I couldn't find him! I heard it was SUPER light though.

10 lbs.

Bump....Richard??? Hello...you still here :D:

Lookin for power in all the wrong places..........
Renisis howls and goes through the paces...

Ah shit...never been a poet or songwriter :D:

Wow! Just finished reading 168 pages . . . my brain hurts now... Some of the things I've learned:

1) A ton of trivia all kinds of aircraft ...
2) That dogs gone missing under mysterious conditions (cable cutting?) really had me worried/concerned/ticked off (Yay! Torque's back!!)
3) That the boats hull was made from aluminum...
4) Axial Flow ROCKS
5) Richards favorite car color is yellow
6) Drag racing is the Fred Flinstone of motorsports (hehe - loved that one :-) )
7) That I really want this product to be a success . . . (more updates please! :-) )

And of course the one thing that is burned into memory forever . . . They weren't Jeans - they were Chaps!!! HueYa!

/off-topic/

this may be of some interest to the aero-dudes out there - a starter turbine Bradley GT link I ran accross few years back . . . http://home.mchsi.com/~siliconsurfer1/index.html

No clue how realistic it is, but it was kinda fun to check out...

/exit off-topic/

By the way I think I must of dozed off somewhere - Richard, did your rx8 engine problem ever get fixed? Was GD right on the Money as expected?? did you just put the engine on the back burner for now while your work with the used one??? What happened???? (this must be what it feels like to be stuck on a soap opera...)

Great Job Richard!! and to everyone who has been encouraging and helping along the way!!! (hymee, ajax, GD, the guitar dude, omicron etc. etc. etc.)

this is the best first post i have ever read. dedication, i will bet you have a good work ethic also.

you didnt doze, the engine problem has never been explained. or answered if it was fixed. the used one was for mock up. dont know if i works or not.

beers

Great summary of the position so far....all highlighting the need for an update, and answers to all those....unanswered :wavey:

well you missed the part where some of us have actually held one now:)

Here is a picture to give you some size reference. This is Richard holding the supercharger.

Here's my ugly mug holding it.

After holding it and playing with it, watching the little blades spin so effortlessly in person I can't wait to get one. Each day I anxiously wait for the bold little letters to appear and the time stamp to change.

Let there be an update RG.
Due to the tight fit of things in the engine compartment a whole new blower has to be built. This one will have an angled intake in the front and the outlet will be from the rear. While the actual stages stay the same every other part of the unit must change. That is a major undertaking. One I did not really want to do.

Think about it, the front and rear housings are all new, the hubs must change sizes. Then the center shaft is all new. The types of seals swap ends so they need new glands. The gearset has to move foward so they must be redesigned.
Oh, the nose peice can stay the same as can the pulley. Small help.

Then there are new adapters for both ends. Everything chases everything else.
It would be a luxury to buy an off the shelf blower. J/K :banghead: :soapbox: :crying:

Nobody worry Hymee and I are buddies, I just like to rib the rumswiggingbastard :beer:

Here is a picture to give you some size reference. This is Richard holding the supercharger.


Damn thats an awful picture of me. I'd been up all night. Can Gomez get me one of those famous masks. :wink2:

Are those your PJ's ?

I was thinking during some downtime today...which usually means I come up with some sort of off the wall idea that doesn't work:

Axial flow and centrifugal sc'rs make most of their airflow in the upper rpms. Would it be possible to have some sort of CVT-like transmission between the pulley and blower to control the blower's rpm to provide twin screw like boost performance? Thus gaining the boost profile of a twin screw unit, while retaining all benefits of the axial flow or centrifugal unit. Seems like it would work to me if you could find/design the "transmission."

Just a thought, while waiting for more updates.

/going off topic (again)/

Swoope,

I'm impressed - figuring out someones work ethic from just that ... (granted that same work ethic drives my wife nuts sometimes - after 10 years of married life, I think I've got that whole work/home balance thing worked out pretty well . . . er . . . at least until she decides I'm wrong :-)

p.s. thanks for a whole lot the beers sig (J/K), everytime I saw it I got that song stuck in my head . . .

b-double-e-double-r-u-n ... beer run!


/back on topic/

Therm8,

I believe that the question of possibly using a CVT like transmission was asked a ways back ... but it would of added too much cost to keep the the axial kit competitive.

Now if cost were no object . . .

/going off topic (again)/

Swoope,

I'm impressed - figuring out someones work ethic from just that ... (granted that same work ethic drives my wife nuts sometimes - after 10 years of married life, I think I've got that whole work/home balance thing worked out pretty well . . . er . . . at least until she decides I'm wrong :-)



naw not hard to figure, i did the same thing. read the whole tread in an evening. looked up and the sun was coming up. that was before the thread hit the 1000 post mark.

still hope one day to find out what the actual problem was with the yellow car.

beers

Therm8,

I believe that the question of possibly using a CVT like transmission was asked a ways back ... but it would of added too much cost to keep the the axial kit competitive.

Now if cost were no object . . .

I was just wondering anyway. I have seen 50cc pocket bikes that run CVTs, and the bikes cost $400-800. Obviously those would be too big, but given the cost of the bikes, I wonder how much scaling down the CVT would cost. Now mass production = lower cost, but there'd be a large market for supercharger sized CVTs I would think.

And this guy seems to have come up with an idea to eliminate most of the inefficiency associated with CVTs: http://www.andersoncvt.com/howitworks.html

50cc - Too big??? :eek: A blower takes a fair amount of power, no matter what the type.

Cheers,
Hymee.

BTW - thanks for the linky. Reading now.

The interesting thing is, RAP has a CVT transmission in his big mutha test stand he uses to spin the blower and do his measurements. I've seen it, and the blower, in action. Refer to some pics of mine from ages ago. That was the day torque disappeared. Thankfully, my twin screw project has found an abundance of torque :p

Cheers,
Hymee.

About 1989 I was looking at a proposed CVT from ZF of Germany. It was about the right size. At that time it was mechanicly controled. Today it could be electronic and be wired right into the ECU. ZF never went foward with it to my knowlage.

I only have this one life to give to supercharging and it's winding down soon. A big company that wanted to put the resorces into this could make some progress.

As to the car, NO it has never been fixed. :crying:

Hymee I hope you found torque. Weren't you the one that lost him in the first place? ;)

As to the car, NO it has never been fixed. :crying:

no SHIT, i thought we were on double secret probation about the issue. wow.

beers

I only have this one life to give to supercharging and it's winding down soon.

Ten more years in the shop and another 20 on the front porch in the rocking chair. 1000's of sunsets left... :)

I only have this one life to give to supercharging and it's winding down soon. A big company that wanted to put the resorces into this could make some progress.


You'd better hurry up and teach me what you know so I can continue the tradition after you are gone of never having a sellable completed product ready! ;) j/k

RAP,

Do you have a USB port in the back of you head? Then I could download all that info like I did from your PC when you went looking for Torque.

Yes - Torque did eventually turn up. Sometime after I left for back home here in Aus.

Cheers,
Hymee.

Hymee I hope you found torque. Weren't you the one that lost him in the first place? ;)
Amazingly found by the dog catcher just around the corner... coincidence? :suspect:

We're still thankful Richard's dogma was not run over by karma. :wink2:

You'd better hurry up and teach me what you know so I can continue the tradition after you are gone of never having a sellable completed product ready! ;) j/k



I could die a happy man knowing that Fred would continue development work and be sure to never sell anything. I could just put it in some kind of trust that stipulates all those things. It could be passed down until the world ends.
The ultimate brain trust. :rollingla :hahano: :slap:

ROFL!!! Nice one!

