To: <80scool_aus@yahoogroups.com>, <80scool@yahoogroups.com> From: "George Couyant" Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 12:08:47 +1100 Subject: [80] Re: Intercooling [was Intercooler sizes] Reply-To: 80scool@yahoogroups.com Another long one inspired by some recent posts about intercooler sizes etc..... Smoke if you've got 'em. If you recall my previous post on turbochargers, there may have been aspects of turbo system design that will have been new to many members. It may have also seemed more complex and confusing than first thought. Intercooling is more complex and indeed even more confusing. An intercooler is simply a device that removes heat. It sits smack bang between a turbocharger or supercharger and the inlet manifold. When air is compressed, energy is added to that air and due to the inefficiency of air compressors, some of this energy manifests itself as heat. It is not uncommon to see charge air temperatures well above 100 deg C at full load from a modern turbocharger and well above 120 deg C from modern superchargers. By lowering the inlet charge temperature, one relieves some of the thermal stress from the engine and can extract higher levels of power and torque at a given boost pressure. This is achieved by feeding the engine a more dense charge of air - ie more oxygen molecules available for combustion for a given volume of air. When fuel is burnt, heat is generated in the combustion chamber. At a certain point, the heat inside the combustion chamber becomes excessive and engine damage may be likely. If for example the temperature of the inlet charge air is 110 deg C. A certain amount of fuel is combusted and it raises the combustion temperature to 650 deg C (in a diesel application - petrol temperatures are higher). A simple way to look at this is that 650 - 110 = 540 deg C worth of "power" has been produced. By lowering the entry air to say 50 deg C, it means that 650 - 50 = 600 deg C worth of power can be produced to achieve the same combustion temperature. Despite my attempt to simplify the issue (I'm already spanking myself for implying that temperature is a measure of power), there's no magic in it. Intercooling obeys all the laws of thermodynamics - no matter what anyone out there implies. Intercooler Size: Since we are interested in removing heat through the intercooler, it stands to reason that the bigger the intercooler, the better it will be. This is true to a point. In Australia where ambient temperatures rarely fall below zero, big is good. However there are other physical constraints such as where to put it and ensuring adequate air flow that makes life difficult. The maths behind intercooler design is fairly straight forward and well documented in heat exchanger design books. The mass flow of air through the intercooler makes the calculations a little more complex however but straight forward none the less. With regard to air flow inside the intercooler, the more internal cores ( air passages) the better. Let's consider an example. If we have two intercoolers, each 600mm wide x 300mm high x 70mm deep. One employs horizontal passages and the other vertical with 60mm spacing between passages. This means that that the horizontal construction has 300mm / 60mm = 5 passages (600mm long). The vertical has 600mm / 60mm = 10 passages (300mm long). Obviously, the vertical construction will flow better than the horizontal. Twice the number of internal passages and half the length. But it is more difficult to spread the air stream evenly across all the 10 passages of the vertical construction intercooler. Intercooler Air Flow: You must get air into and out of an intercooler. That's easy. The tricky part is to ensure that you have a good spread of air feed into *all* of the intercooler. Air flow is momentum based and if the end tank design is such that the entry air favours one side of the intercooler, that side will flow more air and the cooling affect will not be as great as the side with slower air. It comes down to how long the charge air is inside the intercooler. The more time, the more heat is extracted. It's useless installing a 1m wide intercooler if 80% of the charge air passes through the 1st 30 cm of core. End tank design is difficult and the maths is complex. Modern flow analysis software for compressible flow does make life easier and can lead to surprisingly accurate results - however computation for the variety of volumetric flow conditions is very time consuming - even with serious computing power. Other than some auto manufacturers, very few intercooler system designers perform any flow analysis. Intercooler type: There are a number of different intercooler types available. Bar and Plate, Fin and Tube, with internally finned and non finned available in each. Bar and Plate characteristics are dominated by the high thermal inertia of the intercooler. Bar and Plate is heavy and it takes a good deal of time to get it hot. It also takes a good deal of time to recover - or to remove the temperature. Let's take a drag race application. Bar and plate is often preferable as you not only experience a cooling affect through air flow through the intercooler but also take advantage of the higher mass of metal acting as a heat sink. In a 4WD application, this is generally the preferable intercooler type since we're