Intake Manifold design theories
-
- Dont Question My Nissan Knowledge
- Posts: 633
- Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 1:13 pm
- Location: Kingsport, TN
Intake Manifold design theories
Ok i'm not too sure if this has been discussed, but I'd like for people to chime in on their thoughts/knowledge of designing an intake manifold.
I'm not a physicist at all and don't know much about air flow and all that stuff, but I do know that air takes the path of least resistance and that's what we're trying to accomplish in our turbo setups, right? Don't we want to maximize airflow abiltiy and velocity into the head without sacrificing power, etc? I am wanting to make/have made h a decent intake manifold sometime this fall and see what kind of difference it will actually make on the dyno...just to kinda explore the dynamics of having a different manifold as opposed to running the stock one.
Does anyone know what's best or what are the general rules for making a more efficient manifold than stock? Do we want to have a more rounded off plenum or a boxy style plenum? How do we know what is a good size volume for the plenum? Do we use the existing runners all the way to where they bolt to the stock plenum and just make a new plenum or do we want to cut the runners off somewhere in the middle so that the air travels in a pretty much straight shot towards the head instead of like oem and having to curve up and back down into the head? Would it be better to not use any part of the stock manifold at all and instead fabricate up a new head-manifold flange, make new runners and a whole new plenum? What is the ideal material to make the manifold out of...aluminum, steel, etc (i'm assuming aluminum)? Why do some people make manifolds with long runners and others have very short runners?
I'm just wanting to know what you guys think is best and why people choose certain designs of manifolds based on ease of construction or efficiency. If you can chip in to this thread, feel free to do so. I'm here to learn as much as possible about my car and others as well as everyone else. Go ahead and post what you guys do and if you can, include pictures to help illustrate certain designs. If anybody is very knowledgeable in this area, don't be bashful, contribute to this if you can...please.
I'm not a physicist at all and don't know much about air flow and all that stuff, but I do know that air takes the path of least resistance and that's what we're trying to accomplish in our turbo setups, right? Don't we want to maximize airflow abiltiy and velocity into the head without sacrificing power, etc? I am wanting to make/have made h a decent intake manifold sometime this fall and see what kind of difference it will actually make on the dyno...just to kinda explore the dynamics of having a different manifold as opposed to running the stock one.
Does anyone know what's best or what are the general rules for making a more efficient manifold than stock? Do we want to have a more rounded off plenum or a boxy style plenum? How do we know what is a good size volume for the plenum? Do we use the existing runners all the way to where they bolt to the stock plenum and just make a new plenum or do we want to cut the runners off somewhere in the middle so that the air travels in a pretty much straight shot towards the head instead of like oem and having to curve up and back down into the head? Would it be better to not use any part of the stock manifold at all and instead fabricate up a new head-manifold flange, make new runners and a whole new plenum? What is the ideal material to make the manifold out of...aluminum, steel, etc (i'm assuming aluminum)? Why do some people make manifolds with long runners and others have very short runners?
I'm just wanting to know what you guys think is best and why people choose certain designs of manifolds based on ease of construction or efficiency. If you can chip in to this thread, feel free to do so. I'm here to learn as much as possible about my car and others as well as everyone else. Go ahead and post what you guys do and if you can, include pictures to help illustrate certain designs. If anybody is very knowledgeable in this area, don't be bashful, contribute to this if you can...please.
98 240sx
06 Lamborghini Gallardo
02 Mitsubishi Montero Sport
99 Infiniti QX-4
07 Suzuki gsxr-600
06 Lamborghini Gallardo
02 Mitsubishi Montero Sport
99 Infiniti QX-4
07 Suzuki gsxr-600
-
- Belongs To The TOP CONTRIBUTING MEMBERS!
