I think you are confused, thats not how you measure efficiency. In fact im not sure what its measures.
By your logic if ambient temperature were 2 C and the post intercooler temps were 3 C, we could say its gone up by 50% lol The correct way to measure intercooler thermal efficiency is thus (Intercooler temp input - Intercooler temp output ) / ( Intercooler temp input - ambient temp) = (138 - 32.5) / (138 - 21) = 90% |
Are those temperature shots taken at idle when stationary?
|
um 50% because the difference of 10 degrees (30-20, i rounded it) is 50% of the initial figure of 20.
the higher the inlet temps go the more power you loose. the temp change shows that inlet temps have gone up by 50%, so power loss, due to temps will be 50% greater than the first pics. But 50% is not 50% power loss, its just 50% additional loss through thermal expansion of air. i can't remember what the figure is for bhp loss for degrees C increase in inlet temps off the top of my head. |
Originally Posted by Tidgy
(Post 9678466)
um 50% because the difference of 10 degrees (30-20, i rounded it) is 50% of the initial figure of 20.
Look at the formula TypeRv4 has given. |
Originally Posted by Butty
(Post 9678444)
Are those temperature shots taken at idle when stationary?
|
To quote Harvey
Originally Posted by harvey
(Post 9402469)
The objective is to get the air entering the inlet manifold at the throttle body as close to ambient temperature as possible.With an efficient front mount that temperature will typically be 6-12 degrees over ambient so let us assume your in car temperature guage is showing 16 degrees then you could expect to see 22-28 degrees on your ACT guage.
We normally refer to air charge temperatures as "X" degrees over the ambient. According to the above a good FMIC does 6-12 degrees over ambient @ WOT. My test shows in this case 11.5 degrees over ambient. So not quite as good as a FMIC but pretty close. It helps this test was done on the road to get real world airflow thru the tmic and i run a big scoop. I hope to do some more tests with a watersprayer. |
The figures above refer to temperatures over ambient on wide open throttle, either on the road or at the end of a rolling road session where we measure the peak on power.
|
ah sorry i get ya, i think i'm getting my wires crossed lol
|
http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/7673/wstmic2.jpg
Retested the same classic hyperflow top mount with waterspray. Left is air temp before the airbox, right is exiting the intercooler. 1.7bar peak - md321. Test on exactly the same road. Temperature increase over ambient 7.1C, not bad for a top mount ;) |
Originally Posted by typeRv4
(Post 9706003)
http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/7673/wstmic2.jpg
Temperature increase over ambient 7.1C, not bad for a top mount ;) |
Originally Posted by Tidgy
(Post 9676451)
so in one run it gone up 50%, mmm so much for efficient top mounts lol
:nono: The % rise in actual temperature should be calculated using the Kelvin scale - ie 11.5/(273 + 21) = 0.039% - not quite 50%!! |
Originally Posted by lunar tick
(Post 9706833)
:nono:
The % rise in actual temperature should be calculated using the Kelvin scale - ie 11.5/(273 + 21) = 0.039% - not quite 50%!! christ if you realy wanna get that pissy about it. lets simplify it, hotter = bad colder = good the temps have gone therefore its bad |
Originally Posted by lunar tick
(Post 9706833)
:nono:
The % rise in actual temperature should be calculated using the Kelvin scale - ie 11.5/(273 + 21) = 0.039% - not quite 50%!! 3.9% |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:07 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands