Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community - FT86CLUB
Page 1 of 6 1 2345 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community - FT86CLUB (https://www.ft86club.com/forums/index.php)
-   Engine, Exhaust, Transmission (https://www.ft86club.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=8)
-   -   JDL V2 EL Header...Revisited and Revised (https://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=52907)

Jesse@JDLAutodesign 12-05-2013 08:08 PM
JDL V2 EL Header...Revisited and Revised
 
We developed our first EL header over a year ago now...gains were pretty good on a non tuned car. Then we got VERY busy with the UEL's and the EL stuff kinda sat around not being pushed. We had a couple out there with the old flex joints and they had issues with clearing the skid pan. Now that we got a couple more welders in here it allowed me to go back and redesign the EL headers. New header clears factory skid pan, has increased runner length and better collector design. I'm excited to get these out there and see some dyno's :)

I'll have some welded shots up tomo to see weld quality, etc.

http://jdlautodesign.net/wp-content/...86-EL-V2_1.jpg

http://jdlautodesign.net/wp-content/...FT86-EL-V2.jpg

http://jdlautodesign.net/wp-content/...86-EL-V2_2.jpg

http://jdlautodesign.net/wp-content/...86-EL-V2_3.jpg

FR-S Matt 12-05-2013 08:19 PM
If this is anything like the UEL, people are in for a treat. JDL FTW!

Captain Insano 12-05-2013 08:30 PM
Dynos, dynos!!

Hardrock4445 12-05-2013 08:42 PM
I love my serial #001 original EL. The quality, sound, power increase on stock tune is well worth it.

akyp 12-05-2013 08:56 PM
Any chance of a catted version?

Seems the best way to make decent power with EL is with the runners going up in front of the engine?

Jesse@JDLAutodesign 12-05-2013 09:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by akyp (Post 1371790)
Any chance of a catted version?

Seems the best way to make decent power with EL is with the runners going up in front of the engine?
Prolly nothing catted...I think the idea of a Cat right after a merge collector kinda defeats the purpose of having a proper collector.

Going up really has nothing to do with power other than I had to go somewhere to get the lengths i needed and going down wasn't an option (skid plate) and neither was going forward (OEM fan shroud). I'm sure it will look good seeing more of it in the engine bay but it doesn't go up as high as some i've seen. :)

Turdinator 12-05-2013 09:09 PM
:eyebulge::drool::wub:

In for stock and tuned dynos. Looks the goods tho :thumbup:

the.big.kahoona 12-05-2013 09:16 PM
Weight?

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk

Hardrock4445 12-05-2013 09:20 PM
Sexy golden color on V1.
http://i797.photobucket.com/albums/y...psc6b294f3.jpg

twag4 12-05-2013 09:25 PM
: ) Yay!

ramiram1984 12-05-2013 10:02 PM
Nice!

jdm-az-fuk 12-05-2013 10:37 PM
Pricing?

IAmNotTheDriftKing 12-06-2013 01:03 AM
Everyone that is thinking about buying from them, just do it. You will not be disappointed.

StormTrooper 12-06-2013 01:17 AM
More EL competition.... I like it.

Plenty of people still waiting for the best. And more buyers all the time.

Looks like HKS is mid and high end. Nameless is low and mid. Curious where this headers adds the power

JDLAutoDesign 12-06-2013 01:43 PM
Snapped a few pics before it gets welded

http://jdlautodesign.net/wp-content/...86-EL-V2_4.jpg

http://jdlautodesign.net/wp-content/...86-EL-V2_7.jpg

http://jdlautodesign.net/wp-content/...86-EL-V2_6.jpg

http://jdlautodesign.net/wp-content/...86-EL-V2_5.jpg

slava 12-06-2013 04:03 PM
Waiting on price and dyno sheet!

Turdinator 12-06-2013 07:50 PM
@JDLAutoDesign how do you determin what runner length to go with? Trial and error? Some sort of computer model?

xDanger_208x 12-06-2013 11:26 PM
Stoked! Can't wait to get mine. Even more exited to hear you're making a great thing even better!

Kodename47 12-07-2013 03:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turdinator (Post 1373888)
@JDLAutoDesign how do you determin what runner length to go with? Trial and error? Some sort of computer model?
I'd suspect both above, and some maths while taking into account restriction on available space.

Lee@JDLAutoDesign 12-08-2013 06:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turdinator (Post 1373888)
@JDLAutoDesign how do you determin what runner length to go with? Trial and error? Some sort of computer model?
Good question. If I were more familiar with this forum and knew how to thank someone for their post I would. :lol:

Sorry in advance for the long winded answer. My philosophy is that when you design any sort of manifold (intake or exhaust) you have to balance:
  1. Spacial constraints
  2. Aerodynamic design
  3. Acoustic design
... and the list goes on to include cost, material section, material availability, etc... but I'll skip those and focus on the three I listed since realistically these are the ones that most affect performance.

The first one is simple; if it doesn't fit in the car and/or you can't install it, you don't have a product.

The second one refers to sizing runner diameters, merge collector lengths (which effectively sets the merge angle), bend radii, balancing number of bends per runner, etc. I call it "aerodynamic design" because the choices you make here set the ~steady state flow conditions (pressures, temperatures, velocities) at each location in the manifold at a given engine speed/load.

The acoustic design is a separate bullet because it is ~more or less independent of the aerodynamic design, meaning if I move up or down a pipe diameter I really haven't affected the harmonics at all. For example, a +/- 0.25" change in pipe diameter (~30% change in area) affects sound speed by ~0.1%. The dominant driver in harmonic design is runner length.

So, to answer your question... we start by specing and building a merge collector that we like. If it's a new style/design I will usually run some CFD on the shape to make sure we are happy with the collector's performance. It is my belief that the collector design/quality is THE most important factor in a header design since the collector dictates the exhaust pressure vs. exhaust flow characteristic of the manifold. We place this collector in the car, then work backward to the exhaust ports making sure the fitment is acceptable, and from this, the runner lengths falls out (of course I'm simplifying this process greatly).

A simple hand calc (it's a spreadsheet, actually) then tells us the resonant speed for each of the first N harmonics. If we are happy with this, then we go forward. If not, we start over and try a different routing to get us closer to our desired runner length.

It's an iterative process, that's for sure, but you can limit the number of iterations if you understand what you are aiming for and how your design choices affect your end results.

Going forward... I'm campaigning to log exhaust pressure in a runner on the dyno as a function of time. My plan would then be to rebuild the signal with an FFT and see how close my 'hand calcs' for resonance actually match the measured frequency content :thumbup:

Hope this is helpful,
Lee

FR-S Matt 12-08-2013 06:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee@JDLAutoDesign (Post 1376946)
Good question. If I were more familiar with this forum and knew how to thank someone for their post I would. :lol:

Sorry in advance for the long winded answer. My philosophy is that when you design any sort of manifold (intake or exhaust) you have to balance:
  1. Spacial constraints
  2. Aerodynamic design
  3. Acoustic design
... and the list goes on to include cost, material section, material availability, etc... but I'll skip those and focus on the three I listed since realistically these are the ones that most affect performance.

The first one is simple; if it doesn't fit in the car and/or you can't install it, you don't have a product.

The second one refers to sizing runner diameters, merge collector lengths (which effectively sets the merge angle), bend radii, balancing number of bends per runner, etc. I call it "aerodynamic design" because the choices you make here set the ~steady state flow conditions (pressures, temperatures, velocities) at each location in the manifold at a given engine speed/load.

The acoustic design is a separate bullet because it is ~more or less independent of the aerodynamic design, meaning if I move up or down a pipe diameter I really haven't affected the harmonics at all. For example, a +/- 0.25" change in pipe diameter (~30% change in area) affects sound speed by ~0.1%. The dominant driver in harmonic design is runner length.

