DIY interfooler?
Oct 15, 2006, 07:39 PM
#46
my goodness some of you people need to learn to listen. This is common sense stuff.
The further the distance the filter is from the throttle body, the longer its gonna take for the air to get there. Therefore, when you mash the gas pedal its gonna take longer for the air to get into the engine. Therefore decreasing throttle response.
Also to get the air from the front bumper all the way to the throttle body, there are going to be alot of curves in the piping. This will slow down the air even more. Whats the shortest distance between 2 points........a straight line. So lots of curvy pipes going from the bottom of the bumper of your car, to the throttle body........is gonna be a long long way for the air to travel.
The entire idea of this is retarded and pointless. There would be ZERO gains from doing anything remotely like this.
The further the distance the filter is from the throttle body, the longer its gonna take for the air to get there. Therefore, when you mash the gas pedal its gonna take longer for the air to get into the engine. Therefore decreasing throttle response.
Also to get the air from the front bumper all the way to the throttle body, there are going to be alot of curves in the piping. This will slow down the air even more. Whats the shortest distance between 2 points........a straight line. So lots of curvy pipes going from the bottom of the bumper of your car, to the throttle body........is gonna be a long long way for the air to travel.
The entire idea of this is retarded and pointless. There would be ZERO gains from doing anything remotely like this.
Oct 15, 2006, 09:11 PM
#47
Evolved Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Bangkok
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The funnel thing actually does work - in that it is hard to suck the water up. But that's because you're pulling against gravity and the ratios between the two areas aren't in your favour.
If the tube diameter is 'd' and the water level is at a height 'h' above where the tube starts to taper out and make a funnel shape, the equation is like this:
{Pa x (pi/4) x d^2} > {m x g} + {Ps x (pi/4) x (d + (2 x h x tanA))^2} for the liquid to move upwards.
where Pa = atmospheric pressure; Ps = pressure above water and the included angle in the cone is 2A. Mass of water = m and g is the usual.
Obviously this neglects vsicous effects and so on, but if it's just a small funnel with water in it, it shouldn't really matter.
Anyway, from the equation, it's clear that Ps has to be really small (or large negative). Assuming d << 2htanA then it's pretty horrible specially considering how little suction a human can generate. Anyway, this does not represent a fluid flow very well because in reality, the flow is not likely to be the same across the section (as here). If you pump liquid through this setup it will probably flow a lot around the centre and nothing much would happen on the sides.
Sorry for the long post, but I thought I should give a reason why I'm saying pretty much the opposite to the others here.
If the tube diameter is 'd' and the water level is at a height 'h' above where the tube starts to taper out and make a funnel shape, the equation is like this:
{Pa x (pi/4) x d^2} > {m x g} + {Ps x (pi/4) x (d + (2 x h x tanA))^2} for the liquid to move upwards.
where Pa = atmospheric pressure; Ps = pressure above water and the included angle in the cone is 2A. Mass of water = m and g is the usual.
Obviously this neglects vsicous effects and so on, but if it's just a small funnel with water in it, it shouldn't really matter.
Anyway, from the equation, it's clear that Ps has to be really small (or large negative). Assuming d << 2htanA then it's pretty horrible specially considering how little suction a human can generate. Anyway, this does not represent a fluid flow very well because in reality, the flow is not likely to be the same across the section (as here). If you pump liquid through this setup it will probably flow a lot around the centre and nothing much would happen on the sides.
Sorry for the long post, but I thought I should give a reason why I'm saying pretty much the opposite to the others here.
Oct 15, 2006, 09:31 PM
#48
Evolved Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Bangkok
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by crypto
my goodness some of you people need to learn to listen. This is common sense stuff.
The further the distance the filter is from the throttle body, the longer its gonna take for the air to get there. Therefore, when you mash the gas pedal its gonna take longer for the air to get into the engine. Therefore decreasing throttle response.
Also to get the air from the front bumper all the way to the throttle body, there are going to be alot of curves in the piping. This will slow down the air even more. Whats the shortest distance between 2 points........a straight line. So lots of curvy pipes going from the bottom of the bumper of your car, to the throttle body........is gonna be a long long way for the air to travel.
The entire idea of this is retarded and pointless. There would be ZERO gains from doing anything remotely like this.
The further the distance the filter is from the throttle body, the longer its gonna take for the air to get there. Therefore, when you mash the gas pedal its gonna take longer for the air to get into the engine. Therefore decreasing throttle response.
Also to get the air from the front bumper all the way to the throttle body, there are going to be alot of curves in the piping. This will slow down the air even more. Whats the shortest distance between 2 points........a straight line. So lots of curvy pipes going from the bottom of the bumper of your car, to the throttle body........is gonna be a long long way for the air to travel.
