Pinch point debate 2

[SchmidtMotorWorks]

You ask like you will be open minded and able to have an open discussion about the pros and cons. But that isn't how conversations go with the threads you take over. Everything you say, you say with absolution. It isn't fruitful to discuss anything with anyone who deals in absolutes....particularly when it comes to them being absolutely right all the time.

Can you point to something I posted as an absolute that is incorrect?

I'm willing to put my methods up to scrutiny, I don't see anyone else willing to do the same.

[SchmidtMotorWorks]

Cant you people discuss without getting mad to each other? I have seen too many interesting topics getting locked becouse people somehow turn all this interesting technical discussion to personal fights.

To the topic, how big the differences might be in a head designed with talented head porter vs. as talented guy designing head with CFD? I mean differences real performance. Can the difference be very big? Since there is a lot of fast cars with heads ported without cfd, using just flowbench, and IRL testing.

Mr. Schmidt, in the first topic you said that there are plenty of examples of flow bench improvements hurting performance. Can you tell an example?

Also, you were going to explain to rookie about how wave action simulation programs work. He didn't seem to be interested but I am

One more thing,

In CFD you can set it up to flow the way a flow bench does or like the way a piston draws air, the difference is huge.

If not too much work, I would be interested to see that (if it isnt already shown on some another thread?)

Start wit this thread, many of your questions are answered here:

viewtopic.php?f=15&t=30828

[SchmidtMotorWorks]

Jon, you really are sounding like the Dyno Ball Buster guy, are you related to him by chance or birth. ?

I don't know him but did read a couple of posts by him that I learned something from. Can't remember what it was just now.

[user-9274568]

Sometime it's logical to withdraw from something that is endless.

Like I tell my kids, it's not what you do, it's how you approach it. You come from a non-teaching angle. Your coming more from the, your a dumb ass and irrelevant..

Nothing endless about it, just post the scanned data.

I think it is clear that you know CFD in the hands of a clueless person like me will produce a more comprehensive explanation of the consequences of pinch than you can provide from experience.

If you review the posts I think you will find that it is you that have said i couldn't find my ass.

I stand by my statement.

The only thing clear here is what I think of you. How I'm certain that your one of those guys who is far from humble.

What I find interesting is how you use underlining tones to stir shit and get a rise out of people. I also find it interesting that a man of your intelligence even wastes his time trying to educate us irrelevant, obsolete people of Speedtalk.

You can insult my intelligence all you wish.

Don't you have something to design or is no one hiring at the moment?

[BrazilianZ28Camaro]

Chad, taking into account the CFD X real life testing, an awesome "challange" would be if you could send John a scanned port before you did an improvement to it.

He can CFD it and say where and why it can be improved , and we can compare this to what you did on the bench and and the respective dyno data.

---Just an idea---

Schmidt,

You see I know very little about CFD, I was hoping you could explain how it is a cost effective tool to improve a head port to the average guy like me.

I also noted that, GM with all the mega bucks specific softwares they must have, still need a wind tunnel to evaluate a car body. In my limited mind, the air/fuel flow behavior into the port is much more complex that the air flow through a car body.

Or the wind tunnel may be used to calibrate the CFD programs?

Please gentleman, lets keep the "rev limiter" just at 6000...this topic can be real produtive.

[dirtracr5]

What im wondering is how the hell you guys ever get anything done???

[SchmidtMotorWorks]

Sometime it's logical to withdraw from something that is endless.

Like I tell my kids, it's not what you do, it's how you approach it. You come from a non-teaching angle. Your coming more from the, your a dumb ass and irrelevant..

Nothing endless about it, just post the scanned data.

I think it is clear that you know CFD in the hands of a clueless person like me will produce a more comprehensive explanation of the consequences of pinch than you can provide from experience.

If you review the posts I think you will find that it is you that have said i couldn't find my ass.

I stand by my statement.

The only thing clear here is what I think of you. How I'm certain that your one of those guys who is far from humble.

What I find interesting is how you use underlining tones to stir shit and get a rise out of people. I also find it interesting that a man of your intelligence even wastes his time trying to educate us irrelevant, obsolete people of Speedtalk.

You can insult my intelligence all you wish.

Don't you have something to design or is no one hiring at the moment?

You called BS on me, I think it is fair for me to say, "put up or shut up" lets compare the fruits of out methods in answering the question at hand.

I'm willing to put my methods up to scrutiny, and others wil learn from it just as they did in the other thread.
viewtopic.php?f=15&t=30828
I don't think you can point to a more constructive thread in the history of Speedtalk.

I'm not sure what underlying tones you mean, I try to be as direct, informative and polite as I can.

[Bucky]

Chad, taking into account the CFD X real life testing, an awesome "challange" would be if you could send John a scanned port before you did an improvement to it.

He can CFD it and say where and why it can be improved , and we can compare this to what you did on the bench and and the respective dyno data.

---Just an idea---

Schmidt,

You see I know very little about CFD, I was hoping you could explain how it is a cost effective tool to improve a head port to the average guy like me.

I also noted that, GM with all the mega bucks specific softwares they must have, still need a wind tunnel to evaluate a car body. In my limited mind, the air/fuel flow behavior into the port is much more complex that the air flow through a car body.

Or the wind tunnel may be used to calibrate the CFD programs?

Please gentleman, lets keep the "rev limiter" just at 6000...this topic can be real produtive.