So, to answer your question... we start by specing and building a merge collector that we like. If it's a new style/design I will usually run some CFD on the shape to make sure we are happy with the collector's performance. It is my belief that the collector design/quality is THE most important factor in a header design since the collector dictates the exhaust pressure vs. exhaust flow characteristic of the manifold. We place this collector in the car, then work backward to the exhaust ports making sure the fitment is acceptable, and from this, the runner lengths falls out (of course I'm simplifying this process greatly).

A simple hand calc (it's a spreadsheet, actually) then tells us the resonant speed for each of the first N harmonics. If we are happy with this, then we go forward. If not, we start over and try a different routing to get us closer to our desired runner length.

It's an iterative process, that's for sure, but you can limit the number of iterations if you understand what you are aiming for and how your design choices affect your end results.

Going forward... I'm campaigning to log exhaust pressure in a runner on the dyno as a function of time. My plan would then be to rebuild the signal with an FFT and see how close my 'hand calcs' for resonance actually match the measured frequency content :thumbup:

Hope this is helpful,
Lee
You gotta get to 10 posts to enable the Thanks feature. :party0030:

peebking 12-08-2013 06:45 PM
I just bought a v1 and you come out a v2 sosad

Turdinator 12-08-2013 07:02 PM
Thank you for the detailed explanation
:party0030: :clap: :cheers:

What sort of rpm should these have a helpful harmonic?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee@JDLAutoDesign (Post 1376946)
Good question. If I were more familiar with this forum and knew how to thank someone for their post I would. :lol:

Sorry in advance for the long winded answer. My philosophy is that when you design any sort of manifold (intake or exhaust) you have to balance:
  1. Spacial constraints
  2. Aerodynamic design
  3. Acoustic design
... and the list goes on to include cost, material section, material availability, etc... but I'll skip those and focus on the three I listed since realistically these are the ones that most affect performance.

The first one is simple; if it doesn't fit in the car and/or you can't install it, you don't have a product.

The second one refers to sizing runner diameters, merge collector lengths (which effectively sets the merge angle), bend radii, balancing number of bends per runner, etc. I call it "aerodynamic design" because the choices you make here set the ~steady state flow conditions (pressures, temperatures, velocities) at each location in the manifold at a given engine speed/load.

The acoustic design is a separate bullet because it is ~more or less independent of the aerodynamic design, meaning if I move up or down a pipe diameter I really haven't affected the harmonics at all. For example, a +/- 0.25" change in pipe diameter (~30% change in area) affects sound speed by ~0.1%. The dominant driver in harmonic design is runner length.

So, to answer your question... we start by specing and building a merge collector that we like. If it's a new style/design I will usually run some CFD on the shape to make sure we are happy with the collector's performance. It is my belief that the collector design/quality is THE most important factor in a header design since the collector dictates the exhaust pressure vs. exhaust flow characteristic of the manifold. We place this collector in the car, then work backward to the exhaust ports making sure the fitment is acceptable, and from this, the runner lengths falls out (of course I'm simplifying this process greatly).

A simple hand calc (it's a spreadsheet, actually) then tells us the resonant speed for each of the first N harmonics. If we are happy with this, then we go forward. If not, we start over and try a different routing to get us closer to our desired runner length.

It's an iterative process, that's for sure, but you can limit the number of iterations if you understand what you are aiming for and how your design choices affect your end results.

Going forward... I'm campaigning to log exhaust pressure in a runner on the dyno as a function of time. My plan would then be to rebuild the signal with an FFT and see how close my 'hand calcs' for resonance actually match the measured frequency content :thumbup:

Hope this is helpful,
Lee

Dimman 12-08-2013 07:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee@JDLAutoDesign (Post 1376946)
Good question. If I were more familiar with this forum and knew how to thank someone for their post I would. :lol:

Sorry in advance for the long winded answer. My philosophy is that when you design any sort of manifold (intake or exhaust) you have to balance:
  1. Spacial constraints
  2. Aerodynamic design
  3. Acoustic design
... and the list goes on to include cost, material section, material availability, etc... but I'll skip those and focus on the three I listed since realistically these are the ones that most affect performance.

