Open Source Electric Supercharger

[neutron256]

Originally Posted by solma

It a paper on what you want to do, atleast in the supercharger.

http://www.movingmagnet.com/medias/d.../m12-12-16.pdf

It's an intersting paper, and I've added the link to the OP.

However I'm not sure that direct a correlation can be made between their experiment, and this specific setup. I'm anything but an expert on FI, but it seems like there are too many variables not defined in the paper to make a real calculation for what our power needs would be.

By your estimation how much power do you think the motor needs to generate the kind of results seen by the Phantom Supercharger?

[neutron256]

Originally Posted by ptuning

18v*94a = 1,692 watts/746 watts = 2.27 hp

I should have been more clear. Not the power of that motor, but the power that would be needed by a motor given this setup to acheive a given amount of boost.

[Toma]

Originally Posted by neutron256

I should have been more clear. Not the power of that motor, but the power that would be needed by a motor given this setup to acheive a given amount of boost.

Watts= pressure(pascals) x volume(m^3/s)

Which assumes 100 percent efficiency. So 2hp is not even close.

[200hp/tonne]

Originally Posted by neutron256

I should have been more clear. Not the power of that motor, but the power that would be needed by a motor given this setup to acheive a given amount of boost.

Compressor work equation :
W = Cp of air * Inlet Temp in K * ((Pressure Ratio^0.2857) -1) / compressor efficiency
The result will be per Kg or per Lb of air to be supplied
Power Req = Mass flow * W
Mass flow = abs. pressure * displacement * (rpm/120) / ( Gas constant of air * post comp temp in K)

[neutron256]

Originally Posted by Toma

Watts= pressure(pascals) x volume(m^3/s)

Which assumes 100 percent efficiency. So 2hp is not even close.

So what is the volume you're using to figure this out? I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just trying to understand so we can have an accurate target for motor size/power.

Originally Posted by 200hp/tonne

Compressor work equation :
W = Cp of air * Inlet Temp in K * ((Pressure Ratio^0.2857) -1) / compressor efficiency
The result will be per Kg or per Lb of air to be supplied
Power Req = Mass flow * W
Mass flow = abs. pressure * displacement * (rpm/120) / ( Gas constant of air * post comp temp in K)

Aghhhh Too much math, my brain hurts.

I'll be the first to admit that while I'm a huge science geek I suck at math which is why I would never have made it as an engineer.

So can one of you math/FI wiz's figure out how much power we do need to make this work?

And don't forget to show your work. J/K.

[Toma]

Well since the goal here is to re invent and rip off Rob's Phantom Supercharger set up. Just feel free to steal his data so far ~140 amps. 24 volts. 1.6 psi at redline of a frs. 200 rwhp. I could tell you airflow.... I have logs. But that doesn't seem like the right thing to do. You could calculate airflow as well.

[200hp/tonne]

Originally Posted by neutron256

So can one of you math/FI wiz's figure out how much power we do need to make this work?

And don't forget to show your work. J/K.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...Xc&usp=sharing

Excel sheet to Calculate supercharger power at given boost, inlet temp, engine size etc.
you can even see if intercooling makes a difference.

Engine math is what i have to do for a living...

[solma]

Originally Posted by neutron256

It's an intersting paper, and I've added the link to the OP.

However I'm not sure that direct a correlation can be made between their experiment, and this specific setup. I'm anything but an expert on FI, but it seems like there are too many variables not defined in the paper to make a real calculation for what our power needs would be.

By your estimation how much power do you think the motor needs to generate the kind of results seen by the Phantom Supercharger?

Good question, its multiple variable to know, see the link(even if it not in the same category):

http://www.dragzine.com/news/lose-po...-loss-testing/

you can possibly extrapolate, a least for sure it give an idea that in the horsepower range.

I would imagine that if you start with the mapping of the compressor, look at the efficacy in the rpm you want to run it, and after that calculate the work needed to compress the air, you should have a ballpark. After, I would to do what I do in all my design give a least factor of 1.5-2, it seem a lot, but when you will end up in high temp/humidy/... condition, your efficacy could go down the drain fast.

[neutron256]

Originally Posted by Toma

Well since the goal here is to re invent and rip off Rob's Phantom Supercharger set up. Just feel free to steal his data so far ~140 amps. 24 volts. 1.6 psi at redline of a frs. 200 rwhp. I could tell you airflow.... I have logs. But that doesn't seem like the right thing to do. You could calculate airflow as well.

If you take issue with "Ripping off" the Phantom supercharger please feel free not to particapate.

I personally am just using that as a baseline for compairson not trying to make an exact copy. It's a good idea and I hope Rob makes a bunch of money off of it. However it's not completly original idea, and as of yet it's also not available for general purchase.

Please Try and keep language in here polite everyone.

[Toma]

Funny how there were NONE of you bandwagon jumpers were doing anything with this idea before one man designed, engineered, tested, tweeked and proved it could be made to work.

Most laughed scoffed ridiculed lol.

I digress though. Congrats on your 'open source' undertaking.

[solma]

Originally Posted by Toma

Well since the goal here is to re invent and rip off Rob's Phantom Supercharger set up. Just feel free to steal his data so far ~140 amps. 24 volts. 1.6 psi at redline of a frs. 200 rwhp. I could tell you airflow.... I have logs. But that doesn't seem like the right thing to do. You could calculate airflow as well.

I am not saying your wrong on your statement, but electric supercharger was invent before Rob's supercharger, here just 1 patent dating 1994 http://www.google.com/patents/US5638796 , and I am quite sure it was patent way earlier that.

So when you call it rip off it little bit harsh.

[solma]

Originally Posted by Toma

Funny how there were NONE of you bandwagon jumpers were doing anything with this idea before one man designed, engineered, tested, tweeked and proved it could be made to work.

Most laughed scoffed ridiculed lol.

I digress though. Congrats on your 'open source' undertaking.

I agree with on this one, but if people would not do that, there would be a super slow evolutive curve in design, i like saying the that piston engine should have been left to train using water vapor.

So to me sometime people needed that little push to jump in new technology and continue finding new and better solution using the same backbone.

[Toma]

Ahhh. So you guys did a patent search and said.... 'eureka, lets build it!' Or did you see Fentons build? Lol

Its all good. We also do diy turbo kits etc. I think it great actually that they managed to spawn excitement and curiosity and make people think.

I think credit for motivation for this idea and proof of concept should be added to the first post and maybe a link to the Phantom site.

[neutron256]

If people want to be negative about this please do your best to ignore them. I agree that this is not a new idea, but I do applaud Phantom for trying to develop it. That said it is a concept of somewhat limited use, and if some of us want to bat around ideas on how it works, how to make it better, or even build our own I don't see anything wrong with that.

From what I can tell we have some seriously smart people here and we might even have some ideas that Phantom might want to incorporate into their product. If they do I’m sure most of us would be excited to see our ideas adopted.

I know that if I get this to work at all (I give it 25% I won't) I will probably end up spending more on it the whatever Phantom's kit ends up costing assuming a kit is made generally available. That's not why I'm doing it. I see it as a challenge, a learning experience, and an intellectual pursuit.