- Posts: 2346
- Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2005 5:23 pm
- Location: Lake Stevens, Wa
with a forced induction set-up runner length is kinda of mute point, plenum size though is very important. you want your plenum to be have a larger internal volume than the engine. with the throttle butterfly before the plenum you will always have a lag between stabbing the throttle and engine response. this is where ITB's come in. you could use the helmholtz approach to match runner length to your desired power band.
on the other hand the big plus that i see is that a aftermarket plenum is alot easier to work on
on the other hand the big plus that i see is that a aftermarket plenum is alot easier to work on
Good topic to start IMO. Sorry Sean, but I disagree with the thinking that runner length is not important. If anything, runner length and flow irregularities in a manifold become magnified under boost. A longer runner, boosted or not, will give higher internal velocity and usually an increase in midrange torque and power at low RPMs. A short-runner manifold will give more top end power and overall flow, at the expense of midrange torque and low end power.
Usually, a manifold should be designed with the fewest number of directions changes as possible. In response to the question about the stock runners, the stock manifold design with one long curve is better than one that uses one or more sharp 90 degree bends in the same area, so take that into consideration when you design your own manifold.
One common misconeption to avoid- many people assume that the most aerodynamic shape for an interior edge is a sharp, razor-like finish. The truth is that air will flow best around a shape with a radius, usually the larger the better. If you dont believe me, look at the front of a 747 or the inside of a turbine housing and you will see what I mean.
Usually, a manifold should be designed with the fewest number of directions changes as possible. In response to the question about the stock runners, the stock manifold design with one long curve is better than one that uses one or more sharp 90 degree bends in the same area, so take that into consideration when you design your own manifold.
One common misconeption to avoid- many people assume that the most aerodynamic shape for an interior edge is a sharp, razor-like finish. The truth is that air will flow best around a shape with a radius, usually the larger the better. If you dont believe me, look at the front of a 747 or the inside of a turbine housing and you will see what I mean.
-
- Dont Question My Nissan Knowledge
- Posts: 633
- Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 1:13 pm
- Location: Kingsport, TN
That is the design that I had in mind right there. I never thought of the ITB idea, but that seems like an awesome thing to do..just don't know what kind of TB's those are. The whole cutting the runners off half way is kind of what I was wanting to try and do, just wasn't sure what it would do for flow, etc.Verik wrote:i don't have much to add but I thought I'd share some pics of what I thought was a great job on not only ITB's but an Intake plenum for a KA-T as well.
98 240sx
06 Lamborghini Gallardo
02 Mitsubishi Montero Sport
99 Infiniti QX-4
07 Suzuki gsxr-600
06 Lamborghini Gallardo
02 Mitsubishi Montero Sport
99 Infiniti QX-4
07 Suzuki gsxr-600
hrmm I bet tappering the plemnum, would also aid in the issue of 4th cynlinder leaning out also. Nice setup though!Verik wrote:Those ITB's are GSX 750 throttle bodies and velocity stacks. he's using a megasquirt to tune it. when his car was N/A he made 155 whp with exhaust and the itb's so they are quite effective.
-
- Knows Some Stuff About 240's!
- Posts: 249
- Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 3:34 pm
- Location: Baltimore, Md
- Contact:
Verik wrote:Those ITB's are GSX 750 throttle bodies and velocity stacks. he's using a megasquirt to tune it. when his car was N/A he made 155 whp with exhaust and the itb's so they are quite effective.
Think about it...those TBs are wayyy too small. They're made to run a 750cc engine @ around 130hp tops....and you're trying to push 300+hp on a 2.4L
Do things add up????
- nissanfanatic
- SuperMod
- Posts: 5078
- Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 1:16 pm
- monooxide
- Dont Question My Nissan Knowledge
- Posts: 906
- Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2004 2:25 am
- Location: Broken Arrow, OK
Ouch, Very true.nissanfanatic wrote:^Would you say the KA throttle body is made to run a 2389cc engine at 155bhp tops so you can't make any more power on it..??
Supra TB only capable of 327HP. Must be some magic.
Also, Most runners bottleneck down to that Inside Diameter anyhow so what does that matter?
My idea for my Intake Manifold is using the GroundZero(Xcessive) Manifold and welding Velocity Stacks on the individual runners to increase flow efficiency.
I figure since FLOW = HP, and using velocity stacks can yield a 17% increase in flow efficiency then that is where you need to focus is your flow efficiency and tuning and the "flow"er.
