Bullet style intercooler set up build
May 12, 2006 | 02:22 PM
#31
Originally Posted by quicksilverado
I went to the track last summer. Got there 2 hours before racing started. Made a couple of passes and then they saw something and kicked me out off line. Turns out it was condensation from the AC. Almost 3 hours had passed since I used it last.
May 12, 2006 | 02:48 PM
#32
good luck on your project! but with all the headaches you have been having why not just buy the STS FMIC? my intake temps with the fmic are only 5-12 degrees over ambient. no headaches or worries, just cool air! Pm me if you want one at a big discount!
May 12, 2006 | 03:34 PM
#33
Have fun at the SAE Comp Duwem, Check out the Rutgers team, I still help my former team out with engineering support and guidance now and then. I can't wait to drive this year's car, it should be fun.
May 12, 2006 | 03:47 PM
#34
Originally Posted by TIM Z
good luck on your project! but with all the headaches you have been having why not just buy the STS FMIC? my intake temps with the fmic are only 5-12 degrees over ambient. no headaches or worries, just cool air! Pm me if you want one at a big discount!
I'm thinking I'm f-ing nuts, but I want something different even if it gives me 100 more gray hairs!!
May 14, 2006 | 06:30 PM
#35
Originally Posted by TG02Z71
I'm thinking I'm f-ing nuts, but I want something different even if it gives me 100 more gray hairs!!
I got to drive the formula car today, in the rain but holy hellll, nothing like 12000rpm redline, 6 gears, paddle shifting and one hell of a low ride height and suspension.
May 14, 2006 | 06:40 PM
#36
Originally Posted by duwem
damn engineers..always complicating things
I got to drive the formula car today, in the rain but holy hellll, nothing like 12000rpm redline, 6 gears, paddle shifting and one hell of a low ride height and suspension.
I got to drive the formula car today, in the rain but holy hellll, nothing like 12000rpm redline, 6 gears, paddle shifting and one hell of a low ride height and suspension.
May 15, 2006 | 07:57 AM
#37
Originally Posted by duwem
damn engineers..always complicating things
I got to drive the formula car today, in the rain but holy hellll, nothing like 12000rpm redline, 6 gears, paddle shifting and one hell of a low ride height and suspension.
I got to drive the formula car today, in the rain but holy hellll, nothing like 12000rpm redline, 6 gears, paddle shifting and one hell of a low ride height and suspension.
Try adding a turbo into the mix. 
May 16, 2006 | 10:47 AM
#38
Ok, did some more simple math, now I need a flow engineer to look at it.
(121) .375" diameter holes =13.36 surface area total.
(61) .5" diameter holes =11.98 " ".
(31) .75" diameter holes=13.7" ".
Combination of (61) .5" and (12) .375" diameter holes=13.05 surface area total.
So what would yeild the best combination of heat transfer vs flow??
For comparison the STS 2.5" pipe would have a 4.91" total surface area opening, and if its a 3" pipe it would be 7.07" total surface area.
(121) .375" diameter holes =13.36 surface area total.
(61) .5" diameter holes =11.98 " ".
(31) .75" diameter holes=13.7" ".
Combination of (61) .5" and (12) .375" diameter holes=13.05 surface area total.
So what would yeild the best combination of heat transfer vs flow??
For comparison the STS 2.5" pipe would have a 4.91" total surface area opening, and if its a 3" pipe it would be 7.07" total surface area.
Last edited by TG02Z71; May 16, 2006 at 10:06 PM. Reason: math errors
May 16, 2006 | 09:43 PM
#39
If you are saying that 121 3/8" circles have 53.46 sq. in. area, as in Pi x radius squared, x 121, then yes, your math is pretty simple. You made a similar mistake in the second post in this thread, which I corrected. Pi x radius squared (.1875" x .1875"), x 121, does not equal 53.46. Your calculations for 1/2" and 3/4" holes are just as wildly wrong as the 3/8" numbers. So are the 2 1/2" and 3" pipe numbers. If you are trying to figure surface area of 36" long tubes, the formula for 121 .375 tubes is: Pi x diameter, x 36, x 121. That comes out to 5132 square inches. I'll let you figure out the others.
Last edited by Mikegyver; May 16, 2006 at 09:55 PM.
May 16, 2006 | 10:01 PM
#40
Originally Posted by Mikegyver
If you are saying that 121 3/8" circles have 53.46 sq. in. area, as in Pi x radius squared, x 121, then yes, your math is pretty simple. You made a similar mistake in the second post in this thread, which I corrected. Pi x radius squared (.1875" x .1875"), x 121, does not equal 53.46. Your calculations for 1/2" and 3/4" holes are just as wildly wrong as the 3/8" numbers. So are the 2 1/2" and 3" pipe numbers. If you are trying to figure surface area of 36" long tubes, the formula for 121 .375 tubes is: Pi x diameter, x 36, x 121. That comes out to 5132 square inches. I'll let you figure out the others.
Thanks for pointing out my brain fart. I did diameter squared like a fool.
I will correct my other post.