PTS Flowbench Forum

Jason,

Can you post some pictures of this thing,

Have you put one of the these heads on any other bench to compare your results?

Interesting stuff.

Rick

Oh, And who is Dr. Air?

I'll try to get some pics up in a few days, although the thing is pretty ugly, like i said i literally built it out of stuff i had lying around so i could try it out. Im glad too, there is definately a learning curve (which is probably not close to finished yet). The new one i'm building now will hopefully look and function a little more respectfully.

No, i have not had the heads on another flowbench, although when i get done w/new i would like to try the PAP's to get an idea. This is most of the reason i posted the results, if someone has an idea if the numbers are out in the stratosphere or not they could give me a heads up. I know all flowbenches read different for various reasons but a general "ballpark" would be okay for me.

DR air is a guy Vizard is friends with named Roger Helgesen(sp?) if you read his articles on floating benches or his books you will see his name. he is also i believe the mentour of Bryce Mulvey that runs DR J,s porting . I have never talked to Vizard or Helgesen just read DV's books and articles, they speak to me better than most. J

Rick,
after reading some of the stuff you have posted about this type of bench i can see that you are largely skeptical so i am not sure if posting ugly pics is the best way to go and get made fun of

The basic bit is that if you saw DV's first published diagram of a vac sucking on the bottom of a cylinder and mano hooked to the spark plug hole you are right, you cannot do that and get cfm. At that point he was writing about what he did first time as a kid. later you read but are not shown that the device should have a plenum and that the pressure tap should be in the plenum to negate velocity gain on the mano. also the plate is first flowed on the 5" hole in the top of the bench with no bore adapt, also because of false velocity gains.

The bit about CFM comes (and im sure you already know this) from converting cfm at one depression to cfm at another. as i understand it this is fairly valid as long as the port is still pretty turbulant? The setup i have is still pulling over 10" at 315 converted cfm. I would think that, while not as good as a higher dep it should still be relevent?

Also my bits and pieces bench has a shortcoming that i know about, it sits on a bench top so the vac comes in the side not the bottom. I was able to largely negate the effects of this by fitting a extension pipe inside the plenum near the floor and trying different lengths until i could put the checking plate on the top with the largest orifice open and turn it in a circle (the orifice is not in the center) with very little change in the manometer reading

Just some notes on how i fixed stuff as i know this type is controversial.
Jason.

Jason,

I think you read into me wrong, I am trying to give support to a comparator design that Mr. V barrowed from another author. I think there is merit in it for those trying to learn and hold to some $ budget. I do not discredit this concept but I also do not call it a flow bench as it uses no standards; it is a comparator and all data is extrapolated and is only good to compare against like data on the same devise. Also you can find great discussion on viably comparing good data tested at 10 extrapolated to 28, it is my opinion and mine only that if you did not test at 28 it is only a concept. Yes you can get an orifice plate to show you it works but take a port that has an issue like flow that digresses with lift, it is sure to not flow at 28 what it flows at 10 extrapolated to 28.

You should not be ashamed of your work as there are many benches on this forum that were made from scrap wood, old desks, and at one time I threatened Bruce I was going to build one out of cardboard just to prove it could be done.

So go ahead and post some pictures let us see that this is not one of Mr. V’s cronies promoting him again and a true person following an experiment and learning something from it in good ole DIY fashion. Then in the future give credit where it is due, “Practical Gas Flow” By John Dalton. A Brit who was an innovator in DIY flow testing and publishing long before GFN.

Last I do not believe there is any one method for flow testing, learning and viably improving the performance of an internal combustion engine; They all have a valid place especially in R&D. I would suggest anyone search on ThomasV or Tom Vaught on the forum and when the old data is back on line there too, you will find his work in R&D with Ford encompasses many types of both commercial and home brew flow testing. That said the performance industry has always fought the concepts of standardization of data as it is not good for marketing unless you truly our better than your competitor.

Jason, in closing yes I am skeptical, skeptical of DV as I have been in and out of this industry for over 30 years and I am not much on self promoters and idea guy’s. That is where my tone comes from.

I have been poking and prodding this thread since it started to see something valid, I am open to learning more, you and you alone are the only one with the grapes to post something valid so don’t stop now.

Rick

Jason, i should post up some pic of that desk top bench that Rick refers to.

That one is mine!
Then you would fill better about your pic's

Vizard plans, that i did, was the one that test presure form the spark plug.
So i as well would like to see a different version of that for sure

Don't be afraid to post up.

You may thing/thought Rick is/was a "Ass Hat" BUT HE IS NOT!!!! AND THERE ARE "0" on this forum.

You won't find a better forum for ideas and help with this project.

Flash;

I resemble that remark!

I was hoping you wouldn't take it too serious.

Way to funny still getting a chuckle out of it.

To bad i can't use that as my Avatar! LOL

Or maybe this one.

Okay .. well played sirs. Wasn't trying to go to a$$hat extremes or anything just trying not to get my A$$ handed to me! (its evidently not hard to do)

Rick- I am also not trying to promote DV or anything of his in particular. the stuff Vizard wrote about this type bench he never took credit for it being his idea that i read, just that he did it as a young person and it worked better than nothing at all (which is what i had previous), although he went to lengths to say that the means to read cfm were not his idea but that he liked the idea. I like reading his stuff as his style is more to the point than many tech writers' and doesn't automatically assume the reader is a moron. By the same token, I worship at NO alter other than what experience has taught me. writers are just guys with opinions, so am I
I will work on the pics- I have never posted any pics anywhere before so bear with me, but thanks for the encouragement. J

Jason,

Pics are easy on this forum, Write your post then just below the first submit button click the browse button "1" in light gray. select your picture "should be resized for web if you can" and must be in a .JPG format/extention. Select the file click open "2" the screen will return to the post, then just below the Browse button click the add file button "3", you will see an upload message apear. once the upload is done you can add more pictures in the same manor.

Rick