FE Power Cylinder Heads

[cammerfe]

Some years ago I had an extended discussion with Mose Nowland regarding the work that was done on TP heads and the flow characteristics in the area where the pushrod tube goes through.

The upshot, boiled down, was that there wasn't significant difference unless the tube was, itself, a restriction to flow. Shaping the runner so that there was no 'bottleneck' at that point got everything there was to get. I called him in the first place to find out what improvement there might be in 'shaping' the tube to make it oval, or pear-shaped, or some sort of airfoil. They weren't able to find any improvement by any shape changes.

This was at the time Brother Lon and I were setting up to use Dove TPs with Jim's 'Type 2' exhaust. The exhaust runners were raised, spaced-out, and re-shaped. I'd have to do some digging to find the numbers now, but they were a definite improvement.

KS

[JERICOGTX]

All this speculation will be debunked when Jay's engine makes over 1000 hp on pump gas.  Joe-JDC

That's pretty optimistic LOL!  I'd be happy with 900 HP for the unported, raised exhaust heads.  What I'm really interested in is the comparison between my ported Edelbrock heads, my CNC ported Blue Thunder heads, and my unported FE Power heads.  That will be an interesting and telling comparison...

Are you going to run the MULE with the E heads and BT heads before your heads?

[jayb]

That's the plan...

[JERICOGTX]

Let me know if you need a extra set of hands to turn wrenches for the swap.

[Royce]

Me first Me first!!! LOL

[fekbmax]

Jay,
Just curious if you thought about making or 3D printing any mock up (dummy) heads for engine mock up and header fab in chassis? 

[fryedaddy]

what im wandering is with the new heads,blocks, power adders etc. could the fe be a street outlaw caliper engine like bbc,sbc,hemi,etc?

[CaptCobrajet]

Wow, 1000 hp on pump gas........that would be a serious piece.  Not sure where to find an honest 1000 hp on pump gas NA from any platform.  That is a huge number.  Takes about 15:1 for my junk heads to make 1000 hp NA.

If the Jay heads do that on pump gas, it will be time to get them approved for Pro Stock.

[Drew Pojedinec]

Some years ago I had an extended discussion with Mose Nowland regarding the work that was done on TP heads and the flow characteristics in the area where the pushrod tube goes through.

The upshot, boiled down, was that there wasn't significant difference unless the tube was, itself, a restriction to flow. Shaping the runner so that there was no 'bottleneck' at that point got everything there was to get. I called him in the first place to find out what improvement there might be in 'shaping' the tube to make it oval, or pear-shaped, or some sort of airfoil. They weren't able to find any improvement by any shape changes.

This was at the time Brother Lon and I were setting up to use Dove TPs with Jim's 'Type 2' exhaust. The exhaust runners were raised, spaced-out, and re-shaped. I'd have to do some digging to find the numbers now, but they were a definite improvement.

KS

I wonder tho, even if quantity is not disturbed, does it disrupt the quality of airflow?

[GerryP]

Some shapes are aerodynamically inert.  An example:  The radar disc on an AWACS plane neither lifts or drags.  I know some builders spent a lot of time giving the pushrod tube a teardrop or airfoil shape.  That didn't help.  You can spend a lot of time perfecting the shape of something but you can't make it disappear.  The pushrod tube in a TP still plays into the area of the port even if it doesn't cause turbulence in the port.

[cjshaker]

There's tons of testing to prove that any added object will create drag and induce turbulence, and that shape plays a big role in it. An airfoil is much more efficient than a round tube..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbjB2gR32L4
On that AWACS plane, you can bet there were millions of dollars spent on shape, design and perfect location to minimize any effect on the planes flying characteristics.

But in an intake port, I have a guess that the reversion pulses have a way of negating that effect. Maybe even eliminating it. I'm sure it plays a role in it, either way.

[plovett]

Some shapes are aerodynamically inert.  An example:  The radar disc on an AWACS plane neither lifts or drags.   

That makes no physical sense.  Where did you get that idea?  You could have neutral lift at some specific speed under certain specific conditions, but zero drag?  That is simply ridiculous.  Where did that idea come from?

paulie

[WConley]

Some shapes are aerodynamically inert.  An example:  The radar disc on an AWACS plane neither lifts or drags.   

That makes no physical sense.  Where did you get that idea?  You could have neutral lift at some specific speed under certain specific conditions, but zero drag?  That is simply ridiculous.  Where did that idea come from?

paulie

Actually the AWACS radome does create extra drag, but the shape creates enough added lift so that the overall lift/drag ratio is not adversely impacted. 

In some cases adding things (drag) can even increase overall efficiency.  Take the winglets that have sprouted on nearly all commercial aircraft.  They add drag, but the energy recouped from the wingtip vortices more than makes up for it!

[GerryP]

...
That makes no physical sense.  Where did you get that idea?  You could have neutral lift at some specific speed under certain specific conditions, but zero drag?  That is simply ridiculous.  Where did that idea come from?

paulie

In a past life, I had the opportunity to spend a week or so with the engineers and scientists at Wright Laboratories at Wright Patterson AFB, Ohio.  Aerodynamics and Computational Fluid Dynamics are so far away from my knowledge center –as you have observed- that I might not correctly describe things.  But anyway, I had a good discussion with an aerodynamics engineer specifically about cutting edge theory.  That turned to the AWACS disc.  I was curious how such a large appendage affected the performance of the aircraft.  He told me more or less what WConley wrote.  The engineer specifically said the disc is aerodynamically inert as far as the plane’s performance is concerned.  He used those words.  He said the lift and drag balanced out, again, like WConley wrote.  So, maybe he was dumbing it down for me so that a layman would understand the theory.  I did understand him and acknowledge here the use of the word “inert” isn’t scientifically suitable in this context and may upset some.

[Joe-JDC]

When I made the statement about Jay's heads, it was a bit "tongue in cheek" to stop the nit picking about the heads fitting shock tower cars and him coming up with new ideas for more options.  He has done a massive undertaking with this project, and should not be nit-picked to death about the little things at this time.  His heads are for serious folks who want to make massive amounts of horsepower without killing the parts to get it.  I just wish I had a vehicle that could use them, for I have a 530 CI FE shortblock that would be ideal for them.  Joe-JDC