garrett turbo + dry sump (garrett guy???)

[pengulns2001]

for mounting the turbo in a lower location (below the oil level) my idea is to use a scavenge canister vented to the valve cover (so we dont pull huge vacume) then Y into one of our drysump lines. is this suffeciant or neccissary? obviously the easiest way is to just connect the line directly to the flange but from past experience that doesnt work but i have a bunch of kids on my team telling me otherwise and want a second opinion... ive attached a drawing of what im talking about

if anyone wants to see a picture of what im talking about ill send you an email i cant figure out how to attach it

[pengulns2001]

for mounting the turbo in a lower location (below the oil level) my idea is to use a scavenge canister vented to the valve cover (so we dont pull huge vacume) then Y into one of our drysump lines. is this suffeciant or neccissary? obviously the easiest way is to just connect the line directly to the flange but from past experience that doesnt work but i have a bunch of kids on my team telling me otherwise and want a second opinion... ive attached a drawing of what im talking about

if anyone wants to see a picture of what im talking about ill send you an email i cant figure out how to attach it

[Mike Cook]

Just wanted to remind you that if you have your turbo lower than like 13inches, it needs to be protected by .065 wall bars (if it is behind the main hoop). This is a new rule.

[310Turbo]

Penguins2001 - perhaps you could email it to me; cam.thai@honeywell.com

Best regards,

Cam

[pengulns2001]

youve got to be kidding me, these rules are getting out of hand, we dont even race against each other... where does it say this i havent seen it? im all for safety but no one could possible relate the rule to safety IMO

what if have the turbo is in front of the roll hoop and half is behind it?

[pengulns2001]

email sent thanks

[Matt Gignac]

It's in there somewhere, or perhaps in a specification sent out by the rules committee. I think the spirit of the rule is they don't want the throttle or any part of the intake coming off in a collision, essentially meaning you're at WOT in an already sketch situation. Doesn't even need to be a multi-car collision. I'm sure some intakes could be knocked off with a solid impact with a cone.

Matt Gignac
McGill Racing Team

[pengulns2001]

our intake could not POSSIBLY be knocked off by a cone, in the case that somehow we got hit by another car (basically impossible) and the intake broke off the car would stall instantly... even if they rules commity would argue it wouldnt stall theres no reason we cant put a lanyard on the intake in front of the turbo so that IF SOMEHOW it broke off it would disconnect and the motec would shut it down.

i did find the rule though... very well hidden i might add

[Alexandre D.]

The rules has been discussed before... Not much people seemed to care back then! It was strange because most of the turbo teams are below 350mm and not inside the safety structure. I guss that with the SEF due soon people are getting worriedhttp://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Even if we had a good protection the rule commitee asked us to add some members to our 2005 design. We went under major chassis modification to comply with this rule without blindly adding 0.065 members.

[pengulns2001]

i sent a picture of where our turbo is hopefully it will pass if not its an easy addition of 1 tube and wont even really look bad if we are forced to.

back on topic though on every dry sumped turbo system ive ever worked on heard of or seen ive always seen/used a collection canister (vented or not) then an outlet line from the canister to the sump pump. my engine team leader asked his contact at garret and he said we dont need it... i guess im just finding it very hard to believe that this is the only turbo/application that doesnt need that collection canister out of dozens that ive worked on and probably hundreds ive seen pictures of.

[Michael Royce]

Before you fellows get too bent out of shape about cones hitting your intake system, look at the first paragraph of FAQ #6 at the following location.
http://www.formulasae.org/forums/formula/dispatch.cgi/r...20Air%20Intake%20SIS (http://www.formulasae.org/forums/formula/dispatch.cgi/rules/docProfile/100076/d20051031210327/No/3.5.3.9%20Air%20Intake%20SIS)

It gives you the reason why this rule was added.

By the way, it applies equally to NA and turbo engines.

[pengulns2001]

perhaps i am missing something but putting it 350mm in the air doesnt seem to solve anything... in our case due to the design of our sidepod it would probably be far MORE likely to get hit

also if our throttle body and restrictor were to get knocked off (they wont come apart) our car would stall

a cone certainly wont go through our sidepod.

either way the rule is there and we have to follow it but perhaps you could make it a little more clear. the way it is worderd no one knows what to do... it says it must comply to side impact rules, surely you do not mean have 3 1".049" tubes at angles to each other protecting our intake???

[310Turbo]

Penguins - I spoke with Anthony regarding this issue. He assured me that your pump is capable of scavenging both air and liquid (at the same time). If your pump is unable to move liquid and gas at the same time, you'll need a collection canister. I would recommend contacting your pump manufacturer for guidance on its capabilities.

Best regards,

Cam

[CornellGixxer]

I'm not a big fan of this rule change either but at least I can see where they're coming from. The only thing they dont consider is the layout and function of the engine management system. If the MAF is located upstream of the dislocation then more air would enter the engine than the ECM calculated for... the engine runs way lean and the engine dies. I can't count the number of times we have popped the hose connection between our compressor outlet and plenum under boost, only to have the engine make a loud "pop" noise and die. With a configuration of MAF-restrictor-throttle-turbo, I cant think of a single situation where a catastrophic failure in the intake tract would cause a WOT condition.

[pengulns2001]

same goes for anyone using alpha N or a combination of alpha N and speed density