Jump to content
SAU Community

Exhaust Diameter Theory


Baz
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just something I have been curious about recently and decided it might be a good idea to pop the question.....

We all know that "generally" the larger the diameter of the piping in an exhaust system the more power it will generally produce and the better that it would respond to modifications as well. But unfortunately the larger you go, the more impractical it becomes due to the excessive noise that it would make.

Now here is my question. Btw cat convertors are disregarded for this experiment.

Now lets say if I hypothetically had an full turbo back 3" exhaust like most people generally buy for there turbo cars which was straight through until it reached the rear cannon, where it had only one to help baffle the sound of the exhaust. Lets say that this exhaust produced 90db.

In my second example lets imagine I had a full 3.5" turbo back system which was helped to keep it down to regulation noise by use of a couple of mufflers (same design as our cannon in example one, same restriction/flow) to keep it at our regulation noise of 90db.

Now between these both setups. Which one would produce more power? Would one produce more than the other? Would one respond better modifications than the other? Or would they be actually the same?

Just wondering.

Cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Baz;

Good question, you could work that out in rough terms by using the figures for back pressure imposed by the second muffler vs increase in flow through the larger diam pipe, they should be available somewhere. Intuitively I reckon you'd need to go up to a 100mm pipe to overcome the pressure created by the second muffler but there would have to be a break even point somewhere. It also depends on the quality of the exhaust design, as opposed to just the diam.

Then again some of the better quality mufflers are expensive becuase they can do both very well ie cancel noise and produce horsepower; it's always going to be a tradeoff and I don't think the 'perfect solution' exists.

Cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if your making upwards of 300rwkw then there is a difference over 3" to 3.5" without a doubt.

Stock turbo i doubt you'll see anything

Adding in extra mufflers wont hurt the power if they are straight flowing ones.

You'll be hard pressed to get its to 90db tho

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting idea Cubes , where does it go from single to double and does it go back to single down the back .

I had a bad experience with noise on an FJ20ET with a GT28RS and 3" tube . The dump pipe was formed to match the turbo outlet flange ie not a saparate waste gate pipe . There were no soft spots and the noise at cruise was LOUD . I think turbos that vent into a large volume and large pipe promote the dreaded drone . The split dump seems to have performance benefits and less noise as well . I've often wondered if the pipe venting the turbine is similar or a smidge larger that the outlet promotes flow and forms an anti reversion restriction when the pipe opens out to the main pipe diametre . I think large pipes can act as an auxilary engine tie bar if the exhaust has no give ie those braid covered stainless steel bellows gadgets , and can transmit engine noise directly to the body making it a boom box .

Corky Bell says that gas velocity is directly related to pipe size and quotes pipe diametres in relation to power output . I think the golden rule is to try to keep the exhaust manifold pressure as close to inlet manifold pressure (on boost) as possible . To do this exhaust pressure needs to be measured pre turbo , post turbo and before and after every cat/silencer in the system . Remember the turbo can be a sizeable restriction in the exhaust system which is why I keep harping about the importance of efficient (free flowing ) turbines and housings .

My 2 cents only A .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

im assuming zorst flow is like current. 2 restrictions in series = double the restriction. whereas 2 restrictions in parallel (seperate pipes) = same restriction... but now im thinking.. .would that cancel out the effectiveness of both of them in a row as far as noise goes? i still think it would be quieter with an overall larger flow area (2x2.5 vs 3)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume APS decided to go a 2 x 2.5" system rather than a big 3.5" single. 2 x 2.5" keeps drone to a minimum on the big ford six.

Head over to the LS1 forums and you will see the 2 x 2.5" systems are quieter than the 3.5" singles on the v8's also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fluid flow is significantly different to electricity in practice despite the claims otherwise. Flow potential increases with a radius^2 relationship, and the conservation of mass/volume has to be maintained.

So essentially if you stick to the simple A1.V1=A2.V2=volumetric flow rate. A and V being Area and Velocity then you can't go wrong.

consider if you push 300rwkw through a 75mm (4415mm^2) pipe, and you increase to a 100mm pipe (7850mm^2) and the gas velocity remains the same the potential flow for power is around 530rwkw (which is far more than linear relationship attributed to just the diameter increase)

Moral, 100mm pipe is just too big when 75mm (3") can deliver well over 300rwkw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats with regards to peak power but how does it affect mid range etc? Can the theory be applied so to speak?

I have know ppls fit up 3.5" exhaust and picked up quite a bit of mid range and turbo spool but still made the same peak power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moral, 100mm pipe is just too big when 75mm (3") can deliver well over 300rwkw.

3" cant deliver much over 300... from what testing i have seen and been told about... changing to a 3.5" can net upto 20rwkw when you get into the mid 300 + range

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll dig out some laminar and turbulent pipe flow data later and get some theoretical flow values. It'll take a while as I've got a pretty busy day and I'll calculate completely the airflow needed for certain power figures, the fuel required, the expansion due to the heat present and finally the pipe size needed. Then I'll do some acoustic calculations for SPL drops. Time to exercise the brain. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Are these the Dmax ones you are in reference too? https://justjap.com/collections/driveshafts-bearings/products/d-max-reinforced-replacement-rear-driveshaft-set-fits-nissan-s13-s14-s15-r32-r33-r34-c35#description Not a bad idea to get the uni flange ones. I have sent just jap an email too. Will see what they say lmao. Only thing is the Dmax ones are on a big back order. Low key anything will be better then my OEM ones I got as they are sounding like popcorn when I go under load lmao 😂☠️🪦.
    • They should do. I have S14 (or something S chassis, anyway) driveshafts in my R32 (because my diff flanges have 3x2). They're the right length. When you go looking for R32/3/4 driveshafts (for turbos), they're all the same thing, so are the same length. So there really shouldn't be any reason why those cheapies from JJ won't also fit an R34. R32/3 NA should also be the same thing. The (3x the price) D-Max ones are uni-fit. They have 5x1 and 3x2 bolt holes and say they cover all the cars. So that would also suggest that they are all the same except for the flanges. And in that case, the flange goes both ways. I'd be buying the D-Max ones if I ever have to replace a shaft. Because that will open up diff options without needing to juggle shafts also. Juggling shafts is gay.
    • Yeah with the adaptors they do look like the photo above - just the fitment within the plenum itself and then further with the rail to the intake is questionable - we shall see tomorrow hopefully once I get some replies from Aeroflow, maybe those bosses are the missing piece....
    • Should be fine, if you have it sitting too far in, you end up just spraying the walls and have shit idle. You "can" run them like that, however I don't think it's a great idea (also depends on your plenum, might be good to just get the injector bosses first, mock it up and see if you need to get the bottom extension) Ideally your injectors, with the extension should look like this  (Not my photos, just Google)
    • Thanks for the replies guys, it's really appreciated.  It seems the kit was supposed to come with those injector bosses but hasn't. Unsure if they'll help as even with the adaptors to make them a 3/4 height injector they still sit too far out so mount the fuel rail?
×
×
  • Create New...