Pro Action head flow numbers (too good to be true??)
11-03-2002, 11:19 PM
#51
Supreme Member
<b>what we are really using from the process are the rapidly expanding gasses and the energy they produce</b>
I think that nails it from the piston's point of view. Our monster V-8 engines all want to rotate this thingy called the crank which rotates another thingy called a flywheel etc.... in the end we are turning a
tire or two 
just cause some fuel vapor was mixed with some oxygen and was allowed to slowly combust and make lots of <b>rapidly expanding gasses</b> that winds up pushing this thingy down to turn a crankshaft.
See? not rocket science.
and those "rapidly expanding gases" wouldnt be available without the "heat" of "combustion" however the actuall "heat" part of the "combustion" makes it harder for our engines to make "power" in a sense that more "heat" means a crappier / more dangerous "combustion".
I think. Disclaimer: "my opinions are opinions and should be considered such. oh yeah, those are all my opinions"
I think that nails it from the piston's point of view. Our monster V-8 engines all want to rotate this thingy called the crank which rotates another thingy called a flywheel etc.... in the end we are turning a
tire or two just cause some fuel vapor was mixed with some oxygen and was allowed to slowly combust and make lots of <b>rapidly expanding gasses</b> that winds up pushing this thingy down to turn a crankshaft. See? not rocket science.
and those "rapidly expanding gases" wouldnt be available without the "heat" of "combustion" however the actuall "heat" part of the "combustion" makes it harder for our engines to make "power" in a sense that more "heat" means a crappier / more dangerous "combustion".
I think. Disclaimer: "my opinions are opinions and should be considered such. oh yeah, those are all my opinions"
Last edited by Kingtal0n; 11-03-2002 at 11:32 PM.
11-04-2002, 05:26 AM
#52
Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My sentiments exactly. I dont see this as a pissing contest. There is validity to what has been said on anyones point.
At least we have shared credentials. I can understand where he/I is comming from and what he/I dont nessarly have specific knowledge of. I am thankful that there is someone that I can have spirited discussions with along the same lines of work.....in my arena there are not too many that even understand the basics. Turbine engines are turbine engines, but depending on the application.....thats where things change.
Statments made are the same, but with a different terminology. FTIT is basically the same thing as TRIT or the 'First stage power turbine'. Ta'moto, to'moto, aerospace, industrial, same, same....yet slightly different. I too have an A&P and military experience as a turbine mechanic from years past, and have fulfilled a different path of education and now find myself in research and development. I guess I should of come across with my point in a different way, which is that all I was stating is that the principals and theory's that have been discussed dont nessarly fall true to the recipacating internal combustion engine. Yet there are laws that do apply and some that have an effect, but some are too small to really make a negligible difference.
Kingtalon has made an very good point, and on this level, when trying to extract EVERY single bit of power or efficiency I believe that Morley and myself understand a little more than the next guy/gal and have a greater appreciation for things a little more specific. No matter what, it all comes down to attention to detail.
And yeah, cast iron does have a greater heat saturation retention than that of aluminum, so at a sustained engine speed Morleys point would have a greater effect.
At least we have shared credentials. I can understand where he/I is comming from and what he/I dont nessarly have specific knowledge of. I am thankful that there is someone that I can have spirited discussions with along the same lines of work.....in my arena there are not too many that even understand the basics. Turbine engines are turbine engines, but depending on the application.....thats where things change.
Statments made are the same, but with a different terminology. FTIT is basically the same thing as TRIT or the 'First stage power turbine'. Ta'moto, to'moto, aerospace, industrial, same, same....yet slightly different. I too have an A&P and military experience as a turbine mechanic from years past, and have fulfilled a different path of education and now find myself in research and development. I guess I should of come across with my point in a different way, which is that all I was stating is that the principals and theory's that have been discussed dont nessarly fall true to the recipacating internal combustion engine. Yet there are laws that do apply and some that have an effect, but some are too small to really make a negligible difference.
Kingtalon has made an very good point, and on this level, when trying to extract EVERY single bit of power or efficiency I believe that Morley and myself understand a little more than the next guy/gal and have a greater appreciation for things a little more specific. No matter what, it all comes down to attention to detail.
And yeah, cast iron does have a greater heat saturation retention than that of aluminum, so at a sustained engine speed Morleys point would have a greater effect.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
