xxChrisxx wrote:autogyro wrote:I thought you were refering to an accumulated raft of data that allowed computer simulation of exhaust gas dynamics for the design and manufacture of tuned exhaust systems?
Mathematical models don't use anything but governing equations that you can program in. They require no 'data' to build.
Just like a suspension system can be modelled by a mass-spring-damper system. It doesn't matter what suspension type you are using they all obey the same laws of physics.
This is exactly the same for air flow.
[quote="autogyro"]
But it's not just air flow. There's a lot more going on inside there. I'm reminded of the engine designer who was talking about the intake side, thought they had good sims and knew what was going on, then discovered that in reality fuel was being injected into 1 intake, being spit out, and injested and used by another. This was a guy with decades of experience, and he seemed genuinely surprised.
As to why Titanium might be used more on bikes than cars, I'd point out that in most cases bike motors and chassis tend to be finished to a higher level than cars. They're on display. The public seems to prefer the looks of Ti over Inconel. Add to that the lower heat rejection of a bike motor, for various reasons (much greater drivability needed, requirement to not cook the rider), and the normally greater cooling available (most bike exausts are at least partially in free stream) and it seems to be a done deal.
On the straight manifold idea, when studying for a vessel engineering license the book said straight vs. tuned manifold were exactly equal in overall efficiency. You trade a general reduction in efficiency across the board for a much bigger increase in efficieny at a couple of specific engine speeds.
Not that you can read too much into that, I'm talking about V16 2 stroke deisels running at max. speeds I'm pretty sure an F1 engine can't even idle at.