TeamSwift

Home of the Suzuki mini-compacts ! Your Home for all things Suzuki Swift, Geo Metro, Holden Barina, Chevy Sprint, Pontiac Firefly, and Suzuki Cultus. TeamSwift is a technical performance oriented community!
It is currently Tue Aug 22, 2017 3:34 pm

Underbody braces, turbos and more!

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 10:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 7:32 am
Posts: 93
Location: India
what i am going to post here has not been tested by me but i just feel that it can be tried.

idea : mini turbo using portable vac fan and its cover.
power source : timing belt driven pulley
rpm's : portable vac rotates at from 3000 - 8000 rpm and generates quite a good force of air flow (black and decker 900 watts )

theory : if the vac motor is removed and a small pulley attached to vac fan which has just enough teeth rotate at a very high rpm say ~ 15000 (10 -12 times engine rpm) it can generate really good pressure of about 3-4 psi.

since vac fan rpm's shall be varying with engine rpm, the pressure created will vary with engine speed.

has someone tried this ever before ?? i have read lots of posts on various forums on leaf blowers being tried to turbo the engine but they need 120- 220 volts and high capacity inverters to run by car battary/alternator.

some have tried leaf blower on honda cars and saw the dyno test on youtube also, then i thought, why not a vac be modified to high rpm using engine power and speed.

this is just a thought and since i had it in my mind i wanted to share with you guys here with lots of experience.

i have no idea of timing belt pulley rpm at idling engine rpm ? everything depends on that as i thought os using that as a variable speed power source for this experiment. :idea:

_________________
Cried for not having a Honda, laughed at Honda not having G13B motor.:ez_pimp:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 12:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 04, 2008 11:55 pm
Posts: 524
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
Quote:
since vac fan rpm's shall be varying with engine rpm, the pressure created will vary with engine speed.


This is how a supercharger works, and they don't create a rising pressure curve like a turbo does. I'm no flow specialist, but i think that's because the increased pumping at higher rpms means more air, but nearly identical pressure (aside from the pressure difference inherent with increased air velocity)

The reason a turbo spools up is because more air in means more exhaust out, which means more air in... which means more exhaust out... etc. etc. so it's a rising rate of pressure despite the increased flow demands of the higher rpms.
A supercharger has to pump more and more air as the RPM's go up just to keep the manifold pressure at 6psi (or whatever psi you're running), so the increased belt speed only serves to make up for the increased demand of the engine, thereby maintaining a (relatively) stable pressure.

I mean... don't get me wrong... what you're describing absolutely sounds like it should work, and should create some pressure, although it's real hard to say how much, and the pressure curve would most likely remain flat, or taper off in the higher rpms.

You'd look, I'm retarded want to run a filter after that system instead of, or in addition to before it aswell. That vacuum fan is designed to run at the vacuum motor rpm, and boosting it up by as much as you're talking about is just asking for that cheap little consumer grade plastic fan to go *pop* and spit a handful of plastic bits into your valves and pistons... which the engine would not enjoy i'm sure :D

If you've got the cojones to put it on YOUR car, i salute you and would love to see pics/dyno runs haha

Kyle


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 1:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 7:32 am
Posts: 93
Location: India
well !! i must thank you for the reply.

i would like to make some point here though :-

1. since i am not spending big bucks on turbo intall so i aint expecting turbo performance.

2. i wont ever use a plastic fan, if at all, i will use only original metal fan out of a real working vac, that too only after getting all details on vac motor's max rpm, wattage and measure the pressure created using a pressure gauge.

3. the whole contraption will feed air to my existing air filter.

4. its gonna be a contant pressure thing as its run by engine rpm's. it wont spool uncontrollably like a turbo.

5. it won't fit an intercooler as i will draw cold air from a scoop in the front bumper below the headlight with plumbing made to design after removing metal panel below the right hand side headlight. at higher speeds this scoop will help creating air pressure in the passage thereby helping maintaing positive pressure in the system even at higher engine rpm, like a RAM AIR thingy, thereby supporting the vac fan with pressurised air (whatever amount, but positive pressure is always welcome at the suction point of vac fan.

6. even a constant boost of 2-3 psi will make me happy as i am modifying nothing else in the engine, so even a realistic gain of more than 5 whp + will make me happy.

any idea whats the rpm of timing belt driven pully located on the left hand side of the engine cover ?? as all my calculations of gearing and rpm of vac fan and thus pressure creation will depend on this only.

i will only touch this project once i am sure of things working at least matematically and mechanically on paper.

thanks a ton

_________________
Cried for not having a Honda, laughed at Honda not having G13B motor.:ez_pimp:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 3:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 7:32 am
Posts: 93
Location: India
some internet study tells me that about 40-50000 rpm of the impeller will be the max for the boost

at idling engine rpm is ~ 900, i will use a bigger belt drive and a smaller pulley (maybe borrow from a swift alternator) to increase the drive speed without using much gearing to drive the impeller.

lets see what parts comes handy.

_________________
Cried for not having a Honda, laughed at Honda not having G13B motor.:ez_pimp:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 7:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2007 7:00 pm
Posts: 435
Location: ALBANY,NY
good idea,ive always wanted to do somthing crazy like that. please keep us updated and pics when available!!!!

_________________
HANSTECH
2001 suzuki swift GA. gutted,srd headers,straight piped,SRI,50mm tb,ported intake manifold,coolant bypass,3tech cam.
member of team
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 9:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:02 pm
Posts: 644
Location: North Florida
Whoa big fella! Respectfully, I think you need to go back to the drawing board. IMO no turbine from any "portable vac" I've ever seen is going to survive "say ~15000" RPM, let alone "40-50000 rpm"! And I've used heavy industrial, compressed air powered vacuums. You realize your talking jet engine speeds here, where air compression is accomplished by a number of precise, high tech, stacked/staged compressor turbines? Incidently "12 times" the ~6500 rpm redline on a Metro tach equal 78000 RPM, "very high rpm" indeed! The relationship between air volume & RPM is NOT linear for turbines, its a sort of bell shaped curve where only a specific range of RPM produces high efficiency.

fitsandy wrote:
homemade turbo using vacuum cleaner

theory : if the vac motor is removed and a small pulley attached to vac fan which has just enough teeth rotate at a very high rpm say ~ 15000 (10 -12 times engine rpm)

about 40-50000 rpm of the impeller will be the max for the boost

the whole contraption will feed air to my existing air filter

it won't fit an intercooler as i will draw cold air from a scoop in the front bumper

i wont ever use a plastic fan, if at all, i will use only original metal fan out of a real working vac


Turbos & superchargers both "draw cold air". The principle "an intercooler" addresses is the substantial & efficiency robbing heat created by compressing the air.

These days "a plastic fan" is what you're most likely to find "out of a real working vac". You may need to look into expensive industrial vacuums or antiques to find an "original metal fan". Manufacturers switched b/c plastic can be cheaply molded into the most efficient airfoil shapes & the important benefit of light weight.

The "existing air filter" is designed to seal under vacuum & will probably need to be modified for pressure. IE the PCV system.

_________________
2000 Chevy Metro 3 cylinder 5 speed 3 door hatch
1998 Chevy Metro 3 cylinder 5 speed 3 door hatch
1998 Chevy Lumina APV
1998 Ford F-150 4X4 XLT
1992 Ford E-150 Club Wagon Chateau
1991 SAAB 900S 5 speed
1987 SAAB 900 Turbo SPG
1985 SAAB 900 Turbo SPG
1974 SAAB Sonett III
1971 SAAB 96 modified to 1980 specs
1966 SAAB 96
1960 SAAB 93F
1958 SAAB 93B
1964 Willys JEEP CJ-5
1954 Willys JEEP M-170 military ambulance
1953 Grumman Kurbside step van


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 10:09 am 
Offline
Sad but True...

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 8:20 pm
Posts: 2973
Location: Saskatchewan
sounds like it would function similar to the electric superchargers, they can only provide so much flow, even if belt driven before it starts stacking up and going back over the blades. While you may be able to generate enough cfm to theoretically create pressure by cfm the engine is using / cfm the blower is making, but whatever the engine doesnt use, I just see going back over the blades. the fan wont have the blade "geometry" to create boost. and it wont survive much more than the rated rpm of the unit. you wont get near 80k rpm

_________________
1991 Swift GT Build G10 +25 psi + other goodies
1996 Metro Build QR25de swap, still undecided where to take it
the lolcar family


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 10:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 9:37 pm
Posts: 1009
Location: West "By God" Virginia
interesting "experiment" ..... but,
how long do you think those bearings will last ?
keep us posted - even failure educates


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 7:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 7:32 am
Posts: 93
Location: India
I am thankful to the feedback provided by the fellow members. What I am talking about is not the boost equivalent to a turbocharger but something equivalent to a supercharger thing.

I just bought a secondhand handy-vac rated 650 watts / 110 Volts and got it for $ 9.00 flat from a scrap dealer. Its a very new working model and someone has sold it as its 110V and in India we haver 220 Volts power supply, I believe he couln't use it possibly.

I have opened it and it has solid built aluminium metal fan blades sandwitched between two round metal plates.

I plan to use the same motor first as its a high RPM motor and generates quite a good suction/ pressure and put the entire thing in a hardware pipe of 6 inches dia, with reducer sockets on both ends to match the existing airpipe dia of 2 inches.

IMHO a 650 watts motor @ 110 Volts will need minimum 6 amperes of current to work at its rated full efficiency.

If I use an inverter to power this vac motor from car batt (I have 12 V / 55 Amp lead acid battary in the car) to support my 150 watt headlamp halogens and stereo amp.

Can I run the 110 V / 650 watts vac motor using the car battary and an inverter ???????

If not then I will have to remove the armature coils and outer coils and use the motor skeleton to fit a pulley and run it with either a 12 V high rpm motor ( ~ 10,000 rpm ) or with extended alternator belt using a very small pulley say 1 inch in diameter. The engine drive pulley is 6 inches it seems so I will get 6 times the engine rpm----->>>

At idling 900 x 6 = 5400 rpm of vac fan blade
at 2000 x 6 = 12000 rpm of vac fan blade
at 3000 x 6 = 18000 rpm... etc etc etc

I know I can never reach above 12-15000 rpm, even this is a tall order, I assume reaching even 10000 at 2000 engine rpm will be good enough to start with.

The whole contraption wont cost me more than $ 20 more in addition to the $ 9 vac that I just bought.

But if successful it can give me some better pickup at city driving speeds. I dont think I can use it on highways, for that I will make a by pass air pipe when using the car on the highway and use my present COLD RAM INTAKE.

Technical inputs welcome, I need them the most right now, including 12 V 10000 rpm motor and 12 V to 110 V inverter to run 650 watts vac motor.

Thanks.

_________________
Cried for not having a Honda, laughed at Honda not having G13B motor.:ez_pimp:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 7:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 7:32 am
Posts: 93
Location: India
This what is there inside the vac with a metal housing and a plastic air guide below it :


Attachments:
turbo project.JPG
turbo project.JPG [ 41.59 KIB | Viewed 4022 times ]

_________________
Cried for not having a Honda, laughed at Honda not having G13B motor.:ez_pimp:
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 8:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 7:32 am
Posts: 93
Location: India
proposed air sealed housing for vac fan and motor


Attachments:
turbo project 2.JPG
turbo project 2.JPG [ 49.21 KIB | Viewed 3072 times ]

_________________
Cried for not having a Honda, laughed at Honda not having G13B motor.:ez_pimp:
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:04 am 
Offline
Sad but True...