The entire idea of this is retarded and pointless. There would be ZERO gains from doing anything remotely like this.
However, the only thing the distance has to do with it is the pressure drop along the pipe line. This can be minimized by making the pipe a larger diameter. The air is sucked into the engine here, by suddenly opening the throttle the air that's already in the pipe will be sucked into the engine. The pipe starts off with air in it, not a vacuum. Similar to how water emerges from a tap as soon as you turn the tap on, regardless of where the water tank is. The more you turn the tap, the faster the water flows (assuming there is enough to supply) because there is less resistance to the flow and this happens immediately. You don't have to wait for the additional water to get from the the tank separately.
The concept of having some kind of resevoir is to have some kind of buffer. If you suddenly open the throttle, the filter may not be able to respond quickly enough - there's going to be some lag between pressure difference and flow rate increase so the air in the resevoir can help.
Oct 16, 2006, 12:05 AM
#49
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: so cali desert
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by x838nwy
The funnel thing actually does work - in that it is hard to suck the water up. But that's because you're pulling against gravity and the ratios between the two areas aren't in your favour.
If the tube diameter is 'd' and the water level is at a height 'h' above where the tube starts to taper out and make a funnel shape, the equation is like this:
{Pa x (pi/4) x d^2} > {m x g} + {Ps x (pi/4) x (d + (2 x h x tanA))^2} for the liquid to move upwards.
where Pa = atmospheric pressure; Ps = pressure above water and the included angle in the cone is 2A. Mass of water = m and g is the usual.
Obviously this neglects vsicous effects and so on, but if it's just a small funnel with water in it, it shouldn't really matter.
Anyway, from the equation, it's clear that Ps has to be really small (or large negative). Assuming d << 2htanA then it's pretty horrible specially considering how little suction a human can generate. Anyway, this does not represent a fluid flow very well because in reality, the flow is not likely to be the same across the section (as here). If you pump liquid through this setup it will probably flow a lot around the centre and nothing much would happen on the sides.
Sorry for the long post, but I thought I should give a reason why I'm saying pretty much the opposite to the others here.
If the tube diameter is 'd' and the water level is at a height 'h' above where the tube starts to taper out and make a funnel shape, the equation is like this:
{Pa x (pi/4) x d^2} > {m x g} + {Ps x (pi/4) x (d + (2 x h x tanA))^2} for the liquid to move upwards.
where Pa = atmospheric pressure; Ps = pressure above water and the included angle in the cone is 2A. Mass of water = m and g is the usual.
Obviously this neglects vsicous effects and so on, but if it's just a small funnel with water in it, it shouldn't really matter.
Anyway, from the equation, it's clear that Ps has to be really small (or large negative). Assuming d << 2htanA then it's pretty horrible specially considering how little suction a human can generate. Anyway, this does not represent a fluid flow very well because in reality, the flow is not likely to be the same across the section (as here). If you pump liquid through this setup it will probably flow a lot around the centre and nothing much would happen on the sides.
Sorry for the long post, but I thought I should give a reason why I'm saying pretty much the opposite to the others here.
Oct 16, 2006, 12:20 AM
#50
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: so cali desert
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by x838nwy
However, the only thing the distance has to do with it is the pressure drop along the pipe line. This can be minimized by making the pipe a larger diameter. The air is sucked into the engine here, by suddenly opening the throttle the air that's already in the pipe will be sucked into the engine. so are u saying that u can help eliminate that lag with bigger piping, or different shaped piping?)The pipe starts off with air in it, not a vacuum.
so this is not a disadvatage right?
The concept of having some kind of resevoir is to have some kind of buffer(what do u mean by buffer). If you suddenly open the throttle, the filter may not be able to respond quickly enough - there's going to be some lag between pressure difference and flow rate increase so the air in the resevoir can help.
so this is not a disadvatage right?
The concept of having some kind of resevoir is to have some kind of buffer(what do u mean by buffer). If you suddenly open the throttle, the filter may not be able to respond quickly enough - there's going to be some lag between pressure difference and flow rate increase so the air in the resevoir can help.
Oct 16, 2006, 01:35 AM
#51
Evolved Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Bangkok
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you broke the quoting thing a bit, but anyway.
As far as I know (and that's not all that far!) the 'lag' here is just a sort of delay between the throttle opening and the time it takes for the air flow rate across the filter to increase. Having some air in 'reserve' imo helps the flow rate to increase quicker initially. For example, the ARC induction box has a volume behind the filter. That's all I'm getting at and it's not much to do with 'lag' as in turbo lag because here the engine sucks whereas the turbo blows.
