1. 3/16/2016 Vanderbilt Motorsports Intake and Exhaust Project 1 Vanderbilt Motorsports Intake/Exhaust Team January 17, 2008 Presentation Kristina Kitko Mark Melasky Perry Peterson Tim Wranovix

2. 3/16/2016 Vanderbilt Motorsports Intake and Exhaust Project2 Introduction Literature Reviews Outline of System Model Parameter Options –Advantages and Disadvantages Rapid Prototyping Wind Tunnel Venturi Testing

3. 3/16/2016 Vanderbilt Motorsports Intake and Exhaust Project3 System Modeling Options Computational Fluid Dynamic Modeling –Fluent Software model construction and analysis 1-Dimensional Analytical Flow Modeling –‘hand-drawn’ solution to theoretical equations with simplifying assumptions Dynamometer Testing of Prototypes –Prototype construction and optimization based on torque curve output

4. 3/16/2016Vanderbilt Motorsports Intake and Exhaust Project4 System Option 1: Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Advantages: –3-Dimensional System Model –Would provide large amounts of quantitative data –Only final product would be constructed and tested –Allows for greater system complexity Disadvantages: –Idealized results may not perform as computed –Creating each model is a time intensive process –Would leave less time to fabricate the new system –Assumptions must be made to make model converge

5. 3/16/2016Vanderbilt Motorsports Intake and Exhaust Project5 System Option 2: 1-Dimensional Analytical Model Advantages: –Based upon application of acoustic theory and engine theory –Less time intensive than 3-D modeling –Results are obtained directly in a short time span –Could be supported by CFD modeling Disadvantages: –Would require many assumptions for calculations –Modifying 1 parameter would be time intensive –No qualitative model to support results –Solution is at one location within the system

6. 3/16/2016Vanderbilt Motorsports Intake and Exhaust Project6 System Option 3: Dynamometer Testing of Prototypes Advantages: –Different models would be immediately fabricated –Results would be based upon comparisons of a torque curve (readily visualized) –No time intensive modeling required Disadvantages: –No dynamometer exists on Vanderbilt’s campus –No strict quantitative framework for results –Does not address intake geometry directly

7. 3/16/2016 Vanderbilt Motorsports Intake and Exhaust Project7 System Construction Rapid Prototyping –Donated by Emerson Process Management – Daniel Measurement and Control –10”x10”x10” maximum volume Issues to be considered –Fuel Resistivity & Leakage Potential Coatings –Heating –Wall Thickness –Wind Force –Dynamic Pressure –Ease of Machining

8. 3/16/2016Vanderbilt Motorsports Intake and Exhaust Project8 Current Restrictor Design

9. 3/16/2016Vanderbilt Motorsports Intake and Exhaust Project9 Venturi Analysis High RPM Range Length Low RPM Range Length 15.2 mm to 24.5mm 3.5° lolo lili 50.4 mm - 69 mm 20 mm 3.5°

10. Venturi Analysis Matlab code in progress using Runge-Kutta Equation approximation 3/16/2016 Vanderbilt Motorsports Intake and Exhaust Project10

11. 3/16/2016 Vanderbilt Motorsports Intake and Exhaust Project11 Venturi Design Testing Vanderbilt Wind Tunnel –Use inlet air speed of 40 MPH (17.88 m/s) to simulate average running conditions Construct different venturi (restrictor) models out of aluminum sheets –Variable length –Variable diffuser angle Measure the outlet air pressure through each configuration –Optimizing for maximum outlet pressure

12. 3/16/2016 Vanderbilt Motorsports Intake and Exhaust Project12 Next Steps Venturi prototype construction and testing –Results next week –Mechanical Model of new Venturi Decision on intake manifold modeling methodology –Consultation with project sponsor –In-depth analysis of design parameters –Initial model