*Whistles*
1993 Coupe S14 SR w/ Bolt Ons and 1 Bar
286WTQ @ 3200 RPM
1993 Coupe S14 SR w/ Bolt Ons and 1 Bar
286WTQ @ 3200 RPM
-
- Driving Mom's Station Wagon
- Posts: 36
- Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 8:26 am
- Location: Edmonton, Alberta Canada
May i ask where you got this number from?monooxide wrote: I figure since FLOW = HP, and using velocity stacks can yield a 17% increase in flow efficiency then that is where you need to focus is your flow efficiency and tuning and the "flow"er.
And i'm pretty sure the gsxr 600 and 750 tb's are the same...130hp sure, but at 14,000rpms, lol...itb's seem to work just fine for the RB26, good enough for me, lol...
95 S14
06 Lancer Ralliart
92 GSX-R750
06 Lancer Ralliart
92 GSX-R750
-
- Dont Question My Nissan Knowledge
- Posts: 633
- Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 1:13 pm
- Location: Kingsport, TN
I'm also curious about this. So correct me if i'm wrong, but velocity stacks are like little horn type things that are inside the plenum that lead to each runner? Never though of using that, but whatever works best. This thread keeps getting better and better..more ideas makes me happy hehRedline wrote:May i ask where you got this number from?monooxide wrote: I figure since FLOW = HP, and using velocity stacks can yield a 17% increase in flow efficiency then that is where you need to focus is your flow efficiency and tuning and the "flow"er.
And i'm pretty sure the gsxr 600 and 750 tb's are the same...130hp sure, but at 14,000rpms, lol...itb's seem to work just fine for the RB26, good enough for me, lol...
98 240sx
06 Lamborghini Gallardo
02 Mitsubishi Montero Sport
99 Infiniti QX-4
07 Suzuki gsxr-600
06 Lamborghini Gallardo
02 Mitsubishi Montero Sport
99 Infiniti QX-4
07 Suzuki gsxr-600
-
- Knows Some Stuff About 240's!
- Posts: 249
- Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 3:34 pm
- Location: Baltimore, Md
- Contact:
-
- Knows Some Stuff About 240's!
- Posts: 231
- Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:34 pm
- Location: Hattiesburg, MS
-
- Driving Mom's Station Wagon
- Posts: 36
- Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 8:26 am
- Location: Edmonton, Alberta Canada
Than the important question is what is the inner diameter of the stock intake runners? Probaly less than 43mm....i'm too lazy to do the math, but wouldn't 4x43mm tb's flow more than say a 90mm? I dunno if it even matters since the piping is probaly 90mm(3") anyway....mattmartindrift wrote:what size are the RB throttle bodies. You don't want to create a bottle neck with the turbo system.
Here's a thought though, since most recomend the plenium being x2 the liters of the engine what happens when you run itb's? I mean the plenium wouldn't really matter since its before the tb's and the volume of the few inches of runners after the tb's certianly wouldn't double 2.4L....so how does this effect lag? throttle response?
95 S14
06 Lancer Ralliart
92 GSX-R750
06 Lancer Ralliart
92 GSX-R750
Bikes are ITB's. Lets see total volume of 4x 44mm ITB's = 72.38 cm^2GlacierFreeze wrote:How many throttle bodies do bikes run? I'm guessing 1 (unless they're ITB, I don't know about bikes). Don't see how it would be a bottleneck on a car if you're running 1 per cylinder (unless the bikes are ITB as I said).
Stock KA TB = 63.62 cm^2
Pretty basic stuff lol. ITB's flow more.
-
- Dont Question My Nissan Knowledge
- Posts: 633
- Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 1:13 pm
- Location: Kingsport, TN
how do you wire something like that up to the AEM EMS since each one has it's own tps sensor? another question, how do you have to hook up the throttle cables so that each one opens at the same time without one being partially opened and the other being 100%?
98 240sx
06 Lamborghini Gallardo
02 Mitsubishi Montero Sport
99 Infiniti QX-4
07 Suzuki gsxr-600
06 Lamborghini Gallardo
02 Mitsubishi Montero Sport
99 Infiniti QX-4
07 Suzuki gsxr-600
- flip240
- Belongs To The TOP CONTRIBUTING MEMBERS!
