×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

tripple SU carbs

tripple SU carbs

tripple SU carbs

(OP)
A friend has been trying for months now, with the help of others and some rolling road work done,to try and get the  tripple Su,s he has put on his car to work

the car is a 2.0,litre , six cyl with  a fire order of  1.5.3.6.2.4, and a  280 deg cam,

the prob he has got is blow back, /fuel stand off of the carbs.

some folk have come to the conclusion that because of the fireing order, then 3 sets of carbs of the SU type will not work

the standard set up is twin SU/Stromberg carbs

he has tried putting in a bigger balance pipe, but is no better

3 x twin side draughts, or FI will work, but these are different from the constant depression carbs like the SU

any one any  experiance with tripples on an engine with this fire order


regards Marcus

RE: tripple SU carbs

It's been many years since I worked with SU's and, I have not done three, but I have done several race cars with two.  The "standoff" you speak of is quite normal and I doubt you would like the performance even if you could eliminate it.  My normal procedure was to us air horns (trumpets) that were just long enough to catch "most" of the visible standoff mist.  On an MG or Sprite, that was something like two to three inches...it varied with displacement/cam/rpm, etc.
Street machines always had an air filter and I assume the standoff problem was not as critical at lower rpm.  On the race cars adding the trumpets made a big difference.
Perhaps you could use a K&N type filter over them.

Some things that come to mind (wow, that's a stretch!)...Using different viscosity oil in the dashpots and or springs could and sometimes did help.  The richer the mixture the more standoff (well, DUH) and on these little engines the needles looked like "sewing" needles!!!


Rod

RE: tripple SU carbs

(OP)
Thanks Rod, but he tried  most of what you suggested too, got some trumpets on too

but the stand off is different on the end to carbs so he says, , and going by the pic and his discription, its still standing off at higher revs

this is whats leading folk to think that they wont work with SU,s due to the fire order

its 1.5.3.6.2.4,  and the exhaust header is  6.3.1. with     1-6,   2-5,   3-4,  linked together.

thanks any how, , Marcus

RE: tripple SU carbs

I have run triple SUs on such a configuration, no problems.

One was a 3.3 litre (202CI) with 3 by 1.75" SUs.

We had a longish manifold, small balance tube and about 1.5" big bell mouth ram tubes. The tubes were mounted inside a plenum and there was a Unifilter at the inlet to the plenum.

We set the carbies up exactly as per the BMC manual for these carbies as twins on an A series engine. I think twin 1.75s were stock on a Cooper S, but memories are now faded.

Some people ran as small as 1.5s and as big as 2". all worked, depending o engine size and rpm range sought.

1.75 worked well from 1000 rpm to 6000 rpm in the 3.3 litre push rod engine with 285 deg cam, Rhodes lifters and 12 port head. There was some stand off, but it never did any harm. Valve float limited the top end. It was a daily driver and my brother taught his 70 year old mother in law to drive in it. We never dynoed it, but it probably made about 150 hp. It outperformed the 5 litre V8 available in the same chassis. The V8s typically dynoed at about 140 to 145 HP and were slightly heavier

Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &
http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm
for site rules
 

RE: tripple SU carbs

Didn't at least one model of "E" Jaguar come with three SU's? from the works?

RE: tripple SU carbs

I think the 4.2 Jag engines used triples as standard.

Bill

RE: tripple SU carbs

(OP)
Thanks you lads , will report back to him,

E types, as far as i can remember they all had tripples,

the fire order is what some folk are saying, cos there are a few Cars over here, that dont seem to go that well with this combination,

Pat, was the engine you had tripples on, the same fire order !!, because it seems to be the middle two that is giveing the trouble

will try and get some pics for you,

and thanks again for your help lads

Regards Marcus

RE: tripple SU carbs


 Hi Guys
  Thanks for the input- I will try to put something detailed together for you over the next few days.
  The car is off the road at present due to the cylinder head failing after I skimmed it too much.
  Not withstanding the fuel stand-off, it was running so well when I broke it!

