Author Topic: April 17, 2011 - The Road to Drag Week 2011  (Read 10965 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7413
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
April 17, 2011 - The Road to Drag Week 2011
« on: April 17, 2011, 10:45:43 PM »
I got a lot of work done on the intake manifold and the car this week.  I went off in a different direction again on the intake manifold, by going to a fully machined runner rather than trying to cut and weld aluminum tubing or forming runner halves and welding them together.  This kept the CNC machine busy most of the week, allowing me a little extra time to get back to finishing the chassis work on the car.

Last week at my local machine shop my friend Bryan there showed me some photos of the latest sheet metal intakes for big block Chevrolet engines, and pointed out that the runners were actually CNC machined, rather than formed and welded out of sheet metal.  Earlier this week I got to thinking about that, and realized it would offer a couple advantages for my project.  First, rather than trying to weld thin aluminum sheet metal tubes, or build a forming tool, form a bunch of half runners, then cut and weld them together, I could just buy some thick wall aluminum tubing, write a CNC program, and let the machine do the work.  Second, I could design the runners so that the were thicker where they needed to be welded to the manifold flanges, making the welding easier.  Third, there wouldn't be any welding required on the runners themselves. 

By Tuesday I had myself convinced that this would be worth a try, so I ordered an 8 1/2" long 1" end mill from Enco, and found some 3.375" diameter 3/4" wall aluminum tubing down at Discount Steel and Aluminum to try out the idea.  I formulated a machining plan for making the parts, and started writing the CNC program on Tuesday night.  Thursday the long end mill arrived, so I got started doing the actual machine work.  I had purchased an 8" length of the aluminum tube, so I squared off the ends and turned it down to an overall length of 7.2", which is what my drawing of the manifold called for.  I also turned down the outside of the tube by a few thousandths, in order to give it a nice appearance.  I figured that the last two or three cuts on the outside of the tube would result in a diameter slightly larger than 3.375", so I wanted the uncut portion of the tube to still have a machined appearance.

I had written the CNC program in two parts, one for the inside of the runner and one for the outside.  Because of the very long end mill, I had written the programs to cut very slowly, to minimize deflection issues at the end of the mill.  I set up my low profile vise on the CNC table to give myself as much Z axis room as possible, clamped the tube in the vise with some room underneath so the chips would fall through the center hole, centered the coordinates on the middle of the tube, and started the inside runner program.

First pass around the tube, though, the cutter knocked the tube out of the vice.  Getting the tube fixtured properly turned out to be the most difficult part of the entire process.  I was trying to clamp the round tube in the vise with enough force to keep it stable, but after a few tries I concluded that this wasn't going to work.  I ended up taking the tube out of the CNC machine and putting it on my Bridgeport to machine a couple of flats on either side.  This solved the clamping problem, and finally on Thursday night I got the inside runner program working.  Here's a couple of photos of the work on the first tube.  First the program cuts the outside of the top of the runner, where it has to fit inside the plenum plates.  Then it moves to the inside of the runner, and starts with an elongated circular cut, slowly reducing the elongation until finally at the bottom of the runner the cut is perfectly circular, to match up with the circular port in the head.







Late on Thursday night the program finished, and it really looked good inside.  The steps inside were only .015" wide, so I can easily take a cartridge roll and smooth them out after the manifold has been welded up.  Friday night I worked on the outside of the runner.  In order to fixture the partially completed runner, I cut an elongated circular piece out of 1/2" thick aluminum, that just fit into the hole in the top of the runner.  I used this piece as a support for the thin part of the tube, and clamped the thin part of the tube in the vice using this support.  Seemed to work pretty well; the outside runner program ran without a hitch.  Here's a picture of the outside of the runner being cut on the CNC:



Late Friday night the outside runner program finished.  I was really pleased with the finished runner:





Now that I knew I could build these things, I decided to proceed with them for the intake manifold.  Saturday morning I was back down buying enough of the aluminum tubing to make the remaining 7 runners.  After I got home, I started by cutting the aluminum tube up into the required lengths and doing the manual machining operations.  Each piece took about 20 minutes to cut in my bandsaw, then it had to be turned on the lathe, flats had to be milled in the sides, and then it could be mounted in the CNC to run the runner programs.  In order to make best use of my time I did the steps in sequence, so that once the first tube was cut, I started the bandsaw on the second and then began the lathe work on the first tube.  Ditto after the second tube was cut, but this time I added the flat milling operation on the Bridgeport.  Pretty soon I had all four of the machines running at once, as I tried to turn out the tubes as quickly as possible.  It felt like a real machine shop in there!  In the end it only took me about three hours to get all the work done.  Here's some photos of the tubes being turned on the lathe, and the flat being cut on the Bridgeport:





I was now constrained by the time required for the runner programs on the CNC machine.  This meant that I could do other work on the car, while the CNC machine hummed away happily doing the inside runner program on all the aluminum tubes.  I only had to take ten minutes every three hours or so to pull the finished tube off the CNC, and set up the next one.  While this was going on, I decided to work on getting the roll cage completed.  This involved installing the swing out side bars on the cage, including the hinges and locating pins, plus the window net mounting brackets and the seat belt, shoulder harness and submarine strap mounting tabs. 

