New horsepower and fuel economy modification for the air intake system for your car called, Tornado. According to the hype, it should provide a car like the C5 with a 20hp gain. Should take about 3 minutes to install if you have done your intake before.

The concept is one that I must admit; I have been working on conceptually for the past 4 months. Looks like I've been beat to market.

I am so disappointed to find out that I've been beaten off the line once again with a performance modification. Now that the cat is out of the bag, I will tell you all that I've been working on a product called, SubSonic Flow. It is a well-known fact that if you increase the level of efficiency of airflow to your engine, you will see more power in the final verdict where the rubber meets the ground. I've been CAD'ing a 5 Blade Non-Linear short duct component that would plug directly behind the air bridge and the throttle body.

Now, I can move on to phase II, by designing a unit that plugs directly between the filter and the MAF sensor. This two-tier system (I hope) will provide even better flow than a post MAF Sensor Directional Duct.

It's all about how you direct the airflow. Too bad I could not work faster - darn!

Anyway, check out the Tornado. It looks very similar to what I have on CAD file.

I'll be damn.... It is a small world after all.

[ 12-07-2001: Message edited by: Top Speed ]

Its bunk. Tested and re-tested, no gains ever shown in real testing. Don't waste your money.

More like junk!!

Turbulence is a funny thing. It can either increase or decrease performance. I tested using a fog machine under the hood of my C4, to see about venting and air flow. (much like what they do in a wind tunnel) Even tried different air intakes, but back to your question....a Toronado won't make a bit of difference in performance.

Barbie

Sorry to get off topic, but do you know where I can get something similar to test for air leaks in my house? Maybe something smaller than a fog machine?

Well that is the whole point.

First you ponder a result. Then you ponder a theory for achieving the result. If the theory makes sense from a physics standpoint, you then design in concept what you think will achieve that result - all the while testing veracity of your theory. If you hit the nail on the head, you've got a new product concept.

As a currently certified Aerodynamicist, I find most C5 air intake laminar airflow discussions rather amusing. Most of those topics I do not even get involved with because the respondents are so far from reality, that it would take me a week just to explain the concept of Incompressible Fluid Mechanics.

To better understand the nature of Uniform Flow of fluid across linear surfaces, I highly recommend the book from Thwaites (Dover Publishing), which is an isolated volume within the Fluid Motion Memoirs. It is a 572 page classical writing covering every topic from the Calculation of the Boundary Layer, to Rotary Flows, and every relevant topic within the realm of discussion. It is very weighty and will require a very strong grip on three-dimensional mathematics to go beyond page 12. It is written in a very staccato like fashion, so it is definitely daytime reading and it will require your undivided attention.

I will not belabor the books points here other than to say that it is very possible to have flow that is roughly symmetrical about an imaginary center line, while the mean of that flow is stable. While at the same time have flow that is both highly turbulent and unsteady in the mean with separation points that are typically asymmetrical and with periodic oscillations. This has been the core of my computer based testing using the given shape of the stock air tunnel and several other design ideas.

The problem I keep running into is the baseline design of the C5 intake system. You see, the MAF sensor is what ultimately sends the signal to the PCM for A/F ratios. The problem with attempting to establish laminar flow through the intake system is that the MAF is located well up-stream as it is attached directly to the air filter itself. The up-stream location does not give much of a chance to correct turbulent and unsteady flows.

This is my dilemma.

What is really needed here is a MAF design that places it well down-stream of the filter. Then my work would be happier, shall we say. If at all possible (and others much more knowledgeable about automobile engine designs can help me out here because I do not know much about auto-engine design), I would like to see the MAF located just prior to the Throttle Body. This would provide the allowance in the time dimension to deal with the intake charge aggressively enough to make a difference before the flow reaches the sensor that ultimately determines air to fuel ratios.

Make no mistake about. I CAN increase true laminar airflow WITHOUT a blower or turbo chargers. Certainly not as much as forced induction would yield, but certainly higher than established static levels in stock configuration. Enough to yield at least a 40-43 hp gain I would estimate. But, in order to do it, I need a running start at that MAF target. Increasing laminar flow is easy from a design standpoint. The hard part is driving the mean variable stream of flow up to a percentage level that is the maximum for the given rate of speed. Laminar flow can be cooler that turbulent and unstable flows. There was a purpose to the screens built into the stock MAF sensor. However, when I look at the apparently generic design of the screen, it becomes clear the GM never consulted an expert in Fluid Mechanics for its design characteristics. The screen itself, while producing perpendicular flows (90 degrees to the sensor elements) has the burden of also producing a myriad of conflicting separation points and a corresponding magnitude of detached vortices. In order for that screen to be where it is, and produce laminar flow past the MAF sensor element, would require a level of precision in design and engineering rivaling that which is seen in Americas space program. And, guess what? It aint that good!

Just as an example: this is the kind of thing that separates say, the McLaren F1, from a mass produced C5. If the boys over at McLaren had designed such a screen for their MAF sensor you can bet it would be researched with the utmost in care and concern as to produce the results they truly want precise control of the flow interacting with the sensor for optimum performance. Note that, I am not slamming GM for this, as this level of detail would drive the cost of the Corvette well beyond my capacity to own one. I am just stating a point of fact that answers the question, “why did they build it like that”. The answer is easy because it was the cheapest solution possible without totally destroying the MAF's ability to make sense of the flows. In other words, State of the Art has a big price tag because someone actually has to sit down and figure out how individual components will work together for the benefit of maximizing the potential of the whole. That kind of work is not cheap.

So, my theory is perfectly sound. However my conceptual model is blocked by a previous design (MAF location) that does not fully integrate with my theory. Of course, GM would say (and has said) that my theory does not fully integrate within their design. In other words, I touched a nerve and opened up a discussion that they rather not have.

I will not bore you guys any further with this stuff. I am just stating the obvious, here.

Keep waving!



[ 12-07-2001: Message edited by: Top Speed ]

I have seen many tests in car and truck mags and no one has found more power with this unit, but I bet they sell a lot of them.

What part does "Incompressible Fluid Mechanics" play in airflow through an engine's intake system?

Only for "bottem breathers"!
Ed

[ 12-08-2001: Message edited by: C5XTASY ]

Yes!

Steve.

So.....,does that mean we leave our MAF screens in or out?

"What part does "Incompressible Fluid Mechanics" play in airflow through an engine's intake system?"

First, when I write like this especially in this type of communicative forum, you have to read a significant amount between the lines. I do not have the time or the space to deliver a full explanation - I would like to – we just do not have that luxury in here. Though it would be fun and educational as I am sure I would learn much from the other contributors to this forum. So, apologize right from the word go, if I leave out important relevant facts.

It has the same thing to do with the human bodies ability to aspirate – change the “state” and all of a sudden you no longer aspirate normally. Or the Saxophonists ability to play jazz – change the “state” and all of a sudden Jazz becomes the Blues. Or, the skydivers ability to reach terminal velocity – change the “state” drastically enough and all of sudden terminal velocity could become terminal for the diver. Or, the wings ability to produce lift for an aircraft – change the “state” and all of a sudden the aircraft loses 15,000 feet of altitude in a matter of seconds.

When you accelerate any volume of air you immediately change its state. It does not matter if it is limited earths atmosphere (air) flowing over a wing at 9,378.57 mph @ 101,000 feet, or air flowing through an induction system with a 3.8 inch diameter at 12.38 mph with a mean temperature of 52.3 degrees F. The key here is in understanding that “state” changes are “ always “relative” to some other preceding “state”.

I'm only using IFM to get at a bigger problem. I did not have to invoke IFM to explain this. But, it does play an important role in the “quality” of the air as it reaches the MAF. That's is all I am concerned with here, better “air flow control”. Thus, you cannot talk about “air flow” without saying something about the laws/principals that govern it, and that would be Fluid Mechanics.

However, in this case we are NOT talking about “High Speed” fluids. The term, “Incompressible” usually sparks the imagination into a “high speed” chase for answers to questions about the behavior of fluids. This is not the case. The modern study of Low Speed Fluid Mechanics is rather complex. To analyze and interpret the science is even more challenging. The intake of the C5 puts this discussion in the “Low Speed” category of “Incompressible Fluid Mechanics”. Whether static compressibility (stationary fluids), or dynamic compressibility (fluids in motion) (I'm now NOT using those two terms (static and dynamic) in the strictest classic sense, rather trying to make this explanation more intelligible) the properties of fluid in either study derive their respective meaning and substance from their “Incompressible” nature. If we are serious about having a discussion regarding improving airflow then we must likewise be serious about discussing the nature of that flow. That cannot be done at any real depth without considering the impact of incompressible flows.

I hope that was not to confusing. I'm NOT a tenured Professor of this subject matter, rather a practical “application'ist” who uses the knowledge in real world applications. I'm not a teacher, just a guy trying to get more power from his C5 without spending another 50 grand.

The C5's intake system is replete with mistakes and flaws the ultimately reduce the chance for better “air quality” / low speed non-turbulent, stable airflow. Since the intake systems does consist of real materials / objects, then “how” the air “flows” about those objects is by definition a study of low speed fluid mechanics with an emphasis on the incompressible behavior, not the mere fact that yes, air can be compressed.

Please mark this question either TRUE, or FALSE and then get back to me. I need to know exactly where I should start this discussion.

Question: Atmospheric pressure increases in a Gale, Tornado, or Hurricane? (true, or false)

New product designed to lighten your wallet by at least...how much??? Tornado may be the right idea but I have read some tests of it and have never read where ANYONE gained anything but the knowledge to be more skeptical on their next purchase.

If mine actually works Silversport, this forum will be the first to know. Of course, I'll post before and after dyno numbers, but most importantly 0-60 and 0-120 times, etc....

why don't you just relocate your MAF to just in front of the throttle body? there is really nothing in the way?
then you can test your theory.