Are those your PJ's ?



You know I don't wear any PJ's. :shocking:

Hymee I hope you found torque. Weren't you the one that lost him in the first place? ;)


hey, i found torque ;)

hey, i found torque ;)

So did we :)

http://www.rx8club.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=62152

:mdrmed:

Cheers,
Hymee.

You know I don't wear any PJ's. :shocking: I'm secure deleting that from my brain - give me a second. OK, all better now. Now, back on track, you never replied about if your SC will allow the Mazdaspeed Front Strut Tower Brace to be installed...

Poke your minds eye out did ya? :lol:
I don't have one of those strut bars. The only thing I can do is make sure it fits the stock one. Notice the room Hymee has, then go back and look at the photos of mine mounted on the mock up engine. You can see how much lower mine is compared to the alternator. So just about anything should fit.

If it were imposable to make it fit then we would just supply our own bar. Not a hard part to make.

Notice also you can add oil to my setup. Even see the oil filter. How 'bout that Hymee?? :dunno:

Cool, I figured it was OK. Now put an LED on the back side of the blower so I can see that friggin' dipstick at night :)

richard... let's pull the 35r off my fd and blow it :D:

i'll have fred make me a header :)

I'll make it out of PVC for lightness.

http://ajax.completelyfreehosting.com/images/9-21-2005-2E.JPG

http://ajax.completelyfreehosting.com/images/9-21-2005-4E.JPG

http://ajax.completelyfreehosting.com/images/9-21-2005-6E.JPG

http://ajax.completelyfreehosting.com/images/9-21-2005-2E.JPG

http://ajax.completelyfreehosting.com/images/9-21-2005-4E.JPG

http://ajax.completelyfreehosting.com/images/9-21-2005-6E.JPG
I can't see anything Zoom. :Freak_ani

I'll make it out of PVC for lightness.


we can spray it with that high temp stuff you find at autobone :ylsuper:

there are ajax's links to RP pics in that post but they dont work:( ill ask him whats up

I'll make it out of PVC for lightness.

LMAO

Let there be an update RG.
Due to the tight fit of things in the engine compartment a whole new blower has to be built. ..... That is a major undertaking. One I did not really want to do.:

Hi Richard,

What does this mean for the project? Does this mean it may not happen at all, or be delayed a year? I have been silently following this thead from the beginning, and now check RX8club mostly to see what it happening with the project.

Thanks and best of luck.

ajax will get me those pics( from my empty post above) to repost as soon as he can.

ajax will get me those pics( from my empty post above) to repost as soon as he can.
They work now:)

sweet everyone go back a page and look at the mock up pics- then forget them 'cause hes doing it different now:D:

I still can't see them. Then again I can look at in 3D.

FYI the drawings are in the computer and being detailed. Hope to produce the new parts this month.

sweet everyone go back a page and look at the mock up pics- then forget them 'cause hes doing it different now:D:
It looks like CFH went down for some upgrades. That's cool. Hopefully it won't break again.

I still can't see them. Then again I can look at in 3D.

FYI the drawings are in the computer and being detailed. Hope to produce the new parts this month.

good luck mate!

When is this project scheduled for release?
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010

Has the engine management system problem been solved?
Keep up the good work to all grumpyoldbastards
Hope it won't be too long as petit has one almost ready to go

Hope it won't be too long as petit has one almost ready to go

Hasn't it been at that stage for a while now ??

Cheers,
Hymee.

yeah, they didn't learn anything from the previous time with the magazine article

Here's my ugly mug holding it.
why this whole time did I think Fred was an old Fart? In fact until I saw Richard Paul's picture I thought he was in his late 30s early 40s and Fred in his 50s!

I keep telling people that I don't look like what people expect. Everyone expects me to be some old guy with a white beard who was around to see the invention of bread. I'm 29. I'll be 30 in March. It's going to be tough for Richard to be in his 30's when he raced at Bonneville in the late 60's!

I keep telling people that I don't look like what people expect. Everyone expects me to be some old guy with a white beard who was around to see the invention of bread. I'm 29. I'll be 30 in March. It's going to be tough for Richard to be in his 30's when he raced at Bonneville in the late 60's!
yah you've got a baby face

My little birdie told me that MNAO ran a Renesis up to 25 PSI. Does anyone else have insider info on this? I think a 10 PSI Blower will work just fine Richard. Does higher pressure make it longer by adding stages?

As others have mentioned before...it's not necessarily the pressure that determines what happens...we are looking for mass flow and proper tuning. Detonation at 25lbs boost will kill an engine (http:///#)...but it will at no boost as well ( maybe not quite as quick though :D: ). A dead engine (#) is just that....dead...so we need to rely on proper tuning and a dose of reality...to end up with a reliable engine that produces the power we want. Personally I want a 280 to 300WHP car that is reliable...not a dyno queen, or a track race (http:///#) monster that needs to be rebuild often cause it is running on the ragged edge.

This isn't what everyone wants...hence why there are different kits out there.

Come on Richard...I like what I hear from this project..................

Yes, lots of air at 10 PSI :)

why this whole time did I think Fred was an old Fart? In fact until I saw Richard Paul's picture I thought he was in his late 30s early 40s and Fred in his 50s! Not old but young with long flowing golden hair. ;)

My little birdie told me that MNAO ran a Renesis up to 25 PSI. Does anyone else have insider info on this? I think a 10 PSI Blower will work just fine Richard. Does higher pressure make it longer by adding stages?
Temperature at max compression mainly depends on initial temperature.
T2=T1*(V1/V2)^0.4
You just have to make sure that the temperatures don't rise significantly after the compressor (intercooler, water injection, low boost and/or efficient compressor).

This old mans ears are still ringing from the test bench this morning. I mean I just got back home from the shop where we ran a 4 stage Rx8 size blower.
From this old mouth I can tell you 10psi with 85%+ efficiency. :ylsuper:
I say conservative on the eff because the ambiant was higher by the time the tests got done then it was when I pluged the number into the calcs and I forgot to look at the later number.
8psi will give you about 76 degree temp rise. That's about what we plan on giving the Ren. That way there will be extra headroom for later development of the engine.

To answer a question, yes to get higher presures it takes more stages. Each stage adds .700 to the blower. But it isn't that simple, you have to design the stages together to get the best off design performance.

Notice I said Rx8 size blower not shape. The new parts are not yet built so don't start asking for pictures. It still looks the same. Only the compressor section carries over to the new design.

RP
I'm still here by the grace of God and moonshine. I'm still following the development. 10lbs would be enough except for the diehard drivetrain blowers. We would just need a good tune with that with maybe some porting?. I still love the concept dude. Any news about the possibility of reflashing our on ecu? You know I got to thinking (which is dangerous and self limiting) but too much power would really un-balance this car for me. Heck we do pretty good on the track the way we are--just need a LITTLE more omph.
Take care you old bastard and yea I remember the Bonneville salt flats in the 60's. I was too young to drive but we where racing micro midgets in the central ga area and we helped open the 1st 1/2 mile circle figue 8 suicide dirt track also. I remember Hot Rod magazine featuring a lot of Bonneville cars. Beadlowe or something like that was holding the unlimited record.
Ah the memories--now where is my damn glasses?
Olddragger

Temperature at max compression mainly depends on initial temperature.
T2=T1*(V1/V2)^0.4
You just have to make sure that the temperatures don't rise significantly after the compressor (intercooler, water injection, low boost and/or efficient compressor).