With no family activities scheduled until Sunday evening, I stayed out in the shop late, working on getting the cage finished up, while the CNC machine whirred away.  I finished the cage work just as the fourth runner finished at 1:30 AM.  Here's a photo of the intake manifold jig with some of the un-CNC'd tubes and some of the tubes with the inside runner program already run.  I went to bed with a pretty good feeling of accomplishment for the day's work.



Sunday I slept in late, and then go out to the shop by around 10:00 AM to keep going on the runners.  After getting the first one set up on the machine, I had to spend some time finishing my tax return, so that kept me busy until mid afternoon.  With that rather unpleasant task out of the way, I decided to finish the chassis work on the car, which amounted to attaching the trailer hitch to the back of the 2X3 frame and adding some supports.  The trailer hitch not only mounts the trailer ball, but it also mounts the parachute, so I cut it into the 2X3 tube at the back of the car, welded it in place, then added some 1" round chrome moly tubing to tie the receiver into the 2X3 back half kit frame rails that run from the back to the center of the car.  I finished around 6:00, and left for dinner with my family while the seventh tube was finishing up on the CNC.  Here's a couple of pictures of the car, showing the side bars and window net mount, and the trailer hitch receiver with the parachute mount installed:





I now have seven of the eight tubes machined for the inside of the runner, and should be able to get the last one finished up tomorrow night.  Then I can get the outside of the runners machined this week.  I have Good Friday off from work, so with luck I will be finished with the runners late Friday, or else Saturday morning.  Next weekend looks like another good one for shop time, so on Friday I'll try to get the headers finish welded so I can send them off for coating the following week, and also work on getting the new door hinges and new hood hinges installed.  I have changed the design of the intake somewhat again, and this will require some new plenum plates, so those will have to get done on the CNC machine next weekend as well.  But I expect that by Sunday I'll be, FINALLY, striking an arc on the intake.  I'll post another update next Sunday night.
Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC

   

WConley

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1164
  • No longer walking funny!
    • View Profile
Re: April 17, 2011 - The Road to Drag Week 2011
« Reply #1 on: April 18, 2011, 01:00:22 PM »
Woot!  Looking good Jay.  That intake is going to be very cool.

Glad you're making progress on the car at the same time too.

I've finished my new spin test cell.  It's very stealthy:



Then you open the first door and things start to look unusual:



The second door reveals the insulated room:



Here's a better view inside the cell (with the machine fitted, before I put in the acoustical tile):



Now the acoustical tile and thick rubber floor are in:




I remembered your advice a while back about building test cells.  Well, I went one step further and independently framed the room slightly spaced away from the existing structure.  Everything is double insulated with thick foam - about 18 inches total with the independent double doors to seal it off. 

The results are amazing!  I ran the machine at 8,700 rpm and the noise reduction is about 35 dB.  You can hardly tell the machine is running when you're outside the building.  Inside, you can have a quiet normal conversation with only a dull drone to remind you of what's happening.

The machine looks big in there, but I'm redesigning the frame to be half its current size.  It will be designed to mount a block directly at about half the current height as well.  That will leave plenty of room to walk around in there with the machine.  Testing will be done with the operator outside the cell, with a webcam and controls outside to do everything.
A careful study of failure will yield the ingredients for success.

ToddK

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
    • View Profile
Re: April 17, 2011 - The Road to Drag Week 2011
« Reply #2 on: April 18, 2011, 06:53:26 PM »
Hi Jay,

Keep up the great progress. I love the work you are doing, especially with the manifold. I have a question regarding the manifold, what is the transition angle like going from the manifold going into the head? Is it a straight shot down to the port, or is there much of a bend? I'm asking because I am considering having a manifold made to use on my BT HR head race motor, but the manifold builder is concerned about the transition angle between the port and manifold, as well as the height of the port floor and whether there is enough room for a manifold floor under the port. I know you are using SOHC heads, but was wondering if you encountered any problems along these lines?

jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7413
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
Re: April 17, 2011 - The Road to Drag Week 2011
« Reply #3 on: April 18, 2011, 08:29:57 PM »

I've finished my new spin test cell.  It's very stealthy

I remembered your advice a while back about building test cells.  Well, I went one step further and independently framed the room slightly spaced away from the existing structure.  Everything is double insulated with thick foam - about 18 inches total with the independent double doors to seal it off. 

