Ram-Air Intake

[mossrider]

10 hours ago, sorkyah said:

are you going to be worrying about heat soak on the tube/plenum as it runs over the engine and into the throttle bodies? 

The intake will run alongside the bike/motor, tucked into the fairings on the race bike anyway. There is no room above the motor like on some other bikes, especially with top mounted airboxs like the Suzuki. This will keep temps low and allow for the most direct path to high pressure air. This would obviously look a little odd on street versions w/o full bodywork. 

[scratchpad]

On 2/6/2019 at 1:25 PM, mossrider said:

This should get it from back to front,

Rubberised, light, shapable wire loom, looks like nice stuff.

I have several feet of this exact stuff. It is red and i believe its 2" ID high heat HVAC tube. Ill have to check. I removed this setup from my bike and going a different route this year. Up for grabs for someone who plans on using it for race purposes. You pay shipping.

[sorkyah]

On 2/7/2019 at 6:43 AM, blackout said:

That's why my filter will be up front like the car guys do.

not all car guys
most import tuners think the closer to the ground it is the better, even if it comes up behind the exh manifold 

also, i need to get into fab work, im tired of not having the tools needed to make something myself instead of waiting to find something on sale or asking someone else to make it. 

[blackout]

30 minutes ago, sorkyah said:

not all car guys
most import tuners think the closer to the ground it is the better, even if it comes up behind the exh manifold 

also, i need to get into fab work, im tired of not having the tools needed to make something myself instead of waiting to find something on sale or asking someone else to make it. 

Well, get at it.  

[mossrider]

1 hour ago, sorkyah said:

also, i need to get into fab work, im tired of not having the tools needed to make something myself instead of waiting to find something on sale or asking someone else to make it. 

We're tired of waiting on you too...

Let's go!

[blackout]

I'd start with a drill press.  They all have adjustable speeds, but look for the one with the lowest rpm setting.  Makes the difference using hole saws on metals.  The larger the bit diameter, the slower the rpm you use to keep tip cutting speeds not too high.

[blackout]

A 2.75" hole saw, a hack saw, and a file, to make the oval opening.   On a drill press of course.

[gregjet]

Couple of possible points here.

One, the inlet is closer to one cyl inlet than the other. This will mean that the pressure at the furthur side will be lower than the inlet side especially with the closeness of the intake cycles . May not be a problem but could be.

Two, the intakes of a ICE are not just flow but also harmonic pulse dependant. You have several parallel sides which MAY cause resonances and could screw things up at some frequencies ( RPM). Unequal/non parralel internals are usually safer.

 My suggesttion ( for what it is worth) would be to feed the box from the centre underneath ( a bit restricted on top, but may be possible) so both inlets get a more even go at the flow.  Might get the inlet a bit lower to avoid fouling riders leg also as a bonus.

Curved sides ( internal is all that matters) could help avoid unwanted resonances. But all that is really necessary is non parallel for fabrication ease in metal.

Edited February 9, 2019 by gregjet
spelling

[blackout]

1 hour ago, gregjet said:

Couple of possible points here.

One, the inlet is closer to one cyl inlet than the other. This will mean that the pressure at the furthur side will be lower than the inlet side especially with the closeness of the intake cycles . May not be a problem but could be.

Two, the intakes of a ICE are not just flow but also harmonic pulse dependant. You have several parallel sides which MAY cause resonances and could screw things up at some frequencies ( RPM). Unequal/non parralel internals are usually safer.

 My suggesttion ( for what it is worth) would be to feed the box from the centre underneath ( a bit restricted on top, but may be possible) so both inlets get a more even go at the flow.  Might get the inlet a bit lower to avoid fouling riders leg also as a bonus.

Curved sides ( internal is all that matters) could help avoid unwanted resonances. But all that is really necessary is non parallel for fabrication ease in metal.

Your input is welcomed of course, but is mostly academic because of the packaging constraints.  You do know the shock is under the airbox.  While I could add curves, a simple design is usually the most practical for cost reasons, so that design should be tried first.  Like mentioned before, I think the best improvement would be to add width on the left side to increase volume, but still keep the square shape.  The left stack would draw easier with more volume around it.  I see no clearance issues with rider and the current setup.  

 

[gregjet]

Packaging constraints...Even in the days of Phillip Irving and the original 2 stroke boys this is always a problem with motorcycles.

Yeah I figured you may be able have room underneath with careful design, but you have to work with what you have got.

I agree that adding volume around the intakes and the left would help. You are after all only drawing 340cc ( approx) per gulp.

Bouncey resonance waves might be more of a problem and increasing the volume lowers the frequencies , but increases the possibility of harmonics. Quite possibly not a problem, and will show up as dip or dips in the torque curve if you keep an eye out for them.  That's partially how I found the restrictors in the Aussie LAMS model.

The sealed intake tract could be a source of similar.

Edited February 9, 2019 by gregjet
correction

[blackout]

22 minutes ago, gregjet said:

Packaging constraints...Even in the days of Phillip Irving and the original 2 stroke boys this is always a problem with motorcycles.

Yeah I figured you may be able have room underneath with careful design, but you have to work with what you have got.

I agree that adding volume around the intakes and the left would help. You are after all only drawing 340cc ( approx) per gulp.

Bouncey resonance waves might be more of a problem and increasing the volume lowers the frequencies , but increases the possibility of harmonics. Quite possibly not a problem, and will show up as dip or dips in the torque curve if you keep an eye out for them.  That's partially how I found the restrictors in the Aussie LAMS model.

The sealed intake tract could be a source of similar.

Mossrider will let us know how the dyno runs turn out.  The first plenum is on its way to him.  I'm building an identical one for myself over the next week.

