HP vs TQ Theory
#61
Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,452
Received 1,852 Likes
on
1,152 Posts
Too much to quote, but yes you are right. I dyslexicated that statement. I'll fix it via edit.
Thanks for the explanation. That answers the question I started the thread for.
I do have stock internals - other than the cam and valvetrain.
Thanks for the explanation. That answers the question I started the thread for.
I do have stock internals - other than the cam and valvetrain.
#62
TECH Addict
That is interesting about the knock sensors. Are there aftermarket "wideband" knock sensors available for the plethora of aftermarket rotating assemblies?
#64
Banned
iTrader: (1)
there are all kinds of gadgets and ways to use intuition to determine if an engine would be safe.
For dramatic example, If you have done a thousand or hundred thousands of tests on the same exact engine type, of varying displacement disregarding reliability, you would find a wide range of different ways of producing torque and monitoring the engine as these are all attempts to monitor something, whether it be knock timing pressure duty cycle, oil pressure. Our attempts to monitor and control torque output include how well we interpret the data among what we collect.
http://ecumasterusa.com/shop/whp-wid...ck-sensor-kit/
For dramatic example, If you have done a thousand or hundred thousands of tests on the same exact engine type, of varying displacement disregarding reliability, you would find a wide range of different ways of producing torque and monitoring the engine as these are all attempts to monitor something, whether it be knock timing pressure duty cycle, oil pressure. Our attempts to monitor and control torque output include how well we interpret the data among what we collect.
http://ecumasterusa.com/shop/whp-wid...ck-sensor-kit/
Last edited by kingtal0n; 10-28-2015 at 06:39 PM.
#65
TECH Fanatic
OK, well something is off. I'm overcalculating torque on the low end. The thick blue line is calculated HP, and the thick green line is calculated TQ. Thin red line is air flow in CFM, thin gray line is HP based off of pure air and gas converted to energy in a loss-less system, thin yellow line is TQ calculated off the gray "perfect" HP line. Once it hits 3600 RPM, it actually looks reasonable
#66
TECH Addict
Thanks for the link. They even called it a wideband knock sensor. That's pretty cool, really. The technology available to us these days is fascinating... as I type this on a phone that fits in my pocket and has more technology in it than what we landed on the moon with (arguably, or whatever).
But we can data log mass airflow, right? And this information could be graphed to the same scale as a dyno, right? Like a cfm vs rpm plot overlayed over the hp vs rpm dyno graph.
PS. I'm talking about actual logged data, not algorithm predictions. For the cfm vs hp vs rpm graph.
But we can data log mass airflow, right? And this information could be graphed to the same scale as a dyno, right? Like a cfm vs rpm plot overlayed over the hp vs rpm dyno graph.
PS. I'm talking about actual logged data, not algorithm predictions. For the cfm vs hp vs rpm graph.
Last edited by DavidBoren; 10-28-2015 at 10:07 PM.
#67
Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,452
Received 1,852 Likes
on
1,152 Posts
Thanks for the link. They even called it a wideband knock sensor. That's pretty cool, really. The technology available to us these days is fascinating... as I type this on a phone that fits in my pocket and has more technology in it than what we landed on the moon with (arguably, or whatever). But we can data log mass airflow, right? And this information could be graphed to the same scale as a dyno, right? Like a cfm vs rpm plot overlayed over the hp vs rpm dyno graph. PS. I'm talking about actual logged data, not algorithm predictions. For the cfm vs hp vs rpm graph.
The motor peaked at 6800, so if airflow peaked then also, it would prove the point. Simply using VE x cylinder volume x RPM looks like air continues to increase past peak.
That kit looks neat. Will it integrate with my factory PCM or would it run like an AFR gauge, where you have to monitor it?
#68
TECH Addict
They were saying that a lot of modern ecu's have the capacity to use it, so I think you could replace your existing sensor with a wideband one. Their, that specific company's, standalone ecu has the capacity to tune it by crank degree, so it only listens when knock is probable, to help filter out white noise. I wonder if the Holley Dominator has **** like this.
#69
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Thanks for the link. They even called it a wideband knock sensor. That's pretty cool, really. The technology available to us these days is fascinating... as I type this on a phone that fits in my pocket and has more technology in it than what we landed on the moon with (arguably, or whatever).
But we can data log mass airflow, right?
#70
Banned
iTrader: (1)
355x6000/3456 = 616cfm
355x7000/3456 = larger number
355x8000/3456 = even larger number
355x9000/3456 = even larger, larger number
Airflow (power output) peak keeps increasing because VE stays at 100% and RPM keeps going up.