RE: tripple SU carbs

(OP)
AHHH welcome Bruce, , now you here, then you can tell the ladds all aboot it, as its your Baby

Marcus

RE: tripple SU carbs

Thanks for the photos, Marcus.  Picture/thousand etc.

First off, Bruce...You need to get some of the heat wrap paint, the silicon/heat resistant, whatever, stuff they sell.  Use it and it will save you countless hassles down the line with the wrap coming loose and "stringing".  Even comes in colors...smokes and stinks a bit on first startup but it goes away quickly. (I use the stainless steel ty-raps, but safety wire works just as well.  Nice job, though).

Second...You REALLY need three DCOE's (OK, so I'm biased)!

Third...Like I said to start, a nice three inch trumpet is what the setup needs...betcha'!!!

Had a close encounter with a "flying" GT-6 at Riverside  many years ago (flown by none other than Don Devendorf).  Good story as far as close calls go.

Rod

RE: tripple SU carbs

Hi Guys
 The engine original spec was as follows:
 2x 1.5" SU constant depression carbs.
 Balance pipe fitted to heated manifold
 2 litre straight six engine
 CR 9.5/1
 Cam 25/65 65/25

 As now:
 3x 1.5" SU constant depression HIF38 carbs.
 Was an in-appropriate balance pipe arrangement.
 Large bore cold air fed to air plenum box housing bell mouths.
 Was an unheated manifold arrangement.
 2 litre straight six.
 CR 9.5/1
 Cam 37/63 74/28. Correctly intalled now!
 Has shallow depth MGB style bell mouth 'stub stacks.
 6-3-1 exhaust manifold with un-evenly matched primary pipe lengths.
 Mapable Megajolt ignition.
 Gas-flowed cylinder head.


 Unless I go for Alfa Romeo Spider style bent stub stacks, there is no space available to fit longer stub stacks due to the wheel arch being in the way.
 I have been very careful to ensure the carbs are balanced at and off idle properly (i.e. gauges prove they simultaneously draw the same volume of air) and the float heights are correct to book. The carb pistons are all weighed and evenly matched. This includes the piston in dashpot drop time test and they all rise/fall at the same rate.
 Where-as twin carbs draw evenly through each alternate carb, triple carbs exhibit a longer drawn out cycle where-by the outer two carbs draw a different sexuence to the middle carb. My outer two carbs(1+3) exhibit pronouned fuel vapour stand-off throughout the rev range, to the point that RR sessions are a definite health hazard!
 I can't help but think that as the twin carb set-ups don't do this to anywhere near this extent(if at all), it frustrates me that the current set-up is busy pushing fuel vapour out of the carb throat when it should be drawing it in.
 These cars put out an alledged 105bhp in the 60's. The car was putting out 120bhp at the rear wheels on the last session. It did drive much better than had been the case post build a few years ago.
 Initially the camshaft wasn't timed in correctly.
 The mapable ignition also greatly improved the torque and drive-ability of the car- far more torque.
 The gas-flowed cylinder head was inadvertantly left with a CR of only 8.3/1! This was corrected with skimming it to 9.1/1, but that was ll it would do due to an inability to skim the head any further. The improvement to the CR also improved the performance incrumentally.
 Getting better needles and lighter carb piston springs improved the situation too, to such an extent that after the last rolling road session, it was a dramatically improved car to drive.
 A recent Trackday session at Cadwell Park showed the car to be very nice to drive- a good spread of torque, though even though the cam is only mild, it does have a marked powerband after the initial low down torque.
 I've ditched he exhaust wrap. Unless there is an issue with under bonnet temperatures(there isn't at present), i'm not convinced of its merit for my installation.
 I can see the relative merits for outright performance of side draught carbies, but the installs on GT6' are fraught with dreadful after market linkages and then there's the question and cost of finding the correct fuelling and getting a knowledgeable RR operator to achieve that throughout the rev range and not leave me with a gas guzzling monster that's got a miniscule power band at 4000+rpm!
 I am happy to fit twin 1.75" carbs and a gas flowed inlet manifold in due course, but I want to just try to sort these out to a point i'm happy with before then.

