Tony D Posted October 25, 2008 Share Posted October 25, 2008 Cool............you can actually be one of the few people with a true "intercooler". EVERY intercooler after a turbocharger is a 'true' intercooler! It is NOT an 'aftercooler' as some contend. The function of the intercooler after a turbo is to cool the charge for density into the second stage of compression which happens to be a reciprocating compressor (the engine). Each stage of compression undertaken without intercooling between stages will show progressive degredation of density due to heat buildup. In Franks setup, intercooling becomes critical as he is undergoing three stages of compression, instead of the normal turbochagred two stages. Just that because two stages occur before final compression does not make it any less an intercooler than a turbo application alone. As long as the gas flow is intended for a subsequent compression, the cooler is referred to as an 'intercooler', the aftercooler is something where the last stage of compression is done, and the gas flows out to point of use, storage, reinjection, etc... This does not occur in an automative application...save for exhaust gas. And if you want to get into semantics, depending on what you do with that exhaust gas, the turbocharger could be looked upon as a "Compander"...but lets not get into that now, O.K.? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowlerMonkey Posted October 27, 2008 Share Posted October 27, 2008 Strange...........I worked on aviation and marine engines and intercooler meant cooling between stages of supercharging. The engine itself is not considered a stage and I never heard it mentioned as such on many of the aero engines I helped restore for the smithsonian that featured two stages of supercharging. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted October 28, 2008 Share Posted October 28, 2008 Restoring something designed and built by others doesn't mean what you were given as terminology, or your understanding of same is comprehensive, nor even correct. Restoration is a lot different than design workup/prototyping/R&D and initial build. Engineering-wise, the engine is simply another stage of compression. It is no different than using a rotary lysholm screw into a reciprocating booster for 600psi bleed air storage for testing flow control valves, or using a centrifugal in similar service. The only significant edit I would make to my original post on this subject is that it really should say 'subsequent stage of compression' instead of specifying 'second'...there can be multiple stages. And the engine is the next, subsequent, stage of compression. If the engine is not a 'stage of compression' then let's simply remove that pesky designation of 'static compression ratio' used to describe what the piston is doing to the incoming fuel/air charge the moment before the moment of ignition. What will you call what the piston does on it's way up the bore on the 'compression stroke' (er....looks like we need to change that term then as well...what did they call that stroke in the aero engines you restored? We are talking reciprocating engines here, correct?) Please...this 'aftercooler' argument is moot. The engine is a compression stage. Argue that it's not... I'd like to see that line of logic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowlerMonkey Posted October 28, 2008 Share Posted October 28, 2008 LOL........this is a terminology argument that does not need to occur. When I was a marine mechanic for hatteras yachts, we had both intercoolers and after coolers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted October 28, 2008 Administrators Share Posted October 28, 2008 As an FAA certified A&P, (Aviation Air-Frame & Power-Plant technician), having worked as a aviation reciprocating engine machinist, been involved with Turbine engines as well, currently build and machine automotive power plants professionally, I have learned that mechanics/technicians are not engineers. Tony’s point is from the engineer perspective. The mechanics perspective really is installation, removal, and repair, regardless of the conversations those mechanics have during the removing, installing and restoring of parts/components and power plants… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PanzerAce Posted November 7, 2008 Share Posted November 7, 2008 Well, reading this thread and some others have caused me to want to see if I can build a super-turbo engine now. I'll be using PnP short blocks untill I get all the kinks worked out of it. Don't want to blow up anything I actually care about Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yetterben Posted May 15, 2010 Share Posted May 15, 2010 (edited) I have to bring this to the top Frank. Whats the deal...... Edited May 15, 2010 by yetterben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.