globi

As soon as it runs neutral then I agree. However I remember that on the Cessna 172 the center of gravity was supposed to be in front of the main wing (or its center of lift), but larger planes might be different. Anyway I think we both know what we mean.

Hymee

iTrader: (1)

OK - I guess we should leave it at that then It's all good

Cheers,
Hymee.

Ajax

AGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!! Too much airplane talk and not enough AFSC talk!!

globi

This question might have been answered before, but for what cars is an AFSC actually available?
Apparently the 1.8l Miata stock engine can handle relatively high boost, have you considered this application?
http://www.flyinmiata.com/news/ubercharger.php
I remember reading about a Honda engine running an AFSC. Could the same type be used on a Miata?

Richard Paul

iTrader: (5)

The Honda units were prototyped and three were built. Two were installed by others and out of our hands. Then We got involved with the rx8 and talked into switching over to here. (Ihave no complaints) So there is one unit left BUT you can't use it on a Miata because they turn opposite directions. The Honda turns backwards until last year when they changed.

Sorry no small car applications have been marketed as of yet. Remember this is a whole new envolope to be developed. The last one was much bigger and slower running, did not contain an internal overdrive. It is like starting over.

globi

I guess you couldn't use the ASFC unit you're designing for the RX-8 and 'just' run it at a lower speed?
Or it looks like that the Miata stock engine can handle 12 psi boost with an intercooler, so maybe you could even use the same unit at the same speed just end up with more boost?

Richard Paul

iTrader: (5)

Problem here too. The rotary is not an efficent engine, you know that because of the gas mileage, right. It takes the same CFM in a rotary to make 300HP as in a piston engine to make 400 HP. So unless your looking at a 400hp miata it can't work. It can be slowed down somewhat but if you go to slow it gets into inefficent area or even surge. Remember your flying a wing, you need to get "lift". It has to go a certain speed to get the right amount of pressure for the airspeed.

This is the reason it is so hard to get the aerodynamics right. You don't want to try and make a DC-3 wing go 600 mph or try to get a C-130 off the ground with a F-15 wing. Get it? So on top of that you have the cascade effect of the stages. This is a very complex set of equations. And even then the design must be compromised to be machineable. Now you get a taste of what I do. It take a lot work to find the right combo. Since I do not have all the test equipment of a big engine manufacturer I have to do some trial and error. Believe it or not so do the big guys.

Like it says below in my sig, "air is funny stuff"

globi

Would the 3.0l V6 Duratec be an option? (eg. Mazda 6, Tribute, a bunch of Ford's and a Jaguar).
What's the useful speed range in percentage of the maximum speed of an AFSC (approximately)?

Hymee

iTrader: (1)

It all depends on what RPM range you want it to work well, and the airflow characteristics of the engine in question.

Cheers,
Hymee.

Snoochie

Any new news/pics?

ltrx8

http://www.vs57.com/literature.htm

I see that richard paul claims to be the inventor of the latham supercharger..I found the size of unit (compared to wd-40 can) was quite small..I read rotory gods comment and began to investigate..Turns out the the inventor is J.W Oehrli who is noted as being the inventor in in the mid 1950's Financed by McCulloch.
ie..(McCulloch Chainsaws) Click the link to read more..

Aoshi Shinomori

....please take your trolling somewhere else. I don't remember Richard claiming to invent the supercharger, and you're not going to take away Richard's support. He is one of the most respected guys on this site. See you around Sherlock Holmes

Hymee

iTrader: (1)

Ummm - Excuse me, but Mr. Paul does not claim to be the inventor of this. He did purchase the Latham Supercharger Company, so he does own the name and any associated intellectual property.

Please re-read. You will find early on the he said he has found ways to make these more economically with modern production techniques.

Cheers,
Hymee.

Hymee

iTrader: (1)

Furthermore, you show your ignorance again by linking to something that is not infact an axial flow supercharger. The diagrams on the site you linked (McCulloch Supercharger) are of a inferior centrifugal design. Richards supercharger is no such beast.

Please review your comments.

Cheers,
Hymee.

Photic

Richard, You sure we can't just bolt this bad boy on?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=4527207569

rotarygod

Now that is cool!

John Corbitt

Hey RP. Is your company the Latham Manufacturing on Congress in West Palm. I have a friend, Dan Rogers, that worked there when they were making roler cams.

John

Richard Paul

iTrader: (5)

The axial flow supercharger was first built in 1955 By Norm Latham in West Palm Beach, Fla. Known as Latham Manufacturing Co. Norm made the Crane roller rocker arms all the way up to mid 1980's. I think when Harvey Crane left the firm.

Norm made the blower up till 1965. I bought the rights to the thing in 1982. I did not by the company. My company was named Latham Supercharger Company.
I redesigned the Latham to use proper aerodynamic shaped blading and built them from lost wax castings. The unit I built was completly different from Norms, nothing interchanged. They share a nominal outside dia. Not exact though.

The volutes were given aerodynamic shape also. Funny thing is that Norm was a Civil Engineer. He knew nothing about airflow or engines. However he was a very clever machinist. His Patents were only for the manufacturing method. Which was to insert a sheet metal blade into a groove then lock it with a tee shaped ring. Hard to explain but it required 364 sheet metal blades be inserted and then turned in the lathe. While clever it made a backwards looking wing. A very sharp leading edge and fat tail. No shape.

I have a bunch of those stages around here and it is amazing how accurite his work was on manual machines. Wish I had those guys working for me now.
A lot of those superchargers still work today and they show up on E bay all the time. Trouble is they flow enough air for '50's engines not todays. It was the best supercharger made in those years it just cost about 25% of what a car did.

In 1980/81 I was playing with Turbos like everyone else. In 1982 I was stacking them and finally one day I was at Larry Bowers shop who made drag race GMC style blowers. We were talking and I said all I have here is a big hair drier. I'm getting so much heat that it isnt working out to well. I felt I was beating my head against the wall. Then I had the thought "what ever happened to that Latham axial flow thing". Bowers had Hot Rod magazines in binder starting in 1947. So we grabed those down and found the ads. I called West Palm info and the girl asks if I want the buisness number or his home.

Norm says "well I'm 76 years old and was ahead of my time". He said people had been trying to buy it from him all the time but he was waiting for someone who knew what he was doing and had the wherewithall to see it through. I told him to sit right there. I was down there in 48 hours. But it didn't work out to be buildable after I spent to much money buying it from him. So after finding out it wouldn't flow enough for modern engines I redesigned it to be built with lost wax and to flow more air. I built those under the name Latham because that is all I really wound up with. I sold those from 1983 to 1990/ In 1990 I again redesigned it to be built from solid billet. That made it even more expensiive to build. I only made a few of those big billet units through 1992.

In 1998 I found the latest method using better CAD systems and better machine programs. Machine controls came a long way in the decade. In 1999 I came up with the newest method that made it practical to build them. That brings us to where we are today. Except that in 2000 we came up with the zero tip clearance stator. Thet little item has caused me some of my latest problems, but that is over with and it works just fine now.

That my freind is the history of the axial flow supercharger. I was there and knew all the personalitys involved. One more thing that should interest you is that I was involved with the Paxton Supercharger in the mid '60's. I ran the Factory number 4 Studebaker Hawk that set a bunch of records at Bonniville. See the current issue of Avanti magazine if you want more on how that came about. I think I have a few pages in there. And a little comment on Vince Granitelli and myself.

Soap box dismount, Richard

Richard Paul

iTrader: (5)

Just to show you that I own all things Latham I just looked up that item on E bay. It was sold to Glastron Boat Company on July 18 of 1963. It was made for a Ford 221 marine engine. So there.

Snoochie

Officially *Bitch Slapped*

Richard Paul

iTrader: (5)

I also have the s/n 0000001 Latham that was used by Racer Brown in tests that were discribed in the June 1956 Hot Rod magazine. If ayone wants it, I'd sell it. It does belong in the Peterson museum and they want me to donate it. I'm just not that generous.


Photic, it's bigger than your engine. It weighs 33 lbs.

Snoochie

I got 60 bucks on me.....

P.S. So how much money do you charge for tutoring, lol

globi

So what applications apart from the RX-8 do you currently offer?

Richard Paul

iTrader: (5)

I'm a lousy teacher.
The only thing we are working on other then the 8 is the S2k. And it is running second place, so you'll know when its done. Yet it might gain favor as there are less problems with it. There are many fuel systems available and it is of know quantity as far as being quite strong up to 400 hp. It also has room.

John Corbit, weren't you supposed to look up Bobby Straman for me? Remember the Se5a biplanes that should be on the airport there.

globi

I hope you don't mind if I ask so bluntly: But how do you actually pay for the food on the table - apart from the short throw shifter? :D
I actually didn't know that you can calculate this analytically. I think there are even CFD packages available specifically designed just to solve turbine related fluid dynamics (but they're also pretty expensive).