- Posts: 1942
- Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2004 1:09 am
- Location: Chicago, IL
on the rb26, and most other inline 6 ITB setups i've seen, they use the classic single cable which pulls a pulley attached to a long rod which is connected to all 6 TBs.. the one pictured appears to operate the same way, with one tps, but the cable isn't connected yet
- Phil - Concord Gray S14 - 339 rwhp, 340 ft-tq @ 12psi
Daily driven turbocharged KA24 for 10 years and counting. 2004-2014
My setup: KA24DE-T
Daily driven turbocharged KA24 for 10 years and counting. 2004-2014
My setup: KA24DE-T
search "helmholtz tuning" for runner length and size and for the plenum size. you want to minize restrictions and using radiused curves are a must. in fact having the velocity stacks protrude upward in the plenum is better. you also need to optimize the shape of the plenum to ensure equal distribution to all cylinders.
there are alot of things to consider when designing an intake manifold and many aftermarket companies dont take them all into account.
for my master's thesis i designed and built an intake manifold for a turbocharged honda
there are alot of things to consider when designing an intake manifold and many aftermarket companies dont take them all into account.
for my master's thesis i designed and built an intake manifold for a turbocharged honda
- nissanfanatic
- SuperMod
- Posts: 5078
- Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 1:16 pm
If I used that setup on my car, I would be nowhere near maxxing those throttle bodies. At the current boost level, velocity would be at 196ft/sec. 300ft/sec is considered maxxing...or at least considered "time to upgrade"
http://not2fast.com/gasflow/velocity.shtml
http://not2fast.com/gasflow/velocity.shtml
My thoughts about intake design (of which we have done for quite a few applications over the years including quite a few full chassis 3TC powered Starlets)...
1- Plenum volume
The bigger the better within reason, when that intake valve opens you want a large volume available to charge that cylinder (like an air cannon or potato gun ). Stacks and/or tapered horn style runners will help, not sure about 17% . My SOHC SQT has a 4" dia x ~14" long plenum and it idles just like stock and has very good throttle response.
ITBs are nice in the fact that you can use any size of plenum you want without any effect except better cylinder filling.
2- plenum shape
I've always been a fan of the round plenum with a domed rear cover. Any shape with sharp corners seems a little counter-productive as the corners will harbor pockets of more stagnant air. A cylinder with a dome has no flat areas or corners. The tapered plenum has been picking up popularity but IMO it reduces volume over #4 and also negates the equalization of the plenum. Again just MO but still ALOT of truly high HP cars still use the large domed cylinder type plenum. I have yet to see any true test of which if either is actually better...
3- runner length / diameter / etc.
Smaller/shorter or longer /bigger? All have their particular res. frequency (rpm). We're all limited by the engine bay in terms of length and one can easily get lost in all the calculations based on assumptions about what is correct. I like to use a tube that can be formed to fit nicely on the shape of the stock intake port. Stacks are cool, we actually made a die to form stacks out of the tubes inside the plenum. The form makes a curved stack that sits nicely on the side of the plenum tube. If one want to get crazy, build runners that are the shape of the stock ports with an 8-10deg tapper and decreasing radius-ed inlets, basically making a horn shaped intake runner.
This is another huger undertaking that may gain a fraction .
Basically you can spend a TON of time trying to "remake the wheel" Or build a basic intake and enjoy the gains over the ultra long runner stocker.
1- Plenum volume
The bigger the better within reason, when that intake valve opens you want a large volume available to charge that cylinder (like an air cannon or potato gun ). Stacks and/or tapered horn style runners will help, not sure about 17% . My SOHC SQT has a 4" dia x ~14" long plenum and it idles just like stock and has very good throttle response.
ITBs are nice in the fact that you can use any size of plenum you want without any effect except better cylinder filling.
2- plenum shape
I've always been a fan of the round plenum with a domed rear cover. Any shape with sharp corners seems a little counter-productive as the corners will harbor pockets of more stagnant air. A cylinder with a dome has no flat areas or corners. The tapered plenum has been picking up popularity but IMO it reduces volume over #4 and also negates the equalization of the plenum. Again just MO but still ALOT of truly high HP cars still use the large domed cylinder type plenum. I have yet to see any true test of which if either is actually better...
