What intercooler are you running and for what reasons have you made this selection?

Status
Not open for further replies.
My new core is 6" thick. My V2 is 3" thick. The double wide V2 is 6" thick.
My goal is to get to 160 trap speed or whatever it takes for mid to low 8 pass.
AG


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Nice!

8 gauge minimum tank thickness.

Looks like a sweet project! Can't wait to see it done.
 
I decided to use 3/16 on the upper tank having the most area. Didn't want to take any chances with blowout at 40+ psi.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Can't argue with that.

Looks like stuffed tubes? Why not extruded? I'm not sure what's more efficient.
 
My new core is 6" thick. My V2 is 3" thick. The double wide V2 is 6" thick.
My goal is to get to 160 trap speed or whatever it takes for mid to low 8 pass.
AG


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Nice!.. what does it weigh? since their handy might as well throw the v2 on the scale also and post it up..:D
 
Nice!.. what does it weigh? since their handy might as well throw the v2 on the scale also and post it up..:D
My original is a V1 or V2. To be honest I get confused on what one it actually is but its the largest single they made and the larger double wide is the same core but 2 put together. So with that being said my original one is 30 lbs, Feedback from a friend with the double wide says its 58 lbs, and the preliminary data I have predicts about 60 lbs for my new assembly.
AG.
 
My original is a V1 or V2. To be honest I get confused on what one it actually is but its the largest single they made and the larger double wide is the same core but 2 put together. So with that being said my original one is 30 lbs, Feedback from a friend with the double wide says its 58 lbs, and the preliminary data I have predicts about 60 lbs for my new assembly.
AG.
Cool stuff ! ...my v2 is 13"h 23"w 3"d
I think the v1 was 16"h 25"w 4.5"d
and there was a V3 that I think was the double core 6" deep but they weren't mass produced so im not 100% sure.
 
Cool stuff ! ...my v2 is 13"h 23"w 3"d
I think the v1 was 16"h 25"w 4.5"d
and there was a V3 that I think was the double core 6" deep but they weren't mass produced so im not 100% sure.
Mine is 16"h 26"w 3"d so I guess I have no idea. Was told it was a CAS V whatever.
AG


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Mine is 16"h 26"w 3"d so I guess I have no idea. Was told it was a CAS V whatever.
AG


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Their was probably a few variations of each through the years since they were custom built cores.
 
AG, just for grins I assumed that the top rectangular plate on your IC is 6x12", edges rigidly supported since they're all welded, thickness 0.187", and at 40 psi I get a deflection in the center of that section of 0.03" and a peak stress at the center of the 6" edges of 20,000 psi which is about half of the "book" tensile strength (depending on the alloy), not counting the loss you will get from the weld, which could be up to 50% depending on the alloy and initial heat treat/work hardening. The peak stress of the deflection from each sloped plate will also be in the middle of the same 6" weld seam, and the welds will be the weak spots compared to the base metal. The sides should be weaker since they are larger but my simple calculator doesn't do trapezoids :). It probably won't permanently deform the first time you pressurize it, but I would be worried about how many (or few) cycles it will take to start a crack - keep a sharp eye on those welds where the sloped ends join the center flat. The tanks on the other end will be stronger since all the individual sections are much smaller, but this large tank has me concerned. If you don't start your pressure testing with water, at least please set up a micrometer on the middle of those 6" long welds so you can see if the tanks are bulging down at 10-20 psi. Does the 3D CAD program you are using also do stress and deflection calculations? Oh, going to 0.25" plate will cut the deflection by almost a factor of three, to about 0.013", and the peak stress in half, to about 12,000 psi, which will greatly help your safety margin on the large tank.
 
I'm assuming you're talking yield. And yes 6061-T6 has a yield of ~40,000 psi. Assuming the analysis is correct, .030" deflection would concern me. Rerun with strips of 3/16" welded to the tank's sides "ribbing".
 
