Is cold air intake necessary on a turboed car? - Page 2 - Miata Turbo Forum - Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


DIY Turbo Discussion greddy on a 1.8? homebrew kit?

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 03-13-2015, 02:06 PM   #21
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Leafy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NH
Posts: 9,093
Total Cats: 90
Default

It would be cool if K&N actually followed that same principal in the design. I doubt they did, not many automotive aftermarket companies do.
Leafy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2015, 02:36 PM   #22
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 4,685
Total Cats: 216
Default

Looks a little restrictive to me.

Look how big of an airbox they use in WRC

Attached Thumbnails
Is cold air intake necessary on a turboed car?-aaaa1.jpg  
Full_Tilt_Boogie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2015, 04:07 PM   #23
Elite Member
iTrader: (5)
 
m2cupcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 7,244
Total Cats: 291
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by speedj View Post
When I started putting this together...
You routed your hot side IC pipe through your cold air source. Reroute that hot side pipe and find power with a cold air box.
m2cupcar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2015, 05:55 PM   #24
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,899
Total Cats: 1,792
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
Let boost be at 6 psi. The temp gain with turbo is about 14/15F per psi, or about 90F.

On a 90F ambient day, ambient absolute would be 90 + 460 = 550F.

The charge temp absolute would be about 550F + 90F from the turbo, which comes out to 640F

Density would degrade by 550/640 = .86

The pressure ratio at 6 psi is 1.41.

With the heat from the turbo, then the 141% more density from compression will be degraded by .86 x 1.41 to about 1.21. or a 21% performance increase.

With a 90% efficient IC, .90 of the 90F temp rise will be taken out, or about 81F removed, thus leaving a net gain of 9F.

So 550F + 9F = 559F

550/559 = .984

This would leave a density loss of only 2% from the heat, or a net gain of 1.41 x .98 = 1.38. or a 38% performance increase.

----

Now let's say we aren't using a cold-air intake and now we have 180F temps under the hood (double the ambient!).

460A + 9F (from turbo minus IC removal) + 90F (intake delta increase) + 90F (ambient) = 649F

550/649 = .85

This would leave a density loss of 15% from the heat, or a net gain of 1.41 x .98 = 1.2. or only a 20% performance increase.

Or we can say, if you expect 10rwhp from every 1psi. that maybe the difference between your 100rwhp car going from 148rwhp from a warm air intake to 158.8rwhp with a cold air intake.

something like that. i probably messed up the math, but i dont tend to let facts stand in my way.
I messed up math. Intake plus turbo equal 270f. 270 x .9 = 27f

550/577 = .953. Vs .984

Somewhat trivial gains.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2015, 06:45 PM   #25
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 67
Total Cats: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by m2cupcar View Post
You routed your hot side IC pipe through your cold air source. Reroute that hot side pipe and find power with a cold air box.
Yes, I agree. I might just have to reclock the turbo and route it down.

But, it wasn't me!... It is a BEIG kit for an MSM. Apparently, they tried to follow the OEM hotside route in their kit.

In it's past life, I solved this problem by using the hollow frame member to route cold air from a filter stashed just behind the bumper cover. (You can see the old route the from the picture). Since then, I ended up plating this opening and used the structure to mount a nerf bar.

speedj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2015, 06:49 PM   #26
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 217
Total Cats: -283
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
I messed up math. Intake plus turbo equal 270f. 270 x .9 = 27f

550/577 = .953. Vs .984

Somewhat trivial gains.
Really interesting read as I'm just now thinking about this.

Flame suit on.. :lowdown:

Soooo.. The calculations were on 180 degree engine bay temps v 90degree outside temps yes? And so at 6psi, it would be about a 10hp difference?

Does this take into account how others are talking about the size of the charge pipe making a difference? If not, is there an even smaller difference with a filter right on top of the turbo v a 1 or 2 foot long charge pipe?

Does colder air move more slowly enough to make a difference in this situation?
Hinano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2015, 08:25 PM   #27
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,899
Total Cats: 1,792
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hinano View Post

Really interesting read as I'm just now thinking about this.

Flame suit on.. :lowdown:

Soooo.. The calculations were on 180 degree engine bay temps v 90degree outside temps yes? And so at 6psi, it would be about a 10hp difference?

Does this take into account how others are talking about the size of the charge pipe making a difference? If not, is there an even smaller difference with a filter right on top of the turbo v a 1 or 2 foot long charge pipe?