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 8:20 pm
Posts: 2973
Location: Saskatchewan
thats going to put a tremendous strain on the electric system, ESPECIALLY if you use an inverter, they arent that efficient. so while it says it makes 500usable watts for 110, its probably taking 700watts to generate that power. If you use anything electric your idea is no better than the e-ram

_________________
1991 Swift GT Build G10 +25 psi + other goodies
1996 Metro Build QR25de swap, still undecided where to take it
the lolcar family


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: E Ram is snake oil
PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 7:32 am
Posts: 93
Location: India
While the ads touting this product make a very seductive argument for buying and installing this item, the actual performance gain is so small as to be unnoticed. The E-Ram only powers up at WOT (which is when you'd want it to power up). It is supposed to give up to 1 PSIG of boost; unfortunately, it does not deliver.

Before I can rip apart the ridiculous claims made by this product's vendor, I have to explain what is supposed to happen. Consider a 2.5L V-6 with a volumetric efficiency of 82%, and with peak HP at 5850 RPM. We need to find the amount of air, in cubic feet per minute (cfm), that this engine is able to pass at peak HP. Now, the displacement of the 2.5L engine (is 2.5L, but we're going to work with cfm) is 152.4 cubic inches. Using the above mentioned facts, we can figure out how much air the engine is capable of passing.

vfr = (rpm * 0.5 * cid * ve) / 1728
Where:
vfr is the volumetric flow rate of the engine
rpm is the engine RPM where expected maximum power is developed
cid is the cubic inch displacement of the engine
0.5 is a factor that takes into account that an gasoline engine only moves air for two of its four cycles
1728 is the conversion factor from cubic inches to cubic feet

Now, we plug in numbers.

vfr = (5850 * 0.5 * 152.4 * 0.82) / 1728
= 211.5 cfm

From the above formula, we find that the 2.5L V-6 is able to pass a maximum of 212 cfm at WOT. Now, the E-Ram is supposed to provide a 1 psid boost at WOT, which would be 212 cfm for the V-6. To provide this much boost for this flow rate of air, one must expend about 1 HP, or about 746 watts (W). Taking this into consideration, and assuming for the moment that the E-Ram is able to provide this boost without any mechanical or electrical losses whatsoever, the E-Ram should draw (746 W)/(13 V) = 57.4 A (amps) when it is running. However, under test, this item only draws 15.3 A, for a power draw of 199 W (0.27 HP). So, at most, the E-Ram can provide about 1/4 psig of boost, which is hardly enough to offset the HP loss just by running this thing.

To compound the situation, the E-Ram actually provides a intake restriction when it's turned off (during any part-throttle response). This, in turn, requires the engine to work harder just to draw air in, which is power that


Attachments:
eram.jpg
eram.jpg [ 27.67 KIB | Viewed 3989 times ]

_________________
Cried for not having a Honda, laughed at Honda not having G13B motor.:ez_pimp:
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 7:32 am
Posts: 93
Location: India
Going by the above formula for my ride 4 cylinder, 1.3 L, that develops 86 hp @ 6000 rpm

vfr (volumetric flow rate of the engine) is as follows :

vfr = (6000 * 0.5 * 79.248 * 0.80) / 1728
= 110 cfm

which is quite possible to achieve with a high speed vac fan.

comments welcome

_________________
Cried for not having a Honda, laughed at Honda not having G13B motor.:ez_pimp:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 10:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 04, 2008 11:55 pm
Posts: 524
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
fitsandy wrote:
This what is there inside the vac with a metal housing and a plastic air guide below it :


Just looking at that vacuum blade housing and you can see it's not a straight through design. The air goes in the front and is then accelerated outwards by the blades, producing the positive pressure around the edge of the fan housing. I'm sure that the vacuum is designed appropriately so you might have to use some of the plastic vacuum housing.

