Shed tinkerer
View Garage
Posted 16 September 2015 - 11:32 AM
Hi everyone,
Just wondering if anyone has any experiences they would like to share regarding the use of engine building software... What did you use, how good is it, how much did it cost etc etc...
I am considering planning an engine build and would like to use simulation software to check my data with (for reference).
Advice?
Forum Fixture
Posted 16 September 2015 - 12:54 PM
I've used Pipemax and I know there are very good engine builders that use the same. It's not fancy but it works and it pretty cheap.
Shed tinkerer
View Garage
Posted 16 September 2015 - 01:15 PM
I've used Pipemax and I know there are very good engine builders that use the same. It's not fancy but it works and it pretty cheap.
I have heard some use pipemax for engine building- but as i havent used it, I am not sure of its limitation as an engine simulation software (I know its highly regarded for exhaust simulation).
i have been playing with http://performancetr...ownload.htm#ea3
There is a demo for the engine anaylser- I have been playing with it and it looks quite good, but I am limited to what I can do. They only give you one engine and you cannot modify the head much, but you can see the effect of valve timing events, and intake/exhaust setups.
I have gotten the demo engine up to 400hp from 210hp by optimising the intake/ exhaust to the cam. I have noticed that good flowing intake and exhausts really like close centerlines for peak HP. With a more restrictive exhaust, the wider LSAs seem better...
Why dont we have a challenge? See who can extract the most peak HP and Torque using the demo (which limits us with block and head), and re-post the specs...
NOTE: don't use the 'optimiser' its cheating! This will calculate the best figures for you. No fun in that...
Edited by LC-GTR-1969, 16 September 2015 - 01:16 PM.
Forum Fixture
View Garage
Posted 16 September 2015 - 01:15 PM
Quarter junior is pretty good also.
_STRAIGHTLINEMICK_
Posted 16 September 2015 - 02:55 PM
_Bomber Watson_
Posted 16 September 2015 - 03:05 PM
_STRAIGHTLINEMICK_
Posted 16 September 2015 - 03:40 PM
Edited by STRAIGHTLINEMICK, 16 September 2015 - 03:40 PM.
_Bomber Watson_
Posted 16 September 2015 - 03:42 PM
_STRAIGHTLINEMICK_
Posted 16 September 2015 - 07:45 PM
It helped me chose a cam duration that maximised hp but kept some torque at lower rpm . The duration was spot on but not sure about the lsa, best lsa was found the old way . Hp was about 280 @5800 which is what the head flowed and is close because it makes 210 Moroso at the track .
Anyway i was running my own business at the time and the aim was to come up with a repeatable street/race combo that i could sell on . I think its an important tool to have because if used as a guide it takes a lot of trial and error out of engine building.
But the main thing to remember with these programmes is if u put bullshit numbers in you'll get bullshit numbers out .
_oldjohnno_
Posted 16 September 2015 - 09:12 PM
Here's an interesting exercise: choose a realistic combo and peak rpm figure and run these through a few different simulators. Obviously if we are running the same cam and rpms each time then we should get very close to the same intake and exhaust dimensions from each simulator. I've tried this with EA, Quarter Junior, PipeMax, DD and a couple of others I forget the names of and they all came up with different numbers, sometimes wildly different. Likewise they'll give different cam recommendations for the same combos. EA especially seems to give wildly optimistic predictions and I consider all the cheap packages to be useful only as a way of getting in the ballpark. They all make too many assumptions to be accurate but the only one I really like (Pipemax) isn't really a simulator at all - but a handy tool just the same. Stan Weiss's Carfor is handy at times too; kind of a swiss army knife of car and engine calculators. Bloody ugly though.
Edited by oldjohnno, 16 September 2015 - 09:13 PM.
_Bomber Watson_
Posted 16 September 2015 - 10:09 PM
Yeah I just pick the one thats mots favorable out of the bunch, then go to the pub and talk up my new combo.
_oldjohnno_
Posted 17 September 2015 - 05:51 AM
Yeah I just pick the one thats mots favorable out of the bunch, then go to the pub and talk up my new combo.
The 440hp 161 with dual 4 barrels?
_Bomber Watson_
Posted 17 September 2015 - 07:09 AM
_STRAIGHTLINEMICK_
Posted 17 September 2015 - 08:33 AM
Forum Fixture
View Garage
Posted 17 September 2015 - 11:40 AM
Oldjohnno, what do you think of Quarter junior?
_oldjohnno_
Posted 17 September 2015 - 10:13 PM
Oldjohnno, what do you think of Quarter junior?
I haven't played with it for a couple of years and even then I didn't spend much time with it. From memory it was one of the ones that gave weird runner lengths though I could be wrong. Having said that Patrick Hale is undoubtedly a smart guy and was one of the first if not the first to offer this kind of software. I suspect it would be much the same as the others - a bit of fun and good enough to use as a rough guide but certainly not gospel.
I bought some two-stroke expansion chamber software and after you enter all your engine details it sits there for about 20 seconds with squillions of numbers scrolling quickly past the screen. I think it's pretending to be doing some incredibly complex calculations to design you the Worlds Most Powerful Pipe. Never mind that the actual sums are pretty simple and could be performed by any old computer in a fraction of a second, it all looks hugely impressive and somewhat hilarious.
I think the 4 stroke stuff is kind of similar - by outputting masses of data precise to the 2nd decimal place the user is led to believe the results just might be accurate. For example some will give ignition timing recommendations at various rpm intervals after being given nothing more than the broadest hint of the chamber type, and nothing at all about swirl or heat or mixture motion at all. So of course the recommendations are bogus though they do look convincing.
Which is not to say I don't think simulation can't be accurate - I'm sure the higher end stuff is very good. But it often costs tens of thousands of dollars, and literally requires days to enter all kinds of data that the average racer doesn't even have.
I'm going to produce my own software specifically for Holden sixes. It'll have just one button labelled "Design me a fast motor"
Pressing it will produce three lines of output:
1, Suggested intake port flow - as much as you can get out of it
2, Suggested cam: as much as you and your available gear ratios can put up with, on a 107 LSA
3, Suggested runner dimensions: whatever Pipemax tells you to use
I might even make it do the scrolly number thing to make it look like it's working really hard to come up with the answer...
Shed tinkerer
View Garage
Posted 18 September 2015 - 07:02 AM
I'm going to produce my own software specifically for Holden sixes. It'll have just one button labelled "Design me a fast motor"
Pressing it will produce three lines of output:
1, Suggested intake port flow - as much as you can get out of it
2, Suggested cam: as much as you and your available gear ratios can put up with, on a 107 LSA
3, Suggested runner dimensions: whatever Pipemax tells you to use
I might even make it do the scrolly number thing to make it look like it's working really hard to come up with the answer...
Funny...
Green Eggs and Spam
Posted 18 September 2015 - 08:05 AM
_Bomber Watson_
Posted 18 September 2015 - 09:55 AM
Green Eggs and Spam
Posted 18 September 2015 - 09:56 AM
Yes, yes I do post alot!
Posted 18 September 2015 - 11:20 AM
Forum Fixture
Posted 18 September 2015 - 11:53 AM
Green Eggs and Spam
Posted 18 September 2015 - 12:50 PM
_Bomber Watson_
Posted 18 September 2015 - 02:47 PM
_GreenLH LS3_
Posted 18 September 2015 - 07:47 PM
. Google Pro 186 . Blue LJ . Mick Douglas owns it. Jack bros in qld builds the engineYes.
Supercharged thing.
Come on, DJ.
I even went trawling through Facebook looking for it and couldnt find it.
Put me out of my misery.
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
