Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > EcoModding Central
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 11-18-2015, 08:15 PM   #21 (permalink)
...beats walking...
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: .
Posts: 6,190
Thanks: 179
Thanked 1,525 Times in 1,126 Posts
FWIW - The Lockheed 749 Constellation with "jet-stack" (short) exhaust pipes actually "...added 15 mph at the maximum cruising speed..." (*) from exiting exhaust gases!



(*) see page 53, C.K. Stringfellow & P.M. Bowers, Lockheed Constellation, 1992, MBI Publications.


Last edited by gone-ot; 11-18-2015 at 09:00 PM..
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to gone-ot For This Useful Post:
aerohead (11-19-2015)
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 11-19-2015, 01:00 PM   #22 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Michigan
Posts: 34
Thanks: 1
Thanked 26 Times in 17 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead View Post
*I went all the way through my textbook for internal combustion engines.
*Back pressure was so monumentally important that it wasn't even listed in the book's index.
*The term 'back pressure' did occur,one time,on page 493,on an engine performance table from I.N.Bishop of Ford Motor Co.,published in 1965"
, etc.
Again, the world has changed since 1985, or 1965, or 1945. Engine Management Systems, direct fuel injection, variable valve timing, and so on have 300 ci engines going from 100 hp to 350 hp with a doubling of mpg's and a reduction of controlled emissions by 99%. High backpressure at low rpm was a kludge then () and has no benefits now.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to HiFlite For This Useful Post:
aerohead (11-19-2015)
Old 11-19-2015, 04:26 PM   #23 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 15,895
Thanks: 23,972
Thanked 7,223 Times in 4,650 Posts
never desired

Quote:
Originally Posted by darcane View Post
Looks like a pretty exhaustive study to me.


Sorry, I couldn't help myself.

But other that the one magazine article, I see nothing that counters my assertion that back pressure is never desired. And I don't put much authority in magazine writers.



A German OEM parts supplier has been making functional prototypes for about 5 years years:
https://www.eberspaecher.com/en/prod...echnology.html
They market it to either silence exhaust or generate an exhaust note for electric/hybrids, but I don't know of any applications where it is actually used yet.
Perhaps you'll allow be so inclined to indulge me:
*The dynamometer data demonstrated that in some cases,when back pressure was reduced,performance fell off,which is contrary to your assertion.
*Standing waves can occur within both the intake and exhaust manifolds.
*Both the intake and exhaust systems need to be tuned.
*The exhaust pressure pulse is a longitudinal wave comprised of alternating compressions and rarifactions.
*Whenever the pressure wave encounters a different medium or different flow section a reflection occurs.
*When a reflection occurs from a change in direction of propagation,a compression is reflected as a compression,and a rarifaction as a rarifaction.
*When a reflection occurs without change in direction of prpagation,a compression is reflected as a rarifaction,and a rarifaction as a compression.
*The violent blowdown generates the pulse,contained within the system and held to sonic velocity.
*With an open pipe,the gas expands into a larger volume or atmosphere,and the pulse is reflected from the open end of the pipe as a strong rarifaction.
*With proper tuning,this rarifaction will reach the exhaust valve during the scavenging event,aiding gas removal,and preventing reversion of exhaust into the combustion chamber/intake tract (depending upon valve overlap).
*The wave will dissipate as a function of viscous attrition.
*Same thing happens in the induction system.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
*As I mentioned,back pressure begins with the intentionally undersized exhaust valve which is limited by materials technology to it's ability to transfer heat away from itself,even with sodium-filled stems.
*Additional surface wall drag occurs in the primaries,collector,down-pipe,catalytic converter,mid-pipe,muffler,tailpipe,resonator (if present),and exhaust tip.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*'Back pressure' is inherent in all exhaust systems.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
*To further complicate things,the engine might as well be variable volume as far as the exhaust is concerned,as the gas load handled by the exhaust will vary from near-zero at idle,to maximum under full load W.O.T..
*It's a tall order to expect a 'static' system to operate ideally under 'morphing' load.
*And the dynamometer data appears to bear this out.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
*For fuel economy we're interested in the unit air charge,which is directly associated with Mean Effective Pressure (MEP), maximum torque,and Minimum Specific Fuel Consumption which occurs near the max. torque.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Regardless of overall internal resistance,OEM exhaust systems are 'tuned.'
*They are a compromise which attempts to optimize flow under ALL loads.
*Ideally,they would be shape-shifting,as Yamaha's smart system attempts.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*If torque is a criteria for fuel economy,and there is laboratory evidence that torque can be harmed by arbitrary back pressure reduction without re-tuning,then it would behoove us to be mindful about exhaust system modifications if we do not possess the technology to re-balance the system.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*As Ford's David Hwang infers,you wouldn't want to 'increase' back pressure,however,we're stuck with some under the best circumstances.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*'Performance' exhaust systems are targeted for enthusiasts which have installed high-flow intakes,cams,headers 'n such and are looking for quicker 1/8th-mile and 1/4-mile times or a 'sound.'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
*And a cautionary note about 'pressure' claims.When you consider Daniel Bournoulli's association between volume/velocity and pressure: one could claim that their muffler lowers 'pressure' at rpm.And that would be true of the local static pressure at the measuring site.What they may not be saying, is that there's a high local velocity at that location,and very high surface friction drag as well as turbulence which they say nothing about.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Most performance product advertising says zero to little about what they tested,how they tested,etc..Anecdotal testimonies flood the pages of advertising,with zero science to bolster their claims.No context.A true informational wasteland.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
*In the context of daily driven passenger cars and light trucks,and their association to fuel economy vs back pressure,I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with your assertion about any back pressure never being desired until you can present more of a case.
*I remain the student,but as they say,extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2015, 04:42 PM   #24 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 15,895
Thanks: 23,972
Thanked 7,223 Times in 4,650 Posts
changed

