Extreme Turbo Systems - 5" Intercooler (PICS) Do you dare?
Jul 12, 2007, 05:41 PM
#6
Evolved Member
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 1,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^^^^^^ ahahaha refridgerator!!!!! That guy is right tho, that thing is MASSIVE!!!! ETS, you guys should call it the "Sub-Zero" intercooler. Good work!!
Trending Topics
Jul 12, 2007, 10:10 PM
#13
As intercoolers get thicker, they have substantially diminishing increases in cooling capacity over their thinner family members. A 5" (air to air) intercooler is not 40% better than a 3" intercooler, for example, all other things being equal, nor does thickness make up for lack of increased frontal area.
Corky Bell notes that the second half of any core (thickness) does only 1/4 of the work of cooling the charge air. Adding thickness to the core does improve efficiency, but the gains are less and less as the core gets thicker, and the downside is that it becomes harder to get the air to pass through the core. Since the same (or lesser) volume of (cooling) air passes through the core, the air first contacts and transfers heat out of the front of the intercooler, and thus is hotter by the time it reaches the back half of the intercooler's thickness, and has less (or no) capacity to absorb out additional heat from the intercooler. It also moves more slowly through the core due to the increased thickness, compared to a 3" or 3.5" thick core. Add to the complications that the air available to the radiator is hotter and there is less volume, and your radiator does less at cooling the engine as well.
Even if you increase the front surface area, rather than the thickness, there are limitations to improving heat transfer from the compressed air in the system. While it is true that the greater the heat transfer area, the more efficient the intercooler at removing heat (all other things being equal), twice the area does not mean double the efficiency. A 10% increase in core heat transfer area will net about 10% of the amount you did not get out the first time. Thus, if the original size was 70% efficient, and you increase the heat transfer area by 10%, the efficiency would increase by 10% of 30%, or a net of 3%, for a overall efficiency of 73%. Thus, each additional increase becomes less and less effective in increasing overall efficiency. This is an example of diminishing returns.
I don't know at what point in thickness an intercooler no longer increases in heat transfer capacity at all, but as Corky Bell summarizes in Maximum Boost "When viewing intercooler designs, regard thick core layouts as less than well thought out."
Corky Bell notes that the second half of any core (thickness) does only 1/4 of the work of cooling the charge air. Adding thickness to the core does improve efficiency, but the gains are less and less as the core gets thicker, and the downside is that it becomes harder to get the air to pass through the core. Since the same (or lesser) volume of (cooling) air passes through the core, the air first contacts and transfers heat out of the front of the intercooler, and thus is hotter by the time it reaches the back half of the intercooler's thickness, and has less (or no) capacity to absorb out additional heat from the intercooler. It also moves more slowly through the core due to the increased thickness, compared to a 3" or 3.5" thick core. Add to the complications that the air available to the radiator is hotter and there is less volume, and your radiator does less at cooling the engine as well.
Even if you increase the front surface area, rather than the thickness, there are limitations to improving heat transfer from the compressed air in the system. While it is true that the greater the heat transfer area, the more efficient the intercooler at removing heat (all other things being equal), twice the area does not mean double the efficiency. A 10% increase in core heat transfer area will net about 10% of the amount you did not get out the first time. Thus, if the original size was 70% efficient, and you increase the heat transfer area by 10%, the efficiency would increase by 10% of 30%, or a net of 3%, for a overall efficiency of 73%. Thus, each additional increase becomes less and less effective in increasing overall efficiency. This is an example of diminishing returns.
I don't know at what point in thickness an intercooler no longer increases in heat transfer capacity at all, but as Corky Bell summarizes in Maximum Boost "When viewing intercooler designs, regard thick core layouts as less than well thought out."
Last edited by CO_VR4; Jul 12, 2007 at 10:12 PM.
Jul 12, 2007, 10:20 PM
#14
Evolving Member
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFL
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've seen that book proven wrong so many times, its just a little out dated on certin subject matter. I would like to see a current edition with todays technology involved in Corky's thought process. Just my 2 cents.