If you just put two tubes on it though, one on either end, it won't produce any pressure. You need a "snail" design like a turbo in order to get that pressurized air.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 11:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 7:32 am
Posts: 93
Location: India
i am sorry dude !! i didnt show the casing in the pic. sorry for the confusion, its all with casing and a plastic air guide that directs the turbo fans air out of the system with pressure.

_________________
Cried for not having a Honda, laughed at Honda not having G13B motor.:ez_pimp:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 12:43 pm 
Offline
Sad but True...

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 8:20 pm
Posts: 2973
Location: Saskatchewan
try it and see, im sure youll find its useless, or maybe youll be like this one douche I know who claims to have an electric supercharger on his sunfire, and its basically just a 12V inline with his throttle body, he says it swirls the air (uhh... then it stops when it hits the butterfly) and produces up to 6psi of boost. And that you can "hear" it work because it whirs at WOT. guess what dummy, that whirr is the supercharger being SPUN by the air moving into the engine. He said it added 25hp :rofl: and was serious.

_________________
1991 Swift GT Build G10 +25 psi + other goodies
1996 Metro Build QR25de swap, still undecided where to take it
the lolcar family


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 10:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 7:32 am
Posts: 93
Location: India
i dont want to use an e ram at all, what i am planning is an absolutely new way of powering the car for low end city runs say max about 3000 rpm.

i am in the process of researching a high rpm dc motor that will be powered by a variable resistor smoething like TPS, that gives low rpm boost at low throttle and high rpm boost at higher throttle, there is enogh space in engine bay to fix one.

its a project from scratch.

once its made (if at all) i will post the pics.

obviously at highway speeds i will swich over to the regular cold ram intake that is already installed in my car.

_________________
Cried for not having a Honda, laughed at Honda not having G13B motor.:ez_pimp:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 13, 2008 12:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 7:32 am
Posts: 93
Location: India
Upon researching I have found an electric motor with following specs suitable for my experiment specially designed for stick blender at 170 W and 230 V.

Supply nominal 230 VAC
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Torque @ rated load 30 mNm
@ max. efficiency 36 mNm
@ max. power 58 mNm
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Speed @ no load 28000 rpm
@ rated load 15000 rpm
@ max. efficiency 13800 rpm
@ max. power 9700 rpm

Pole number 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Power input @ rated load 150 W
input @ max. efficiency 160 W
output @ rated load 47 W
output @ max. efficiency 52 W
output @ max. power 58 W

Max efficiency @ max. efficiency 32 %
@ rated load efficiency 32 %
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weight 300 g
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Max. current @ no load 0.34 A
@ rated load 0.66 A
@ max. efficiency 0.74 A
@ max. power 0.94 A
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No load Rated load Max efficiency Max power
Speed (rpm) 28000 15000 13800 9700
Current (A) 0.34 0.66 0.74 0.94
Torque (mNm) - 30 36 58
Efficiency (%) - 32 32 -
Input power (W) - 150 160 -
Output power (W) - 47 52 58
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now theoretically I dont have to create a pressure but increase the cfm of the air flow. I assume no boost will be there but good air flow. Mind it the 1.3 Litre engine rated 86 hp @ 6000 rpm needs 110 CFM only.

What I am talking about is max 3000 rpm the engine will require only about 50-60 cfm.
________________________________________________________________________________________

A well designed vac's turbo blade fan's cfm @ 10000 rpm is roughly matching the requiremnt of the engine at 3000 rpm and easily matches with lower rpms than 3000.

To my mind on paper this should be able to increase air flow upto 3000 rpm making engine run smoother, burn fuel more efficiently and increasing the low end torque of the engine making it a pleasure to drive in city running conditions.

Comments and criticisms welcome.