The results are amazing!  I ran the machine at 8,700 rpm and the noise reduction is about 35 dB.  You can hardly tell the machine is running when you're outside the building.  Inside, you can have a quiet normal conversation with only a dull drone to remind you of what's happening.

The machine looks big in there, but I'm redesigning the frame to be half its current size.  It will be designed to mount a block directly at about half the current height as well.  That will leave plenty of room to walk around in there with the machine.  Testing will be done with the operator outside the cell, with a webcam and controls outside to do everything.

Geez Bill, from the outside that thing looks like my neighbor's spa LOL!  Very nice, and obviously a great improvement in operator livability during the testing process.  Between the spintron and the CNC machine, you will have plenty to do...
Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC

   

jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7413
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
Re: April 17, 2011 - The Road to Drag Week 2011
« Reply #4 on: April 18, 2011, 08:37:29 PM »
Hi Jay,

Keep up the great progress. I love the work you are doing, especially with the manifold. I have a question regarding the manifold, what is the transition angle like going from the manifold going into the head? Is it a straight shot down to the port, or is there much of a bend? I'm asking because I am considering having a manifold made to use on my BT HR head race motor, but the manifold builder is concerned about the transition angle between the port and manifold, as well as the height of the port floor and whether there is enough room for a manifold floor under the port. I know you are using SOHC heads, but was wondering if you encountered any problems along these lines?

It is a straight shot down to the port, even though the runner is at an angle to the intake flange.  The ports on these heads are raised about 3/8", and the porting job makes them come out of the head at an upward angle, compared to the head flange.  The intake runner just lines up with that angle.

I considered during the design phase actually making the runner angle even more extreme.  If I did that, I wouldn't have to worry about extending the runner length inside the plenum; I could just make the runners as long as I wanted, and adjust the angle at the head to fit.  But I was advised by a few people to avoid this, for good reason I think.  You probably don't want the air/fuel charge to come out of the manifold runner and  hit the floor of the intake port.  Not good for flow, or for a homogenous (sp?) air/fuel mixture.  So I think your manifold builder is wise to be concerned about this.  That angle is just one of the constraints that you have to deal with when designing one of these intakes.  Everything is a tradeoff, and there are often no perfect solutions...
Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC

   

Qikbbstang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 892
    • View Profile
Re: April 17, 2011 - The Road to Drag Week 2011
« Reply #5 on: April 19, 2011, 09:26:17 AM »
Nothing like Race Parts that also serve as artwork, another  "Masterpiece".. Jay just wondering with a high horsepower engine aka the FORD GT Motor using two injectors per cylinder and it's I guess you could say moderate displacement at least compared to your way larger cube SOHC, have you any thoughts of using twin injectors per cyl. to better match the wide fuel quantity demands from idle to WOT or will a single large injector be fine especially since it's not exactly a EPA Smog Motor/complex in fuel mgt?

cammerfe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1660
    • View Profile
Re: April 17, 2011 - The Road to Drag Week 2011
« Reply #6 on: April 19, 2011, 12:42:06 PM »
The phrase keeps on resounding in my brain---'Neater than spats on a duck'. I'm in awe of your efforts.

It also seems that the only tool you need, to have a complete shop, is a cracked veeblefeetzer fixer. I'll keep my eyes open for a good used one for you!

KS
« Last Edit: April 19, 2011, 03:00:35 PM by cammerfe »

Mario428

  • Guest
Re: April 17, 2011 - The Road to Drag Week 2011
« Reply #7 on: April 19, 2011, 07:14:33 PM »
Nice work on the runners Jay, gotta love CNC. LOL
Couple of thoughts for the next time, long ball nose would have cut well on ID & OD especially since you started with tube, would have cut down on the hand blending. I know about tooling budgets too though.
A thought for holding the runners, cut the tubing approx 1.5 long, clamp a lathe chuck to the table and hold them that way, very rigid and repeatable.

jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7413
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
Re: April 17, 2011 - The Road to Drag Week 2011
« Reply #8 on: April 19, 2011, 08:03:56 PM »
Nothing like Race Parts that also serve as artwork, another  "Masterpiece".. Jay just wondering with a high horsepower engine aka the FORD GT Motor using two injectors per cylinder and it's I guess you could say moderate displacement at least compared to your way larger cube SOHC, have you any thoughts of using twin injectors per cyl. to better match the wide fuel quantity demands from idle to WOT or will a single large injector be fine especially since it's not exactly a EPA Smog Motor/complex in fuel mgt?

