Did you guys miss me, been covered up with ECOBOOST work

[Tom Vaught]

Really busy now that ECOBOOST has taken off at Ford.

We moved the BIG Flow Bench (The one in the pics I posted about years ago in the Pass Around Plates thread)
over to the Powertrain Flow Systems Lab.

No more What does this thing flow? like the old days.

That being said do we have a lot of newer flow benches made by members out there these days?

Post some pics up for me.

Tom Vaught

[slracer]

Hi Tom, Welcome "Home"!
Doug

[Brucepts]

Welcome back!

Yes, lots of PTS Flowbenches out there now!

Most of the pics are over in the PTS Plans area if you forgot the password I'll PM you

[jfholm]

Hi Tom,
Glad to see are still around!

John

[Old Grey]

I would show you mine, but it's super secret - either that or it's taking so long to build that I'm too lazy to take pictures -.

Pretty much everybody is doing the PTS Ver2 - motors on the side rather than Ver1's on the bottom -.

I'm waiting for PTS Ver3 - which is what mine is aiming for -, a fully externally controllable, high production, FB with multiple orifices.

[1960FL]

WOW! Long time

Thought maybe you crawled under a rock after GM Dropped the Pontiac Line

For all you new guy's Tom is one that might be able to answer your BOOST related questions.

Good to see you stop in.

Rick

And to wet your wistle here is a current version of a PTS bench done using the basic internal components cheep motors cheep power control.

http://www.flowbenchtech.com/forum/view ... ?f=8&t=565

[Brucepts]

I would show you mine, but it's super secret - either that or it's taking so long to build that I'm too lazy to take pictures -.

Pretty much everybody is doing the PTS Ver2 - motors on the side rather than Ver1's on the bottom -.

I'm waiting for PTS Ver3 - which is what mine is aiming for -, a fully externally controllable, high production, FB with multiple orifices.

Never been a version with motors on the bottom? Side and front slider versions (no official release yet on the front slider design) and a 12 motor design which I do not advertise currently.

You'll be waiting a long time for Version 3 Since there are probably +300 current versions in use today I think we hit on a winner

Psst . . . don't think you will find a need for multiple orifices using digital, multiple orifices add complexity to the design which takes it out of the realm of the diy'er doing it in their own garage with simple handtools which is what the current design is made for. No need to make it more complex than it needs to be for the market it's directed to.

[Old Grey]

I would show you mine, but it's super secret - either that or it's taking so long to build that I'm too lazy to take pictures -.

Pretty much everybody is doing the PTS Ver2 - motors on the side rather than Ver1's on the bottom -.

I'm waiting for PTS Ver3 - which is what mine is aiming for -, a fully externally controllable, high production, FB with multiple orifices.

Never been a version with motors on the bottom? Side and front slider versions (no official release yet on the front slider design) and a 12 motor design which I do not advertise currently.

You'll be waiting a long time for Version 3 Since there are probably +300 current versions in use today I think we hit on a winner

Psst . . . don't think you will find a need for multiple orifices using digital, multiple orifices add complexity to the design which takes it out of the realm of the diy'er doing it in their own garage with simple handtools which is what the current design is made for. No need to make it more complex than it needs to be for the market it's directed to.

I thought this was based on Ver1
http://www.tractorsport.com/forum/viewt ... ?f=9&t=916
and this is Ver2
http://www.flowbenchtech.com/forum/view ... ?f=8&t=186

And based on this
http://www.flowbenchtech.com/forum/view ... ?f=5&t=827
and this
http://www.flowbenchtech.com/forum/view ... p?f=5&t=79
multiple orifice is preferable.

I'm more a high end user, and the big benefit of SF is speed because it's fully externally operated - a 50 test development sucks up the days -, so I'm chasing that.
I wanted to go with 1 orifice, if it's accurate, it's just that I was advised to do multiple.

[Tony]

I wanted to go with 1 orifice, if it's accurate, it's just that I was advised to do multiple.

One orifice will be accurate provided it is suitably sized for the particular piece being tested. For most of us that presents no difficulty.
If you have built a very high capacity bench, and you plan to flow some very small pieces, then you use an appropriately smaller orifice suited to the smaller job.
If you plan accordingly, there should be no need to change orifices during a test.

Selecting an appropriate measurement orifice is just like selecting an appropriate bore adapter and radiused port entry, and rigging up something to control and measure valve lift.
It involves a bit of stuffing around the very first time, but once you have the hardware on hand, its very quick and easy to put it all together again for similar future testing.

[86rocco]

Hi Tom,

Welcome back! I'm sure I speak for many others here; I'd love to hear a bit about the work you've been doing assuming of course you're at liberty to disclose that.

Ed