2nd Generation Specific 1986-1992 Discussion

Turbo Maps and Volumetric Efficiency

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 04-10-2007, 05:50 AM
  #1  
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
RXTII400's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 8
Default

What is the generally accepted figure for volumetric efficiency for our cars? I have been reading maximum boost, a book by corky bell, and one of the chapters discusses turbo sizing. A key part of the equation for selecting a turbo that has a good fit is the volumetric efficiency of the engine you are going to be using the turbo on but it does not discuss how to make an estimate or get the figure. The book just uses 85% for a ford 302 cubic inch V8. Any thoughts or help?



Thanks.
RXTII400 is offline  
Old 04-10-2007, 06:58 AM
  #2  
Senior Member
 
j0rd4n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Greenville / Sanford, NC
Posts: 222
Default

Originally Posted by RXTII400' post='867485' date='Apr 10 2007, 06:50 AM

What is the generally accepted figure for volumetric efficiency for our cars? I have been reading maximum boost, a book by corky bell, and one of the chapters discusses turbo sizing. A key part of the equation for selecting a turbo that has a good fit is the volumetric efficiency of the engine you are going to be using the turbo on but it does not discuss how to make an estimate or get the figure. The book just uses 85% for a ford 302 cubic inch V8. Any thoughts or help?



Thanks.


I've read that the N/A RX7 VE is around 94%. I'm not sure exactly how accurate that is, as it was treated as a 2.4l 4-cylinder in the VE formula since, to my knowledge, there isn't a rotary VE formula.



I actually just started reading about VE and such, so does it mention that VE can be greater than 100%??? It's ridiculous.
j0rd4n is offline  
Old 04-10-2007, 09:53 AM
  #3  
Senior Member
 
j9fd3s's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: California
Posts: 22,465
Default

i'm not really sure either, and it changes with rpms. just throwing figures at a calculator, about 85-95% is a good figure.



another method of turbo sizing, would be to look at the stock turbo specs, and just upsize, stock compressor is 63mm turbine is 62mm, notice how close they are sized, hint hint



another method would be to see what people are running with similar power goals, take with a grain of salt, and choose a turbo that way.







the KEY when choosing a turbo, is to be honest about what you want the car to do, are you looking for the highest hp #? instant response? only 260hp? the better you define what you want the engine to do, the easier it is to do it.
j9fd3s is offline  
Old 04-10-2007, 12:38 PM
  #4  
Senior Member
 
j0rd4n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Greenville / Sanford, NC
Posts: 222
Default

Originally Posted by j9fd3s' post='867502' date='Apr 10 2007, 10:53 AM

i'm not really sure either, and it changes with rpms. just throwing figures at a calculator, about 85-95% is a good figure.


oh yea, i forgot to mention that. your greatest VE comes at your highest torque rpm, which is....4500? i really forget :/
j0rd4n is offline  
Old 04-10-2007, 01:12 PM
  #5  
Senior Member
 
j9fd3s's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: California
Posts: 22,465
Default

Originally Posted by j0rd4n' post='867521' date='Apr 10 2007, 10:38 AM

oh yea, i forgot to mention that. your greatest VE comes at your highest torque rpm, which is....4500? i really forget :/


yeah, its prolly really close to, if not just over 100% around 4500...
j9fd3s is offline  
Old 04-10-2007, 01:23 PM
  #6  
Senior Member
 
j0rd4n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Greenville / Sanford, NC
Posts: 222
Default

Originally Posted by j9fd3s' post='867530' date='Apr 10 2007, 02:12 PM

yeah, its prolly really close to, if not just over 100% around 4500...


What I read (and, again, this guy's formula is used for piston engines, so I'm not sure of the error rate) is that he calculated it to be 95% at peak torque.



This makes sense, since engineers had many restrictions in terms of developing the intake. I believe that 95% is pretty good for a stock intake. A porting, etc, helps increase VE, I'd like to see someone do a calculation of VE on a modded intake and exhaust (yea I said exhaust. A better-flowing exhaust will not cause as much resistance for the intake air being pushed into the intake area in the rotor).



For those who don't know, VE and HP have a direct (linear?) correlation. Raise VE 10%, and you've raised HP 10%.
j0rd4n is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
captdallas
Meet and Greet
4
07-08-2006 04:58 PM
1Revvin7
Rotary Engine Building, Porting & Swaps
71
05-28-2005 09:31 AM
Rotaryman88
2nd Generation Specific
44
09-29-2003 06:30 AM
7sins
Insert BS here
3
11-28-2001 10:23 AM

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 


Quick Reply: Turbo Maps and Volumetric Efficiency



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:44 PM.