[urq] Too much Crankcase ventilation? - MoreBen Swann benswann at comcast.netWed Sep 5 20:02:44 EDT 2007
OK - looks like I have some closed-system options and a myriad of catch can and vent options. I'd prefer to keep the system closed, and am posed with basically two choices - EITHER #1 use valve/restriction directly into manifold - eg. PVC valve at Port on back of head or post throttle port. This is pretty much the way it is shown in most diagrams I've seen for EFI/turbo systems. OR #2 use pre-throttle venture-effect via hole and fitting installed in the intake hose pre-turbo. It would not be a big-deal to install a fitting in the rubber hose in the air intake tract, but I'm not sure I like the idea of sucking blowby from crankcase and head as it will likely just get trapped in the intercooler and cause problems down the line. This is essentially the way the earlier CIS car did it, but just does not give me a warm fuzzy. The other way is to use the PVC valve located at a port in back of the head, or just after throttle-body. I found the original restrictor. It is a fitting that is inserted in the hose. The diameter of the fitting is about 2 cm and the hole is about 1 mm. and must restrict the flow of CC gases sufficiently to have done the job for so long. I could even install a catch can inline, but it seems to me it is best to just get any unburned hydrocarbons, condensation, and oil into the combustion process where it just adds to the fuel content, keeps pollution down. I would think this is not enough to effect combustion process unless there is a lot of oil - in which case there is some other problem. I'm just playing cautious at this point as it seems like the large draw of vapors from the system might be still too much, but after reading the paper Scott turned us onto, I have to presume that most PVC valves will prevent too much vacuum in the crankcase. Am I correct in thinking that the tiny hole will proportionally drop the pressure differential (vacuum) down, or will this just reduce flow. If it were electronics, then I'd call it a resister and say the voltage would be lowered or current dropped, but how does the small orfice at 20 inches of mercury effect the pressure in the larger chamber basically combined crankcase and valve-cover volume? Do PVC valves really work as well as described - basically to keep the draw fairly uniform at all load levels except for backfire or positive pressure where the valve get forced shut? I'm skeptical. Anyway, I'll be hooking something up tonight that uses a PVC valve which ought to be better than having no restriction which is the case presently. Ben _____ From: QSHIPQ at aol.com [mailto:QSHIPQ at aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 4:55 PM To: benswann at comcast.net; Djdawson2 at aol.com; vegener at post7.tele.dk; quattro at audifans.com; urq at audifans.com Subject: Re: Too much Crankcase ventilation? - More Ben I'll address this to you since you started it, but Claus and Dave's responses are in here as well. First, a look at how the 20vt works. Indeed there is PCV at the valve cover Dave, at least on a 95.5 S6, I just looked. It's the little hose below the turbo intake breather hose connection at the back of the valve cover. It goes down to the vacuum valve at the crankcase, where crankcase, valve cover and intake feed all converge at the crankcase '8 ball'. According to TST 218, during high vacuum (idle) the PCV is drawn into the intake via the ck valve at the intake manifold. During low vacuum or boost, the PCV is drawn into the inlet side of the turbo via the pressure control valve. This means that a larger turbo with the same size inlet pipe will have more vacuum pulling on the pressure control valve. It also means that oil sloshing in the head and oil sloshing in the crankcase, has a really good chance of getting sucked up at idle, just off idle, launches and at a higher than stock boost level. Not sure why audi mounted all this so low on the block, it's really conducive to sloshing issues of both the block and the head (guessing the head causes more oil issues than the block, since that 8ball crankcase design on the block has been around a long time without issue). WRT what to use for a modded/improved PCV, I would highly suggest the supra twin turbo app (don't forget the gasket) 1993-1998. It operates per the website I provided, and it has a really good turbo shutoff action on it. And, discounted, it's less than 10 bucks. I noticed that the Mustang supercharger boys use this valve as the 'standard' as well. For hookup on your 10vt Ben, I would consider putting this valve in place of the stock urq pcv valve, and mount it above the valve cover somehow. I would think you could machine up a simple block that would tie all this together with the stock system. Since the supra twin turbo uses a really high compression ratio, I'd bet the match to the orifice of that PCV valve would be really good. What may screw all this up, is the amount of vacuum present at the turbo inlet. That's pretty key to making sure the breather is acutally breathing air vs fighting an alternative vacuum source. Claus, wrt octane vs oil vapor... In a properly designed PCV system, there shouldn't be enough blowby to make this significant. And if you read the site I posted, if 70% of that vapor is unburnt HC, you aren't affecting octane much at all. IME, running back to back PCV connected vs not, there appears to be no significant difference in dyno output (read: just another run can result in the same change). Martin, PCV is one of my interests along with the black mysteries of Torsen operation. Call me PCV boy if you want, but I really believe there are very few that really understand how it works, more specifically, how to work it. I don't see closed loop PCV as a bad thing, and both Eaton and Magnuson advocate running PCV closed loop to carbon treat the blades of the SC and put a coating of deposits in the plenum to screw clearance. I don't see why this theory also wouldn't hold true for a turbo as well. Scott Justusson PCV Boy formerly known as Torsen Boy '94 Landcruiser Supercharged with modified PCV In a message dated 9/5/2007 3:19:48 P.M. Central Daylight Time, benswann at comcast.net writes: Thanks Scott, This is helpful in furthering my understanding. I thought I knew what a PVC valve did and how the system functions - or is supposed to. I think by the end of this I'll really understand. Until the next time that is. So any recommendation on which valve to use - if you go to FLAPs there are at least 50 different versions of valves and even more variation when you get into model, port size and orientation. Some are simple check valves and some are apparently much more. We have to presume that I no longer have the proper remnents of the UrQ setup, and that the restriction would be significantly different. I checked out the early TQ implementation and it works because there is just a slight venture vac. Used inside the metering box. With speed density, no such port. Ben _____ Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com <http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour/?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000982> .
More information about the urq mailing list |