I don't think I've seen that equation before. I've given the formula before but I'll do it again. Of course it depends on initial temp but mainly the only difference you can make is with efficiency.

100% eff (which you can get the same day I get Bo Derick) is thus:

Pr^.283-1 is your y factor
Y x degrees R (amb + 460) -460 is your rise over ambiant at 100%
100% over eff=your rise

Therfore if your 100% number is 65 and your eff is 50% then your rise is 130.
If your eff is 75 then your rise is 86 degrees. And so on.

This old mans ears are still ringing from the test bench this morning... Forget those damn ear plugs again? Who need them - hell I can't hear a damn thing right now :)

OK, you could be my Dad along with Olddragger - does not matter, I'm going to wait for you to finish - got faith in old age and treachery I guess.

Now, with what dannobre says, we need CFM at low boost - I have to ask, "If we force too much air thru the Renesis, it acts as a pressure drop, so have you caculated a "system curve" for the engine block? I remeber that old second order system curve nonsense, "It takes four times the pressure to force twice the flow thru the same diameter pipe". Does this only work for non-compressible fluids?

PS: Have you been involved in http://landspeed.com/ ??

I the posted the stock air flow measurements (at WOT) of the RX-8 engine ages ago, and Richard has a copy of that. Good tool that sCANalyser ;)

Cheers,
Hymee.

Nemesis,
I have patients at the hospital that have intestional problems that will validate the second order system curve nonsense you speak off! They realy get red in the face!
olddragger

If you want to put more CFM in it has to be with more pressure. Now if you want more MASS then you can get that with efficiency. IE cooler discharge. See above equation. :doh:

All the rambling on about turbos that have bigger comp sections so they will give you more CFM at X psi is out of context. The maps are true but you have to figure out what size hole your putting it into. If you put more mass into the hole it has to be with more pressure or cooler air. I've posted equations for this way back at the start of this thread.

If a vender is telling you he has a bigger blower so he gets more air in for a given pressure beware. The exception to that is if his compressor operates in a higher efficiency range. Then that is the unit you should be running in the first place.
Someone somewhere on the forum has shown this with specific turbo numbers. You could search Rotarygod, but that might be alot of reading. :evil_laug

I don't think I've seen that equation before. I've given the formula before but I'll do it again. Of course it depends on initial temp but mainly the only difference you can make is with efficiency. I have this equation from a physics book. T1/T2=(V2/V1)^0.4
It's valid if you compress dry air adiabatically (assume no frictional losses = 100% efficiency) which is still close to what goes on during the compression cycle in a IC engine.
It simply prooves that not boost pressure but temperature (after the compressor) is mainly responsible for knocking issues.

10psi with 85%+ efficiency This is great! And would be reason to buy a RX-8 just be able to use your compressor.

Whooo, the adiabatic efficiency of the piston otto cycle engine is about 36%.

I'll play with your equation for a few minuites.

Whooo, the adiabatic efficiency of the piston otto cycle engine is about 36%.
That's the efficiency of the whole thermodynamic otto cycle.
I was just looking at the compression part, which is of course more than 36%. An air compressor (not otto cycle) has a higher efficiency than 36%.

The reason why a piston or a rotary engine should have a relatively high compression efficiency is because they seal better than for instance a roots blower. (Although they would take more space and be heavier if simply used as compressors).
What's interesting and I believe most people don't know is that the Swiss Engineer Bernard Maillard patented a double acting 'Wankel'-compressor 1943 already. Unfortunately for Maillard he didn't realize that he could easily adapt this compressor design to create a 4-cycle engine. (See link - it's German but the pictures are self explanatory).
http://www.rx-7club.ch/pdf/Geschichte-Wankelmotor.PDF
What's also interesting is that James Watt came up with a compressor design 1759 which looks very similar to a Honeywell compressor design, that was talked about in the 80's. I wonder what happened to it?

You guys are too smart for me, but I do know that I'll wait for RP kit to become a reality. I really want one of these on my rotary.

Richard, given all this talk about efficieny I guess I'll ask a layman's question. I recall before you expressed the want to run your SC without an intercooler.

At the rate of efficiency you're achieving, does that still leave you on track to not need one?

Is there a simple guideline to how much extra heat, like a farenheit base temp, that you can push into the engine without worrying about detonation?

Do we actually know when this kit will be fully developed?
What are the sticky points of the project?
Asking these questions to try and help out or to understand what problems are still to be overcome.

After the tests we ran last weekend I'm very confident that our goals are met.
As for a limit I had heard and RotaryGod confermed that A mazda study of several years back claimed 180 f as a safe limit for intake charge. I think this study is still available someplace.

What are the problems left to solve?
First there is the redesign of the housings to fit the engine compartment and the ECU. That's it. Also the intake manifold but that has to come after the new housings are done.

Biggest problem is that we have no budget for this it has to be done around making the shop pay for itself.

Thanks Richard. We're all pulling for you!

Do we have a target price in mind then, and how was the dyno runs??(in theory)

I have the plug and play engine mangement (Interceptor-X) and would really like to see your product on the market! How can I help? Scott

No kidding!

I was going to ask RP about that. All I need is manifold pressure and temperature sensors, right. I have the LC1 afr sensor already. All three could hook up the the -X right?

This way, I could benefit from the -X right now, then add the SC later :)

richard, give me a call if you need any help.

Start taking preorders at a reduced price with a $500 deposit.


After the tests we ran last weekend I'm very confident that our goals are met.
As for a limit I had heard and RotaryGod confermed that A mazda study of several years back claimed 180 f as a safe limit for intake charge. I think this study is still available someplace.

What are the problems left to solve?
First there is the redesign of the housings to fit the engine compartment and the ECU. That's it. Also the intake manifold but that has to come after the new housings are done.

Biggest problem is that we have no budget for this it has to be done around making the shop pay for itself.

Why a reduced price???

Why a reduced price???
No kidding. You're talking about the most unique blower on the market with probably the simplest implementation there is. It doesn't even need an intercooler! If this thing isn't the most affordable aftermarket option for forced induction besides those crazy turbonators, i'll be suprised (well, engine management done right could make it pricey).

I see no reason to reduce the price..

Now, pre-orders with a deposit would help but might be hard to come by without some kind of extrapolated performance number.

How much CFM are you gearing this thing to run into the car? (or was that answered on some page way back, lol).

Does anyone know how long it will take to get a CARB EO# for the SC? (assuming it was complete and working properly right now and the paperwork was submitted on Monday)

The form is located here (Form C):
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/aftermkt/topforms.htm

Form C refers to these test procedures:
- Cold Start CVS-75 Federal Test Procedure
- Cold 505
- Hot Start CVS-75 (applicable to some diesel-powered vehciles)

Anyone know what these involve?
I tried googling and the www.epa.gov site but coulding find anything specific.

