Nitrous/Methanol Anti-Lag System Afterburner!

Hey Donnie it was a pleasure meeting you. I was thoroughly impressed with your work. Your car is as nice as the weather out there.:) Sorry I missed the track outing but I'll be following you on Youtube.;) Thanks for taking the time to make my day.

Oh yeah I'll get those new fuel maps out for you later this week. Hopefully you can plug them in and get rid of those little trouble spots thats been driving you mad.:p
 
Nasty Wendy said:
Hey Donnie it was a pleasure meeting you. I was thoroughly impressed with your work. Your car is as nice as the weather out there.:) Sorry I missed the track outing but I'll be following you on Youtube.;) Thanks for taking the time to make my day.

Oh yeah I'll get those new fuel maps out for you later this week. Hopefully you can plug them in and get rid of those little trouble spots thats been driving you mad.:p
Click to expand...
And I must say, I had a great time visiting with you also. I just hope I didn't bore you too much.
Waiting patiently for the new fuel map.

Your friend,
 
Afterburner tuning notes (thinking to myself)

Stoich for nitrous and methanol is 4.13:1.

The latest 50 hp shot afterburner n/f ratio is 2.5:1, or .61 lambda.
The first 28 hp shot was at a ratio of 3.87:1, or .94 lambda.

Equivalency ratios for each of the above values in comparison to gasoline would be 8.93:1 and 13.76:1, respectively.

Would shooting for a mixture closer to 3.75:1 or .91 lambda produce more heat? Gasoline equivalency ratio would be 13.3:1. Methanol equivalency ratio, 5.87:1.

5.0:1 is a common good lean power ratio thrown around for methanol. Lambda would be .78 or 3.22:1 n/f. Gasoline equivalency ratio, 11.42:1. I think I'll try this one at the track testing this weekend. This will require a larger nitrous jet, keeping the fuel jet the same.

Funny. The engine likes to burn the gasoline a/f equivalency ratio of 10.8 - 11.4:1, methanol a/f ratio range of 4.77 - 5.03:1. That would be a lambda range or .74 - .78, or a n/f ratio range of 3.06 - 3.22:1. Hmmm. Could it be that simple?
 
DonWG said:
Thanks guys. I stuck it out with this small engine, large turbo, tight torque converter combination because I believed that if I finally got the combination to work the way I had always dreamed it could, there could be no doubt in the minds of the naysayers that something truly amazing is going on here.
I wish I could pit beside a big name turbo racer who is checking out his popping and banging gasoline ALS, and show him what a truly technically advanced ALS is supposed to sound like. But then,... my ALS wouldn't excite the little children as much. :( Oh well.
Click to expand...


Don, the big time turbo racer you would be pitting next to would most likely be racing heads up where you can't have 2 power adders. For a bracket car or a grudge race car I can't argue what you are doing with the NOS is working and a big turbo other than the more complex the machine the more that can go wrong.

Time to see some BIG numbers at the track... :cool:
 
S2V6RACER said:
Don, the big time turbo racer you would be pitting next to would most likely be racing heads up where you can't have 2 power adders. For a bracket car or a grudge race car I can't argue what you are doing with the NOS is working and a big turbo other than the more complex the machine the more that can go wrong.

Time to see some BIG numbers at the track... :cool:
Click to expand...
Yeah, I know. Still, it would be fun to see the look on their faces when I smoothly brought the rpm and boost up. :D

I'm taking the wheelie bars with me this weekend. We're going to see what kind of 60' best I can come up with. :cool: In the 1.2s, maybe?

If people always shied away from complexity, neat discoveries like this would never come to light. From a technical point of view, that would be an awfully boring world.
 
Here's an interesting note.
When I was first contemplating switching to the 91mm, I ran some sims on different size turbo compressors to see what large turbo my engine combination might like. There was absolutely no disputing that the sim really liked the 91mm. It was hands down far ahead of the other compressor sizes.
What was real interesting was that the sim also showed that I would need to use a 400 hp shot to get a decent spoolup out of the turbo.

Presently, I'm injecting a 364 hp shot with the port system and a 50 hp shot directly into the turbo. Turns out to be real close to that 400 hp shot the sim showed me I would need to use to spool this monster.
 
DonWG said:
Here's an interesting note.
When I was first contemplating switching to the 91mm, I ran some sims on different size turbo compressors to see what large turbo my engine combination might like. There was absolutely no disputing that the sim really liked the 91mm. It was hands down far ahead of the other compressor sizes.
What was real interesting was that the sim also showed that I would need to use a 400 hp shot to get a decent spoolup out of the turbo.

Presently, I'm injecting a 364 hp shot with the port system and a 50 hp shot directly into the turbo. Turns out to be real close to that 400 hp shot the sim showed me I would need to use to spool this monster.
Click to expand...

What simulator are you using?
 
New best. A 1.28 60 foot on the last pass for the night. Might of had a better one, but I aborted a high wheel stander on the 2nd pass of the night.
Still dialing in the boost controller, nitrous turn off point and the aux fueling transition timed events.
 
Wow

excellent 60 ft!
couple that with the bakersfield 155mph run
and that'll hush a few doubters!:D
 
It felt like the T76 was back in it.
Delay time settings for each pass, from nitrous activation to transbrake release went like this.
First pass: 1.30 sec. delay. 1.4 sec. 60'. On par with recent past performance.

Second pass: 2.00 sec. delay. Busted pass. The wheels got up there pretty high. It felt like it was starting out to be one of those 'wheels want to keep climbing' type of runs. Launch aborted. Reports from a few spectators went like this, ":eek:".

Third pass: 1.70 sec. delay. Busted pass. The aux fueling transition timing caused an intake backfire on launch.

Fourth pass: 1.70 sec. delay. 1.28 sec. 60'. Felt like old times with the T76 at Speedworld.

Today, the first pass will have a 1.80 sec. delay. Wheelie bars will be set lower. :tongue:
If this pass goes well, I'll creap up on the delay time .05 sec. at a time.
 
1.28 60' and a 91mm that spools like a 76mm. Nice!

The 'Wheels want to keep climbing' pass.....did you not have a wheelie bar on?
 
The wheelie bars were on, but they were on the highest setting.
I admit it. I wimped out.
 
DonWG said:
The wheelie bars were on, but they were on the highest setting.
I admit it. I wimped out.
Click to expand...

At 1.20 60' times your wheelie bars will start being just as important , and just as big a tuning item as any of the rest of your off the chart tuning aids. Dont discount their value!! Keep it coming!! This is good!! Mike:eek::cool:
 
BlownV6 said:
At 1.20 60' times your wheelie bars will start being just as important , and just as big a tuning item as any of the rest of your off the chart tuning aids. Dont discount their value!! Keep it coming!! This is good!! Mike:eek::cool:
Click to expand...
Yes. I completely understand. As this project has progressed I've learned just how important chassis tuning can be. That would include the wheelie bars. I'm still just a young pup at this chassis stuff. I really didn't expect that the car would do what it did when I tried that 2.00 sec nitrous/transbrake delay. When the first pass with the 1.30 sec delay didn't really show much improvement over recent past testing, I got a little frustrated and thought, to heck with it, and threw in the whole enchilada (2.00 sec). That was a wake up call! Yes. I was certainly saying to myself that I wished I had set the wheelie bars to a more proper setting, instead of just the far chance of 'rear bumper damage control'.
I'm at a 1.80 second delay with the nitrous/transbrake timing. The next big hurdle before I start moving towards that 2.00 sec. delay again (with wheelie bars set correctly) is the aux fueling transition timing, and the boost controller.
Map is climbing at a different rate than before and it's thrown off the aux fueling transition. After I find the sweet spot on that system again, then I'll be working on a new boost control strategy.
It seems that with the boost climbing quicker in first gear, it's unreasonable to try to control the boost to only 16 psi for the 1-2 shift. It dogs the car down big time. I think the car will tolerate a higher boost level for the 1-2 shift now that the launch is quicker.
In the datalogs, the rpm is plateauing much too early before the correct 1-2 shift point. It's as if the boost control strategy is holding the rpm climb rate back. The next time out, I'm going to set the controller so that the turbo can build as much boost as it can before the 1-2 shift so that I can see just exactly what the unrestricted boost climb rate looks like. After I have that information, I should be able to come up with a proper boost control strategy.
 
Nasty Wendy said:
<hanging head in shame>
:D
Click to expand...
LOL. Yeah, I received a flogging from a long time friend/fellow racer that came up to me in the pits and said, "You were scared, huh?" I perked up and replied truthfully, and said, "Yep!!!", with a big smile on my face. :biggrin:

New launching strategy. I'm going to mount the wheelie bars permanently, and start testing at a max launch tune. That would be the 2.00 second nitrous/transbrake delay. The wheelie bars will be set conservatively (low to the ground) to start with.
It seems that there's the chance that with each change of the nitrous/transbrake delay, there will end up being a different aux fueling transition tune for each of the delay settings. Instead of ending up constantly chasing the aux fueling transition tune with each change of the nitrous activation/transbrake release delay, I'll just go straight for the assumed max launch power setting (2.00 sec) and tune the aux fueling transition to that launch delay setting. Once I'm sure that power setting looks to be the right one, I'll work on incorporating that power setting into a 3 amber and pro light launch routine.
 
Taking videos of the launches is going to be very important at this stage of the launch tuning. Finding the right angle to take the videos for the best picture of what's happening with the tires and the chassis. Any suggestions on that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
Do I really need LS,ish individual coils?
Replies
10
Views
848
THensley
T
P
Winter storage for alky system???
Replies
6
Views
386
Mr.Spool
M
M
A/C O-Rings
Replies
0
Views
208
Metacom
M
C
What shoes/pads and brake cylinders
Replies
2
Views
268
1KWIKSIX
1KWIKSIX
W
cruze ls iac
Replies
7
Views
568
william B.
W
Top