Does colder air move more slowly enough to make a difference in this situation?
Not 10rwhp.

If you assume 10hp per psi.

Then 9.5 x 6 = 57hp. Vs. 9.8 x 6 = 58.8hp from the turbo at 6psi.

Measurable difference but very trivial. Intercooler is key.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2015, 09:27 PM   #28
Elite Member
iTrader: (15)
 
patsmx5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 8,797
Total Cats: 248
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
I messed up math. Intake plus turbo equal 270f. 270 x .9 = 27f

550/577 = .953. Vs .984

Somewhat trivial gains.
What is missing from your calculation is the fact that if you're running the same "boost" in each scenario, the turbo has to work harder (more energy into compressor) to get the same boost from the hot air, as it's less dense. So that means more energy out of the turbine, so to do that the wastegate clamps down to raise turbine pressure to get the extra energy.

So two identical engines, one with cold air intake, one with hot air, the cold one will actually flow more air since the turbine pressure goes down, less likely to detonate (turbine pressure goes down). It's more than just boost and intercooler temps.
patsmx5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2015, 09:30 PM   #29
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Newcastle, Australia
Posts: 2,640
Total Cats: 25
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafy View Post
I really wonder how much that setup adds in restriction. The walls of the cone being so close to the filter itself add a lot of restriction. It would be interesting to compare pressure drops with a manometer of that filter vs a normal cone filter in a diy sealed box thats also fed cold air from the same type of hose.


I have a back to back of this exact filter, with and without the end piece that you can put a hose on.
No hose either run, both runs had the enclosure in the power steering reservoir location.

GT2560, well flowing cast log, 2.5" exhaust. 20ish psi tapering on.

This is 285rwhp, and the difference where you can see it averages 5rwhp.



Adding to what brain is saying, the math shows its trivial, and that's before what no one has yet mentioned.. Delta T.

If the intercooler is fed hotter air, the difference in intercooler surface temp compared to ambient air temp cooling it is greater, (greater Delta T). The greater the difference in temperature the faster the heat transfer.


Ie, when the air into the cooler gets hotter the cooler gets more efficient.

I really don't bother with cai ever on low boost setups, I just add one click on the MBC.

Dann
nitrodann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2015, 11:58 PM   #30
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 217
Total Cats: -283
Default

Does the length of the charge pipe also have resonance effects like the intake?

Last edited by Hinano; 03-14-2015 at 12:28 AM.
Hinano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2015, 12:35 AM   #31
Elite Member
iTrader: (15)
 
patsmx5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 8,797
Total Cats: 248
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hinano View Post
What about when considering heatsoak? How would that play into the math?
Imagine if you had a huge fan in the engine bay, and all it did was suck up engine bay heat, and blow it into the mouth of the car at the heat exchangers.

This is exactly what your turbo is doing when you have a hot air intake. Makes all the heat exchangers from the intercooler back less effective since they are getting warmer air.

There is no question that a CAI is the better way.

To try to put numbers to how much it helps, to do it somewhat close, you'd need a map sensor before and after the turbo, temperature before and after turbo, temp after intercooler, turbine inlet pressure, and preferably a MAF sensor too. And if you want to put numbers to how it affects say, radiator effectiveness, it would get even more complex as then you'd need water temp in/out of radiator and air temp before/after radiator for both setups. To measure heat soak, you'd have to datalog all of this and graph it, and measure time between cooldown after a set of runs or something to accurately know how much it matters.

Or you could just accept the physics that cold will make more power and make the engine less likely to detonate and build a CAI accordingly.
patsmx5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2015, 12:39 AM   #32
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 217
Total Cats: -283
Default

Sorry, I edited my question while you were answering it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by patsmx5 View Post
Imagine if you had a huge fan in the engine bay, and all it did was suck up engine bay heat, and blow it into the mouth of the car at the heat exchangers.

This is exactly what your turbo is doing when you have a hot air intake. Makes all the heat exchangers from the intercooler back less effective since they are getting warmer air.

There is no question that a CAI is the better way.

To try to put numbers to how much it helps, to do it somewhat close, you'd need a map sensor before and after the turbo, temperature before and after turbo, temp after intercooler, turbine inlet pressure, and preferably a MAF sensor too. And if you want to put numbers to how it affects say, radiator effectiveness, it would get even more complex as then you'd need water temp in/out of radiator and air temp before/after radiator for both setups. To measure heat soak, you'd have to datalog all of this and graph it, and measure time between cooldown after a set of runs or something to accurately know how much it matters.