often working the engine hard for a short period of time - say blasting up and sand dune, with a good period for recovery by the time we reach the next obstacle. Internal finning is of course preferable since with the larger surface area of metal exposed to the charge air inside the intercooler core, the efficiency of the heat exchanger is raised and more energy is removed. These do offer increased restriction however the efficiency gains far outweigh the added restriction. Fin and Tube is of much lighter construction, hence of lower thermal inertia. It heats up quickly and recovers quickly. High performance vehicles such as Porsche turbos use fin and tube intercoolers - again with internal finning. Where light weight is of importance, fin and tube is generally used. Fin and tube is often more expensive than bar and plate. Efficiency is generally the same between the two types of intercooler. But one must consider the entire system in relation to feeding an engine rather than the intercooler core (heat exchanger) alone. Intercooler Piping: You must get air from the turbo to the intercooler and then get the air to the inlet manifold. This is a very frustrating part of intercooler system design since the designer is bound by the physical constraints of the engine compartment. Again, since air flow is momentum based, bends in the piping present resistance to flow. Ideally you are after straight runs however one can increase the diameter of the piping around a bend to minimise the pressure drop. That said transition pieces (to go from one diameter to another) often present as much restriction as the bend itself. The best solution is to use mandrel formed rubber/silicon piping where the designer has flexibility to increase/decrease piping diameter smoothly. And why wouldn't you run the largest diameter possible for best flow? - Which brings me to a very important and often overlooked issue. Intercooler System Volume: The total volume of the entire intercooler system (from turbo to inlet manifold) has a significant affect on engine response. The time taken from when you depress the accelerator to the time the engine responds. In the 4WD world, I believe that engine response is very important and this is one area where compromise must occur. I have had many a long argument over this issue and no doubt will continue to do so in the future. The turbocharger must pressurise the entire volume for the engine to respond. The larger the volume of the entire intercooler system, the longer the delay in response. Compromise often occurs when designing a system that flows well but still maintains good response. If for example, reducing the diameter of a section of pipe reduces the total volume by say 20 cm3 but presents an additional 0.1 psi pressure drop at 4,000 rpm, is it a positive or negative modification to make? Or perhaps by increasing the size of the intercooler, we increase the total system volume by a certain percentage. Does the additional cooling affect offset the negative affect on response? This is one area where maths is of little use. It's a dyno and seat of the pants issue. Intercooler Position: This is an aspect that I have strong feelings about. There's no doubt that good air flow over the intercooler is vital for effective and consistent intercooler performance. In an 80 or 100 Series that means that the intercooler must be placed outside the engine bay. With a top mount intercooler, in cases where the vehicle speed is relatively low (ie climbing a dune) the radiant heat from the engine is high and in many cases, this heat actually adds heat to the inlet charge through the intercooler rather than removing it. Almost all high performance turbocharged vehicles employ front mount intercooling because it offers the best air flow and the greatest flexibility to install an intercooler of the correct size rather than one that fits into a cramped space. A common misconception is that a front mount intercooler "blocks" the air flow into the radiator. This can be true for some intercooler cores of very fine construction. To be effective in a front mount application the core itself needs to be of a fairly open design so that air flows through the core and into the radiator. The amount of energy extracted through the intercooler has little if any impact on the temperature of the air flowing through the intercooler and into the radiator. It is measured in fractions of a degree. On some vehicles with obstacles such as large driving lights, high mount winches, etc placed in front of the radiator, it may be necessary to install foam rubber around the outer edges of the intercooler to effectively seal the air flow so that it must flow through the intercooler and then the radiator. This increases the effectiveness of the intercooler and the radiator. Another issue often ignored when installing a top mount intercooler is that by cutting into the bonnet (hood...) particularly the bonnet frame the bonnet itself is weakened. On and 80 and 100 Series, when the bonnet is closed it forms a part of the structure of the vehicle and it acts as a stressed member in a frontal collision. Tuning Sounds obvious but when an intercooler is added, or for that matter any device that affects the air/fuel requirements of the engine, the engine must be retuned to suit the new requirements of the engine. Simply bolting on an intercooler will invariably disappoint the power hungry person. Maintenance Whilst there are no moving parts to wear, it is a good idea to ensure that the space between the intercooler and the radiator is not clogged up with mud. In fact, it's good practice to periodically remove the intercooler and clean the radiator properly. Items such as insect screens in front of the radiator should be avoided like the plague. These have a significant negative affect on radiator and intercooler performance by restricting air flow. Driving lights etc have an adverse affect as well however we really do need them..... Driving lights etc generally have a greater affect on engine cooling by pushing air over the bonnet rather than through the radiator. The affect on intercooler performance is minimal. Why Intercool? I've left this until last because it'll otherwise be lost in the ramble above. Sure a good intercooler will offer more and more consistent power and torque, but when do you consider one? The biggest single mistake I see people make is that they purchase an intercooler system because - "The ol' girl's getting a bit tired and she needs a bit of help"... If (and only if) one is not satisfied with the power and torque of their forced induction engine *when in good condition* should they consider looking for any other way of improving engine performance. Seems logical doesn't it? Enough typing.... My fingers ache. Hope this helps. Cheers gc '97 HDJ80 - Melbourne Oz To: 80scool@yahoogroups.com From: "Maarten J.M.Verschure " Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 13:13:04 -0000 Subject: [80] Re: SAFARI INTERCOOLER!!?? Reply-To: 80scool@yahoogroups.com --- In 80scool@yahoogroups.com, "q_o_h2001 " wrote: > Does anyone have a safari intercooler in a 4.2 12valve diesel? > Does it make a difference? Is it easy to mount like a DIY kit? > Has anyone had overheating problems? > > Thanks. Hi Pedro, Better get a European Intercoolersystem,its a bit cheaper,somewhat bigger in the coolingarea and last but not least its used by Toyota as original equipment when the 80 series was still available. Its also fitting LHD and RHD cars. OEM Toyota partnumbers; 00310-05500 12 valve 1HD-T engine, 00310-06000 24 valve 1HD-FT engine, 00310-05900 oilcoolerkit automatic gearbox, Sportcamshaft 13501-1HDTS, Upgrade turbocharger 00310-18500. Differences start at 20% more torque and horsepower. Yes you can do it yourself depending on mechanical expirience. Take care, Maarten Verschure From: Willem-Jan Markerink To: Henry Chan Subject: Re: 1HDFTE performance upgrades Cc: maarten@all-american.nl Reply-to: w.j.markerink@a1.nl Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2003 21:37:55 +0100 (CC to Maarten Verschure @ All American Imports, for contact and possible corrections) (PS Maarten: this kind of upgrade info should be on page #1 of the AAI-site....we need a table with Cruiser-model, upgrade-type, power- /torque-gain and prices....cuts down on my repetitive typing for all those poor dieseltuning-deprived folks elsewhere....;)) xxxxxxxxxxx On 31 Jan 2003 at 18:59, Henry Chan wrote: > I would like to know what kind of upgrades are > available for the 1HD-FTE engine with a 4-A/T. > > What upgrades can be done to the stock engine, and > what HP gains can be expected? Rough estimates: 1) Fullsize intercooler (HDJ-100 has only small stock unit, HDJ-80 none): +10% gain in both horsepower and torque (20-30% with HDJ-80) 2) Recommended at the same time: larger (stainless steel) exhaust, another 5-10% (very conservative & *static* data, the dynamic effect (turbo spooling up much faster) can not be expressed in numbers; the subjective effect is almost as large as the intercooler-only on a HDJ- 80) 3) Larger turbo: 250hp/600Nm 4) Different camshaft: 275hp/650Nm civil / 300hp/700Nm rallye-trim 5) Additional LPG-injection: 350hp/850Nm Rough price estimates are respectively US$1500, US$1000, US$2500, US$1000(?) (somewhere down the line the fuel pump might need replacement/modification too, not sure), LPG unknown (quite complex if you want to do it safely, with all kinds of detectors/shut-off- valves (you can't stop a diesel when LPG is still flowing)). > Do you know some websites I can check out with info on > modifying 1HD-FTE engines? No (active) website, but the guru in Europe, supplying several resellers in all of Europe, as well as directly to teams running in Dakar & other desert rallye's: All American Imports (Maarten Verschure) Veerweg 6 Kaatsheuvel The Netherlands, Europe Voice: +31 416 540167 Fax: +31 416 272304 Email: all.american@worldonline.nl sales@all-american.nl http://www.all-american.nl/ xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx PS: I also highly recommend you subscribe to either 80-series and/or 100-series Mailinglist; links to all kinds of Cruiser mailinglists are on my site (or www.lcool.org for 80/100 directly). To: 80scool@yahoogroups.com From: Craig Vincent Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 20:37:35 +1300 Subject: Re: [80] 1HD-T or 1HD-FT on Steroids! Why go this route justification. Reply-To: 80scool@yahoogroups.com hzj80 wrote: >From: "Craig Vincent" > >>Hi guy's, >>there is mention in the archives of really powerful modified cruisers in >>the Netherlands. Most of the posts seem to be by Maarten Verschure. >> >>The figures I have seen mentioned are : >>1HD-T a relaible 240Hp & 470 ftlb's torque (180kW & 640Nm) using >>exhaust, cam, intercooler, turbocharger, & pump mods. >> >>1HD-FT a reliable 280Hp & 490 ftlb's torque (210kW & 660Nm) using >>exhaust, cam, intercooler, turbocharger, & pump mods. >> >>and the wild child >> >>1HD-FT as above plus LPG 350Hp & 630+ ftlb's torque (260kW & 850+Nm) but >>no mention was made of longevity or reliability. >> >>Has anyone any experience of these mods? >>A link to a graph of the power/torque curve? >>How does the rest of the drivetrain cope? >>Prices of parts and availability of the parts used and various options >>of performance i.e. stock plus stage 1 and later upgrade to stage 2 or >>is it a giant leap in one bound? >> >>hoping for some informed debate. >> >>Cheers, >>Craig. > > >Craig, > >If those are the sort of torque numbers you're after, then I'd suggest >looking for a larger diesel motor to start with like a Cummins BT6/ISB, or >even a Powerstroke. > >These numbers might make for a good autobahn speedster, but I doubt you'd be >left with a usable offroad drivetrain. > >I've only ever seen those sorts of numbers associated with the marine >versions which have unlimited cooling water, limited power curve, low comp >ratio's, etc. > >Remember the old saying, "If it seems too good to be true....." or to put it >a different way, "If it was that easy and cheap, everyone would have one". > >hth, > >Ian B >93 HZJ80+T >89 V6N105+auto >Canberra, Australia >www.geocities.com/hzj80 > Hi Ian, I am not specifically after those numbers but this is where I am coming from. I have put bigger turbo's on 2L-T & 2L-TII in the past and pyro temp went down, power went up, fuel economy improved and routine oil analysis showed upto a 50% reduction in soot levels in the oil and all wear metals dropped. On a 3B Toyota I gave the head a mild port and polish and built a set of 4into1 extractors for it, which were ceramic coated, and a T3 Garrett was sat on the end of the extractors. The result was 175hp at sub 650=B0C but the soot loading in the oil was grossly excessive upon dropping back to 140hp the oil contamination was within acceptable bounds. On the 1HD-T's I have gone the KISS principle so far snorkel with Donaldson ram made from 4" exhaust tube (will fit between inner and outer guard just), electric pusher fuel pump (so that the injection pump can get on with its job not forcing it to suck from the tank. On the test bench the fuel is forced in at 2.8psi @40-45=B0C not sucked like on the car) and removed the factory main muffler. On the 1HD-T's this usually results in a 12-15% improvement in economy, dramatic increase in high speed throttle response (especially on a cold damp evening as they do need a intercooler), 0-100km/h drops to 13.8-14 seconds in the auto. At this point the fuel screw hasn't been touched it is just improved efficiency giving the gains. Upon performing routine oil analysis at 10,000km oil is fine, spin on a new Toyota filter, re-analyse @ 20000km slightly cleaner than at 10000km (because of the oil added at the last filter change), new filter added re-analyse at 30000km about the same as 10000km result, change filter again re-analyse at 40000km oil still very clean and suitable for continued use. At this point it was changed anyway it has done 8 times the standard drain. Oil was Amsoil series 3000 5w30 and Finer air filter the reults are typical for several cruisers set up the same way. WARNING don't treat these results as a reccomendation to run extended oil drains on your cruiser YOU have to sample your oil and determines its life for your type of work and driving style. What I was thinking was 3-3 1/2" exhaust, snorkel as described above, electric fuel pump and intercooler. I like the idea of LPG injection to keep the oil clean, improve economy, and reduce exhaust emissions, see www.atlasgas.com most other commercial sytems use the Vaccuum signal between the air cleaner and turbo to get a indication of engine load and hence increase LPG flow but my intake is not restrictive enough for this. I suspect a small increase in turbo size would positively affect drivability (especially on the 1HD-FT) as Toyota has purposely kept the turbo compressors small to reduce excess air in the engine. NOx (nitrous oxides) are formed in the combustion chamber at elevated temp (hence retard timing to keep peak cylinder temp lower, but not exhaust temp), in the presence of excess air (hence make the turbo compressor only just big enough, whereas excess air helps keep soot emissions and pyro temp down). Hence the newer engines produce less NOx but fuel economy may have worsened and engine life probably hasn't been helped. If you ignore NOx fuel economy can be improved, engine life, fuel economy, particulate (soot) emissions reduced, oil contamination by poisitive changes to airflow and pump setup, but the Japanese exhaust emissions standards that are very tough on NOx don't allow the manufactures to follow this route. I was looking for options in this direction not neccessarily a Diesel fueled cruise missile. As the 1HD-FT is basically a high performance engine with smog gear added I suspect it has significant untapped potential with out significantly stressing it, but I have no experience on turbo upgrade options. Craig.