DocBar
New member
I'm not sure exactly what day I'll be there. Jon's going to throw a sump in for me and he's been wanting to get it on the dyno for forever.
I talked with Jon yesterday and he knows I'm coming.
Time for a new hpop thread
- Thread starter TyCorr
- Start date
I talked with Jon yesterday and he knows I'm coming.
ja_cain
Active member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2013
- Messages
- 4,597
- Reaction score
- 2
It's probably a non-issue with hybrids and the larger nozzles. Probably equivalent to stock nozzles at 2800 psi vs the hybrids at 3400. Now an a code with smallish nozzles may be a different story.
I'm just trying to figure out why the higher ICP and pw produced lower power in Thuglikes truck. Maybe just needed some timing tweeks to get the most out of with less fuel. Would love to see the two graphs posted.
I guess the whole hpop thing just boils down to tolerances if the bore and strokes are the same. If the tolerances are much tighter (less bypass) then it should flow more since we are talking about positive displacement pumps and fluids. Internal modifications could be done to decrease pressure drop thus decreasing bypass at higher flowrates. Need to open one of these things up sometime.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
I'm just trying to figure out why the higher ICP and pw produced lower power in Thuglikes truck. Maybe just needed some timing tweeks to get the most out of with less fuel. Would love to see the two graphs posted.
I guess the whole hpop thing just boils down to tolerances if the bore and strokes are the same. If the tolerances are much tighter (less bypass) then it should flow more since we are talking about positive displacement pumps and fluids. Internal modifications could be done to decrease pressure drop thus decreasing bypass at higher flowrates. Need to open one of these things up sometime.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
02BigD
New member
Not certain what you mean here...could you clarify?
That pressure is vadtly different than what happens at the injector tip. Think cr rail pressures. We arent that far off. Its our electronic delay that kills us.
The quote in that post from which you wuoted me tells the story. T'was suggested to start a new thread. I said it didnt need to be done. I asked for this kind of info from the beginning. Big surprise mj shows up and says "we dont need a thread about this" and turned it into a shti-***kin-show...
Im guessing starting a thread to ask the same thing over again will net the same 3 pages of bs before anyone posts anything.
I thought it was time to have a current up to date thread and if people had some seat time with any "new" pumps and some simple parameters involved pw/dc% egts inj nozzle size to post up.
m j
Active member
and, there is still zero 'new info' in this thread.
everything in it can be found with the search feature.
you should try it some time there is some really good info from around 2011 (the other forum was the place to be back then apparently)
it seems odd to me knowing an injector is empty in 3ms to load a tune that has 4.5 ms.
I am going to have to ponder where the oil volume is going when the injector is bottomed during the extra 1.5ms.
at first glance something isnt adding up. difference in commanded vs actual?
everything in it can be found with the search feature.
you should try it some time there is some really good info from around 2011 (the other forum was the place to be back then apparently)
it seems odd to me knowing an injector is empty in 3ms to load a tune that has 4.5 ms.
I am going to have to ponder where the oil volume is going when the injector is bottomed during the extra 1.5ms.
at first glance something isnt adding up. difference in commanded vs actual?
ja_cain
Active member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2013
- Messages
- 4,597
- Reaction score
- 2
Ty,
That's right, hence the different levels of atomization between an A code and hybrid with the same nozzle and same icp. It stinks that injector builders don't givmm
e actual orifice sizes, then it could easily be modeled once you know the land length, cylinder pressure, injector pressure and fuel temp (viscosity).
The point I'm trying to make, is there might be a point of diminishing returns with increasing sustained icp and smaller nozzles and the higher injection ratios of A codes. Moving to hybrids with larger nozzles should move you back into a code droplet sizes at the higher icp's (3200 - 3400). I wonder if any tuners ever call for icp's in the 3200 to 3400 range when tuning for a codes. If ignition starts significantly sooner than expected at lower engine speeds, then cylinder pressures could spike unexpectedly.
Here is a cool paper on fuel atomization, soot production and performance. I'm wondering what most tuners command for icp (max) on smallish nozzle a codes. Have not gotten around to converting injection pressures of the paper from bar to psi yet. Looks like 20 micron and lower is where you want to be for droplet size of diesel fuel for acceptable performance. My brother can supposedly model this. Need to sit down with him once he gets back from England.
We are also talking about setting up a spreadsheet/program for selecting turbo/intercooler compound setups for the 7.3's. I have forward the links from Garret so he can get spun up on everything. He is one badazz mofo. He can develop mathematical models for anything.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212540X14000248
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
That's right, hence the different levels of atomization between an A code and hybrid with the same nozzle and same icp. It stinks that injector builders don't givmm
e actual orifice sizes, then it could easily be modeled once you know the land length, cylinder pressure, injector pressure and fuel temp (viscosity).