The first one is simple; if it doesn't fit in the car and/or you can't install it, you don't have a product.

The second one refers to sizing runner diameters, merge collector lengths (which effectively sets the merge angle), bend radii, balancing number of bends per runner, etc. I call it "aerodynamic design" because the choices you make here set the ~steady state flow conditions (pressures, temperatures, velocities) at each location in the manifold at a given engine speed/load.

The acoustic design is a separate bullet because it is ~more or less independent of the aerodynamic design, meaning if I move up or down a pipe diameter I really haven't affected the harmonics at all. For example, a +/- 0.25" change in pipe diameter (~30% change in area) affects sound speed by ~0.1%. The dominant driver in harmonic design is runner length.

So, to answer your question... we start by specing and building a merge collector that we like. If it's a new style/design I will usually run some CFD on the shape to make sure we are happy with the collector's performance. It is my belief that the collector design/quality is THE most important factor in a header design since the collector dictates the exhaust pressure vs. exhaust flow characteristic of the manifold. We place this collector in the car, then work backward to the exhaust ports making sure the fitment is acceptable, and from this, the runner lengths falls out (of course I'm simplifying this process greatly).

A simple hand calc (it's a spreadsheet, actually) then tells us the resonant speed for each of the first N harmonics. If we are happy with this, then we go forward. If not, we start over and try a different routing to get us closer to our desired runner length.

It's an iterative process, that's for sure, but you can limit the number of iterations if you understand what you are aiming for and how your design choices affect your end results.

Going forward... I'm campaigning to log exhaust pressure in a runner on the dyno as a function of time. My plan would then be to rebuild the signal with an FFT and see how close my 'hand calcs' for resonance actually match the measured frequency content :thumbup:

Hope this is helpful,
Lee
Interesting post.

A couple things to look at:

While diameter doesn't affect acoustic return timing, it does have an effect on scavenging, since the acoustic waves are either positive or negative pressure, and pressure is based on force and area.

Another thing is your CFD. With your testing in another thread, you analyzed a 2-1 merge collector. However you were analyzing steady flow coming from both runners into the collector. Perhaps analyzing different velocities in each runner would give a better idea of how pulsed flow into the collector would act.

My .02$.

Lee@JDLAutoDesign 12-08-2013 07:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dimman (Post 1377070)
Interesting post.

A couple things to look at:

While diameter doesn't affect acoustic return timing, it does have an effect on scavenging, since the acoustic waves are either positive or negative pressure, and pressure is based on force and area.

Another thing is your CFD. With your testing in another thread, you analyzed a 2-1 merge collector. However you were analyzing steady flow coming from both runners into the collector. Perhaps analyzing different velocities in each runner would give a better idea of how pulsed flow into the collector would act.

My .02$.
Good post.

Completely agree on both of your points. These are certainly simplified analyses done with limited time and resources. My day job is aerodynamic design work in a different, more well funded industry so I'll be the first to tell you that the tools I'm using here are ~crude in comparison to the state of the art. With that said, I'm ONLY trying to let the tools I have available guide me in the direction of better or worse; but at the end of the day every piece we produce is dyno'd and/or tracked and that's the final judge of the decisions we've made.

About the CFD... yes, the code as I ran it is certainly missing some amount of deterministic mixing (nevermind the turbulent mixing!) associated with 4 out of phase flow streams merging. The challenge is, even if I could model the time varying flow field I would still have no real way of obtaining good boundary conditions for these models (other than simply ~assuming them, which may or may not be better than my simple, steady model). The good news is, as I'm sure you know, mixing loss in an accelerating flow field is always less penalizing than in a diffusing flow field, so I'm fairly confident that I'm not fooling myself here with the analysis I ran. If we were going the OTHER way and modeling an expansion and I was relying on the CFD to predict separation, than I would be very very nervous :mad0259:

Give me a few days... I'll put together a case with out of phase boundary conditions and see how it looks. It's somewhat labor intensive to set up and run the cases (need to make myself a GUI :thumbup:).