BB, you should check out Injector Dynamics fuel injectors.  They are a modern injector that maintains a linear fuel flow profile almost down to zero flow.  You don't end up with the poor low flow characteristics of a lot of the older fuel injectors, where they need to be up at 5% or more of their rated flow before they provide a linear flow characteristic.  The Injector Dynamics injectors I have are nearly 200 lb/hour injectors, and the engine idles really smoothly with them, and responds cleanly to very small increases in the fuel map at the very low flow rates.  With those injectors, there is really no reason to go the dual injector route.

Of course, if I was trying to satisfy the EPA requirements, it may be that dual injectors would be better.  Or if I was trying to satisfy the beancounters at the auto company, two cheap injectors per cylinder may be better than one expensive one.  I have the luxury of not having to deal with that stuff  ;D
Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC

   

jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7413
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
Re: April 17, 2011 - The Road to Drag Week 2011
« Reply #9 on: April 19, 2011, 08:05:40 PM »
The phrase keeps on resounding in my brain---'Neater than spats on a duck'.

You know, Ken, my kids have a duck.  Hmmmm....
Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC

   

jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7413
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
Re: April 17, 2011 - The Road to Drag Week 2011
« Reply #10 on: April 19, 2011, 08:12:34 PM »
Nice work on the runners Jay, gotta love CNC. LOL
Couple of thoughts for the next time, long ball nose would have cut well on ID & OD especially since you started with tube, would have cut down on the hand blending. I know about tooling budgets too though.
A thought for holding the runners, cut the tubing approx 1.5 long, clamp a lathe chuck to the table and hold them that way, very rigid and repeatable.


A ball mill!  Why didn't I think of that?  I'm sure you are correct; that would have made the blending easier.  The photo I saw of the sheet metal intake had the same steps in it that my runners do, so I was thinking along those lines when I purchased the end mill that I used.  But a ball mill would have definitely been better.  Oh well, live and learn...

Good idea on the lathe chuck too; I especially like that idea because I wouldn't have to center the tube every time a new one is clamped into place, if I used a chuck.  It would have also given me more Z clearance over the tube, and held the tube much more securely than I am holding them now.  I'm running the outside profile of one of the tubes while I am typing, and the vibration from the machine is notable.  The one downside, though, is the extra tube length required to use the lathe chuck.  The material turned out to be really expensive, along the lines of $40 for every 8" section that the runners are made out of.  According to the people at the place where I got the material, Alcoa has just raised all their prices, so even though it was expensive before, it is even more expensive now.  An extra 2" per tube would have made them $50 per tube, not $40.  Yikes!
Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC

   

Mario428

  • Guest
Re: April 17, 2011 - The Road to Drag Week 2011
« Reply #11 on: April 20, 2011, 04:51:47 AM »
Nothing like Race Parts that also serve as artwork, another  "Masterpiece".. Jay just wondering with a high horsepower engine aka the FORD GT Motor using two injectors per cylinder and it's I guess you could say moderate displacement at least compared to your way larger cube SOHC, have you any thoughts of using twin injectors per cyl. to better match the wide fuel quantity demands from idle to WOT or will a single large injector be fine especially since it's not exactly a EPA Smog Motor/complex in fuel mgt?

BB, you should check out Injector Dynamics fuel injectors.  They are a modern injector that maintains a linear fuel flow profile almost down to zero flow.  You don't end up with the poor low flow characteristics of a lot of the older fuel injectors, where they need to be up at 5% or more of their rated flow before they provide a linear flow characteristic.  The Injector Dynamics injectors I have are nearly 200 lb/hour injectors, and the engine idles really smoothly with them, and responds cleanly to very small increases in the fuel map at the very low flow rates.  With those injectors, there is really no reason to go the dual injector route.

Of course, if I was trying to satisfy the EPA requirements, it may be that dual injectors would be better.  Or if I was trying to satisfy the beancounters at the auto company, two cheap injectors per cylinder may be better than one expensive one.  I have the luxury of not having to deal with that stuff  ;D

I saw a set of those on the weekend, very small for the flow capacity. The shop that does my machine work (yes the "tractor" engine is machined) builds intakes for 4 cyl Comp Elim racers. Looked at an intake for a Ford 4 cyl engine with the latest Pro Stock head.  It only had one injector per cyl though they do not worry too much about a good idle. LOL