 My initial plans are a new cylinder head with a CR of 10.5/1.
 Trial the much enlarged (and improved) balance ppe arrangement, with the newly installed heating arrangements for the inlet manifolds.
 Try longer ram pipes on the RR- irrespective of them not being able to be fitted with the bonnet down!
 The, have a power mapping run to maximise the power throughout the rev range.

 So, any thoughts on my plans?
 Regards
   Bruce.
 
 


 

  

RE: tripple SU carbs

Turbo with 1 big carb. will solve your problem.

RE: tripple SU carbs

I had a two inch SU on a Judson supercharged 1950 MG-TD...Ran just fine and with it, I could finally blow off those damned VW bugs.

Rod

RE: tripple SU carbs

Nothing has changed over the past 50 years it's still the same as I was told when I first started playing with hotting up (or trying to) car engines.

Of course I am only referring to fueling an internal combustion engine in this instance.

1. get it in - as fast as you can
2. squeeze it - as hard as you can
3. get it out - as fast as you can  

RE: tripple SU carbs

I don't see the purpose of a bigger balance tube or the lighter pistons. SUs set up stock on a similar port layout will work OK. Go back to exactly as the most similar carby is when used by OEM with one carby per siamesed port. Better still but not essential if it has a similar divider to the manifold and similar number of degrees of crank rotation per inlet stroke. OEM spec is always a good starting point. Tuning away from OEM most often creates more problems than it solves. Make sure the needle and seat are concentric, the correct needle is at the correct height and the jet and float are at the correct heights. Use stock piston and spring. Can you shorten up the manifold to make room for ram tubes. Can you rework the inner guard to make room, being careful not to interfere with suspension and tyre interference with all combos of travel and lock.

The only purpose I see for so called balance tubes is if the carby is to small and each cylinder can pull a little from the nearby carbies, or else mainly for allowing fuel enrichment on one carby for cold start and to a smaller extent for closed throttle.

So long as the idle throttle settings are reasonably close, and the linkage is not ridiculously bad and they all get full throttle when you stomp on the pedal it will run OK. It may not be optimized but it will be 95% of optimum.

Maybe you are trying to solve a problem that does not matter and overlooking one that does.

I have seen a lot of standoff problems along with poor performance created by valve train problems.

Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &
http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm
for site rules
 

RE: tripple SU carbs

Thanks Pat.
  The bigger balance pipe is actually a balance reservoir in effect. The previous install wasn't correct in its design- or even my implementation of that design. I haven't tried the new install yet, as the car is awaiting its new head at present.
  I understand and agree with the sentiment about OEM spec's. The guys who designed these set-ups were after all full-time Engineers.
However, this firing order appears on other straight 6's which seem not to suffer with the stand-off mine has- something is intrinsically wrong here, I'd like to put that right, rather than run the white flag up the pole at the first hurdle, as it were.
  Carbs are pretty much sorted for state of tune. I haverebuilt them very carefully (new throttle bushes, plain throttle discs, thinned down throttle spindles etc. I break outhe micro-meter when I set the jet heights(all of which are new). The fitting of lighter springs and alterations to the needle were fine tuning of a non-standard set-up, which improved the engines behavior and performance considerably.   
  The throttle linkage is all new and works well(no slop or lost motion between the carbs) allowing uniform full travel/opening of throttles.
  The valve train is entirely standard- albeit the 'go-faster' cam has a higher lift than standard.  I set my valve clearances to .017"
  I will try longer stub stacks on the rolling road- as the bonnet/wheelarch will be raised and out of the way.
  "Maybe you are trying to solve a problem that does not matter and overlooking one that does".
  I suspect there maybe something in wht you say!
  Regards
    Bruce.
   

