dyson motors

[Malvin]

You want a cheap vacuum motors with similar air flow as in your last post
here you go http://www.surpluscenter.com/Brands/Pan ... 6-1448.axd

[damunk]

You can buy 4 of these panasonic one stage motor for every 1 of the ametek one I posted in the previous post.

[RACEPUMPER]

The Panasonic is a good price, check on a distributor in the UK or allow for shipping from US. I checked the shipping to me in Australia, its equal to the motor cost.

Its a smaller flow motor with approx. 45cfm @ 44" 3.3 amps. The performance data is a bit brief but the cfm/amp is half reasonable at approx 13.5.
As Malvin said "you want cheap motors?" This motor is the winner in the cost amount.
You may need twice the motor count to get where you want to be with your bench because of the low flow but the cost is attractive.

Are you building your bench for a 1.4 litre engine only? Or are bigger ports or higher depressions an option later on? If you work on a rise of 16" across the orifice and want to test at 28", read the motor flow at 44" to work out total flow. If you had 4 of these motors you can assume 150 -170 cfm total flow @ 28". Alternately 8 of these motors possibly 300-340cfm @ 28". ( When motors are grouped they "steal" a little air from each other, that's why the total flow estimates are lowered )

Jim

[Malvin]

RacePumper

Alternately 8 of these motors possibly 300-340cfm @ 28". ( When motors are grouped they "steal" a little air from each other, that's why the total flow estimates are lowered )

Jim I doubt very much with those vacuum motors he would ever see 340 CFM @ 28" depression
I forgot to add I have 6 of those vacuum motors

I have to agree 100% with Storm that he is rushing and would regret making a choice with vacuum
motors that are not with in a average sealed Vac of 96" to 110" and flow max of no less then 135 CFM to 147 CFM
from what have seen looking at vacuum specs .

[RACEPUMPER]

I have to agree 100% with Storm that he is rushing and would regret making a choice with vacuum
motors that are not with in a average sealed Vac of 96" to 110" and flow max of no less then 135 CFM to 147 CFM
from what have seen looking at vacuum specs .

I agree also Malvin, I think although the Panasonics are cheap, they are too small for what we need in a bench build. The low cost of motors would be long forgotten when you can't flow what you wanted because of poor choices. I made my suggestion but they are out of his budget it would seem.

Jim I doubt very much with those vacuum motors he would ever see 340 CFM @ 28" depression
I forgot to add I have 6 of those vacuum motors

Have you ever run those 6 motors by themselves and noted the peak flow? I know that every bench is different but I think its important in design if we can get an approximate factor in how much is lost in total flow when motors are grouped. I currently just go on personal experience from my few bench builds and what I read here and other guys I have helped out outside the forum

Jim

[Malvin]

RacePumper

Have you ever run those 6 motors by themselves and noted the peak flow? I know that every bench is different but I think its important in design if we can get an approximate factor in how much is lost in total flow when motors are grouped. I currently just go on personal experience from my few bench builds and what I read here and other guys I have helped out outside the forum

Jim

To be honest with you no at 3.3 amps per vacuum motor I put them in my bench top flow bench model wired them up to one
30 amp house toggle switch used the clothes drier wire and plug wife was not happy about that well any ways it feel way short
of my targeted goal. Those vacuum motors are only 5"dial not 5.7" dial I can test one of them and see what they do by them selfs
but it will be 2 weeks maybe 3 weeks before I will be able to those test

[damunk]

Yes. I'm building for 1.4 16v engines only. Those I am tuning/porting.

Also when you talk about more motors combined "stealing" from performance from one another.
Is this because we should design the pipe work from each motor similar to a car exhaust manifold then link them all to one main pipe like an exhaust so there is no back pressure problem....

[RACEPUMPER]

Is this because we should design the pipe work from each motor similar to a car exhaust manifold then link them all to one main pipe like an exhaust so there is no back pressure problem....

Sounds like a lot of work, I don't think I would bother doing it, adding one motor or using the right motors would be a better option in my opinion.
What design flowbench are you building?

Jim

[damunk]

@racepumper : don't laugh

manifold.jpg

I've got a spare one of these.

[Tony]

Also when you talk about more motors combined "stealing" from performance from one another.
Is this because we should design the pipe work from each motor similar to a car exhaust manifold then link them all to one main pipe like an exhaust so there is no back pressure problem....

Where there is only one motor, the air moves towards the motor intake hole from all directions, and accelerates as its gets closer to the motor intake. Its a pretty orderly process.

If you have a whole cluster of motors located very close together, the air becomes very confused and turbulent around the motor intakes.
It cannot make up its mind which motor to flow into. If the whole thing is then further confined into a relatively small blower box on the intake side, the air around all the motor intakes will go frantic and be quite turbulent.
The motors fight each other for air, and the result is each motor flows slightly less than it would if it was the only motor running.

As you add more motors to your bench, the final airflow will always be slightly less than the number of motors multiplied by the rated flow of a single motor. Its not a huge reduction, but its definitely there.