The pipe always has air in it. When the throttle draws air in, the pressure difference across the induction system increses and the flow rate is increased. There's never really a vacuum, but a sort of low pressure.
A carefully designed induction system resonates at a particular rpm (well, over a range) as to help engine performance. This actually improves performance and is used in the design of the stock induction box of a virtually every car with a varying degree of enthusiasm. THe Gallardo, iirc has a variable induction geometry to make use of this effect. The FIA also banned variable airbox geometry at the beginning of this season because a number of manufactureres were designing it.
IMO, your best bet would be to have a large filter area and a good volume behind that - like the black one a few posts back. Keeping bends to a minimum and take the air from somewhere that's not really hot. Using an intercooler in combination with a filter would just cause an unnecessary pressure drop that would just hurt performance.
{as to how you calculate the resonance of the induction box, i need a couple of books and a quiet afternoon which i don't have. iirc, it prolly has something to do with a helmholtz resonator.... hold on, just found it here: http://www.calsci.com/motorcycleinfo/Airboxes.html good luck.}
As far as I know (and that's not all that far!) the 'lag' here is just a sort of delay between the throttle opening and the time it takes for the air flow rate across the filter to increase. Having some air in 'reserve' imo helps the flow rate to increase quicker initially. For example, the ARC induction box has a volume behind the filter. That's all I'm getting at and it's not much to do with 'lag' as in turbo lag because here the engine sucks whereas the turbo blows.
The pipe always has air in it. When the throttle draws air in, the pressure difference across the induction system increses and the flow rate is increased. There's never really a vacuum, but a sort of low pressure.
A carefully designed induction system resonates at a particular rpm (well, over a range) as to help engine performance. This actually improves performance and is used in the design of the stock induction box of a virtually every car with a varying degree of enthusiasm. THe Gallardo, iirc has a variable induction geometry to make use of this effect. The FIA also banned variable airbox geometry at the beginning of this season because a number of manufactureres were designing it.
IMO, your best bet would be to have a large filter area and a good volume behind that - like the black one a few posts back. Keeping bends to a minimum and take the air from somewhere that's not really hot. Using an intercooler in combination with a filter would just cause an unnecessary pressure drop that would just hurt performance.
{as to how you calculate the resonance of the induction box, i need a couple of books and a quiet afternoon which i don't have. iirc, it prolly has something to do with a helmholtz resonator.... hold on, just found it here: http://www.calsci.com/motorcycleinfo/Airboxes.html good luck.}
Last edited by x838nwy; Oct 16, 2006 at 02:05 AM. Reason: found the link and saved a lot of work!!!
Oct 16, 2006, 01:38 AM
#52
Evolved Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Bangkok
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just a quick note, old volvos had this feature of a 'hot air intake'. Basically, if the intake temp is too cold, there's a sort of thermostatic mechanism that diverts the induction box to take air from the engine bay. They do this to make sure the engine warms up. Which is probably useful if you live in Sweden but not a lot of use in California for example. I don't know if they still have it.
Oct 16, 2006, 04:56 AM
#53
your best option is not to bother with this at all. If we all agree there are no gains then really theres no point in doing it. Just get yourself a decent CAI or SRI. and have done with it.
There is a reason those are the two thing EVERYBODY does. Its because they work 100%. The gains may not be massive, but they do work.
This interfooler thing is rediculous, i can't even believe we're still discussing this.
If you want cold air.....get a cold air intake. that will work a million times better than an intercooler with a filter strapped to it.
There is a reason those are the two thing EVERYBODY does. Its because they work 100%. The gains may not be massive, but they do work.
This interfooler thing is rediculous, i can't even believe we're still discussing this.
If you want cold air.....get a cold air intake. that will work a million times better than an intercooler with a filter strapped to it.
Oct 16, 2006, 05:04 PM
#55
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: so cali desert
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by crypto
If you want cold air.....get a cold air intake. that will work a million times better than an intercooler with a filter strapped to it.
.i like those #smoderators like to move threads and change titles huh....
Last edited by ILovE WHEELS; Oct 16, 2006 at 05:22 PM.
Oct 18, 2006, 10:25 PM
#57
EvoM Staff Alumni
iTrader: (88)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Concord Township, Ohio
Posts: 8,733
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Originally Posted by 02whitelanceroz
a million.... .i like those #s
moderators like to move threads and change titles huh....
.i like those #smoderators like to move threads and change titles huh....
1. A question about your intake in Lancer General is in the wrong forum.
2. Just because you refuse to call it an interfooler, doesn't mean it's not an interfooler.
4. No offense intended. #1 was doing my job, #2 was having fun. And there's no #3, cuz I said so.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