RE: tripple SU carbs

Does this problem manifest itself when you drive the car,
we had similar poroblems with older 4 cylinder engines
when you hold the power on the rollers @ a costant
speed you get stand off. If you do a sweep off at least
300rpm per sec no problem. One other thing springs to mind
check camshaft base circle run out as this will also cause the problem if it is cronic, try opening out the tappet setting on the offending cylinders then do a run  

RE: tripple SU carbs

Hi Paul.
 Forgive my ignorance- but what is cam shaft base circle run out? Opening the tappets will in effect retard the valve timing if my understanding is correct?
 Regards
  Bruce.

RE: tripple SU carbs

Opening the tappets cannot retard the timeing. It will reduce the duration and lift. In reducing the duration, it will retard opening, but advance closing, leaving the centre exactly where it was.

Base circle run out is the base circle of the lobe not being perfectly round and or concentric with the cam bearing axis.

Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &
http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm
for site rules
 

RE: tripple SU carbs

I think you should consider the basic cause of "standoff" - fuel mist/spray coming out of the carbs. The only apparent cause would seem to be the excessively late closing of the intake valve allowing the piston to push the fuel/air mixture back out of the intake tract when the engine is not "on the cam". Is the cam maybe not actually a 280 but but something with more duration? Is the cam still not installed correctly?
 Having said this I have seen helical cam engines demonstrated idling with the intake valve closing at around 110 degrees ABDC with no sign of fuel spray coming out of the carbs - so maybe "standoff" can have other causes.
What is the cranking-speed compression pressure? This should give some indication of how "big" the cam is or if it is installed correctly.

I don't think base circle runout affects cams with tappet clearance much - if at all. Runout does affect hydraulic tappet cams very much though.

On the subject of balance tubes - I have never seen a one-carb-per-cylinder motorbike engine that had a balance tube (or any interconnection) at all - so it would seem that the size etc. of the balance tube is not very important.        

RE: tripple SU carbs

Big vlad the base circle can be a problem we have seen as much as 12th rise on base circle caused by bad grinding, the effect is to close the tappet setting and leave the valve of the seat causing what looks like stand off. Opening the tappet clearance is a quick way of checking
if this is the case if you are at the rollers. beleve me it
not as uncommon as you might think, its just it gets missed.

RE: tripple SU carbs

An easy way to check base circle run out is to get on the start of the base circle,, then with someone slowly turning the engine, keep testing the clearance by constantly sliding the feeler gauge in and out, looking for loose or tight spots.

One cause of stand off is if the cam starts to lose a lobe. I can't explain why, but I have seen it happen.

Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &
http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm
for site rules
 

RE: tripple SU carbs

Thanks guys.
 A little more info for you:
 OE Triumph cam: Dur 270. 25/65 65/25 lift .232"
 Triumph tune:   Dur 288. 37/63 74/28 lift .288"

 The Triumphtune cam is instructed to be installed at 103 degrees. But mine was found to be dialed in at 105 degrees! The car had a very noticeable lack of low end torque which was improved considerably when the cam was re-timed in at 103 degrees. It also had a bizarre comedy 'kerfuffle' out through the exhaust valve, moments after killing the engine. This was also eradicated on re-timing the cam in.
 
 

RE: tripple SU carbs

103/105 degrees? Where is this measured from? I still suspect that the cam is not correctly installed. "Kerfuffles" are a sure sign of cam or ignition maladjustment.  A change of only 2 degrees would normally have little (or no) noticeable effect. So if it was wrong at 105, it still will be wrong at 103 (wherever this is measured from). Installing a cam is a very tricky business once you get away from standard engines with standard cams and timimg marks (and even this can go badly wrong if you are not careful).  I have seen quite a few people swear on the bible that the cam timing was correct only to discover later that it wasn't.  

RE: tripple SU carbs

An easy way to check if the cam is close is to check the split overlap. Bring the piston to TDC in the non fireing or overlap stroke and check the valve lift. If both valves are at equal lift within a few degrees of TDC the cam is close enough to run good if not optimum. Optimum can be up to about 6 deg from TDC, depending on cam and engine and track.

Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &
http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm
for site rules
 

RE: tripple SU carbs

Hi Vlad, whilst I am not expert at such things- its all been a learning curve, I did try to be very thorough in re-timing the cam in, as it may be that this hadn't been the case by the person who originally timed it in? So, once the head was off, this was how I did it.
 Having established the genuine piston travel TDC with a pre-loaded DTI, and setting the firmly mounted cranksaft timing disc to a fixed marker: this gave n accurate indication of TDC.
 I then set about establishing the cam lobe centre angle on inlet valve 1(valve 2 of 12 on engine).
 By using another DTI carefully set-up to operate vertically on the pushrod sat in the cam follower for No.1 inlet valve, this allowed me to establish an idea as to maximum lift on this pushrod. Zeroing the pre-loading DTI there, the crank degree position on he timing wheel was noted .020" before and .020" after the inlet valve No.1's DTI's zero indicated.
 So this gave me an indicated 62 degrees and 148 degrees respectively on the timing wheel. That makes 210 degrees in total: divide by 2= 105 degrees.
 I then adjusted the vernier timing wheel to give the recommended cam instal position of 105 degrees.
 The valve springs are nice and 'gentle' OE items, not super strong and trying to flatten the cam lobes.  
 What do you think?
  

RE: tripple SU carbs

Gt6boy: Not many people are experts at cam timing - I'm certainly not. However your methods and calculations look OK to me. One minor point is that 103 degrees would give (assuming the duration is 280) the quoted 37-63. 105 would give 35-65 - not enough to make any noticeable difference. Your method doesn't give the total duration so I suppose there is a slim chance that the cam has more duration than you think.
With 120HP at the wheels there can't be too much wrong with the engine.
 Maybe all GT6's with your carb/cam setup behave just like yours?

RE: tripple SU carbs

Different cam producers quote duration at different lifts. It can make a considerable difference. Set it up at split overlap as I described earlier, that way you cannot go wrong.

Once you try it at split overlap, if you want to move the power band down the rpm range, advance the cam a few deg. 4 deg is normally enough to see a few hundred rpm difference. If you want more top end, retard the cam. Yes I know that's counter intuitive, but that definitely is how it works

Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &
http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm
for site rules
 

RE: tripple SU carbs

Pat: The method you describe is actually what I normally do. I work pretty much only with OHC engines where you can usually see which way the cam lobes are pointing. The method has the advantage that at TDC at split overlap etc. you can see the lobes and visualise how they relate to  valve opening/cam theory/4-stroke theory in general. If you can see the distributor rotor at the same time (if you have a distributor) you can also verify that the ignition is in phase with the rest of the system. The method does tend to be foolproof - at least as much as such things can be.
Peter Waggott (of Waggott cams fame) recommends this method if you doubt the timing marks etc.  

Gt6boy: On a slightly different topic - the photo of the manifolds on the windowsill. I wouldn't have thought that this type of manifold would have any form of heating at all - and the copper pipe fittings look distinctly odd. The balance pipe is not connected to any exhaust heating is it?
 

RE: tripple SU carbs

Hi Vlad.
 The manifolds have a very pronounced downward slope from the head to the carb, in order to obtain bonnet clearance. This leads to the potential for fuel vapour fall-out to gather in the carb throat/inlet manifold area. The heating of the inlet runners is effected by .5" pipe drilled through the underside of the intake runners. This should assist minimising the collecting of fuel fallout: albeit it at the potential cost of reducing the benefit of a cold intake of petrol/air mix.
 The copper pipe affair is being chromed- even as we speak! The tee-piece affair is the take-off fashioned for the brake-servo.
 Regards
  Bruce.   

RE: tripple SU carbs

Gt6boy: I really don't think your manifold changes are very wise and they may be the cause of all the problems.
What does the half-inch hole do in connection with heating? What goes through the hole? I don't think you need to worry about petrol vapour etc. gathering at the bottom of the slope of the manifolds.
Also it looks like the stock rocker cover breather hose goes to atmospheric pressure in the air cleaner. Your photo and words imply that the breather hose now goes to full manifold vacuum on the new copper pipe fittings balance tube.
 I personally would return all the manifold pipe arrangements back to standard.