Quote:
Originally Posted by HiFlite View Post
Again, the world has changed since 1985, or 1965, or 1945. Engine Management Systems, direct fuel injection, variable valve timing, and so on have 300 ci engines going from 100 hp to 350 hp with a doubling of mpg's and a reduction of controlled emissions by 99%. High backpressure at low rpm was a kludge then () and has no benefits now.
*yes,everything you've mentioned was foreshadowed in 1973.We just didn't have the technology at that time.
*If you have a contemporary textbook on internal combustion engines and air pollution,we might mine that just to see what engineering students are being exposed to today.
*The Yamaha tests results indicate a benefit from valving the exhaust tract in the 21st-Century.Is that a black swan?
*The engine dynamometer and chassis dynamometer testing indicates conditions under which an arbitrary back pressure reduction can lower engine performance.The exception proves the rule?
__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2015, 08:14 PM   #25 (permalink)
.........................
 
darcane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Buckley, WA
Posts: 1,597
Thanks: 391
Thanked 488 Times in 316 Posts
Aerohead,

I believe we are in violent agreement here, once you realize what I am actually saying and not what you think I am saying. Keep in mind that the pressure in the exhaust system varies along it's entire length and varies with time. My assertion is that it is never desired to increase back pressure at the exhaust valve at the time it opens.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead View Post
Perhaps you'll allow be so inclined to indulge me:
*The dynamometer data demonstrated that in some cases,when back pressure was reduced,performance fell off,which is contrary to your assertion.
*Standing waves can occur within both the intake and exhaust manifolds.
*Both the intake and exhaust systems need to be tuned.
*The exhaust pressure pulse is a longitudinal wave comprised of alternating compressions and rarifactions.
*Whenever the pressure wave encounters a different medium or different flow section a reflection occurs.
*When a reflection occurs from a change in direction of propagation,a compression is reflected as a compression,and a rarifaction as a rarifaction.
*When a reflection occurs without change in direction of prpagation,a compression is reflected as a rarifaction,and a rarifaction as a compression.
*The violent blowdown generates the pulse,contained within the system and held to sonic velocity.
*With an open pipe,the gas expands into a larger volume or atmosphere,and the pulse is reflected from the open end of the pipe as a strong rarifaction.
*With proper tuning,this rarifaction will reach the exhaust valve during the scavenging event,aiding gas removal,and preventing reversion of exhaust into the combustion chamber/intake tract (depending upon valve overlap).
What you have just described is a negative pressure wave traveling back towards the valve, timed so that pressure is reduced just at the moment the valve opens to assist scavenging the cylinder.

You have just reduced the back pressure.

It is NEVER desired to increase back pressure at the exhaust valve while it is open.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead View Post
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
*As I mentioned,back pressure begins with the intentionally undersized exhaust valve which is limited by materials technology to it's ability to transfer heat away from itself,even with sodium-filled stems.
Just because it is done intentionally, doesn't mean it is desired. It is also undersized due to geometric considerations: there is only so much space in the cylinder to put all the valves and leave them reasonable un-shrouded.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead View Post
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*If torque is a criteria for fuel economy,and there is laboratory evidence that torque can be harmed by arbitrary back pressure reduction without re-tuning,then it would behoove us to be mindful about exhaust system modifications if we do not possess the technology to re-balance the system.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*As Ford's David Hwang infers,you wouldn't want to 'increase' back pressure,however,we're stuck with some under the best circumstances.
And I have never suggested arbitrarily modifying the exhaust.

For an exhaust system tuned to maximize torque at a high RPM, a restriction placed late in the exhaust system may be beneficial to low RPM performance. This is not because backpressure is increased, but because the restriction alters the timing of the negative pressure waves to reduce backpressure at the valve and aid scavenging.

As I've said on the other thread related to this, a better solution for a dedicated economy car is to tune the exhaust for optimal performance at the lower RPMs where it will get the best fuel economy.


Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead View Post
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
*In the context of daily driven passenger cars and light trucks,and their association to fuel economy vs back pressure,I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with your assertion about any back pressure never being desired until you can present more of a case.
*I remain the student,but as they say,extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
I believe the extraordinary claim is that you can improve performance by increasing the back pressure at the valve. I don't believe that this is what you are trying to say though.
__________________
Past Cars:

2001 Civic HX Mods

CTS-V

2003 Silverado Mods
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to darcane For This Useful Post:
aerohead (11-20-2015)
Old 11-20-2015, 03:40 PM   #26 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 15,895
Thanks: 23,972
Thanked 7,223 Times in 4,650 Posts
agreement

Quote:
Originally Posted by darcane View Post
Aerohead,

I believe we are in violent agreement here, once you realize what I am actually saying and not what you think I am saying. Keep in mind that the pressure in the exhaust system varies along it's entire length and varies with time. My assertion is that it is never desired to increase back pressure at the exhaust valve at the time it opens.