If you are working with actual maf voltage data, keep in mind the voltage curve is parabolic, the closer you get to the edge of the voltage cap (around 5volts) the less resolution available (a small change to voltage equates more mass of airflow near the end of the voltage curve)
#71
Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,452
Received 1,852 Likes
on
1,152 Posts
How are you finding a decrease in airflow total mass after a peak horsepower is taken? Are you using the standard equation cidxrpm/3456 = CFM?
355x6000/3456 = 616cfm
355x7000/3456 = larger number
355x8000/3456 = even larger number
355x9000/3456 = even larger, larger number
Airflow (power output) peak keeps increasing because VE stays at 100% and RPM keeps going up.
If you are working with actual maf voltage data, keep in mind the voltage curve is parabolic, the closer you get to the edge of the voltage cap (around 5volts) the less resolution available (a small change to voltage equates more mass of airflow near the end of the voltage curve)
355x6000/3456 = 616cfm
355x7000/3456 = larger number
355x8000/3456 = even larger number
355x9000/3456 = even larger, larger number
Airflow (power output) peak keeps increasing because VE stays at 100% and RPM keeps going up.
If you are working with actual maf voltage data, keep in mind the voltage curve is parabolic, the closer you get to the edge of the voltage cap (around 5volts) the less resolution available (a small change to voltage equates more mass of airflow near the end of the voltage curve)
I've used the CID x RPM/3456 formula, air keeps increasing
I've used VE x cylinder volume x RPM/4 (since there or 2 intake strokes per revolution out of 8 cylinders), air keeps increasing. I converted everything to CFM to specifically measure airflow per unit time
I wanted to see if the MAF logged air would show a peak, but unfortunately, I don't have any logs where I go past 6750. I thought I had one going to 7K, but it didn't save. But the airflow is on a steep enough curve that it looks like it would be still increasing past peak.
That was when I started looking at internal resistance as a potential culprit
#72
TECH Addict
It sucks, because we all know that there are at least a couple people on this forum who have this information. I'm not implying they are intentionally withholding the data, just unaware that we are looking for it.
For anyone reading this that has a date with the dyno, please record your air mass readings and try pull to 7500rpms, if you can. Please post your results in here.
For anyone reading this that has a date with the dyno, please record your air mass readings and try pull to 7500rpms, if you can. Please post your results in here.
#73
Old School Heavy
iTrader: (16)
I wanted to see if the MAF logged air would show a peak, but unfortunately, I don't have any logs where I go past 6750. I thought I had one going to 7K, but it didn't save. But the airflow is on a steep enough curve that it looks like it would be still increasing past peak.
That was when I started looking at internal resistance as a potential culprit
That was when I started looking at internal resistance as a potential culprit
403 cubic inches. This engine achieved 1.75 Hp per CID.
#74
TECH Addict
Thank you speedtrigger! Although this is exactly what I was looking for, it clearly shows that the airflow continues to climb after peak hp, which takes a big, healthy dump right on our theory of peak horsepower occurring at peak airflow. Hmm...
#75
Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,452
Received 1,852 Likes
on
1,152 Posts
This might be of interest to you in comparing theoretical to real world. The only thing that might throw you off on this sheet is that the carburetor was about 50-100 CFM too small for this engine. If you notice, the manifold pressure gives that away as it gets past the torque peak. With a properly sized carburetor, this engine consumes about 20 more CFM at torque peak and about 50 more CFM at peak HP.
403 cubic inches. This engine achieved 1.75 Hp per CID.
403 cubic inches. This engine achieved 1.75 Hp per CID.
#76
Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,452
Received 1,852 Likes
on
1,152 Posts
Originally Posted by DavidBoren
And in the name of keeping this somewhat scientific, this being your peer review process, the 0.8 multiplier in the piston/rod peak force equation... where and how was this number derived?
So, question for you - does friction increase or decrease with rotational speed? I know static friction is less than kinetic friction, but once it gets moving, does it stay constant? Does the oil thinning with heat reduce the drag? I can almost argue either point of view in my head. Help?
#77
Old School Heavy
iTrader: (16)
Friction increases with load. Load increases with engine speed.
The pistons and connecting rods are reciprocating. Valvetrain is reciprocating. If something is moving in one direction and you have to stop it and accelerate it in the other direction, that takes energy. The faster it is traveling and the more it weighs, the more energy it takes.
The power it takes for the engine to pump the air it needs increases with rpm.
The power it takes to run the oil pump increases with RPM. The power it takes to run the water pump increases with RPM. Oil windage deflecting off of the rotating assemble robs power and increases with RPM.
The volumetric efficiency of the engine decreases after peak torque.
Those are your players.