3- runner length / diameter / etc.
Smaller/shorter or longer /bigger? All have their particular res. frequency (rpm). We're all limited by the engine bay in terms of length and one can easily get lost in all the calculations based on assumptions about what is correct. I like to use a tube that can be formed to fit nicely on the shape of the stock intake port. Stacks are cool, we actually made a die to form stacks out of the tubes inside the plenum. The form makes a curved stack that sits nicely on the side of the plenum tube. If one want to get crazy, build runners that are the shape of the stock ports with an 8-10deg tapper and decreasing radius-ed inlets, basically making a horn shaped intake runner.
This is another huger undertaking that may gain a fraction .
Basically you can spend a TON of time trying to "remake the wheel" Or build a basic intake and enjoy the gains over the ultra long runner stocker.
-
- Dont Question My Nissan Knowledge
- Posts: 633
- Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 1:13 pm
- Location: Kingsport, TN
Not to sound dumb about this, but what is the actual ADVANTAGE of running ITB's? Does it have a real advantage over just running the single TB and if so, what is it? Another thing..if you are running ITB's then there's no need to have a single TB at the front of the plenum, right? you just have an open plenum with the intercooler pipe hooked right up and nothing stopping the flow until the ITB's, right?
98 240sx
06 Lamborghini Gallardo
02 Mitsubishi Montero Sport
99 Infiniti QX-4
07 Suzuki gsxr-600
06 Lamborghini Gallardo
02 Mitsubishi Montero Sport
99 Infiniti QX-4
07 Suzuki gsxr-600
Throttle response and no restriction to flow.wildbama37 wrote:Not to sound dumb about this, but what is the actual ADVANTAGE of running ITB's? Does it have a real advantage over just running the single TB and if so, what is it? Another thing..if you are running ITB's then there's no need to have a single TB at the front of the plenum, right? you just have an open plenum with the intercooler pipe hooked right up and nothing stopping the flow until the ITB's, right?
you have some good points and seem to know you stuff but here you have some misconceptions. A tapered dome would be ideal. What happens on a side feed plenum is that the air rushing in from the throttle body does not want to change direction and flies past the other cylinders and smashes into the back of plenum right at #4, creating a more dense pocket in the plenum. This leads to #4 getting a greater mass flow rate or air, essentially creating a leaner condition in that cylinder.JGSturbo wrote:
2- plenum shape
I've always been a fan of the round plenum with a domed rear cover. Any shape with sharp corners seems a little counter-productive as the corners will harbor pockets of more stagnant air. A cylinder with a dome has no flat areas or corners. The tapered plenum has been picking up popularity but IMO it reduces volume over #4 and also negates the equalization of the plenum. Again just MO but still ALOT of truly high HP cars still use the large domed cylinder type plenum. I have yet to see any true test of which if either is actually better...
That is why you have a tapered plenum. You create a greater restriction for that cylinder, evening out the cylinder distribution.
What would be ideal is a plenum so large that the runners act like there is no plenum and open to atmosphere. This is why you have the runners protrude up into the plenum so that are no restriction on the entrance from the side of the plenum. But in a cramped engine compartment this is quite difficult.
With the age of Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) one can create many variations of plenum shape and decide upon the optimal shape relatively quickly, which is why you are seeing what you are with tapered plenums.
I hope this helps. If you have any questions I spent a year studying this stuff to design mine for my thesis.
- turbonola
- Encyclopedia-Nissan
- Posts: 1234
- Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 6:07 pm
- Location: Metairie, La.
- Contact:
Verik wrote:Those ITB's are GSX 750 throttle bodies and velocity stacks. he's using a megasquirt to tune it. when his car was N/A he made 155 whp with exhaust and the itb's so they are quite effective.
kinda off topic but i thought he used haltec to tune? and also i love his setup because or the short intercooler pipes.
11.65@118 1.64 60ft
-
- SuperMod
- Posts: 1948
- Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 2:13 am
- Location: PDX Metro