TXDTR#8 (North Texas DTR) April Meet
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 8,234
Likes: 1
From: Texas/Oklahoma Border
...Rowland, what gauge(s) are you reading the primary and secondary outlet boost with? Are they direct-reading or remote mount? Mechanical, right? .... I haven't done the math, but it "feels" like 7psi is too much for that short of a distance. If it's actually so, I'm very interested
The 7 psi delta came from the engineer at BD, not from my own testing, and is for their setup. Said it assumes a constant diameter pipe from primary to secondary turbos.
I was surprised when I first heard it, but the more I think about it the more it seems reasonable.
We all know how hot a turbo's compressor housing gets from normal operation (compressing air and some heat soak from the turbine). Given the cooling effect of fan driven air on the free floating, metal piping, a serious pressure drop seems feasible.... No?
A heat gun would give the two temps on the cool air piping, but I have no idea the math required to calculate it's effect on the pressure inside? Nor if outside pipe temps would be meaningful and/or proportional?
RJ
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,534
Likes: 0
From: Plano, TX
Thread Starter
Chapter President
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 4,983
Likes: 1
From: Sedalia, Texas
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 7,785
Likes: 3
From: Pattonville, Texas
... did you check the "freshness date"?
Funny you mention the "will work for beer" stuff. I actually have a t-shirt that says that on it. And stop being a pansy and turn that quad box up to 3 and throw the smarty on there. All your gonna do is hurt the clutch. I hear ya on having the stones with the water/meth.
Yer two skeerd to even mention the nitrous...
are you guys bringing base plates or something so the jackstands don't sink into the ground? (and thus crushing our puny bodies to pulp)
I think Woody wants an entree, not an hor'deurve...
Speaking of worrisome things, Charlie, I saved a worn out quart of contact cement that has attained the consistency of napalm - I just KNOW somebody wants to throw it on the fire...
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 7,785
Likes: 3
From: Pattonville, Texas
Rowland, remind me to look at your twins this weekend - maybe we could set the piping up for testing the differences in boost quantity and quality via pressure and temperature monitoring.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 7,785
Likes: 3
From: Pattonville, Texas
Dan, that is some cool stuff!
The new Gerald R. Ford class of aircraft carrier to begin fleet duty in 2011 will have 25% larger nuke plants for higher flank speed, as well as to supply enough power for the three-fold increase in electrical generation, which will not only launch aircraft electromagnetically, but have the excess capacity to power ENERGY WEAPONS to be installed when they come on-line! 
Star Wars, here we come!
or is it Battlestar Galactica?
The new Gerald R. Ford class of aircraft carrier to begin fleet duty in 2011 will have 25% larger nuke plants for higher flank speed, as well as to supply enough power for the three-fold increase in electrical generation, which will not only launch aircraft electromagnetically, but have the excess capacity to power ENERGY WEAPONS to be installed when they come on-line!
Star Wars, here we come!
or is it Battlestar Galactica?
Chapter President
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,741
Likes: 0
From: Big Spring (now Stephenville), Tx
Energy weapons on an aircraft carrier? Defiantly not Battlestar Galactica kind of weapons (not much different from what we have now). No more steam launches for the aircraft?
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 7,785
Likes: 3
From: Pattonville, Texas
CVN-78
No more steam catapults!
They consume ~1300 pounds of steam/launch, and are large and heavy.
New electromagnetic rail launches increase launch energy by 30% while lowering the G-load on the airframes. Max out about 90 million ft-lbs. and 200 knots. (Every 45 seconds, of course!)
Two A1B reactors.
Enough excess generating power to supply defensive beam weapons when they become available.
No more steam catapults!
They consume ~1300 pounds of steam/launch, and are large and heavy.
New electromagnetic rail launches increase launch energy by 30% while lowering the G-load on the airframes. Max out about 90 million ft-lbs. and 200 knots.
(Every 45 seconds, of course!)Two A1B reactors.
Enough excess generating power to supply defensive beam weapons when they become available.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,534
Likes: 0
From: Plano, TX
CVN-78
No more steam catapults!
They consume ~1300 pounds of steam/launch, and are large and heavy.
New electromagnetic rail lauches increase launch energy by 30% while lowering the G-load on the airframes. Max out about 90 million ft-lbs. and 200 knots. (Every 45 seconds, of course!)
Two A1B reactors.
Enough excess generating power to supply defensive beam weapons when they become available.
No more steam catapults!
They consume ~1300 pounds of steam/launch, and are large and heavy.
New electromagnetic rail lauches increase launch energy by 30% while lowering the G-load on the airframes. Max out about 90 million ft-lbs. and 200 knots.
(Every 45 seconds, of course!)Two A1B reactors.
Enough excess generating power to supply defensive beam weapons when they become available.
That is just too cool! Getting to the point where the atmosphere will be an issue! Ever see that Land speed record for that rocket rail? They had to enclose it in a tube of Helium (Wouldnt want to foot that bill!!!) to keep it from burning up!
10,300 km/h (Mach 8.6) USA, Holloman Air Force Base High Speed Test Track, unmanned rocket sled, 30 April 2003.
Thread Starter
Chapter President
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 4,983
Likes: 1
From: Sedalia, Texas
ONLY wood in the fire this trip!
Thread Starter
Chapter President
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 4,983
Likes: 1
From: Sedalia, Texas
MAN...i saw those electro magnet rail bolt guns they had on that show.......Talking about Mach 8 projectiles!!!! That is just too cool! Getting to the point where the atmosphere will be an issue!
Ever see that Land speed record for that rocket rail? They had to enclose it in a tube of Helium (Wouldnt want to foot that bill!!!) to keep it from burning up!
10,300 km/h (Mach 8.6) USA, Holloman Air Force Base High Speed Test Track, unmanned rocket sled, 30 April 2003.
That is just too cool! Getting to the point where the atmosphere will be an issue! Ever see that Land speed record for that rocket rail? They had to enclose it in a tube of Helium (Wouldnt want to foot that bill!!!) to keep it from burning up!
10,300 km/h (Mach 8.6) USA, Holloman Air Force Base High Speed Test Track, unmanned rocket sled, 30 April 2003.
Are you at work? What does this have to do with improving the quality and dependability of an HPFP?
Banned
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
There gonna get it to spin at mach 12 and pump eleventy billion PSI with a flow rate of 30,000,000,000,000 GPM. That should shut those walbro guys up.
Mike, I like my headgasket where it is thank you very much.
I've got a couple of jack stands I can bring but my floor jack went caput the other week so I don't have that anymore.
Mike, I like my headgasket where it is thank you very much.
I've got a couple of jack stands I can bring but my floor jack went caput the other week so I don't have that anymore.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 8,234
Likes: 1
From: Texas/Oklahoma Border