What you have just described is a negative pressure wave traveling back towards the valve, timed so that pressure is reduced just at the moment the valve opens to assist scavenging the cylinder.

You have just reduced the back pressure.

It is NEVER desired to increase back pressure at the exhaust valve while it is open.



Just because it is done intentionally, doesn't mean it is desired. It is also undersized due to geometric considerations: there is only so much space in the cylinder to put all the valves and leave them reasonable un-shrouded.



And I have never suggested arbitrarily modifying the exhaust.

For an exhaust system tuned to maximize torque at a high RPM, a restriction placed late in the exhaust system may be beneficial to low RPM performance. This is not because backpressure is increased, but because the restriction alters the timing of the negative pressure waves to reduce backpressure at the valve and aid scavenging.

As I've said on the other thread related to this, a better solution for a dedicated economy car is to tune the exhaust for optimal performance at the lower RPMs where it will get the best fuel economy.




I believe the extraordinary claim is that you can improve performance by increasing the back pressure at the valve. I don't believe that this is what you are trying to say though.
*Okay,so now you've thrown in a caveat which was missing from your original statement which changes everything.
*Yes,at the time of valve overlap we always want a rarifaction pulse striking the exhaust valve,never a compression pulse.Bear in mind that these are sonic,sinusoidal pulses within the gas itself,then after blowdown,the piston must evacuate the remainder of the spent charge,more of just a simple subsonic pumping action.This is where the rarifaction pulse is handy,just before the exhaust valve closes,rather than a compression pulse which would cause reversion.
*With respect to the exhaust valve size,the literature underplays the significance of exhaust system friction,while overplaying intake friction as a rational for larger intake valves rather than exhaust.
*The indicated hp of an engine is limited by the unit air charge.
*The manufacturer will try to maximize the intake valves.
*They'd put larger exhaust valves in if they could,but at up to 3,000-degrees F,a large tulip cannot transfer heat fast enough to the seat and stem and we end up with a warped or burned valve.
*Some pent-roof combustion chambers will run 3-intake and 2-exhaust valves to try and maximize flow.
*With respect to timing of the pulses,whether rarification or compression is present,it is a function of reflection.
*Any structure present within the exhaust tract can cause a reflection and wave inversion.
*A valve can cause the beneficial reflection when tuned,as Yamaha did with their EXUP technology.
*Pressure,measured before the valve restriction (back pressure) would increase.
*Pressure measured within the restricted cross-section would be less (a crude venturi).
*pressure would increase again once the gases passed the valve.
*So we need to qualify where our pressure taps are located.
*In the common vernacular,the valve would be interpreted as a restriction and any gases upstream of it would encounter 'back pressure.'
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
*As Richard Waitas reminds us,all passive exhaust systems are an exercise in "concessions"."You cannot calibrate an exhaust to provide low end torque plus high end horsepower."
*Ideally,we'd travel to where Avatar was filmed and get us some 'unobtainium' for which to construct a shape-shifting,biomimetric,fully-morphing system which could expand and contract as CFM varied.
*So far,Yamaha's and today's Walker' Dynomax Valve Technology (VT) exhaust systems are as close as we've come.
*(wait 'til exhaust tuners get a load of a Pelton-wheel turbine or Junkers JUMO 004 turbojet bullet-jet valve)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
*I'm with you on the low-speed torque/mpg wavelength.
*With respect to the extraordinary claim about the EXUP valve technology,we may be in a semantics conundrum.Most guys on the street will consider the pressure between the exhaust port and the restriction during post-blowdown pumping, and interpret the pre-restriction reading as increased back pressure.They won't think in terms of the very low pressure at the choke point.They get it with carburetors

,but not exhaust.
*If they're savvy at all,they'll understand 'tuning' and won't just randomly toss the 1st aftermarket system to come along on their car and expect results.
*It does look like 'active' systems are the way of the future.
__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2015, 05:33 PM   #27 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 15,895
Thanks: 23,972
Thanked 7,223 Times in 4,650 Posts
Chevrolet multi-mode exhaust

Chevrolet entered the world of active exhaust systems with it's C6 Corvette.
The 2013 C7 Corvette Sting ray has standard 'DUAL MODE' exhaust.
The 2014 Camaro SS offered DUAL MODE exhaust as an $895 option.
Butterfly valves in two of the exhaust tips are open or closed depending on.........................

__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Are hybrid SUVs a good or bad thing? SVOboy Hybrids 71 05-05-2017 03:24 PM
Lugging the engine - good or bad for economy? landspeed General Efficiency Discussion 28 05-23-2014 11:03 AM
The Bad with the Good Lazarus The Lounge 1 01-31-2008 12:30 AM



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com