Thanks


Attachments:
File comment: 220 V / 170 Watt 10000-28000 rpm Electric Motor
U5415-005.jpg
U5415-005.jpg [ 8.83 KIB | Viewed 3906 times ]
File comment: Motor Performance Curve
U5415-005_cur.jpg
U5415-005_cur.jpg [ 8.31 KIB | Viewed 3905 times ]

_________________
Cried for not having a Honda, laughed at Honda not having G13B motor.:ez_pimp:
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 13, 2008 12:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 7:32 am
Posts: 93
Location: India
As far as power supply is concerned a small inverter capable of 300 VA will suffice for this purpose as the max current drawn by motor is 0.94 Ampere. Power requirement is 230 Volts x 0.94 Ampere = 216 watts.

Even if I assume the inverter efficiency as 80% I will need 270 watts from the car battary. That results in current being drawn by the whole set up as about 20 Amperes at 14 V battary terminals voltage when car is running.

I have 55 Amp battary in my car which can take this load easily for short distance city running like say 10 kms at a time.

Doesnt it seem plausible ??

_________________
Cried for not having a Honda, laughed at Honda not having G13B motor.:ez_pimp:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 13, 2008 1:16 pm 
Offline
Sad but True...

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 8:20 pm
Posts: 2973
Location: Saskatchewan
im here for the results, put it together you said it was cheap enough

_________________
1991 Swift GT Build G10 +25 psi + other goodies
1996 Metro Build QR25de swap, still undecided where to take it
the lolcar family


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 14, 2008 8:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 8:18 pm
Posts: 159
Location: Brisbane, Australia
If you put the amount of effort you have trying to work this out, you could have turbo or supercharged your car, horsepower does not come for free or cheap. Have a look on ebay in England for supercharges they are cheap.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 14, 2008 8:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 7:32 am
Posts: 93
Location: India
the idea is not to get in too much fabrication and plumbing and generate positive pressure to get smooth acceleration and better mileage in city driving conditions, that too using backyard parts.

_________________
Cried for not having a Honda, laughed at Honda not having G13B motor.:ez_pimp:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 14, 2008 8:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 8:18 pm
Posts: 159
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Stuff like this is sold on ebay every day, like the electric turbo charger, a fan that blows air into your engine. Non of it has ever worked and never will. Good luck dont let me stop you.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 10:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:02 pm
Posts: 644
Location: North Florida
Some things don't seem to add up here.

For instance my ordinary Hoover vacuum draws 9 amps @ 110 volts or 990 watts. This is nearly 5 times the power ("216 watts") you're considering w/blender motor.

Also blender motors are usually mechanically isolated from thrust & axial loads, providing only rotational input to the blades, which are supported by the blender's pitcher assembly.

A "no load 28000 rpm" speed would need to be carefully matched to a fan for durability & efficiency. You can not just spin a fan faster to achieve more cfm, each fan blade design has limits. Attempt to make them spin faster & efficiency rapidly drops off b/c they'll essentially slip & cavitation will actually reduce output.

Consider that the fastest, most effective/efficient airplane propellers rarely spin more than 3500 rpm, many prop aircraft motors use reduction gears to spin props & adjustable pitch props are commonly used to take advantage of different speeds. Similarly w/boat propellers, there are strict rpm limits, hence the multiprop installations.

IMO you'd be far better off using existing Suzuki turbocharger components which are truly "using backyard parts" instead of trying to adapt a 230V blender motor to a vacuum cleaner fan.

_________________
2000 Chevy Metro 3 cylinder 5 speed 3 door hatch
1998 Chevy Metro 3 cylinder 5 speed 3 door hatch
1998 Chevy Lumina APV
1998 Ford F-150 4X4 XLT
1992 Ford E-150 Club Wagon Chateau
1991 SAAB 900S 5 speed
1987 SAAB 900 Turbo SPG
1985 SAAB 900 Turbo SPG
1974 SAAB Sonett III
1971 SAAB 96 modified to 1980 specs
1966 SAAB 96
1960 SAAB 93F
1958 SAAB 93B
1964 Willys JEEP CJ-5
1954 Willys JEEP M-170 military ambulance
1953 Grumman Kurbside step van


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group