliable than trying to increase boost beyond a certain RPM as timing cam be adjusted in correlation with both boost pressure and RPM instead of just RPM.

Honestly though, as long as you stay within a certain range, you won't have any issues. You can make astronomical torque at high RPM and not break any parts as long as risk of detonation is minimized.
Detonation will cause cylinder pressures far beyond normal combustion, and often in very concentrated areas, causing rods to bend, pistons to crack, heads to lift, all kinds of mayhem.