How much do independent labs charge for the first two tests? (assuming the last test doesn't apply)

i wonder if i could talk richard into making a really big one for my 3 rotor :D:

i wonder if i could talk richard into making a really big one for my 3 rotor :D:

Twincharger maybe? Although I'd be concerned since only the turbo would feed through the intercooler if that'd cool the charge enough to prevent pinging when both SC & TC are working.

If Richard won't, I have some contacts at Pratt & Whitney. You did say *really big* didn't you? :)

Speaking of a 3 rotor... interesting comments I was reading in the no. 28 issue of RX-7 Magazine. They had a big section on Sevenstock and interviews with Mr. Oku from RB and a guy from MNAO. Interesting comments... one about a 3 rotor Renesis and the other about a 4 rotor Renesis for a future 7. The MNAO guy would like to see that with a F1 McLaren 3 seater setup... take the LeMans car as a base... I wish I had bought the issue so I could translate and post the articles... maybe I'll grab one tomorrow.

If Richard won't, I have some contacts at Pratt & Whitney. You did say *really big* didn't you? :)


naw, by "really big", i mean 6-800 whp range.

:jump: :rofl: :rofl: :rollingla :rollingla :yelrotflm :yelrotflm

thats the most obscure RP post yet......

Start taking preorders at a reduced price with a $500 deposit.

Reduced price? He hasn't even named a price yet and you're already trying to undercut it!!!

I think that there are enough of us that would put down deposits to get things rolling..............What about it Richard??

You kinda answer your own question there buddy. Why a reduced price? To give incentive for people to take the plunge without substantial numbers backing up Richards claims.


No kidding. You're talking about the most unique blower on the market with probably the simplest implementation there is. It doesn't even need an intercooler! If this thing isn't the most affordable aftermarket option for forced induction besides those crazy turbonators, i'll be suprised (well, engine management done right could make it pricey).

I see no reason to reduce the price..

Now, pre-orders with a deposit would help but might be hard to come by without some kind of extrapolated performance number.

How much CFM are you gearing this thing to run into the car? (or was that answered on some page way back, lol).

You kinda answer your own question there buddy. Why a reduced price? To give incentive for people to take the plunge without substantial numbers backing up Richards claims.
He hasn't named a price yet!!! How the hell can he reduce it?

Richard, announce a selling price $1000 over what you were planning. Obviously this implies first naming a price. Then "discount" it by that much to keep the reduced price people happy.

Putting money down only gives people an excuse to complain when he doesn't hit the target date. We see it here all the time with deposits. He shouldn't take any deposits and get it done at HIS own pace. Of course he could always discount it, take a deposit, and not take the time to finish it properly leaving all of it's flaws to be worked out by the buyer. At least it would be done quickly for the impatient people though. After all you get what you pay for. That would only be fair.

Personally I'm of the belief that if you are a sceptic and rely on fudged dyno numbers as proof, go buy something else that you do believe in. If you feel this will be worth it, you'll wait for it and pay the asking price. If you don't feel it's worth it, you won't end up having one. Simple really. You won't find any other distributers so good luck getting cheap about it and still getting one. Obviously some won't wait and others will wait but then they won't pay the asking price. It happens. No big deal. That'll leave the rest to have a very nice product.

Richard presented a problem (lack of funds), and I presented a solution (preorders). There really isnt any more to it. Whatever Richard decides to do is up to him. I would think it would be obvious that a person who is as enthusiastic emough about his product to preorder it at this stage, to help development, would have a similar attitude to what you described (Wanting him to get it done in a quality manner at his own pace). But thanks for the lecture, captain obvious.

He hasn't named a price yet!!! How the hell can he reduce it?

Richard, announce a selling price $1000 over what you were planning. Obviously this implies first naming a price. Then "discount" it by that much to keep the reduced price people happy.

Putting money down only gives people an excuse to complain when he doesn't hit the target date. We see it here all the time with deposits. He shouldn't take any deposits and get it done at HIS own pace. Of course he could always discount it, take a deposit, and not take the time to finish it properly leaving all of it's flaws to be worked out by the buyer. At least it would be done quickly for the impatient people though. After all you get what you pay for. That would only be fair.

Personally I'm of the belief that if you are a sceptic and rely on fudged dyno numbers as proof, go buy something else that you do believe in. If you feel this will be worth it, you'll wait for it and pay the asking price. If you don't feel it's worth it, you won't end up having one. Simple really. You won't find any other distributers so good luck getting cheap about it and still getting one. Obviously some won't wait and others will wait but then they won't pay the asking price. It happens. No big deal. That'll leave the rest to have a very nice product.

He hasn't named a price yet!!! How the hell can he reduce it?

Richard, announce a selling price $1000 over what you were planning. Obviously this implies first naming a price. Then "discount" it by that much to keep the reduced price people happy.

Putting money down only gives people an excuse to complain when he doesn't hit the target date. We see it here all the time with deposits. He shouldn't take any deposits and get it done at HIS own pace. Of course he could always discount it, take a deposit, and not take the time to finish it properly leaving all of it's flaws to be worked out by the buyer. At least it would be done quickly for the impatient people though. After all you get what you pay for. That would only be fair.

Personally I'm of the belief that if you are a sceptic and rely on fudged dyno numbers as proof, go buy something else that you do believe in. If you feel this will be worth it, you'll wait for it and pay the asking price. If you don't feel it's worth it, you won't end up having one. Simple really. You won't find any other distributers so good luck getting cheap about it and still getting one. Obviously some won't wait and others will wait but then they won't pay the asking price. It happens. No big deal. That'll leave the rest to have a very nice product.

Hmm, I'll bet you don't own any stocks :)

Thank you guys. I think it's grat you offer but I couldn't take your money. If I did then I'd have someone to answer too. Like being married. Also it takes alot of money to develop something like this. If all we did was work on this it would get done but it would have to support all the overhead while we did it.

It's getting done, really. The manifold flanges are being cut right now and then we can fab the manifold tubing. I'm happy with the blade design now, so that is finally over. We are still running endurance tests as the same comppressor sits on the test rig. We just turn it on every so often and let it run.

So as goes on I think I'm happy with the bearings and shaft design. Oil pressure on the test rig isn't as high as it is in the car. I can raise it but the orfice is to big. This needs work as I can't get the same temp out of the oil yet. All these little things must be worked out before we release product.

Keep the faith Grasshopper. :hahano:

Lets all buy a short shifter, maybe two, that should help out a bit with the funds :p:

Lets all buy a short shifter, maybe two, that should help out a bit with the funds :p:

did that,

most of the pepole that have read "PART" of the thread miss the point that rp is doing this out of passion.

if you dont understand i cant help you.

the greater good.

beers

sorry, just my opinion i could be wrong

hey Richard;)

Racing Beat is offering an oil pressure sensor adaptor which goes in under the filter

http://www.rx8club.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=63754

i believe you have said this is where you will take oil for your SC. i assume we cant just keep stacking things on top of each other there. will your oil tap double as a presure sensor maybe?

I think that there are two taps in their spacer. If it really is a good thing to move the sensor then mine will have two taps for sure. Just 'cause you asked. Not a hard part to make. :)

Slightly off topic, but since I've been following this thread since page 1, I'm going to ask a question any how. The history page at axialflow.com mentions strut bars for the front and rear. Have you made any progress on that front? From a completely uninformed point of view, it seems that should be a considerably less involved project, and should provide some additional revenue, like the short-shifters.

Hmmm, that sorta slipped from my mind. Maybe I will go back and revisit that. I did have something worked out in my head but never drew it. It requires having an extrusion die made. I'd have to sell enough of them to pay that tab.
I'm gonna check the price of that.

hey Richard;)

Racing Beat is offering an oil pressure sensor adaptor which goes in under the filter

http://www.rx8club.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=63754

i believe you have said this is where you will take oil for your SC. i assume we cant just keep stacking things on top of each other there. will your oil tap double as a presure sensor maybe?
this is brilliant

Hmmm, that sorta slipped from my mind. Maybe I will go back and revisit that. I did have something worked out in my head but never drew it. It requires having an extrusion die made. I'd have to sell enough of them to pay that tab.
I'm gonna check the price of that.

I'm in the market for front and rear strut bars. Let me know what you come up with. I'll take a look at your site for other supercharger revenue assisting purchases.

Any ideas on how to control the wheel hop?

Any ideas on how to control the wheel hop?Easy, Rear sway.

^here here :) i second that (and drop the clutch when you make max torque..not at red line (so about 5k - 5250k rpm :) )

Anybody actually heard the Axial Flow? Richard? I leafed through the thread but may have missed this. Just curious as to the sound and how it compares to a turbo or twin screw unit?

From the street, or from the passenger seat, what will the sound be like?

On the test bench it sounds like a small jet engine revving up. With a throttlebody and intake manifold hooked up to it, you'll be really hard pressed to hear it at all.

The more stealth the better as far as I'm concerned. No one hears it, no one wants to mess with me.

Is there a mesh screen downstream of the blower before reaching the throttle body?

The throttlebody is installed in front of the blower not after it.

Just some info I posted in another thread... just thought it might be of interest for RP as I recall several conversations about MAF vs MAP and ECU behavior. This info is about the new Mustang's ECU... which is different, however, it and the RX-8'S ECU seem to behave similarly and considering that Ford and Mazda engineers regularly work together there is probably some value to looking at this info as well.

http://www.rx8club.com/showpost.php?p=1142114&postcount=34

Before supercharger


Affter supercharger

so does this mean you've got the 'charger setup completed :Wconfused , if so please put up some pics and tech info as it sounds intrestin. :mdrmed: .
if so i may ask my mum to save some money so she could put one on her '8' :biggthump

:beerchug:

Before supercharger


Affter supercharger


that could also be dsc/tc on and off hehe :mdrmed:

Does anyone else think we should force richard to work on the real supercharger, not just the flash animations version?

8)

Richard, how's the new mockup coming along?

????

OooOOoo! shiny, me like shiny objects

We have the flanges machined for the manifold and got the bends the other day.
We just have to make a swedge tool to form the manifold oval shape. Then build the manifold. That is coming along well.
We have the new rear volute made and the stages for the final design(front inlet).
The other parts are drawn and will be machined soon. The only part that needs to be made outside is the center shaft which must be center ground.
The nose and gearset are a carryover so they are ready.
The intake to throttlebody will have to be designed after it is in the car.
That will probably wind up a casting, but we will see.

Just finished a run of Rx8 shifters and the first batch of S2k shifters, so some machine time is opening up.

yay! good luck....

Any news to quench us before years end? :)

He did ask me about an ecu solution about a week ago so he must be getting close.

^^^
Hooray!!!!!

Interceptor, PowerMod, Motec or ?

^^^^^^ Hehehe - only the Aussie options ;)

There was a reason I wrote those :)

forgot one.

beers

Those Aussies are so cocky. ;) ;) :dark:

I know I forgot one :) But I know how much RP loves a good Assuie smack.

Richard, my shifter needs his big brother under the hood in '06

what you need is a webcam in your shop/garage :)

I started a new thread to ask this question but didn't get enough response so as to have a good answer.
How many ribs are there on your AC belt?
I have two different styles here, my car has three and my spare engine has four.
I need to design the kit for something. I suppose my car is wrong as it is an early build. Yet how long did this go on?

If yours is a three rib also give me the build date. Anyone with an 05 or 06 check in on this please.

Nov 03 build date

ALternator belt/water pump 5 rib belt...4 land pulley
A/C /idler belt... 4 rib belt 3 land pulley

RP are your compressors/turbines capable of pumping hydraulic fluid?

Are they capable of pumping that incompressible fluid at the speeds that would be necessary for the supercharger to work?

Basically hydraulic input to an axial turbine which was connected by a shaft to the AFSC (no gearing).
Assuming the correct amount of hydro pressure and flow rate would it be possible to drive the supercharger to the speeds necessary for a FI setup.


Off the wall question yes just trying to develop an idea.

:crazy: :crazy: Mad scientist at work :crazy: :crazy:

Ok, I know there have been things posted in this monster thread that I really didnt understand....but this one is completely baffling me. Maybe I just misread it...trying to figure out how hydraulic fluid fits into the SC picture....

Ok, I know there have been things posted in this monster thread that I really didnt understand....but this one is completely baffling me. Maybe I just misread it...trying to figure out how hydraulic fluid fits into the SC picture....
Ditto :scratchhe

he want sto run it hydraulically instead of by a belt

too much loss with hydraulic drive over belt drive I would think

Your first question answered itself. If you want to pump a non compressable fluid, use a pump. You can't compress it. This is a compressor, a roots is a pump.

The rest of your post I don't understant unless what Zoom said is it. Then of course you can use hydrulic motors to drive anything. It just adds machinery and anytime you change mediums you lose something.

Or were you thinking that the SC could run itself, perpetual motion machine?

Yes - a perpetual motion machine!

http://www.rx8club.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=67623&stc=1

actually i had a perpetual motion thought the other day not unlike that picture. the water falls thru a really efficient indestructible generator. the generator makes electricity which is used to heat the water basin. there is an angled roof over the structure so the evaporating water condensates and drips back into the resevoir above the generator. perpetual motion:)

my arm is a prepetual motion machine when my eyes are staring at a Playboy.

LMAO guy321!

RP I sent you a PM via the s2ki.com site with my email address.
I want to send you my design notes/pictures of the "out of the box" ideas I have.

I should have stated my question more clearly.

What I meant to ask is it possible to C&C a hydro pump and a motor (no compression) using an adaptation of your design... would need to be capable to pump/run at the same speeds as the compressors necessary RPM to obtain the desired flow rate and pressure

RP when you see my design notes it should be clearer what and why I am trying to do....

Do you have Microsoft word?

Yes I am looking at alternatives to using a belt drive the system.
Exhaust driven turbine (something other than aluminum it wont stand up to the heat) drives a high speed axial hydro pump (no compression) which provided hydro pressure to a hydro axial pump which in turns drives the compressor. No gear sets necessary.
Or connect the turbine and the compressor together via a shaft (turbo style)
Back to the hydro system: Turbine and compressor are separated thermally as much as possible to reduce heat transfer via conduction through the metals and via convection from the header to the compressor casing. Using hydro system to drive the compressor in this way allows more options in mounting the compressor. And most importantly since the mass moment of these systems is very low and the thermo-mechanical efficiency is hi; no boost lag and very linear boost profile.
Making the system more like a turbo set up but using an axial compressor and an axial turbine.

Yes - a perpetual motion machine!

http://www.rx8club.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=67623&stc=1


And I'm spending the weekend in Vegas with Angelina.

