Eesti Saabiklubi foorum

Niiih:head:

Nokitsen pisut, puhastan turbo ära, siis hakkan kollet ehitama.

Siin ma nüüd jään vist jänni omadega. Istunud juba tunde lihtsalt põrnitsedes flantse. Kuidas krt ma sinna need torud ikkagi panen. Kust pihta hakkan ja kuidas asi edasi välja näeks.

Vaikselt areneb ikkagi

suht pisike see holsett:evil:, mis hetkel ta puhuma hakkab........?

Hooki ja Viggega rääkisin. Compressor inducer lubaks mõõtudelt umbes 400 hj. Maybe more, maybe less. Turbiini exducer lubaks 700 hj. Ma uurin veidi seda compressori poolset tiivikut. Minu teada on need Holsetitel vahetatavad, mõtlen siis seda, et võimalik panna suurem jne.

Ütleme nii, et kõige raskem oli teha toru otsad sobivaks flantsidega, ülejäänud on nagu lego juba.

btw, minu selle aasta plaan oli saavutada ca 450 hj. Ei tea kas saan hakkama Mõni kuu on veel aega. Kui T5 peale saaks siis poleks vast enam probleemi.

Respect SAABNINETHOUSAND!!!! :notworthy::notworthy:

Jälgin huviga asjade kulgu!

Ma mõtlen seda keevitamise värki veel. Ehk oleks mõistlik lasta kellelgi kogenenumal seda asja keevitada. Ses mõttes, et ka keevised ilusad jääksid. Siis liivaprits ja siis ma edasi enam ei teagi. Too ju hakkab roostetama hirmus hästi:mad:. Järgmine kolle on siis üleni roostevabast ja seda ma loodan juba isiklikult keevitada TIG keevitusega.

Kapotialune läheb veel raskemaks kui ennem. Pidamine parem:wise:

Tegelikult keevitamist oleks vast mõistlikum teha gaasikeevitusega, siis jääb pingeid ka vähem sisse.
Seda roosteteemat kollektori puhul väga karta ei tasuks. Kui seal ka roostevabast teha, siis peab olema ikka väga hästi valitud materjal, sest üldiselt vilets roostevaba kipub ka selliste temperatuuride juures kiirelt roostetama hakkama.

Hi, difficult to see from the picture but is the turbine housing single entry or double?
How about the outlet to WG where have you planned to mount it?

The turbine housing has a divided inlet. But I made the manifold as single inlet. Was it wrong? Should I make a new one, because a divided one should reduce Lag Time.

I planned to mount the WG about the same like this one HERE, but not like 90 degrees.

Alkuperäinen postittaja SAABNINETHOUSAND
The turbine housing has a divided inlet. But I made the manifold as single inlet. Was it wrong? Should I make a new one, because a divided one should reduce Lag Time.

I planned to mount the WG about the same like this one HERE, but not like 90 degrees.

I would recommend to keep it divided, to mimize the lag.
Runners 1-4 and 2-3 will the need to be connected and also the wg outlet should to kept sepratre all the way to the wg valve. Depending on the manifold design the wg outlet can be like this simply "divided"
http://www.stcf.net/viggen/otava.jpg
or like how it on for instance hooks manifold with seperate tubes from each side which are jointed near the WG.

Update. Sorry Vigge but this time I'll make it this way:thumb: At the moment it's enough for my needs. (I'm too DONE already, I don't want to start all over again )

Makin manifold is somekind of ART.. So i will not be very surpriced, if you will try few different manifolds with your hw..

Currently im having third version of exhaust manifold with my hx40super in four month.
All manifold have had some (dis)advantages.
I (& Vigge) will post littlebit more of our experience (&logs) about challences of "good working" manifold soon.

I think a few of us are curiously waiting to see the results of the "good working" manifold

Alkuperäinen postittaja SAABNINETHOUSAND
Update. Sorry Vigge but this time I'll make it this way:thumb: At the moment it's enough for my needs. (I'm too DONE already, I don't want to start all over again )

It really does not matter where you start since there is and always will be parts which you can improve later on if the outcome with the first version is not sufficient enough.

Alkuperäinen postittaja SAABNINETHOUSAND
I think a few of us are curiously waiting to see the results of the "good working" manifold

What is "good working" for one may not be it for the other due to differences in the other HW and also what the purpose of the car is, i.e where in the rpm range the power is wanted/needed.

The manifold it self is just one component at by altering its size and shape the boost treshold can be affected, just like the case it with different turbine housings, cams etc etc.
Due to these reason certain caution shall be used when looking into manifold design from other cars if not all the HW is the same inluding the physical turbo and with likewise goals.

My personal approach to tuning is and has been to measure and study everything I do to the car to find out what changes took place after a mod was done and did it lead to gains/losses both absolute and in terms of registry, since I have newer liked the assumption that all HW parts will lead to positive outcome. In addition even if the HW has not changed I like to fiddle out with the testing and SW tuning with the aim to get more out of it. That aside here are a few examples.

