[s-cars] FMIC info digested...

Wed Nov 2 19:21:39 EST 2005

Why could you not just use a differential pressure gauge to measure the 
restriction thru it.
Use thermocouples and measure the delta T across it as well.

I think at this point measuring HP numbers would be irrelevant, as it would 
simply relate to the heat loss at the intercooler.

A timed run on the dyno would be all that would be required IMHO.

Aside from this, I can't see why the larger mass of the bar and plate 
exchanger would be an issue. During actual driving conditions the duty cycle 
of high boost is quite small. Therefore, IMHO, the higher mass is a good 
thing to absorb more heat than it can displace during a steady state 
condition.

Myself, I run the stock IC, and use direct water injection. To me this is 
better than a FMIC, except of course when you run outta water.

Mark

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Trevor Frank" <tfrank at symyx.com>
To: <djdawson2 at aol.com>; <mswanson at sonitrol.net>
Cc: <gcmschemist at gmail.com>; <tmullane at gmail.com>; <s-car-list at audifans.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 2:49 PM
Subject: Re: [s-cars] FMIC info digested...

>
> Umm...how did you measure the pressure drop? And relative to what, I
> mean I have always's suspected that mine is quite large compared to a
> top down configuration, I would like to measure the pressure drop and if
> I could find someone else with some data on another core we could then
> get some data points so that we knew what was high and what was low.  It
> would be interesting to then use that and map temperature rise with a
> given turbo so that we can directly measure how an inefficient
> intercooler correlates to temp rise in the core.
>
> If anyone else has this data, pressure drop, I would love to see it.
> Also how it was measured, I have my ideas on how to do it and collect
> the data but it would be interesting to see how everyone else is doing
> it.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: s-car-list-bounces at audifans.com
> [mailto:s-car-list-bounces at audifans.com] On Behalf Of djdawson2 at aol.com
> Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 10:08 AM
> To: mswanson at sonitrol.net
> Cc: gcmschemist at gmail.com; tmullane at gmail.com; s-car-list at audifans.com
> Subject: Re: [s-cars] FMIC info digested...
>
> Less restrictive is not accurate.  Some are, some aren't... depends on
> design.  To state it as an advantage is not correct.  I've measured my
> pressure drop... it isn't an issue.
>
> Lower mass... you need to think this through.  When drag racing, an
> engine is typically doing little more than idling prior to the run.  It
> will not heat soak at idle, because turbo outlet temps are basically
> ambient.  BTDT at the drag races.  It remains very cool the entire time.
> In fact, during that first 100 feet, the tube and fin will heat up more
> because airflow is low, and stored energy is low.  We're talking
> thermodynamics 101 here.
>
> Trucks... hmm.  I'm currently sitting in a truck shop on Portland, OR.
> It's full of N14 Cummins powered Volvos and Kenworths.  Yep, they are
> tube and fin.  There are several reasons for this.  First, they are dirt
> cheap.  Second, there are no space limitations... these ICs are about 3
> feet by 4 feet.  Third, they can use HUGE tubes, due to the lack of
> space limitation... they look remarkably like a typical bar and plate,
> except they have plastic end tanks.  When we're talking trucks, however,
> we're comparing apples to oranges... low rpm, detuned/huge displacement,
> very low output vs displacement, etc...
>
> We're talking S-cars here... and since space is one of our greatest
> limiting factors, bar and plate is, in fact... better, hands down, no
> questions.
>
> In the interest of friendly banter, however... if you want a tube and
> fin... give it a try.  Let's see some before and after dyno runs.  Data
> is data, and conversational speculation is kind of... well... just
> speculation.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Swanson <mswanson at sonitrol.net>
> To: djdawson2 at aol.com
> Cc: gcmschemist at gmail.com; tmullane at gmail.com; s-car-list at audifans.com
> Sent: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 12:33:18 -0500
> Subject: Re: [s-cars] FMIC info digested...
>
>
> On Tue, 2005-11-01 at 23:39 -0500, djdawson2 at aol.com wrote:
>> OK, let's say "inefficient."  It's a well established fact that the
> tube and
> fin IC doesn't perform as well as a bar and plate of equal size.
>
> You're missing a few advantages that tube and fin intercoolers enjoy:
>
> - less restrictive (lower pressure drop)
> - less mass (lower weight)
>
>
> Bar and plate ICs are physically more massive than tube and fin and as a
> result, they hold more heat.  This can actually be a liability,
> especially considering situations such as drag racing.  You'll spend a
> good 10 minutes miniumum getting your car to the starting line.  During
> that time, your intercooler has soaked up as much heat as it possibly
> can, and will likely spend the fist 100' or so getting rid of it whereas
> the tube and fin core has less mass and thus would take less time to rid
> itself of the accumulated heat.
>
>
>>   You can read about it anywhere, and often... so why would one choose
> that
> route?
>
> I'm not doubting that bar and plate is more efficient, because it is.
> But there are other factors involved.
>
>
>>
>> Bar and plate intercooler cores function basically the same as a tube
> and fin
> core. In a bar and plate core, the charge air travels through passages
> that have
> more surface area... about a 35% larger surface area for cooling.  Yes,
> you CAN
> have a tube and fin IC that provides good results.  However, if you are
> limited
> in space (and we are) a tube and fin of size "x" will never provide the
> same
> heat transfer capability of a size "x" bar and plate IC.
>>
>> Another point to consider is the mass of the BAP, compared to the TAF.
> TAF
> cores are very light... whereas the BAP is quite heavy.  The BAP has a
> substantial ability to "store" energy... using it for those typically
> short
> periods of high output.
>
> See above.  I see that as a liability.
>
>> As a data point... see if you can find an OE tube and fin IC in any
> German
> performance car.  I certainly haven't seen everything... but in
> everything I
> have seen, it's been bar and plate.
>
> Just going off of what I've had in my hands, the UrQ is tube and fin, as
> are the big diesel truck ICs.
>
>> But hey, YMMV, and if you like tube and fin, go for it.
>
> I think I'm just trying to level the discussion and point out that bar
> and plate is NOT necessarily better, hands down, no questions.
>
>
> --
> Marc Swanson
> 95.5 //S6 Avant
> 90 CQ 4.2 V8 project car
> _______________________________________________
> S-CAR-List mailing list
> S-CAR-List at audifans.com
> http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list
>
> =======
> Notice: This e-mail message, together with any attachments, contains
> information of Symyx Technologies, Inc. that may be confidential,
> proprietary, copyrighted, privileged and/or protected work product,
> and is meant solely for the intended recipient. If you are not the
> intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please
> contact the sender immediately, permanently delete the original and
> any copies of this email and any attachments thereto.
> _______________________________________________
> S-CAR-List mailing list
> S-CAR-List at audifans.com
> http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list
> 