rpmag
Automotive
- Oct 15, 2004
- 105
I have recently tested 6 different ports on a flow bench at 25" H2O. The ports are known to have a poor short-turn radius that is too tight. The port modifications were attempts to overcome the flow seperation that occurs in the std port.
The std port flows:
in: .05 .1 .15 .2 .25 .3 .35 .4 .45 .5
cfm: 26 51 74 96 115 127 136 139 142 144
One modified port flows:
in: .05 .1 .15 .2 .25 .3 .35 .4 .45 .5
cfm: 25 50 73 95 112 127 141 154 163 167
My query is in regards to possibility of onset of flow seperation. In the std port the volume of flow per .05 in of lift starts to decrease at .2-.25 a 12 cfm increase, at .25-.3 there is a 9 cfm increase and .3-.35 there is a 3cfm increase.
From this I get the impression that the flow is perhaps starting to seperate at .2/25 and the flow seperation get progressively worse, i.e. has greater detrimental effect on the overall flow rate.
Whereas the modified port reduces the impact or amount of flow seperation at the same lifts.
Is this a reasonable train of thought?
The std port flows:
in: .05 .1 .15 .2 .25 .3 .35 .4 .45 .5
cfm: 26 51 74 96 115 127 136 139 142 144
One modified port flows:
in: .05 .1 .15 .2 .25 .3 .35 .4 .45 .5
cfm: 25 50 73 95 112 127 141 154 163 167
My query is in regards to possibility of onset of flow seperation. In the std port the volume of flow per .05 in of lift starts to decrease at .2-.25 a 12 cfm increase, at .25-.3 there is a 9 cfm increase and .3-.35 there is a 3cfm increase.
From this I get the impression that the flow is perhaps starting to seperate at .2/25 and the flow seperation get progressively worse, i.e. has greater detrimental effect on the overall flow rate.
Whereas the modified port reduces the impact or amount of flow seperation at the same lifts.
Is this a reasonable train of thought?