[QUOTE=deppenma]RP I sent you a PM via the s2ki.com site with my email address.
I want to send you my design notes/pictures of the "out of the box" ideas I have.



Negative, just checked the S2k forum and no PM.
No I do not have word, I hardly have anything as I never got the damn thing fixed.

Take your camcorder, but only film Angelina :)

Take your camcorder, but only film Angelina :)


I'm hurt!
:rollingla :rollingla :rollingla

Or connect the turbine and the compressor together via a shaft (turbo style)

Cool. To quote RP from an much, much earlier post: "You just invented the Jet Engine." :) ;)

Cheers,
Hymee.

twas me that did that- and dont forget it. im thinking of changing the name to something more..... snappy. for the ad campaigns;)

what type of word processing software do you have?
word perfect?
what about power point??

If not I will print out what i have and send you a letter via your return info from my SS box.

You will probably have to send the letter as RP broke is poor puter and has yet to fix it. There are about 10 pages of this thread, way back somewhere, dedicated to trying to help get his computer fixed haha.

Hey Richard,
Did you realize that if you get this supercharger running that you partially getting to work what Rolls Royce patented about 10 years ago? (Not that this would get you in trouble by any means, but it's interesting nevertheless.)

They patented an aircraft engine where a rotary engine drives an axial flow compressor and the exhaust gases drive an axial exhaust turbine which drive a fan.

Of course the size of the turbine blades compared to the engine are completly off and the power density of an actual turbofan could never be reached, but it must have been patented by Rolls Royce for some reasons.

Hey Richard,
Did you realize that if you get this supercharger running that you partially getting to work what Rolls Royce patented about 10 years ago? (Not that this would get you in trouble by any means, but it's interesting nevertheless.)

They patented an aircraft engine where a rotary engine drives an axial flow compressor and the exhaust gases drive an axial exhaust turbine which drive a fan.

Of course the size of the turbine blades compared to the engine are completly off and the power density of an actual turbofan could never be reached, but it must have been patented by Rolls Royce for some reasons.



I had not heard of this before. I can't make out how the rotory engine fits inside the turbofan in that drawing but I'd sure like to see the whole paper. How do you get that from the net? If you can.

Go on:
http://free.patentfetcher.com/Patent-Fetcher-Form.php
Type in the patent number:
5692372
Then click on: Fetch

(Make sure that you have a PDF Reader installed).

The parts labeled "26" above are the rotors. You can see a front view if you download the patent file Three rotors to be precise. Nice find globi.

To bad it's not the same thing, wouldn't I just love them to sue me. I'd even pay them to sue me. That would put me on the map.

almost a jet turbine engine.
Looks like the rotors are used to get the system to operational speeds.

It is a turbofan engine. It substitutes the combustion chamber with 3 rotary engines to apparently reach higher efficiencies.

If you take off the axial flow turbine and the fan, it's basically a rotary engine with an axial flow compressor. That's why I mentioned it.

Also, if you read the patent you'll notice that NASA apperently worked on a similar concept in the 70's. So it's not a completly new idea.

nice find

depending on the axial compressor would the rotary need to spinn at very high speeds 20000+ RPM.

Thats one of the main things I love about rotary engines there is allmost no max operational limit.

RP paper designs/ideas have been sent to your email.
Let me know if you have problems with the file/document.

I have your study and I must say you spent some time thinking and drawing. I could use that energy myself. Anyway I think you invented the turbocharger except you replaced the shaft with a hydraulic pump and motor.
Yes it could work but would be alot of extra equipment and money.
Hyd pumps are very heavy because they make lots of pressure. Ditto the motor. Cast iron with steel rotors.

If you want to think about something try a high pressure axial flow compressor that lets it fluid expand in a turbine that then drives a centifugal compressor or another AF in series with the first for very high boost applications like tractor pullers. Say 100+ psi or Pr of 7 or more.

Still I like the effort. You might try some of those things on the goverment for a grant. If I could do it right I would present them something. Just have to know the BS to print with it. Read some of the grants they have given and you'll get the idea. How about a spherical piston? Got a patent on it too. How stupid do you have to be??

combine his "turbo" with my "jet engine" and we can have a "turbojet"!! tm copyright all license reserved etc etc.

Is the axial turbocharger (direct drive shaft from axial expansion turbine to axial compressor turbine) feasible depending on the exhaust turbine material.

Might be worth looking in to in the future.


When I get board at work (R&D) my mind tends to think about these things. :evil_laug

Zoom44
Yes, there has been a guy calling me about that, I think his name is Whittle.
That might not be exactly how he spells it, British accent and all. He's looking for you but I didn't have your number.

Then when I woke up it didn't seem to matter. :mdrmed:

Is the axial turbocharger (direct drive shaft from axial expansion turbine to axial compressor turbine) feasible depending on the exhaust turbine material.

Might be worth looking in to in the future.


When I get board at work (R&D) my mind tends to think about these things. :evil_laug


Yes, it's been done. Sorry. The thing that hasn't been done is the expandable air to start with. Just never gonna get that perpetual motion machine done no matter what I try.

Anyone out there invented the breeder reactor yet? Or cold fusion?

Yes cold fusion has been done, but the power they have received from it so far hasn't been completely worth while, but they are on the right track.

Yes cold fusion has been done, but the power they have received from it so far hasn't been completely worth while, but they are on the right track.


Ah yes, but can you put a unit number on "cold"?
Therein lies the quirk.

Is the axial turbocharger (direct drive shaft from axial expansion turbine to axial compressor turbine) feasible depending on the exhaust turbine material. Might be worth looking in to in the future.
Actually the original turbocharger patent from 1905 shows an axial flow compressor and axial flow turbine (couldn't find a better picture):
http://www.histomobile.com/histomob/internet/techniqu/113-1.jpg

And ABB makes turbocharger with axial flow turbines:
http://www.abb.com/global/gad/gad02007.nsf/Images/BC6953AB872BC9D7C1256FCD006E36F0/$File/TPL_A%20Kopie.jpg

yes axial compressor but the exhaust side looks like the standard designs of today.


I was looking for a turbo like setup but with both sides being an axial flow compressorand axial flow expansion turbine.

yes axial compressor but the exhaust side looks like the standard designs of today.
I'm not sure what you are referring to, but the ABB turbocharger has a radial compressor and an axial exhaust turbine. Intake = blue, exhaust = orange.

I was looking for a turbo like setup but with both sides being an axial flow compressorand axial flow expansion turbine.
As I said the turbocharger design that was patented 101 years ago, had both axial flow compressor and axial flow turbine.

With an axial compressor in a turbocharger you'd need several stages in order to reach the same pressure ratio as with a single radial compressor wheel. It would make it more complicated and increase the rotational mass and you'd end up with a giant turbohole.

My father used to tell me that I was a wealth of useless information.
Ya see dad, I could've had more. :hahano: :Eyecrazy:

At least if you read, you don't necessarily end up repeating errors or develop products others came with already.
Besides I don't know whether this is the actual reason why we don't have axial flow compressors in turbochargers. So I can only guess, but this is how I would explain it.

Also last year was the centennial of the turbocharger, so many people probably read about its invention anyway - after all pretty much all ships, trains and trucks are fitted with turbochargers.

With the better picture now I see what you were talking about globi.
I thought axial flow compressors were more efficent than a radial compressor wheel. Hence this project to develop an axial flow supercharger.