Or you could just accept the physics that cold will make more power and make the engine less likely to detonate and build a CAI accordingly.
Hinano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2015, 12:42 AM   #33
Elite Member
iTrader: (15)
 
patsmx5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 8,797
Total Cats: 248
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nitrodann View Post
Adding to what brain is saying, the math shows its trivial...
His math is wrong, it's not trivial! See my post right above this. Leafy touched on it too, the pressure drop upstream of the turbo is a big deal too! Having a good flowing CAI is much better than sticking a little filter on the inlet of the turbo.
patsmx5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2015, 10:34 AM   #34
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,899
Total Cats: 1,792
Default

my math on the inlet has been corrected. if you're going to bring up the turbine efficiency, show us a math formula that factors it in.

a 90f intake delta, plus the 90f turbo delta, after intercooler would be an extra 27f on a day 90f day assuming a 90% effective IC.

you're only 18f degrees more likely to detonate from intake temps. in the grand scheme of things that nothing and the compressor/turbine efficiency difference between the two is also going to be negligible.

I'm not saying CAI isn't better, but im saying it's not a make or break big deal, assuming you have a good IC. I made efforts to source ambient temps myself. But I'd be more worried about living in the rocky mountains vs. the dead sea really...

Last edited by Braineack; 03-14-2015 at 10:54 AM.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2015, 01:14 PM   #35
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Leafy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NH
Posts: 9,093
Total Cats: 90
Default

Brain there are other math that uses the turbine work to determine the temperature increase across the compressor. But the math going on with the turbine, the efficiency and rho is a whole lot more difficult to do. You're into the case where you have to solve a non linear equation. Either using matlab or brute force in excel like a child.
Leafy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2015, 02:01 PM   #36
Elite Member
iTrader: (15)
 
patsmx5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 8,797
Total Cats: 248
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
my math on the inlet has been corrected. if you're going to bring up the turbine efficiency, show us a math formula that factors it in.

a 90f intake delta, plus the 90f turbo delta, after intercooler would be an extra 27f on a day 90f day assuming a 90% effective IC.

you're only 18f degrees more likely to detonate from intake temps. in the grand scheme of things that nothing and the compressor/turbine efficiency difference between the two is also going to be negligible.

I'm not saying CAI isn't better, but im saying it's not a make or break big deal, assuming you have a good IC. I made efforts to source ambient temps myself. But I'd be more worried about living in the rocky mountains vs. the dead sea really...
The equation for the turbine is the change in Enthalpy across it. Enthalpy is denoted H, and H = U + P*V, where U is internal energy, P is pressure, V is volume. Thus you need all the stuff i posted above (temps, pressures, MAF sensor) to measure it.

Like leafy said it's several things changing, not just one. When you change one, it changes all the other things. Kinda like how if I put a turbo on my car, more air goes in, but then air gets hotter, and then cooler from IC, and then denser, and then need more fuel, and then have to change timing now, and so forth. One thing changes other things in the system.

I'm not going to makeup 14 assumptions for temp/pressure and try to solve it, I don't have a software that will do it worth a crap.

But I'll at least show you this to help everyone understand. Say it's an 80*F day. With a CAI, temps going into the turbo are 80*F, with a hot air intake, lets just say 100*F HIGHER, so 80 + 100 = 180*F into the turbo.

I'll assume we're running the same boost before/after, and that the boost reference is at the intake manifold.

And let's just say we're at sea level, 40% relative humidity.

Case 1: Density Air at 80*F, 0. 0727 lb/ft^3
Case 2: Density Air at 180*F, .0569

So if you have a 300whp miata, you're flowing about 30 lb/min through the compressor.

At 300whp, airflow is 30lb/min, so with a 3" inlet pipe hooked to the inlet of the turbo, air speed is

Case 1: 30 lb/min / .0727 lb/ft^3, = 412.7 ft^3/min, or CFM
Case 2: 30 lb/min / .0569 lb/ft^3 = 527.2 ft^3/min.

So at this point, we can see that with a hot air intake, the CFM going through the compressor inlet had to go up by 527.2 / 412.7 = 27.7% just to match the same mass flow rate of air.