[twf]

3 hours ago, blackout said:

I think the best improvement would be to add width on the left side to increase volume, but still keep the square shape.  

 

Best would be not having air box if it wasn't for rules

[sansnombre]

Had an idea - any chance of extending the plenum rearward into the original airbox location? You could increase the overall volume quite a bit it seems, and may be able to have bilateral inputs, as the pressure differential from the two sides would be able to resolve better within the larger volume and hopefully not create an issue.

 

Just a thought . . .

[blackout]

2 hours ago, sansnombre said:

Had an idea - any chance of extending the plenum rearward into the original airbox location? You could increase the overall volume quite a bit it seems, and may be able to have bilateral inputs, as the pressure differential from the two sides would be able to resolve better within the larger volume and hopefully not create an issue.

 

Just a thought . . .

Not without making the shape more complicated, therefore increasing cost.  Shock clearance becomes an issue.  I think the volume is actually pretty good as is.  At least the stacks are clear to breath, unlike the stock air box.  Started the 2nd one.

[blackout]

The stock box with no filter and no lid or snorkel weighs 2.13 pounds.   My aluminum box weighs 1.25 pounds without the Hord velocity stack plate.  (I forgot to weigh it when it was off the bike, and I'm too lazy to pull it off.)  I doubt it weighs more than 1 pound.  So, it looks like the new box is no heavier than stock.  That's good.

[mossrider]

So, just doing some simple calculations. It looks like if I get air from the stagnation point in the center of the fairing for max effect, I should be able to over pressure the plenum by approx. .4-.5 psi near 150 mph. That would be good for about 3% (1.03) more hp or just shy of 3hp at full song. Since the power needed to overcome air drag is equivalent to the cubed root of 1.03 (hp gain) or about 1.0099163 times top speed (150) = 151.48mph.  Approx 1.5mph more top speed.  We're now strolling away from the guy next to us, in simplistic terms!

Woot.

Mockup

Re-routing some wiring and routing intake 

And if we're completely daft and get it all wrong we still have a bitching cold air intake.

Hardly.

[blackout]

Bitchin!

[sorkyah]

Damn you both for making me want to spend money I don't have

[sansnombre]

Wait . . . 150MPH?!

 

On 2/25/2019 at 2:11 PM, mossrider said:

the power needed to overcome air drag is equivalent to the cubed root of 1.03 (hp gain)

This can't be true as a straight equation - aren't there many other factors/variables involved?

[mossrider]

57 minutes ago, sansnombre said:

Wait . . . 150MPH?!

 

This can't be true as a straight equation - aren't there many other factors/variables involved?

Right, I've made some assumptions and done some rounding to use simpler math. We have GPS speeds of 147mph from a random FZ on BIR's long course, so I'm guessing at some point we'll see 150.  Using rounded figures from tables for over pressure to obtain .4-.5psi at stagnation point let's us determine we can generate approx 3% more hp or roughly 3hp at that speed. 3hp is good for about 1.48mph considering wind resistance. (Wind resistance goes up at the square of speed but the power to overcome wind resistance goes up as the cubed root of power x speed) These are just theoretical numbers to show if we make some hp we'll be forced to use it all up fast for little gain in top speed. Even if it's a ram air fail we can still use a cold air increase of 1% gain in hp for every 10 degrees drop in air temp. 

 

And I am discounting frictional losses do to rolling resistance and internal motor loss, thermal loss etc. for simplicity sake

Edited February 27, 2019 by mossrider

[blackout]

Aerodynamics, I have to wonder whether the FZ07R would benefit from wider body panels to get the rider out of the wind stream.   The Ducati V4R is wider than their V4 for that reason.  But narrow bikes look so cool in the showroom, so the manufacturers do what sells bikes first.

 

[mossrider]

6 minutes ago, blackout said:

Aerodynamics, I have to wonder whether the FZ07R would benefit from wider body panels to get the rider out of the wind stream.   The Ducati V4R is wider than their V4 for that reason.  But narrow bikes look so cool in the showroom, so the manufacturers do what sells bikes first.

 

I wonder about hydrodynamics. There are much bigger objects hauling ars around the seas than there are in the skies. I'm not an engineer or even smart for that matter. 

[mossrider]

34 minutes ago, blackout said:

Aerodynamics, I have to wonder whether the FZ07R would benefit from wider body panels to get the rider out of the wind stream.   The Ducati V4R is wider than their V4 for that reason.  But narrow bikes look so cool in the showroom, so the manufacturers do what sells bikes first.

 

The little moto3 bikes with approx 65hp have a theoretical top speed around 155 and are only a foot wide WTH? 

[blackout]

9 minutes ago, mossrider said:

The little moto3 bikes with approx 65hp have a theoretical top speed around 155 and are only a foot wide WTH? 

I don't know, but it's settled science.  lol   Looking at the front view, the bodywork should move the air around the rider's body.  The body work can do it more efficiently than the air hitting the rider's body directly.   Aerodynamics is free horsepower at speeds over 100 mph.  Words straight from Al Gore's mouth.   

[mossrider]

Just now, blackout said:

 Words straight from Al Gore's mouth.   

There it is, pure science, lol.

 

That was more tongue in cheek than fact. Since I'm better than 260 in gear it kills me when those kids weighing a buck ten get on those bikes that would disappear somewhere in my anatomy if I sat on them. 

 

You're right tho, wider is easier to push than taller or dirtier, especially at speed. Looking at the drag factors of different vehicles bears this out. Bikes have about 3 times the Cd of a car but with 1/3 the frontal area. Much quicker at lower speeds but get killed as speed rises.