I thought it was conventional to call those "radial" compressor wheels centrifugal

Cheers,
Hymee.

So without browsing through the 2000+ posts, is there any word on this? Still in R&D, scrapped, in production?

it is close to production and nearing the need for a final tuning solution. richard is awaiting a response from someone on their idea

Ah yes, but can you put a unit number on "cold"?
Therein lies the quirk.


Pyroelectric fusion was reported in April 2005 by a team at UCLA. The scientists used a pyroelectric crystal heated from −34 to 7 °C, combined with a tungsten needle to produce an electric field of about 25 gigavolts per meter to ionize and accelerate deuterium nuclei into an erbium deuteride target. Though the energy of the deuterium ions generated by the crystal has not been directly measured, the authors used 100 keV (a temperature of about 109 K) as an estimate in their modeling.[9] At these energy levels, two deuterium nuclei can fuse together to produce a helium-3 nucleus, a 2.45 MeV neutron and bremsstrahlung. Although it makes a useful neutron generator, the apparatus is not intended for power generation since it requires far more energy than it produces.


They advertised it as room temperature. Even though they didn't generate more energy than what was put in, they're working on it. :)

Shows a bit of promise.

Photic, you're a geeks geek. :rollingla :rollingla

It's been so long since this adventure started that I've forgotten why exactly an axial flow supercharger is superior. I'd rather not have to read through everything again and I was wondering if someone could quickly tell everyone why this is better than a normal supercharger or turbo?

why this is better than a normal supercharger or turbo?
it is made by Richard Paul the III King of Boostishire ;)

^ Here are some of its advantages compared to other superchargers:
- lighter
- smaller
- more efficient
- doesn't need a bypass valve or a clutch

adding to globi’s comments the AFSC is both thermodynamically
and mechanically more efficient.

truemagellen said all i need to hear. i had no idea richard paul is a king. that does it for me.

globi and deppenma, thanks for your input, but don't you think your info is a little irrelevant and off topic? :hahano:

You don't have to read the whole thread. Most of what you want is in the first five pages. That is when the entire forum was asking the same thing.

By the Trugell I like that title, I think I'll keep it.
I mean if Richard Petty can do it...........so there are two King Richards. Maybe that's why I'm the third?
Not that I can compare to his record of achivements. He truely is a King, but what the hell.

globi and deppenma, thanks for your input, but don't you think your info is a little irrelevant and off topic? :hahano:



Isn't that what you asked?

sarcasm richard;)

and richard i thought i was going to be emailing you today. but im waiting to hear back from someone

[QUOTE=zoom44]sarcasm richard;)


:doh:

Someone email me. Let it be the KING.

It is amazing how much you add to all the conversations in which you partisipate, spitura.

There, how's that for sarcasm?

carBONE, how's the chemistry and sashimi going? your intellectual prowess was so impressively irrelevant. are you ever going to finish hornet high school?

They advertised it as room temperature. Even though they didn't generate more energy than what was put in, they're working on it. :)

Shows a bit of promise.

I read that article, I found it outstanding.

'Course, im a geek also.

A geek with a pretty car though :ylsuper:

carBONE, how's the chemistry and sashimi going? your intellectual prowess was so impressively irrelevant. are you ever going to finish hornet high school?


Hey, sarcasm is fine but no insults, not on my thread anyway. I have friends who are mods and they are bothered by the legnth of the thing now.

sportura- we arent playing that game. thats enough.

carbonRX8- you too. cut the personal attackes

This site is under construction.

Are we waiting on engine management here? Given that there are flash tuners coming out, and you may be looking at this option, I would personally like the ability to dyno tune this blower for the rest of my mods with an ECU like the Interceptor. Any updated thoughts on this?

RP what is the Boost Vs engine RPM profile/equation with the current compressor?

I know the relationship is linear just what is the profile
1psi : 1kRPM;
1.5psi : 1kRPM;
2psi : 1kRPM
Ect ???

And also how would the ratio change if you were to add stages to the compressor to put out 10,11,or 12psi max

Knowing the maximum boost is based on max engine rpm and compressor design (compressor stages) I would like to calculate the boost amount at any RPM assuming WOT

Assuing efficiency stays constant as rpm's rise, it would be a direct ratio of rpm vs boost. As an example if he set it up to run 8 psi at 8000 rpm, it would be 4 psi at 4000 rpm, 2 psi at 2000 rpm, etc. He has played with the blade design to give different efficencies at certain rpms though to get the curve he wants so this may not hold exactly true. I also don't know what boost level he wants to run. The axial flow is a pretty steady boost rise with rpm as compared to a centrifugal which has boost rise as the square of the rpm (not sure if I worded that properly but you get the idea).

So roughly its a 1psi:1k engine RPM ratio regardless of the number of compressor stages.

Theoretically. Richard will probably elaborate on it more.

You don't have to read the whole thread. Most of what you want is in the first five pages. That is when the entire forum was asking the same thing.

By the Trugell I like that title, I think I'll keep it.
I mean if Richard Petty can do it...........so there are two King Richards. Maybe that's why I'm the third?
Not that I can compare to his record of achivements. He truely is a King, but what the hell.

NASCAR Richard Petty? He was one of the greats. I was never a Dale Earnhart fan (hey.. I'm a Ford man), but that man could drive a car.

Didn't know you kept up with NASCAR.

Ok, I read like the first 30 pages of this thread before I realized just how long it's gotten. Can we get a capsule summary for the late joiners like myself ? What's the state of this projects ? Has it been put in a car yet ? Are they available to buy ?
Thanks!

I think he's got the final design down now, and is working on getting production started

sorry i cant go through all the post to find it but...whats the estimate price of this kit??

Somewhere between 5k and 25k would be a safe guess.

:nono:

In the 4k's depending on the controller cost.

That's a sweet deal :)

:nono:

In the 4k's depending on the controller cost.


ooo a price :) any chance on estimated power?

Somewhere between 50 and 500 hp ;)

I know that RG, I know he posted the price in the first post, but that was so long ago.. now that we are getting somewhere it's nice to know the price is still sitting where it started.. it looks like it's still @ 8psi, which if we use the greddy turbo as an example @ 7 psi with the right controller means 65-100 hp gain with boost choking @ 7500 rpm, a SC won't have this problem so it'd venture to say it'd get closer to 120 or more @ top end and have no lag.

maybe i'm wrong...

Somewhere between 50 and 500 hp ;)


I'll take the 500hp version please :ylsuper:

At a guess I'd say around the 300hp mark at the wheels. Richard will fill us in after he gets it totally done and tested. I know he's hesitant to give a number right now as he doesn't want to say one that is overly optiistic and then not hit it.

At a guess I'd say around the 300hp mark at the wheels. Richard will fill us in after he gets it totally done and tested. I know he's hesitant to give a number right now as he doesn't want to say one that is overly optiistic and then not hit it.


300 at the wheels would make the RX8 the car of my dreams. I might be able to hang with my coworkers GTO with that kind of power :D:

RP what is the Boost Vs engine RPM profile/equation with the current compressor?

I know the relationship is linear just what is the profile
1psi : 1kRPM;
1.5psi : 1kRPM;
2psi : 1kRPM
Ect ???