This is not without consequence. I said we have a 3" inlet pipe, so at 3" ID, Area is A = pi*r^2 = 7.0868 in^2. One foot of pipe would be 12", so one foot has 7.0868 *12 = 85.04 cubic inches. There are 1728 cubic inches in a foot (12x12x12) so 85.04 cubic inches is 0.04921296296 cubic feet in 1 foot of pipe.

So case A, 412.7/ .04921296296 = 8386 ft/min, 5280 ft in a mile, so 8386/5280 = 1.58826 miles/min, times 60 is 95.3 mph. Speed of sound is 761.2 mph, so 95.3/761.2 = .12 mach

Case B, 527.2/.04921296296 = 10713 ft/min, 10713/5280= 2.0289061833 miles/min, times 60 is 121.7 mph, so 121.7/761.2 = 0.16 mach, or 0.16/0.12 = 33% faster air.

Pressure drop vs speed is not linear, it's squared!

I'm not keeping units anymore, but lets say you have 10 units of crickets worth of pressure drop in Case A, Case B is going to have 16.31 crickets worth of pressure drop, or 63.1% higher pressure drop!!!!!

If inlet temps are more than 100*F higher (say your turbo is bolted to a hot exhaust manifold, for example) the numbers get worse. Or if you have anything smaller than 3" pipe for your inlet, again, it gets worse.

I would like to point out that I ONLY did some of the calculations for pressure drop upstream of the compressor. I did not touch anything else!
patsmx5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2015, 02:08 PM   #37
Elite Member
iTrader: (15)
 
patsmx5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 8,797
Total Cats: 248
Default

And just in case it's not obvious, asking your turbo to flow 27.7% more pushes you to the right of the compressor map, and most people here are already right of the "sweet spot", so then the compressor is becoming less efficient (more heat in charge, more turbine inlet pressure to get energy to drive compressor).

There is a reason that every turbo engine in production in the world has a cold air intake from the factory.
patsmx5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2015, 04:00 PM   #38
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,899
Total Cats: 1,792
Default

that doesn't really touch on anything I said.

It's my opinion that you use the largest intake pipe you can fit to reduce the pressure drop between the filter and turbo.

one example of a warm air intake on a turbo car: the mazdaspeed miata.

Last edited by Braineack; 03-14-2015 at 04:12 PM.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2015, 04:06 PM   #39
Elite Member
iTrader: (15)
 
patsmx5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 8,797
Total Cats: 248
Default

You said it's trivial, I showed you why it's not. You were only looking at one aspect of it, not all of it. Even I didn't look at all of it, just another aspect that is a lot more significant than the one you considered when you stated CAI is trivial, intercooler is key. No disrespect, but you can't draw a conclusion looking at just one part of the picture. Even my math is only one part, I didn't consider the turbine, compressor efficiency, etc.

You also asked for the equation for the turbine so I posted that too.

The point is that CAI does in fact make a difference, it is significant, and there is a lot more benefit than just 3* colder AITs as you posted. I want people to realize that and not assume that is the ONLY consequence of a hot air intake. There are in fact many reasons to run a CAI, and 3* or whatever cooler AITs is not the only reason.
patsmx5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2015, 07:17 PM   #40
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,899
Total Cats: 1,792
Default

you're ignoring a lot more than i am. and yes, you really lost track of your units, conversions, and relevance there.

you're forgetting how much a good IC equalizes the density ratio of the air that the motor ingests on each gulp, and that's really the most important factor when talking WAI vs CAI. Yes, the turbo will have to work a little bit harder to compress that air, but I don't you're going about determining that correctly.



here, this one factors in most:

Not2Fast: Turbo Calculator

it agrees that the change from 26.6*C to 82*C intake temps doesn't change the HP significantly once you input the rest.

Last edited by Braineack; 03-14-2015 at 07:31 PM.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
91 1.6l turbo complete part out. Tony the Tiger Miata parts for sale/trade 63 12-29-2016 03:23 AM
1.8, C30-74 Rotrex, 9psi, 235WHP/190WTQ (E85) Lincoln Logs Dynos and timesheets 4 09-23-2015 01:26 PM
1991 Turbo Miata partout tottestad Miata parts for sale/trade 18 09-14-2015 08:52 PM
Noob from Fort Worth, Texas checking in. Miatabro Meet and Greet 7 09-11-2015 01:13 PM
New here, saying hi, here's what I'm workin with. SuperSneakySecretSquirrel Meet and Greet 5 09-06-2015 09:30 PM


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:18 AM.