Chamber Grooves - what do you guys think?

General engine tech -- Drag Racing to Circle Track

Moderator: Team

Postby Ed Wright » Mon Feb 13, 2006 7:25 pm

I know I'm really old, and evidently really dumb. I don't see how this is going to do much of anything good. Hope I'm wrong, more power and/or less fuel needed is always a good thing. Going to be interesting if nothing else. I participated in a test, as a favor to Pete Incaudo (Had to fly to Atlanta to do it), of Jim's golf ball dimples in an LS1 engine. Intake bowls, and piston tops. Was worth about 6 fwhp, and it changed the fueling up for sure. May be something here also. Old as I am, I haven't seen everything yet.
Ed Wright
Pro
Pro
 
Posts: 232
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 4:45 pm
Location: Tulsa, OK

Postby automotive breath » Mon Feb 13, 2006 7:33 pm

Ed Wright wrote: I don't see how this is going to do much of anything good. Hope I'm wrong, more power and/or less fuel needed is always a good thing. Going to be interesting if nothing else. ...

I’ve been doing this for more than a year. I have a good idea of what the results will show, but don't care to speculate. I'll let the numbers speak for themselves. This I will say, it's important to look beyond HP and torque.
automotive breath
Guru
Guru
 
Posts: 1492
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2005 10:54 pm

Re: -

Postby kdrolt » Mon Feb 13, 2006 11:10 pm

automotive breath wrote:I have a set of LT1 heads running with three grooves coming together with a common outlet between the valves. Comments please, before I show up at Larry’s for the test!

If the "logic" I posted in page 1 of this thread holds, then at a certain point adding multiple grooves will begin to defeat most of the effects of squish, and in doing so the jet velocity will drop to the point where it won't help assist burn. IOW you add grooves to help move the mixture from the squish region (good) but the jet speed drops (bad) and so does the useful squish (also bad). There's a tradeoff involved and I don't know where the optimum lies.

Still no word from Dr Combustion from Ford yet?
kdrolt
 

Postby V Remian » Mon Feb 13, 2006 11:57 pm

If grooves swirling the incoming mixture are so efective-what happened to the mitubishi and honda jet valves?
V Remian
New Member
New Member
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:34 am
Location: Central Massachusetts

Postby maxracesoftware » Tue Feb 14, 2006 2:47 am

The most amazing before / after test I ever did on the dyno was with a SBC, small hydraulic cam, about 370chp. It had a single plane intake with a Quadrajet carb. It was a used intake and came with an adapter that held in place a homemade plenum divider plate. The plenum divider plate was rectangular and didn't match the plenum at all, just very crudely divided the manifold plenum in half from front to back. We did all the testing with the divider plate in place but took it out for a couple tests to see what effect it had. The engine dropped 57ctq with the plate out. I couldn't believe it. That is not a typo - it dropped 57 corrected ft. lbs. torque!! I've tried a plenum divider plate on many other engines since and it has never had that much effect.

I don't know if the grooves mod will be that good

i've also witnessed a pretty weird effect
of a Plenum Divider when used on a Victor 4x4
on a NHRA SuperStock 283 with Rochester 4GC Carb.

that particular "top secret" :) carb spacer-plenum divider" combo
made a little over +20 HP gain on an already competitive well-tuned
and Dyno tested engine.

the only major problem=> weird ideling characteristics....
RPM would vary great deal like it was surging from a Vacuum Leak, yet
there was no vacuum leak.
you had to maintain engine RPM of 3000 RPM on upwards to make it go
dead-smooth.

since this RaceCar had a 6200 stall converter..i don't think it was
much of problem ??

i've tried normal Plenum Dividers in the past...but this particular one
was miles ahead in HP/TQ gains...must have been handling the very high velocity coming out of that real-restrictive 4GC Carb ,extremely well,
sort of like NASCAR restrictor-plate technology ?

in 1993 it ran (without that Divider)
i never found out what it ran WITH the DIVIDER in place ???

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
NHRA SS/KA 1966 Chevy II Nova in Super Stock

283 cid ( 292 cid = 3.935 Bore x 3.000 Stroke )
Edelbrock Victor 4 x 4 with Rochester 4-GC carb
3-Step headers 1 5/8, 1 3/4 , 1 7/8 x 3.000 collector
Cam Motion Roller cam CM 123-02 74.3 deg OverLap
276.3 int / 280.3 exh duration at .050
.4087 int / .4191 exh Lobes
installed on 98.5 CL 1.60 int / 1.50 exh Rocker Ratios
3030 Lbs. weight 6.14:1 gears 1.96 1st gear PowerGlide
99.5 inch RollOut Slicks

February 14 , 1993 actual run
60 Ft= 1.420
660 Ft= 6.830
1320 Ft= 10.87 ET at 120.99 MPH
Meaux Racing Heads
MaxRace Software
PipeMax and ET_Analyst for DragRacers
http://www.maxracesoftware.com
http://maxracesoftware.com/bulletinboard/index.php
maxracesoftware
Guru
Guru
 
Posts: 2266
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 4:04 pm
Location: Abbeville, LA

Postby Monkeywrench » Wed Feb 15, 2006 5:56 pm

Just noticed the posts on the grooved combustion chambers. A USA-based BMW tuning shop, Metric Mechanics , has been putting multiple grooves in combustion chambers for a while now. They seem to be very succesful at it too.