The pistons and connecting rods are reciprocating. Valvetrain is reciprocating. If something is moving in one direction and you have to stop it and accelerate it in the other direction, that takes energy. The faster it is traveling and the more it weighs, the more energy it takes.
The power it takes for the engine to pump the air it needs increases with rpm.
The power it takes to run the oil pump increases with RPM. The power it takes to run the water pump increases with RPM. Oil windage deflecting off of the rotating assemble robs power and increases with RPM.
The volumetric efficiency of the engine decreases after peak torque.
Those are your players.
Last edited by speedtigger; 10-29-2015 at 12:48 PM.
#78
TECH Addict
Say your engine achieves 120% VE @ peak torque, and makes 500rwtq. Now let's say that it makes 400rwtq @ 100% VE... this will make sense in a minute.
Same scenario, now air mass continues to climb after peak torque, even though VE is falling.The engine continues to make power until the volumetric efficiency has dropped far enough that no matter how much more air mass you add, the engine is incapable of efficiently using any more air. Say your peak power is 600rwhp at this point.
As long as the engine is going, anything more than idle, the VE isn't going to fall below 100%, so after the power production peaks, it will fall off until you pretty much stabilize at whatever power your combination makes @ 100% VE, in this example 400rwtq, which let's say is 500rwhp.
Obviously, you would need one hell of a valvetrain to be able to run the dyno to a high enough rpm for the power curve to stabilize after peak power. On an engine that peaks around 6-6500rpms, the point of stabilizing is probably close to 9-10k.
That's my theory, at least. In the real world, there may never be a point of stabilization after peak power because of friction increasing with rpms. But the theory that volumetric efficiency will only fall back to 100% after peak torque, and the power will only fall back to whatever your combination makes at 100% VE, would actually account for the loss of power regardless of increasing air mass.
#79
TECH Addict
And that would imply that the number one contributor to power production is volumetric efficiency. Which actually back up a personal belief of mine, that power is a derivative of efficiency.
#80
Old School Heavy
iTrader: (16)
This is what I keep coming back to. It doesn't matter that air mass continues to climb after peak torque, because the volumetric efficiency is decreasing. At some point, probably right around peak power, the VE versus air mass fails to be capable of producing power.
Say your engine achieves 120% VE @ peak torque, and makes 500rwtq. Now let's say that it makes 400rwtq @ 100% VE... this will make sense in a minute.
Same scenario, now air mass continues to climb after peak torque, even though VE is falling.The engine continues to make power until the volumetric efficiency has dropped far enough that no matter how much more air mass you add, the engine is incapable of efficiently using any more air. Say your peak power is 600rwhp at this point.
As long as the engine is going, anything more than idle, the VE isn't going to fall below 100%, so after the power production peaks, it will fall off until you pretty much stabilize at whatever power your combination makes @ 100% VE, in this example 400rwtq, which let's say is 500rwhp.
Obviously, you would need one hell of a valvetrain to be able to run the dyno to a high enough rpm for the power curve to stabilize after peak power. On an engine that peaks around 6-6500rpms, the point of stabilizing is probably close to 9-10k.
That's my theory, at least. In the real world, there may never be a point of stabilization after peak power because of friction increasing with rpms. But the theory that volumetric efficiency will only fall back to 100% after peak torque, and the power will only fall back to whatever your combination makes at 100% VE, would actually account for the loss of power regardless of increasing air mass.
Say your engine achieves 120% VE @ peak torque, and makes 500rwtq. Now let's say that it makes 400rwtq @ 100% VE... this will make sense in a minute.
Same scenario, now air mass continues to climb after peak torque, even though VE is falling.The engine continues to make power until the volumetric efficiency has dropped far enough that no matter how much more air mass you add, the engine is incapable of efficiently using any more air. Say your peak power is 600rwhp at this point.
As long as the engine is going, anything more than idle, the VE isn't going to fall below 100%, so after the power production peaks, it will fall off until you pretty much stabilize at whatever power your combination makes @ 100% VE, in this example 400rwtq, which let's say is 500rwhp.
Obviously, you would need one hell of a valvetrain to be able to run the dyno to a high enough rpm for the power curve to stabilize after peak power. On an engine that peaks around 6-6500rpms, the point of stabilizing is probably close to 9-10k.
That's my theory, at least. In the real world, there may never be a point of stabilization after peak power because of friction increasing with rpms. But the theory that volumetric efficiency will only fall back to 100% after peak torque, and the power will only fall back to whatever your combination makes at 100% VE, would actually account for the loss of power regardless of increasing air mass.
Throw a long block on an engine stand and put a hand crank on the snout of the crankshaft and get to spinning the engine. Tell me how many RPM you can manage. Now try to spin that thing 7000 RPM and let me know how you do.