The point I'm trying to make, is there might be a point of diminishing returns with increasing sustained icp and smaller nozzles and the higher injection ratios of A codes. Moving to hybrids with larger nozzles should move you back into a code droplet sizes at the higher icp's (3200 - 3400). I wonder if any tuners ever call for icp's in the 3200 to 3400 range when tuning for a codes. If ignition starts significantly sooner than expected at lower engine speeds, then cylinder pressures could spike unexpectedly.
Here is a cool paper on fuel atomization, soot production and performance. I'm wondering what most tuners command for icp (max) on smallish nozzle a codes. Have not gotten around to converting injection pressures of the paper from bar to psi yet. Looks like 20 micron and lower is where you want to be for droplet size of diesel fuel for acceptable performance. My brother can supposedly model this. Need to sit down with him once he gets back from England.
We are also talking about setting up a spreadsheet/program for selecting turbo/intercooler compound setups for the 7.3's. I have forward the links from Garret so he can get spun up on everything. He is one badazz mofo. He can develop mathematical models for anything.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212540X14000248
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Last edited:
ja_cain
Active member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2013
- Messages
- 4,597
- Reaction score
- 2
I wonder if there is some sort of parasitic draw when the plunger bottoms out. Hpop is trying to pump oil but piston is not moving anymore so it's dead heading and creating resistance. God, I wish I was smarter/more intuitive about this stuff.
Sorry if I'm just raising the noise floor with my comments. Just trying to learn and think out loud.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
psduser1
Active member
Hpop doesn't care what the injector(s) are doing. Bottomed out, or starving for oil, doesn't matter. The pump moves x amount of oil/revolution.
If the pressure meets commanded requirements, the excess is dumped via the ipr.
ja_cain
Active member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2013
- Messages
- 4,597
- Reaction score
- 2
Right, but how fast is it able to respond when the piston bottoms out and the computer is commanding an icp of 3400 psi. I am not a controls expert but I have been around them enough to know that unexpected changes in things can be a real pain in the azz to deal with. I would love to see some data from Thuglikes dyno runs.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
ja_cain
Active member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2013
- Messages
- 4,597
- Reaction score
- 2
Giving part of the info in a thread like this without painting the whole picture is not helpful in my opinion. I think the original intent of the thread was to gain knowledge not create more obscurity.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
elrodalexander73
Member
I run an Adrenaline with 250/200s and in the hottest tune it will trip the CEL if you stay in it long enough.. Things start to get hot at that point, due to a lot of the lack of atomization due to the lack of pressure to create proper injection, I really need a GEN 3 system, I wish my scan tool wasn't inop I would do some data logging for you and give you some feed back. I did notice a seat of the pants feeling, the pump seemed to build ICP faster and cleared up quite a bit tow tune smoke which is what I wanted.. I have put 40,000 miles now on a 250/200 adrenaline set up with a crap shoot fuel system to support it and I have never had a break down. It's as reliable as it was when it had 225 hp lol..
ja_cain
Active member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2013
- Messages
- 4,597
- Reaction score
- 2
This is the thing I am trying to wrap my brain around. It's not only the maximum it builds but the rate at which it builds pressure. This should correlate well with the maximum ipr% that results. If the percent is higher, then the pump must be lower output relative to the next pump when all other things are kept constant like nozzle size and injection ratio. At the same time the control system is going to take longer to dial in the commanded pressure due to the ipr having to adjust so much to get it to the commanded pressure. Optimal fuel atomization may play a more important role than what some of you are thinking. Energy to spool the turbo may be available via optimal fuel atomization. Windowed block my be intimate due to too much fuel atomization, incorrect timing and low engine speeds. Lol!
Last edited:
elrodalexander73
Member
What the pump will hold and how fast it will build is what separates the big pumps from the single bolt ons... Hook to the sled and you'll see the true difference. But an adrenaline over the Obs stock 15 degree there is a tremendous diff, I don't know for sure how much the diff the 17 degree is but this is the part that creates a truck with better drivability. Instead of a pump that is slow to build and creates heavy plumes of black smoke followed by a jerky set you in the seat feeling, I noticed a truck that quickly cleared up the smoke and accelerated much more evenly all the way through overdrive gear with a locked in TCC. I was much happier with the drivability. I wish I had the funds to buy a Gen 3 and try it out, but my forged rods I think would be on thin ice and I'm not about to window a perfectly good block.
thuglike
Active member
The graphs and logs were posted on psn a lifetime ago...I will go search and see what I find,
ja_cain
Active member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2013
- Messages
- 4,597
- Reaction score
- 2
ja_cain
Active member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2013
- Messages
- 4,597
- Reaction score
- 2
Yeah, if you look at that paper I posted you can see the impact atomization has on cylinder pressures. They did this while keeping the amount of fuel constant per injection event.
I too would love to fart around with a Gen 3. Maybe I'll look into the diy route. I seem to remember a thread about it on one of the forums.
I need to pick up another cheep older 7.3 to mess around with. That way I I'm not messing with my work truck.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