http://www.metricmechanic.com/ , note the pictures I've seen from other publications of their work show deeper looking grooves, and only say 3 or 4 per combustion chamber, than the ones on their site. It may depened on the head application...
-Bob
Monkeywrench
Member
Member
 
Posts: 158
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 9:14 pm
Location: South NJ

Postby Ape » Wed Feb 15, 2006 9:06 pm

I might be wrong but Moto Gp bikes (supposedly) do have 3dimensional (3D curved areas) squish areas, for similar reasons. I know this doesnt fit the topic perfectly but nevertheless thought it might be off interest.
There is always advancement to be made.
Ape
Pro
Pro
 
Posts: 284
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 4:16 am

Postby automotive breath » Wed Feb 15, 2006 9:20 pm

Monkeywrench wrote:Just noticed the posts on the grooved combustion chambers. A USA-based BMW tuning shop, Metric Mechanics , has been putting multiple grooves in combustion chambers for a while now. They seem to be very succesful at it too…

Both ideas are based on the same principals, which are they induce higher turbulent flame velocity and aid in air/fuel mixing during combustion.

The results of higher turbulent flame velocity are less time needed to burn the mixture and higher flame temperatures. The results are lower ignition timing requirements and more complete burn.

The difference in the Metric concept and Somender Singh’s concept is the later has a greater potential because the squish flow is organized to generate the desired results. This compares closer to the work of Larry Widmer.
automotive breath
Guru
Guru
 
Posts: 1492
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2005 10:54 pm

Postby airflowdevelop » Wed Feb 15, 2006 11:35 pm

Let me know when you find the unicorns...I'll hang out then.

Forget about the dyno, run these things down the track!

point is..I have found many unicorns on the dyno...that turn into turds on the track.

You've got me interested...eventhough this tech-no-ology is older than Dick Cheney's gun powder.
airflowdevelop
Guru
Guru
 
Posts: 1964
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 12:19 pm
Location: Dillsburg, PA

Postby n2xlr8n » Thu Feb 16, 2006 12:02 pm

This may elicit a grin from you guys (the folks testing this theory), but do you think the effects you are noting would as pronounced on a Hemispherical, DOHC 4V head?

Thanks for the input; I'm looking forward to seeing the results!

S.
From BBCs to Boxer 4s....I'm not too bright.
n2xlr8n
Member
Member
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 8:01 pm
Location: Bama

Postby 67RS502 » Thu Feb 16, 2006 12:55 pm

I talked to to my friend (a local roundy round engine builder here in Houston) and
he said things like this have been tried before... and his head porter Jimmy Bell didnt
think its gonna really work.
From following this thread I believe that some power will show up on the dyno.
But could this be do to the chamber design, or lack of on a 23deg. SBC head.
I think this could be a bandade fix that makes more power on a SBC, but the same
idea may not work on a hemi or 4valve head or a SB2 deal?
67 camaro 373s
girly cams on pumpgas:
420 - 641hp BretBauerCam, 1.4, 9.90 @ 135
383 - 490hp 224/224, 1.56, 10.77 @ 124.6
502 - 626hp 252/263, 049s 1.44, 10.08 @ 132.7
62 Nova cruiser
383/200-4R/12-bolt w 373s
224/224 HR cam
1.57 10.97 @ 121.2
User avatar
67RS502
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 595
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 11:57 am
Location: Houston Tx.

Postby Ed Wright » Thu Feb 16, 2006 1:37 pm

Jimmy Bell didn't just fall off the turnip truck.
Ed Wright
Pro
Pro
 
Posts: 232
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 4:45 pm
Location: Tulsa, OK

Postby MadBill » Thu Feb 16, 2006 5:35 pm

I'm poised to start whittling on a pair of BBC heads in the near future, so results are of more than passing interest!
A philosophical point however: Although the 'squish jet' will be active only near TDC, the flame front (however 'wrinkled' by turbulence, etc.) will have been advancing for the preceding ~40 degrees of crank rotation. So is the plug gap really the appropriate target? (Perhaps that's the purpose of the multi-jet configuration: To churn up the advancing flame front wherever it may be at TDC?)
"There's no product that can't be made cheaper and worse."
MadBill
Guru
Guru
 
Posts: 7539
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:41 am
Location: Northeast of Toronto, Ontario Canada

Postby Ed Wright » Thu Feb 16, 2006 5:53 pm

The only way to know for absolutly certain would be to run the car at the track, pull the heads, cut them, put them back on and run it again. Hard to do all this at the track, unless you had an easy car to pull the heads (not a late model Firebird/Camaro, for sure) and John Force's mobile machine shop at the track. Unless it is a pretty good gain (or loss), testing on different days would probably be inconclusive.

I'm going to R&M's school this weekend (should know EVERYthing about building race engines by Sunday evening <jk>) and this may come up. Darren's take would be interesting. I think I know what it is from his earlier comment, but could make for some interesting discussion.
Ed Wright
Pro
Pro
 
Posts: 232
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 4:45 pm
Location: Tulsa, OK

Postby Joe Mendelis » Thu Feb 16, 2006 6:54 pm

Ed Wright wrote:Jimmy Bell didn't just fall off the turnip truck.

Is he the one that works at Faerman's?
Joe Mendelis
 

PreviousNext

Return to Engine Tech

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bigcam406, Bing [Bot], BrazilianZ28Camaro, crazyamc, dave brode, dcl, fast_crew, gnicholson, jsgarage, Keith Morganstein, Lockwire, MotionMachine, paulzig and 23 guests