Im working on a whipple twin screw supercharger powered car, its axial flow. Now we are back on topic.

 

Rotarygod, would you try this, (once again). you write better then I do.

 

Would I try what? If you are referring to Ice's comment, he's only joking. We all know Whipple's are really centrifugal!

 

Apologies to Richard in advance...

I'm someone who had his thread about Richard's Short Shifter project hijacked by some fool suffering from too much time on his hands and too little patience.
I shall refrain from name-calling..

Gomez.

 

Yes whipples are quite centrifigual :D

http://www.customfurniture.net/rodjaypdx/page2.html

 

The jokes on me, I'm a little slow.
Damn good thing I didn't give a two page lecture, then I'd have to shoot someone.

 

Great picture! I love the custom cold radiator fan air intake!

 

First pf all the correct term fo the turbo is "turbosupercharger".

Next I would love to see the intake temp. Wanna bet it melts the eaton rotors if held at full throtle.

I was once contracted by an off shore team in Italy to go over to their facility and consult on S/cing. They had run into trouble with roots blowers on the dyno. They were getting the rotors so hot that they got soft and started transfering metal. That was with 12 psi.

The only way to get away with WOT as on an offshore boat is to run the fuel into The blower. Can't do it with port injection.

I got a nice trip to Italy though. I was there three days and gained 6 lbs.
Had to stop in GB for a few days to loose it.
Sorry Brits, I love England and the people but your food sucks.

But I love the air horns.

 

Quite correct, especially since that turbo is non-intercooled. After seeing a friends 99 MX-5 running 20 PSI on an Mp62 with air/water intercooler and water injection and seeing 300-400F temperatures, woohoo.

I am not the one working on that setup, but they are possibly planning to actually sell a setup like that (in small quantities), or at least using it as a joke.

My setup is just straight 1.2L twin screw with air/water intercooler and water injection. Might not need the water injection but we will see.

 

Something's wrong with the pictures on this page, but here's an interesting blurb about a real-life combination of turbo and SC:

http://freespace.virgin.net/shalco.com/lancia_S4.htm

 

It's definitely been done before. There are just so many easier ways to get alot and probably far more power than combining two different systems. I would like to see them sequential. I'd like to see a positive displacement supercharger for the low end but then swtich over to a turbo for the high end. I would rather see them integrated in parallel rather than series. This would be a bitch to do but it is actually hinted that this is the technique used on the rally car in that article. That would be cool.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tokenbrit
Who the hell do you think you are anyway!


Well, at least we know that Gomez is not a whinging POM!

Joe

 

All I have been doing in the past is putting forward an opinion. To me, that's my right as a forum member here. It seems to me that the loyalty RP has attained here has put him on a pedestal. I hope this loyalty is well placed. I wish him luck, I really do, because (in my opinion) this will be the ideal type of FI for road use.
It is clear that my worries are not shared by many others. And I'll leave it there...

 

C'mon RG - do you want seqential or parallel? Hehehe.

As a mater of fact, it is quite common in marine engine applications to employ a combination of both a mechanical-supercharger, and a turbo-supercharger. I get extra points from RAP for those terms

As one who has gotten to know RAP personally, and seen his workshop and products, I would like to ask TokenBrit, in the politest possible manner, to tone it down a bit, thanks very much.

RAP's axial flow is a piece of engineering perfection. Well, nearly as perfect as a Autorotor twin screw Hats off to you, RAP.

Cheers,
Hymee.

 

And I appologise for this (really), because I am briefly taking this thread off track again.

BUT Gomez, I don't like your digs at me. I told you to that if you wanted to insult me, do it on PM. If you haven't got the ***** to do that. Your more of a ***** than I originally thought you were. Don't slyly dig me. That's the cowards way...

Back on thread now... Sorry everybody.

 

Done. I wasn't wanting to start a 'war' anyway.

 

Your getting the last word type of comment will probably get a rebuttal again. We don't need that. Your message as per your own statement could have been sent through a PM and not here. Please guys, stop it!

 

Just use an electric turbo and you're all set.

 

There is no such thing as an electric turbo. Turbochargers are, by definition, TURBINE-DRIVEN superchargers. An electrically driven supercharger in NOT a turbocharger.

 

Oops, I see how that wording was very confusing and actually wrong. I was thinking one think but typing another. I would like to see the supercharger only for low end and the high end only on the turbo. When I said sequential, I actually meant a transfer from one to the other rather than bringing the other one in later in conjunction with the first. You probably figured that out though.

 

No such thing? So what's this then?
http://rotarynews.com/?q=node/view/381

An electric motor doesn't care whether it has to drive a supercharger (centrifugal, axial, twin screw, roots etc.), a turbocharger with a turbine wheel and a centrifugal compressor on the same axis or a leaf blower for that matter.

 

He was being technical.

 

Precisely. I tend to use words carefully.

The item to which the link refers is an electrically-assisted turbocharger. It is NOT an "electric turbocharger." It is a turbocharger by virtue of having a turbine to drive the compressor at high engine speeds, as all turbosuperchargers (the proper term) have. You can electrically assist almost any rotating device.

The electrically-assisted turbosupercharger is actually quite an interesting idea and sounds practical if one has sufficient electrical power to operate it. I would assume that the electric motor automatically disconnects after the turbine gets up to speed via an over-running clutch or some such device.

I just tend to get rather annoyed at the hordes of folks who seem to think that "turbochargers" are not superchargers.

 

Hooray!!! Here, here!! My sentiments exactly!

We have 2 basic genre...

(1) Turbo-superchargers,
(2) Mechanical-superchargers.

Item 1, is commonly known as a "Turbo".
Item 2 could be extended to include Electrically driven.

Then one could further decompose these families into the types of compressors they use - Positive Displacement (Roots, Twin-Screw, Vane), and Centrifugal and Axial Flow.

Then you could even decompose the "turbo" bit to indicate if it was axial flow, like in a jet engine, or the common turbine wheel style.

And then you could start making all sort of combinations of the drive mechanism, and the compressor mechanism Some would be practical, and some not. One combo would be a Jet engine as seen in aircraft, another combo would be a gas turbine like in a ship or generator, one combo would be the "turbo".

An impractical combo would probably be a exhaust driven positive displacement supercharger

Cheers,
Hymee.

 

And Item 2 could be extended to include pneumatic, hydraulic or even flywheel driven superchargers. (Not that any of these would necessarily be any better).

And in addition to a turbocharger one could use a turbine wheel to drive or rather assist the crankshaft instead of driving a supercharger. As for instance Scania does, which claims to sell the most efficient Truck engines.

http://www.scania.com/products/new_t...itre/470hp.asp