Turdinator - let me track down the final runner lengths and get back to you. :cheers:

RiskyTrousers 12-10-2013 03:48 PM
@Lee@JDLAutoDesign

Any idea when my EL header replacement will ship? I was promised a replacement September/October. It was requested in August. Why so long?

Dimman 12-10-2013 08:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee@JDLAutoDesign (Post 1377127)
Good post.

Completely agree on both of your points. These are certainly simplified analyses done with limited time and resources. My day job is aerodynamic design work in a different, more well funded industry so I'll be the first to tell you that the tools I'm using here are ~crude in comparison to the state of the art. With that said, I'm ONLY trying to let the tools I have available guide me in the direction of better or worse; but at the end of the day every piece we produce is dyno'd and/or tracked and that's the final judge of the decisions we've made.

About the CFD... yes, the code as I ran it is certainly missing some amount of deterministic mixing (nevermind the turbulent mixing!) associated with 4 out of phase flow streams merging. The challenge is, even if I could model the time varying flow field I would still have no real way of obtaining good boundary conditions for these models (other than simply ~assuming them, which may or may not be better than my simple, steady model). The good news is, as I'm sure you know, mixing loss in an accelerating flow field is always less penalizing than in a diffusing flow field, so I'm fairly confident that I'm not fooling myself here with the analysis I ran. If we were going the OTHER way and modeling an expansion and I was relying on the CFD to predict separation, than I would be very very nervous :mad0259:

Give me a few days... I'll put together a case with out of phase boundary conditions and see how it looks. It's somewhat labor intensive to set up and run the cases (need to make myself a GUI :thumbup:).

Turdinator - let me track down the final runner lengths and get back to you. :cheers:
Could you run several steady simulations at different velocities/runner and view them sequentially? Animating them, so to speak.

What exactly can you do with that program, btw?

Lee@JDLAutoDesign 12-10-2013 08:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RiskyTrousers (Post 1381448)
@Lee@JDLAutoDesign

Any idea when my EL header replacement will ship? I was promised a replacement September/October. It was requested in August. Why so long?
I don't handle orders, but I'll look into this and ask Ronnie to contact you ASAP. Thanks for your patience.

Lee@JDLAutoDesign 12-10-2013 09:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dimman (Post 1382022)
Could you run several steady simulations at different velocities/runner and view them sequentially? Animating them, so to speak.

What exactly can you do with that program, btw?
I could do something like that, and what you would end up seeing is something that looks like a pulse jet oscillator. Basically, the flow would always be turning toward the cylinder that was not exhausting, so over time you would see the flow "wave" up and down. I had a certain video in mind to share but I'm not finding it online... will edit this post if I find it.

As to what the code can do... I wrote the initial version of the CFD solver and grid generator when I was in grad school to solve super sonic flow over wedge shape airfoils. I've been expanding the code's capabilities ever since. I'm guessing that most people are not so interested in the technical details of the CFD modeling, so if it's okay with you I can PM you and fill you in so as not to derail this thread. However, if people actually ARE interested, I would be happy to share, so please feel free to chime in.

Turdinator - Here is a quick first order guess for the harmonic layout of this header, based on the average runner length and an assumed exhaust gas temperature. Please understand that this is only an approximation (due to many factors), and you shouldn't expect "discrete" benefits. By that I mean, you shouldn't expect a benefit at exactly 6448.972 RPM... but you might expect a benefit from ~6200-6800. Also, keep in mind that some of the harmonic energy is lost with each shock reflection, so higher order harmonics will provide less of a benefit than low order harmonics. This is another reason I'd like to FFT an exhaust signal, because if the stars align and the data/sampling is good you ~should be able to pick up the variation in strength with each harmonic.