Hook recently swapped his 42mm (O.D.) tube manifold to 38mm without altering much of the design. Its affect can be seen from this graph, in which a second car also with HX40_super and 42mm O.D. manifold has been included.
http://www.stcf.net/viggen/mani_comp1.gif
From the graph we can note the difference in terms of boost build-up between these cars is quit smallish when both cars had the 42mm manifold (down low there is diff though) and the run with the new 38mm manifold spools roughly 300rpm lower.

The level of "shift" in spool is roughly the same which I have noted in my car, after the change in cams and swapping turbine housing between .86 and .64 A/R
http://www.stcf.net/viggen/boost64_86_31.gif

However boost is a poor indicator for power and therefore looking into other parameters is needed to get to the bottom that more bhp was indeed made. Cars acceleration naturally correlates with torque and is therefore a better indicator than then plain boost is. This is from Hooks car (same runs as above)
http://www.stcf.net/viggen/sarja_acc1.gif
and from it we can note that the earlier spool also offered a likewise gain in acceleration(dashed lines linked to 2nd y-axis m/s^2) and the curves meet again when the 42mm manifold run has built up the boost also.

In the mid rpm range these type of mods (manifold, cams, housing etc) dont usually change much since after all majority do limit the level of boost to limit torque to a desired level, and by altering it you can eliminate the affect caused by a hw if it was negative.

Up in high rpm area something eventually becomes the "bottle-neck" and begins to limit the bhp for further increse/ causes a decrase and studying that rpm area becomes therefore interesting. From Hook car we do not yet have the results what happens in that rpm area and will the new 38mm manifold become anymore limiting factor than the 42mm was. Eventually it will start to limit faster than the 42mm manifold if bhp level is raised high enough, but is that level higher than what the rest of the HW can offer is not known (requires testing).

In my case with the turbine housing the .64 offered an earlier spool (graph posted above), but also ate away from the topmost rpm region (6000++) and lead to negative gain in my use (flat out long runs) and I went back to the .86 housinn, thus the poorer spool. For somebody else with different goals to mine could have choosen the .64 housing and it is easy to undestand, since not all of use are looking for the best "GO" when running up the gears. Some give more value to lower rpm region Torque what the .64 did offer. Due to difference in oppionion it is quit easy to now understand the meaning of the first centance if it didnt open up then "What is "good working" for one may not be it for the other ".

I'm thinking now splitting this topic into S9K-s car part and manifold building part..

Alkuperäinen postittaja Cyber
I'm thinking now splitting this topic into S9K-s car part and manifold building part..

sound good.

Naisss, ma oleksin võinud tegelikult ju täiesti otsast peale pilte teha, aga fotokat polnud käepärast ja himu oli meeletu.

Mr. Vigge and Mr. Hook, which type of welder should I use? It's hard to get on a TIG welder, we don't have those here very much. I can't reach to every place with the MIG because there are some tight spots. Arc welding is definetly out of the question. Is an ordinary gas welder ok?

Our welding wizard@work
http://www.npr.fi/~heikki/misc/holsusarja3.jpg

Tig gives best outlook.. But normal mig will works also.

Peaks nüüd valmis olema keevitamiseks ja seejärel viimane lihv.

Should be ready now for welding those things together. The wastegate outlet is still to come cause I don't have any wastegates at the moment

I'll ask tomorrow about this TIG welding.

kuidas plaan seda seestpoolt töödelda, lihvida??
väljast ju savi, milline jääb, ikka sisemine pool see tähtsam

edit:
vaata, gaaside ja vedelike voolamisel on hästi tähtis pind, mida mööda gaasid või vedelik voolab. need krobelised seinad ja yleminekud tekitavad suuri keeriseid, mis aeglustab ja ka takistab gaaside liikumist . toru keskel on gaasideliikumiskiirus suur, ja äärtes hulga väiksem. ja just tänu krobelisele seinale ja yleminekutele, kuhu veel lisandub läbikeevitamise tulemusena tekkiv keevisõmblus. seega sisemine pind mitte ainult ei vajaks lihvimist, vaid lausa poleerimist, et tulemus oleks normaalne. ( sa ju teed korralikku ....)

edit2:
uurides natuke hydraulika kirjandust leidsin huvitava probleemi:
esimene, et mida aeglasem on voolamise kiirus, seda tähtsam on seina siledus.

Seest ju kõik korras. Mis seal ikka lihvid. Torud on 2.5 mm seina paksusega. Keevis õmblus sealt teisele poole läbi ei jõua.

What are the specs of that Holset? Manifold looks pretty good to me, collector is well planned - you actually can put the bolts in quite easily (not so easy on my manifold) .

More mates from finland, welcome! I'll measure the compressor and turbine inducer and exducer tomorrow. A/R can also be measured I think. It's a Volvo FL6 truck turbo.

When I first fitted the turbo for just to see where it goes, then I mostly looked for the oil outlet, this had to be good.