AG, just for grins I assumed that the top rectangular plate on your IC is 6x12", edges rigidly supported since they're all welded, thickness 0.187", and at 40 psi I get a deflection in the center of that section of 0.03" and a peak stress at the center of the 6" edges of 20,000 psi which is about half of the "book" tensile strength (depending on the alloy), not counting the loss you will get from the weld, which could be up to 50% depending on the alloy and initial heat treat/work hardening. The peak stress of the deflection from each sloped plate will also be in the middle of the same 6" weld seam, and the welds will be the weak spots compared to the base metal. The sides should be weaker since they are larger but my simple calculator doesn't do trapezoids :). It probably won't permanently deform the first time you pressurize it, but I would be worried about how many (or few) cycles it will take to start a crack - keep a sharp eye on those welds where the sloped ends join the center flat. The tanks on the other end will be stronger since all the individual sections are much smaller, but this large tank has me concerned. If you don't start your pressure testing with water, at least please set up a micrometer on the middle of those 6" long welds so you can see if the tanks are bulging down at 10-20 psi. Does the 3D CAD program you are using also do stress and deflection calculations? Oh, going to 0.25" plate will cut the deflection by almost a factor of three, to about 0.013", and the peak stress in half, to about 12,000 psi, which will greatly help your safety margin on the large tank.

Good analysis and yes I been concerned given the surface area. I was debating on adding some internal struts to make the long sides more rigid.
AG.
 
Yes, vac, a peak stress of about 20,000 psi to be compared with the tensile strength of 40-50,000 psi (for 6061T6, half that if 1100; not familiar with the 1010 mentioned earlier) before welding, which will get cut roughly in half in the heat affected zone by the welding. AG, the problem with internal struts is the corruption of the airflow. I know you have worked to fill all available space on the car with intercooler, but if you have the room I'd add something to the outside. Maybe take a 4" x6" piece of the same material and bend it to match the angle where the flat meets the sloped sides, put a few holes in it, and then lay it on top of the first weld and weld the edges and make plug welds through the holes? That would stiffen what I see as the weakest areas. Not sure exactly where and how to reinforce the sides. My guess is that the peak stress will be halfway down along the sloped welds, where the trapezoidal side meets the sloped top, so maybe make some 4"x4" pieces with a 90 deg bend (so essentially 2" angle) and lay them on top of those weld areas like I suggested above. I think the simplest answer is to go to 0.25" material for the big end tank, or to change the simple rectangular cross section to the shape I've discussed before, with two equally spaced 45 degree bends instead of each 90 degree bend. Those extra bends and smaller flat regions really help all of this.
 
ijames, any idea if the charge temps have any significant impact on the deflection?

Sent from my SM-N910H using Tapatalk
 
The deflection is inversely proportional to Young's Modulus (or elastic modulus), which does go down some with temperature. For various aluminum alloys it drops about 15% between room temperature and 600 deg F, so for the same applied force the deflection will be 15% greater at 600 F than say 75 F. So yes, it does change, but not that much over the range an intercooler and its piping is likely to see (and not that much more than the accuracy I'd expect from calculations like these, without detailed characterization of the actual alloys used). The yield strength drops a lot more with increasing temperature. For 6061 it is down to about half of the room temperature value at 300 F, and only about 5,000 psi by 500 F. The air exiting the turbo can be over 600-700 F so the pipe and couplings to the intercooler will get pretty hot, but given how well the intercooler conducts heat and how massive it is my complete guess is that the inlet tank won't get over maybe 200 F, especially in drag racing where it will only see that hot air for less than 10-15 seconds (less than 9 seconds hopefully for this intercooler :)). The large end tank in this design will stay much cooler than that, since the air has gone halfway through the intercooler before it gets to that tank, so I think it is safe to ignore the temperature rise for these estimates.
 
I'm going to do some minor redesigning of the top tank anyway to angle the front piece back to give more clearance to the grill. I think I can come up with an interlocking braces for the outside to give it some rigidity


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I'm going to do some minor redesigning of the top tank anyway to angle the front piece back to give more clearance to the grill. I think I can come up with an interlocking braces for the outside to give it some rigidity


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
My simple way of thinking would be if possible to clearance the grill to the intercooler, instead of redesigning the top tank for clearance.
 
My simple way of thinking would be if possible to clearance the grill to the intercooler, instead of redesigning the top tank for clearance.
It looks like it would possible fit as-is but I'm not sure if its worth taking chances. a 6" core has fit in this space before and my design fits within that same box.
AG.
 
The flow path is very different from your first design. I would imagine this was to keep from cutting the core support as most guys (myself include) wouldn't want to cut it. Do you think that the overall efficiency has changed a little due to the direction change in the upper tank?
Don't know, there ae a lot of unknowns. This design was to maximize cooling efficiency to support 1400 FWHP as the first design was a compromise to reduce pressure drop at the expense of some cooling efficiency and better suited fo alky cars. Not to say the first design wouldn't work but they both have similar flow capability but the first just won't cool as well.
AG.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top