RE: tripple SU carbs

I certainly would ensure that there was no exhaust gas entering the inlet air stream. You could use exhaust to heat a jacket sealed from the inlet air or you could use engine water to heat a water jacket on the inlet manifold.

I would block off any tube that fed air into the ram tubes apart from the carbies themselves and just possibly the output from a PCV valve.

An upward slope from the carby to the port is not conjunctive to neither high performance nor quick resonse.

If you could fabricate a manifold to turn on the horizontal plane and retain the carby at a slightly higher position than the port with the carby facing more fore and aft (like maybe about 45 deg bend) you might do better. That might leave a lot more room for ram tubes. The linkage could be a real b***ch.

Copper tube and swept bends with the same or slightly larger ID as your throttle bore can be purchased from your local plumbers supply. Flanges can be flame cut or milled from steel plate or even cut from OEM cast iron manifolds and brazed together.

 

Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &
http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm
for site rules
 

RE: tripple SU carbs

Hi guys.
 We may be at cross purposes here.
 The .5" pipe through the bottom of the inlet manifold runners will have engine coolant running through it via a restricted size oriface union, as did the OE twin carb heated manifolds.
 The OE UK market cars had a closed loop crank case breathing system to minimise emissions, by taking the crank case breather pipe to a 'Y' connector which then fed to an oriface on each carb, just the engine side of the throttle butterfly, there-by putting the potential pollutants into the incoming petrol/air charge, and burning them. I have a very similar system in place.
 The balance arrangement again is very similar in practice to that used by Triumph on their later manifolds. On these they had a much larger balance pipe- more of a chamber than a pipe, between the inlet manifold areas immediately behind the throttle butterfly. Then, immediately on top of the balance pipe,chamber was a single take-off for the brake-servo. This is what I have achieved with the copper-pipe.
 When I pick up the balance pipe from the chromers this week, i'll try to get a picture of it in situ on the head for you.
 Regards
   Bruce.
 

RE: tripple SU carbs

GT6boy,

I had similar trouble with my twin SUs on my tuned Reliant 850. No-one else seemed to have done this conversion; the manifolds looked very similar to yours (except that mine were semi-down draught and not semi-updraught like yours seem to be). Try disconnecting the crankcase breather assembly (run it to a catch bottle with a small filter to atmosphere) and blanking off the breather inlets to the carbs. It may be that pulsing crankcase pressure from your breather system is affecting the barometric pressure in the manifolds. If you have a couple of cylinders with more piston ring blow-by than the others it may not affect each carb in exactly the same way. I can't give you a mathematical reason why as my brain isn't up to it tonight but it might be worth a try.

Regarding the difficulties of setting up the carb linkages, you can convert a single throttle cable from the pedal to a double or a triple cable at the carb end by using a 1960s - 1970s motorcycle cable "splitter". Basically this is a free-floating plastic or metal piston in a cylinder with a screw end cap. One end of the piston has a single fitting for a cable from the throttle pedal and the other end has a multiple fitting for two, or three individual cables. This allows you to fit carbs at completely different angles - as long as the individual cables to the carbs are of the correct length the relative angles at which the carbs sit doesn't matter.

As you are in UK like me, look at Vehicle Wiring Products web catalogue, in the motorcycles section.

If you want to use the SU mixture enrichment (or jet holder lowering system, I am reluctant to call it a choke), you can try using it on just one carb, or if not, a second cable splitter for all three.

Regards, Paul Wheatley.

RE: tripple SU carbs

The cold start enrichment on one carby only works. Well at least it does in the climate in Sydney and with a slightly downdraft manifold runner.

I have tried the motorcycle cable system, but had trouble getting anything like synchronization and the throttle was VERY heavy and sticky. We ran the cable to the centre carb and used its shaft to mount arms on each end that linked to the outboard carbs.

Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &
http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm
for site rules
 

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources