|
|
|
6-23-07, 9:32
|
#1 (permalink) |
 
 
|
Freds theoretical dyno and drag runs, probably bogus, but interesting.
ok, so its a reasonably well known thing that if you use X fuel, you are making Y power. you can waste fuel by running to rich, which not only doesnt make more power for the extra fuel, but actually removes some from being too rich.
my afrs were sitting right on 11 at max power, so that is included in this calcs. ms docs say 350 crank hp from 534cc injectors at 85% duty ((100 * 550 * 350 ) / (534 * 85) )*( 100/110) - Google Search so with 550cc and 100% and 10% extra inj capacity for the richness, it works out to 385hp crank so from that figure, with duty cylce, i can just multiply out to get a crank hp figure. sure it doesnt take anything like ign advance or whatever inot account, but i have most of that stuff perfect, right, or close to right, so i'm confident from the butt dyno and theory combined that there is some serious hp there. heres the plot of torque and hp. the figures are calced from 3500 to 7500 and guessed below that.  the program i used for the drag run i wrote myself some time ago. i was trying to write a complete one that did all the calcs in great detail. i never quite finished it. things that werent working to my liking were box losses (though these were close), traction limiting (too pessimistic), and air friction etc (never included). the upshot is that the launch is usually worse than reality, and the end speed better by a chunk. there is however statistical data to compare with, so i included the formulaes for that in my code, and it is output also. for my skyline though, the theory said 16.5 best. the program said 15.5 best, and i ran 16 flat... so neither is right always, as you could expect. it will be close however, heres the summary : Statistical Elapsed time: 12.54 seconds Statistical Trap Speed: 183.14 kmph and by my software : The final position of the car was: Speed: 194.69 kph Time: 12.85 seconds bare in mind that the power in the graph above is crank, and i could have lost upto 50 to the box, and 50 to poor tune, but i reckon its about right. whp 325 +/- 50 heres the full dump note the shift points, and low low gear ratios : Welcome to FastDrag by Fred Cooke. Reading input files and initialising objects/variables... Attempting to read preferences file FastDrag.rc... Using values from FastDrag.rc Launch rpm: 4100.0 Verbosity: verbose Using defaults: Time increment: 0.0010 seconds Driver mass: 80.0 kgs Reading track layout file... Reading engine torque curve file... Reading transmission ratios file... Reading chassis detail file... ******************************************** ******************************************** start of shift Speed: 43.24 kph Time: 1.75 seconds Distance: 10.52 metres ******************************************** ******************************************** ******************************************** ******************************************** end of shift Speed: 43.24 kph Time: 2.15 seconds Distance: 15.32 metres ******************************************** ******************************************** ******************************************** ******************************************** start of shift Speed: 72.41 kph Time: 3.33 seconds Distance: 34.29 metres ******************************************** ******************************************** ******************************************** ******************************************** end of shift Speed: 72.41 kph Time: 3.83 seconds Distance: 44.35 metres ******************************************** ******************************************** ******************************************** ******************************************** start of shift Speed: 119.44 kph Time: 6.16 seconds Distance: 106.59 metres ******************************************** ******************************************** ******************************************** ******************************************** end of shift Speed: 119.44 kph Time: 6.56 seconds Distance: 119.86 metres ******************************************** ******************************************** ******************************************** ******************************************** start of shift Speed: 190.83 kph Time: 12.01 seconds Distance: 355.32 metres ******************************************** ******************************************** ******************************************** ******************************************** end of shift Speed: 190.83 kph Time: 12.51 seconds Distance: 381.83 metres ******************************************** ******************************************** Writing all output to log file: logs/Ford-Courier-1989-singlecab-new-2007.06.24-12.21.35.526.log... Outputting all details... Race track details: Track layout: name: quarter length: 400.0 Vehicle info: Vehicle: Ford-Courier-New Layout: rwd Launch speed: 4000 rpm Coefficient Of Drag: 0.5 Frontal area: 4.0 m^2 Straight shift(1-2 or 3-4): 0.4 seconds Skew shift(2-3 or 4-5): 0.5 seconds Mass of vehicle: 1380 kg Weight distribution (front): 58.0 % Width of driven tyres: 215 mm Engine torque specs: Engine name: Mazda-FE-DOHC-Turbo-Holset-take1 RPM Torque (Nm) 0 0 500 80 1000 134 1500 170 2000 190 2500 205 3000 210 3500 224 4000 346 4300 395 5000 395 5224 409 5700 410 6100 410 6600 410 7000 386 7499 360 7500 0 Transmission details: Transmission name: 89-Mazda-B-Series-ute Platform type: rwi Rolling tyre diameter: 0.6 metres The final drive(diff) ratio: 4.444444444 First gears ratio: 4.4156 Second gears ratio: 2.6364 Third gears ratio: 1.5978 Fourth gears ratio: 1.0 Fifth gears ratio: 0.909 In addition: Peak power occured at 6600 rpm, and was 283.37 kw. Peak torque occured at 5700 rpm, and was 410.0 Nm. Peak power occured at 6600 rpm, and was 385.27 ps. Peak torque occured at 5700 rpm, and was 41.81 kgm. Peak power occured at 6600 rpm, and was 380.0 hp. Peak torque occured at 5700 rpm, and was 302.4 ftlb. Statistical Elapsed time: 12.54 seconds Statistical Trap Speed: 183.14 kmph Log contents: 10mps speed (m/s) 10.00 1 624610.007.31.457100.09466.8 60ftTot distance (total) 20.00 2 538514.4420.02.504100.09466.8 60foot distance (segment) 20.00 2 538514.4420.02.504100.09466.8 60mph speed (m/s) 27.00 3 610327.0072.95.044100.07958.2 100kmph speed (m/s) 27.78 3 627927.7876.55.179100.07958.2 halfway distance (segment) 200.00 4 581941.13200.08.721100.05163.0 100mph speed (m/s) 45.00 4 636645.00244.59.754100.05163.0 10secsTot time (total) 10.00 4 649745.92255.710.000100.05163.0 10secsSeg time (segment) 10.00 4 649745.92255.710.000100.05163.0 quarter distance (segment) 400.00 5 695454.08400.012.850100.04293.4 stop distance (total) 400.05 5 695454.08400.112.851100.04293.1 200kmph speed (m/s) 55.56 ******************* NOT REACHED!! ******************** The final position of the car was: Speed: 194.69 kph Time: 12.85 seconds Distance: 400.08 metres Thankyou for using FastDrag. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6-23-07, 19:59
|
#3 (permalink) |
|
|
i just ran it through 7 more times with a few mods that display shifting rpm and a few other details that werent there before, and found a few things :
top speed as it stands is 209kph moving the diff ratio to the point where 5th gear isnt inside the quarter mile makes the run a gearshift (0.4s or so) faster than using all gears within that distance. other changes to ratios make little difference to 1/4 time as there is sufficient power spread to overwhelm the tyres most of the time anyway. that i should sort out a better gear set to go in the box to allow the rpms to stay higher on a shift and minimise time below the full monty torque level. top speed with the 3.3 diff from a diesel will give a 282kph redline in 5th. if thats attainable i am yet to discover as i dont have air friction at all. <insert useless member flame here>, i may just tidy up some loose ends in my software and make it do interesting things like generate mlv readable log files to show movement and speed and other variables during a run, and a gui and and and... if i finish it it will be quite a powerful tool indeed. one that i will of course share with those here that i trust and that want to try it. fred. Last edited by imagoonmx6 : 6-25-07 at 8:27. Reason: Quit baiting and flaming. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6-25-07, 9:12
|
#5 (permalink) |
|
|
thanks :-) i have it logging to a mlv file now, so you can see it moving through the gears etc. when i have it more fine tuned, i will post up some screenies and more results. still needs a lot of work to be really good.
when i get it working a bit better i will be happy to share an obfuscated jar and instructions etc around to those who wanna play with it. when i get it mint, i will gnu licence it and share it in source with anyone who wants to play, and invite patches to errors. but i'm too proud to let out the dodgy source i have at the moment :-) mean while, i'll keep ploding away... fred. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6-25-07, 20:21
|
#6 (permalink) |
 
 |
thats a really good butt dyno jeje
Now you need to get to the real |
|
1992 Mazda Mx-3 GS with FE3n Engine Swap 425whp 10.8 @ 129mph (@ the Junkyard)
1994 Mazda Mx-3 RS with FE3n Engine Swap 362whp 11.5 @ 118mph on pump Gas 93oct (For Sale) 2002 Suzuki XL-7 Limited Stock 17.3 @ 76mph (Daily Driving Car) 1993 Mazda B2600 Cab Plus ---- Just for Work |
|
|
|
|
|
6-26-07, 3:57
|
#8 (permalink) |
|
|
i wrote that program in feb 2005 :-) the fuel duty > hp graph took under 10m. just satisfying my curiosity really, although, historically, theoretically, practically, it cant be much worse than that. the afr combined with the known quantity of fuel means that there WAS a certain amount of air in there, and past that, its hard to not make the power when you have the air. thats what all mods we do are about, getting more air in in the part of the rev range where we want it. you should note that its not in my sig nudge nudge wink wink only teasing sick ;-)
fred. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6-26-07, 13:40
|
#10 (permalink) |
 |
cool stuff, any chance of you sharing your program sometime?
|
|
'91 GT Running again! - $55 engine on MS ftw
'96 accord beater - $500 + $500 in parts. MTSU Formula SAE - not mine, but i get to build it and drive it! (Turbo Lag - Turbo Power) + Hype = VTEC  My IHI turbo page |
|
|
|
|
|
6-26-07, 14:50
|
#11 (permalink) | |
|
|
Quote:
yeah, you would be more than welcome. its not accurate at the moment, and depends on good data about the layout etc of the car to do a decent job. i'm working on it, and when its usefull, i can post a jar etc up. mean time, if you wanna fill out the data files and email them, i can run your ride through, and post the results. i'll put the files used for the above in a few more posts... fred. |
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
6-26-07, 15:19
|
#12 (permalink) |
 
|
Fred- have you ever though of picking up a used GTech? The old ones work just as good as the new ones with all the gadgetry and USB hookupery.
The RR is the more expensive of the newer styles (compared to the SS) and can be found pretty cheap if you look around on eBay. I've found a brand new RR that sold for $50 almost brand new because the seller didn't title it all that great when they normally sell for $275 from the factory. Point is, so long as you enter your parameters accordingly, they're surpisingly accurate. This is for 60', 1/8, 1/4 and a theoretical dyno with graph. They work great for road conditions and the RR allows you to save multiple runs. G-TECH/Pro Homepage You can find the old style VERY cheap: |
|
|
|
|
6-26-07, 15:29
|
#13 (permalink) |
|
|
i have a brand new RR, i've used it extensively on the track and some fav roads :-) didnt get a chance to run the ute on a flat straight dry piece of road in the few days before flying out... or i would have logged it...
they can be quite good, but yes, once again, bad input, bad output :-) most software (the gtech is software really) is like that. for either to be right i have to put it on some scales too. i just guessed teh 1300kg mark. could be 100kg more, or 50kg less. not sure. pretty confident in the power level being about that at the crank though. looking forward to coming back and trying it. mean time, trying to figure out what to buy and mod here in the uk :-) fred. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6-26-07, 15:37
|
#14 (permalink) |
|
|
And then you also have to take into account the driver. I don't take you as the type to try and downsize your weight and shoehorn yourself into last years hot pants.
I was suprised by the RR and GTech in general and it was pretty much spot on for the dyno session. Well, once you took drivetrain loss into account. It was very close to what it probably is. (/new can of worms])Do you have any logs that you can post? |
|
|
|
|
6-26-07, 17:05
|
#15 (permalink) |
|
|
all sorts, but i have to find them on my win disk that crashed. i can post a few laps of taupo racetrack pulling upto 1.1G, with good D shaped trail braking patterns.
the new can of worms is worth debate. the gtech reported lower power than i would have expected for the skyline, but i never had it on a scale either, so that could be me entering the weight too low... could i have to eat my words twice in a matter of weeks :-) surely not. fred. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
 |
|
|