And also how would the ratio change if you were to add stages to the compressor to put out 10,11,or 12psi max

Knowing the maximum boost is based on max engine rpm and compressor design (compressor stages) I would like to calculate the boost amount at any RPM assuming WOT

RP is the above asumption valid??/

What a crappy answer!! ;)

Somewhere between 50 and 500 hp ;)

What a crappy answer!! ;)hahaha:yelrotflm

RP is the above asumption valid??/


In a perfect world where the eff for both the engine and the SC were the same throughout their RPM range then yes. But we know this is not true don't we?
The pumping of both will effect the other, however for arguments sake we call it linear. Thus if there is going to be 8psi at 9000 then it is about 1 psi per 1k.

I have found a graph from some tests done on the dyno by Peterson Publishing years ago with four different blowers on the same engine. I'm going to try and get it scaned or photoed for you. It shows a lot about HP vs boost at the flywheel.

richard, you are my hero...
i think you need to start your own "The Apprentice"... show donald trump what's up.
anyway, good to hear everythings going well, cant wait for this thing. well i can, but, yeah...

hummm maybe you all would like to see this, althought i have no idea what car this is on....... don't look like an 8 to me...

I have found a graph from some tests done on the dyno by Peterson Publishing years ago with four different blowers on the same engine. I'm going to try and get it scaned or photoed for you. It shows a lot about HP vs boost at the flywheel.


You're right Mark- i doubt its an RX-8;) :rolleyes:

I have a copy of the same graph, and the report that goes with it, courtesy of RAP.

Pretty sure it is a 350 Chev.

You're right Mark- i doubt its an RX-8;) :rolleyes:
You think your so smart now that your a dad eh.....
It is a test of my axial flow SC against the other roots blowers all limited to 7psi manifold pressure on the same engine. All done by Airflow Research on a Superflow dyno.

Somewhere between 50 and 500 hp ;)
You think your so smart now that your a dad eh.....

HAHAHAHAHA.


Sorry. Had to consolidate...

This is a test that I spoke of a long time ago but couldn't find. It is a test of a 350 Chevy that had a base of aprox 320 BHP. The test was for all blower manufacturers to install their units set up for a max of 7 psi. If it didn't we had to change pulleys until we did.
The reason it is important here is that my unit made twice the increase then the next competitor. Aprox 140 vs 70. Also while the axial flow didn't make the pressure at the bottom end it still passed the roots at 3000 RPM. It started to pass the others while making less pressure due to the efficiency.

In the end the difference is that there was more mass for the given pressure and took less power to drive it. The new blower has more then 20 years of development from the unit tested here. It will perform much better in terms of efficiency and boost curve. Therefore I am anticipating that we will still match and then pass the positive displacment units at 3000 (even though it has a 9000 redline)and outperform them at the top for any given boost.

I also can claim this sort of delta compared today with any roots blower out there.

I have a copy of the same graph, and the report that goes with it, courtesy of RAP.

Pretty sure it is a 350 Chev.


You have that article? I don't have it, send me a copy, please.

It is a test of a 350 Chevy

Just call me "Never Wrong" Hymee ;) :mdrmed:

Cheers,
Hymee.

You have that article? I don't have it, send me a copy, please.

Don't tell me you gave me your last copy. You sillyoldbastard.

Cheers,
Hymee.

In the end the difference is that there was more mass for the given pressure.


So what this translates to in laws of nature is that your compressor puts less heat into the charge, as the relationship between pressure, mass and volume gets back to a constant. More mass for the same pressure must mean less temp.


I also can claim this sort of delta compared today with any roots blower out there.

Thank goodness I'm using a twin-screw instead. :angel:

Cheers,
Hymee.

Don't tell me you gave me your last copy. You sillyoldbastard.

Cheers,
Hymee.

I must have the original magazine but it hasn't jumped out at me lately.

So what this translates to in laws of nature is that your compressor puts less heat into the charge, as the relationship between pressure, mass and volume gets back to a constant. More mass for the same pressure must mean less temp.

And If you don't make the heat you don't use the power to produce it. :scratchhe



Thank goodness I'm using a twin-screw instead. :angel:

I was carefull not to lump you in there as just a PD. :moon:

I wish I could edit your posts and fix the quotes up for you!

Cheers,
Hymee.

RP compressor gets more net power form an engine because of the following main reasons not including the mixing effect if additional fuel is added before the compressor

1) It take less power to drive the unit at any given PSI/RPM (less parasitic drag on the crank) :shocking:


2) It produces a higher mass flow rate at any given PSI/RPM (due to a more efficient compression mode causing less heat of compression) :shocking:

3) The compressed air charger is lower in temperature so the ignition timing can be advanced. :shocking:

what's wrong with his quotes?

RP compressor gets more net power form an engine because of the following main reasons not including the mixing effect if additional fuel is added before the compressor

1) It take less power to drive the unit at any given PSI/RPM (less parasitic drag on the crank)

2) It produces a higher mass flow rate at any given PSI/RPM (due to a more efficient compression mode causing less heat of compression)

3) The compressed air charger is lower in temperature so the ignition timing can be advanced.


Damn, I was trying to cheat a little by not mentioning that mixing thing. I guess you read my homoginization paper where I mention this test. So yes the fuel went in before the blower because it was a drawthrough carb system. So were the others. But the ign timing was held the same for all blowers.

I read that homogenization article also...is this unit for the RX-8 not going to do the homogenization process also?

..... But the ign timing was held the same for all blowers.

ok so you could have gotten even more POWER than the other guys :biggthump

I'd be curious to see what would have happened if that test was allowed to have seen what the full max potential from each design was with optimum tuning for each setup. Forget being fair. Let the axial flow walk away even further from those heaters.

Well said rotarygod


I don’t think it has been posted yet what is the output of the compressor at WOT in either
mass flow rate VS RPM
OR
lbs of air VS engine RPM??

RP are you still planning on adding additional fuel before the compressor?
If yes
Have you figured out how much heat will be removed from the air charge due to the evaporation/mixing of the fuel with the air as it goes thru the compressor?

You really can't put a definitive figure on how much heat is going to be taken out. You always want to be careful when injecting fuel that far away. If you get a backfire in the intake (probably a lot harder on a rotary than pistons), you can very easily destroy the blower.

So is the Axial Flow basically a better centrifugal blower (in powerband type)?

You always want to be careful when injecting fuel that far away. If you get a backfire in the intake (probably a lot harder on a rotary than pistons), you can very easily destroy the blower.

Not just a backfire, but any source of ignition such as foreign object ingestion or a broken blade could be bad news. Would an ignition source turn the AFS into a blowtorch? Or did I just invent the jet engine? :)

i invented the jet engine 40 or more pages ago. in fact you owe me a quarter for use of the term:D:

You really can't put a definitive figure on how much heat is going to be taken out. You always want to be careful when injecting fuel that far away. If you get a backfire in the intake (probably a lot harder on a rotary than pistons), you can very easily destroy the blower.

So is the Axial Flow basically a better centrifugal blower (in powerband type)?
If he added fuel befre the blower, it would only be at higher boost levels when the air is moving very fast. He wouldn't inject it full time.

The powerband should be better than a centrifugal. As was stated earlier, in a perfect world the boost curve of this would be linear. A centrifugal though has it's boost rise with the square of the rpm. The axial would have more midrange power.

So the intent is still to have the supplemental boost fuel added before the compressor?

no

He wasn't going to do it as far as I knew. That's just how he would do it if he decided to.