![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Has anyone had any experience with the "gasflow" of VW engine to improve
horsepower at lower RPM? ------------------------------------------------- If by 'gasflow' you mean volumetric efficiency, I've some experience in that area. I'll also assume your question hinges on the fact that maximum torque always occurs at the point of maximum volumetric efficiency while maximum propeller efficiency comes from the longest prop that amount of torque can swing at an rpm that will keep the tip speed below about 880 feet per second. Toward that end I believe you will find it is fairly easy to emulate the torque & rpm curves typically found in aircraft engines by simply grinding a cam that approximates the timing & duration found in the small Continental engines (ie, a-65, for example). Unfortunately, following that path I found that the small displacement (1584cc or 96cid) of the stock engine leads to a rather unreliable powerplant unless you keep the manifold pressure fairly low, which of course limits the output, usually to something to small to be considered practical as an aircraft powerplant (ie, power to weight is poor). The obvious next step (at least, for me) was to increase the displacement of the engine. This gets you back into the A/C powerplant ballpark but the next limitation you will encounter, if your experience matches mine, is the thermal barrier imposed by the fin area of the VW heads. When the continuous output exceeded about 45bhp I found cylinder head temperatures in the vicinity of the exhaust valves exceeded the safe maximum level (about 450 degrees on the Fahrenheit scale). Operating at or above that level for any length of time lead to a drastic shortening of the useful life of the exhaust valves (as little as ten hours, on some experiments). On a similar note, efforts to improve volumetric efficiency through the use of a tuned exhaust system were more amusing than effective. At anything below about 3200 rpm the weight of the exhaust manifolding begins to approach the weight of the engine, since the minimum runner length is on the order of sixty inches :-) I found the best compromise to be alternate-pair exhaust stacks (ie, cylinder 1 coupled with cylinder 3 and 2 coupled with 4) each having a total length of 27" As a point of interest, I began trying to improve the output of the VW engine in the late 1950's, starting by applying all of the typical hot-rod techniques that have been used to improve volumetric efficiency. Some of them work but most do not, largely because of the nature of propellers; what you gain in apparent output at the prop flange is lost in the reduced efficiency of the propeller at high rpm. Experiments with larger valves and ports having a mirror-like finish gave remarkably better rates of flow on the flow-bench. But on a real engine there was no significant improvement in output, probably because of the relatively low flow rate of even the largest VW engine when running at prop speeds. (Typically, the engine would have to operate at 3500 or above to see any improvement in flow-smoothing.) Experiments with different combustion chamber shapes proved to be an expensive waste of time. Altering the shape of the VW's wedge-type combustion chamber appears to upset internal flow during the process of combustion. At prop speeds the typical result was less power, apparently do to improper combustion. This is partially confirmed by a marked increase in hydrocarbons in the exhaust gas, evidence of after-burning in the stacks and so forth. I'm presently working with thermal barrier coatings, having spent a couple of years learning how to appy them :-) Preliminary results on one-cylinder engines have been positive although difficult to quantify due to the relatively small scale of the improvement and lack of laboratory facilities (you have to adjust your temperature & torque observations for the local temperature & atmosphere, etc.). Finally, none of the above is new information. I've previously posted this information, including some engine modification drawings, to mailing lists devoted to flying Volkswagens (which this Newsgroup is not). If you'd care to provide a valid email address I'll be happy to point you toward the various archives. -R.S.Hoover |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Aerobatic engine IO-360 AEIO-360 comparison | Jay Moreland | Aerobatics | 5 | October 6th 04 01:52 AM |
turbo video | Peter Holm | Aerobatics | 13 | September 29th 04 11:31 PM |
Pressure Differential in heat Exchangers | Bruce A. Frank | Home Built | 4 | July 3rd 03 05:18 AM |