The idea (or hope) here is that the second and third harmonic... from which you should expect noticeable benefits... should provide a pretty nice torque curve based on their placement and spacing. I'm really interested to see how it tests; either way we will learn something :thumbsup:http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/g...ps0de5eb1c.png

Turdinator 12-11-2013 12:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee@JDLAutoDesign (Post 1382159)
Turdinator - Here is a quick first order guess for the harmonic layout of this header, based on the average runner length and an assumed exhaust gas temperature. Please understand that this is only an approximation (due to many factors), and you shouldn't expect "discrete" benefits. By that I mean, you shouldn't expect a benefit at exactly 6448.972 RPM... but you might expect a benefit from ~6200-6800. Also, keep in mind that some of the harmonic energy is lost with each shock reflection, so higher order harmonics will provide less of a benefit than low order harmonics. This is another reason I'd like to FFT an exhaust signal, because if the stars align and the data/sampling is good you ~should be able to pick up the variation in strength with each harmonic.

The idea (or hope) here is that the second and third harmonic... from which you should expect noticeable benefits... should provide a pretty nice torque curve based on their placement and spacing. I'm really interested to see how it tests; either way we will learn something :thumbsup:http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/g...ps0de5eb1c.png
Awesome! I appreciate that there will be some variation between theory and practice so I can't wait to see the dynos.

As an aside (and I can't talk for everybody of course) I much prefer it when people like yourself who clearly know what they're talking about keep the dumbing down to a minimum. Us plebs can always ask questions or do our own research do figure out what you are discussing.
Keep up the good work :thumbup:

JDLAutoDesign 12-11-2013 10:56 PM
Final shots of the V2 EL

http://jdlautodesign.net/wp-content/...86-EL-V2_2.jpg

http://jdlautodesign.net/wp-content/...86-EL-V2_3.jpg

http://jdlautodesign.net/wp-content/...6-EL-V2_11.jpg

http://jdlautodesign.net/wp-content/...T86-EL-V22.jpg

JDLAutoDesign 12-11-2013 10:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RiskyTrousers (Post 1381448)
@Lee@JDLAutoDesign

Any idea when my EL header replacement will ship? I was promised a replacement September/October. It was requested in August. Why so long?
Coater will have an exact date for completion of your header tomorrow :thumbsup:

slava 12-11-2013 11:10 PM
Dyno dyno dyno!

xDanger_208x 12-11-2013 11:12 PM
Hurry and send mine and I'll get it on the rollers asap! ;-)

JDLAutoDesign 12-12-2013 11:42 AM
We have 4 going out so im sure we will have some dynos really soon

xDanger_208x 12-13-2013 09:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDLAutoDesign (Post 1385730)
We have 4 going out so im sure we will have some dynos really soon
Does one of those have an overpipe/catted front pipe going with it... all Vband??? ;-)

xDanger_208x 12-24-2013 09:23 PM
Any idea of completion time? I've sent 2 e-mails over the past 2 weeks.. no response.

xDanger_208x 01-09-2014 08:06 PM
I'm getting quite concerned at the lack of response from your company. On this forum.. and especially emails.

JDLAutoDesign 01-09-2014 09:31 PM
Hey guys sorry we were closed for the holidays and as soon as we got back in we got to work on FT orders. Over Pipes & Front Pipes are built for the combos on order. 15 FT86 UEL/EL collectors are build and are being ported. Most are ready for assembly and welding including 1 Vband EL header OVP & FP Combo ( Shane :D ). These will start shipping by the middle as next week as they get completed. Tracking will be emailed to each of you as it goes.

2 warranty headers are at the coaters and we have been hounding him to get them asap as we have patient customers


Im still going through emails and voicemails from our break so bear with me as we get to them. You will also be pleased to here we also have a 3rd welder staring here on the 20th so that will eliminate any more wait time once we get these 15 taken care of. Sorry for the lack of posts, ive been away from the comp doing a million things here but you all are our main priority.

Ronnie

http://jdlautodesign.net/wp-content/...ollectors-.jpg

xDanger_208x 01-09-2014 09:37 PM
Excellent! Thanks so much for the response. Getting anxious as hell!


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:45 AM.
Page 1 of 6 1 2345 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2026 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.


Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.