Originally posted by Guy_H
View Post
The Configuration sub section of the Tanks area shows that ARE don't consider the SEAT style layout (180 turn at the far end tank) to be sub optimal.
In fact...
The other design mostly is used in the USA., where tanks are on the top & bottom of the core, causing the charge air to make two 90 deg. bends. By using a second manometer with a long thin probe, we found that 80% of the intake charge flows through the end 25% of tubes on our first test tank, which was of reasonable length. Flow rate was good but cooling rate was terrible. When we doubled the length of the tank, 55% of the intake charge flowed through the end 25% of tubes & overall flow dropped 9%, indicating that this design has too have very long tanks, but should be able to be avoided anyway
.
.
.
A dual pass intercooler is heaps more efficient where both pipes are on the one side, but they require more height for the core.
.
.
.
A dual pass intercooler is heaps more efficient where both pipes are on the one side, but they require more height for the core.
Whatever can be gleaned from the dyno day on this subject will be most worthwhile.
Comment