I should think that if he has the ability to evaluate cylinder head ports, he certainly has more than a few on file already. He's only stirring the pot.

[Bucky]

You ask like you will be open minded and able to have an open discussion about the pros and cons. But that isn't how conversations go with the threads you take over. Everything you say, you say with absolution. It isn't fruitful to discuss anything with anyone who deals in absolutes....particularly when it comes to them being absolutely right all the time.

Can you point to something I posted as an absolute that is incorrect?

I'm willing to put my methods up to scrutiny, I don't see anyone else willing to do the same.

The irony is overflowing in this post. I'm done too. You are brilliant....at destroying the usefulness of a thread.

[Warp Speed]

The only thing clear here is what I think of you. How I'm certain that your one of those guys who is far from humble.

Hello Pot............................Meet Kettle!!!!!!


I thought you were "Done"....................................3 pages ago!!!!!! HAHAHAHA


I'm realy surprised your taking this angle on this subject, and I that you would be really into CFD and it's capabilities to give an "inside view" but..................................?

It's not the ego getting in the way of learning is it????

[user-9274568]

The only thing clear here is what I think of you. How I'm certain that your one of those guys who is far from humble.

Hello Pot............................Meet Kettle!!!!!!


I thought you were "Done"....................................3 pages ago!!!!!! HAHAHAHA


I'm realy surprised your taking this angle on this subject, and I that you would be really into CFD and it's capabilities to give an "inside view" but..................................?

It's not the ego getting in the way of learning is it????

You don't know me other than from these forums.

I have no problem learning, but it's a two way street.

Jon is offering nothing I'm interested in.

Like Bucky said, he's brilliant, just ask him..

Ego in the way? More like I'd like some respect. Not being called obsolete and irrelevant..

You win Jon, your way is the only way.

[SchmidtMotorWorks]

Schmidt,

You see I know very little about CFD, I was hoping you could explain how it is a cost effective tool to improve a head port to the average guy like me.

I also noted that, GM with all the mega bucks specific softwares they must have, still need a wind tunnel to evaluate a car body. In my limited mind, the air/fuel flow behavior into the port is much more complex that the air flow through a car body.

Or the wind tunnel may be used to calibrate the CFD programs?

Please gentleman, lets keep the "rev limiter" just at 6000...this topic can be real produtive

Most of the software at GM can be had by anyone, what they use ctually has some of the capabilties of the original software turned off so that less expereinced people can work on the models that more experienced people make. Most large companies operate this way. They do have some special things turned on for specific companies too. The days when you could write software that was better than commercial software are mostly history, you just can't compete with 40 years and hundreds of people of continuous development in a couple years work with one development team. Even NASA and JPL mostly use regular commercial software.

There is a lot of tradition in automaking even though they have virtual reality studios that make you feel like you are sitting in or touching a real car they still make clay models. People like what they are used to.

In regards to wind tunnels it is much more expensive/difficult/time consuming for vehicle exteriors than internal shapes like ports. The reason is that the wind tunnel has to be much larger than the car so to do that with CFD you have to solve for a huge volume around the car. Also, there are certain aesthetics about a smoke trail flowing over a car that will always be worth the price. I worked at Swift for a while, a wind tunnel is endlessly entertaining.
Of course huge amounts of time and money are saved on car exteriors with CFD. A lot of people go to school hopng to get a job using CFD for racing cars, but in reality most of the jobs are for things like designing air conditioning ducts.
I forget the name of it now but there is some racing jobs site that has something like 50 CFD guys looking to get into racing instead of AC ducts etc..

[CGT]

Jon, Do you have anything that you could post or illustrate in CFD that would be related to the subject at hand? I for one, would be interested in viewing it. Maybe a previous project or something? Maybe it will help keep this thread on track. I think there are more than a few people that would enjoy seeing a simulation that they could relate to this subject. Then debate.

[SchmidtMotorWorks]

I should think that if he has the ability to evaluate cylinder head ports, he certainly has more than a few on file already. He's only stirring the pot.

I do have losts of ports even some 23 degree stuff, but I don't have a single plane manifold. Maybe if I have time I will make one tonight.

I have been down this path before though, when I use my own data, at the end people say "but that isn't like my data".

[rookie]

Cant you people discuss without getting mad to each other? I have seen too many interesting topics getting locked becouse people somehow turn all this interesting technical discussion to personal fights.

To the topic, how big the differences might be in a head designed with talented head porter vs. as talented guy designing head with CFD? I mean differences real performance. Can the difference be very big? Since there is a lot of fast cars with heads ported without cfd, using just flowbench, and IRL testing.

Mr. Schmidt, in the first topic you said that there are plenty of examples of flow bench improvements hurting performance. Can you tell an example?

Also, you were going to explain to rookie about how wave action simulation programs work. He didn't seem to be interested but I am

One more thing,

In CFD you can set it up to flow the way a flow bench does or like the way a piston draws air, the difference is huge.

If not too much work, I would be interested to see that (if it isnt already shown on some another thread?)

It's not that I'm not interested, I am interested in anything that can be backed with dyno and track #'s...that is why I am more interested in Chad's formula he posted in part one of this thread, I can look at the dyno sheets and on track performance from builds on his site and see that his formula does exactly what he says, this is something I can take and apply to my own builds and at least know what to expect.