A
Anonymous
Guest
Other sites are buzzing about Somender-Singh's grooved squishbands. But the real brains are HERE. Any opinions? Google it.
We had a huge thread about it a couple of weeks back.
http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=42926
What's the verdict across the web?
My skepticism is pretty obvious in the above thread
http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=42926
What's the verdict across the web?
My skepticism is pretty obvious in the above thread
A
Anonymous
Guest
Thanks, I'll check it out, and this can be deleted.
A
Anonymous
Guest
I would like to know how in the 150 years of internal combustion engines, with all the modifications made and technologies researched, no one ever put gash in the head until now. I wonder what other things I could put a gouge in and improve....
Groove or not to groove?
Real or not, why so long to be stumbled upon and not used?
Good question, but consider Ricardo's work that showed the benefits of 3 angle valve seats and back cutting valves and how long it was before it became common pratice. 100 years to find and 50 to be put to use and he was an recognised and respected engr and scientist.
If the groove has no sharp edges to be hot spots can't see how pinging tendences would increase. If it causes turblence or increases mixing then it should lessen lean mixture layers in the A/F column lessen the chance of compression induced detonation.
Any body remember "fire grooves" across domed pistons or why hemis like dual plug heads.
Would like it to be real, but have some reservations. Manily the price of the had.
Real or not, why so long to be stumbled upon and not used?
Good question, but consider Ricardo's work that showed the benefits of 3 angle valve seats and back cutting valves and how long it was before it became common pratice. 100 years to find and 50 to be put to use and he was an recognised and respected engr and scientist.
If the groove has no sharp edges to be hot spots can't see how pinging tendences would increase. If it causes turblence or increases mixing then it should lessen lean mixture layers in the A/F column lessen the chance of compression induced detonation.
Any body remember "fire grooves" across domed pistons or why hemis like dual plug heads.
Would like it to be real, but have some reservations. Manily the price of the had.
A
Anonymous
Guest
One of the aspects that makes me skeptical is the appeal of the groove enthusiasts to our intuition; can't you just see by looking that the groove is going to channel a concentrated blast of turbulent mixture right at the spark plug. Why, we've all heard that combustion chamber turbulence is good, right, and more should be better, and aiming it at the plug must be the ultimate . . . .
Well . . . intuition about what goes on in a combustion chamber doesn't seem to get us very far, at least not MY intuition. For instance, you might intuit that the spark plug ought to be aimed where the flow out of the intake valve would evidently go straight at the open plug. But Ford's latest small-block GT-40 Turbo heads aim the plug AWAY from the intake valve, and even shroud it quite a bit! Thinking about it AFTER seeing these heads might make you guess that the intake charge tumbles over the edge of the shrouding and into the plug, maybe. Another example is the dual -plug heads Thad mentions: what about those notorious "colliding flame-fronts" that abound in pop-science theories of detonation? If you believe them, dual plug heads should be terrible detonators, yet millions of uneventful air-miles have been flown behind dual-plug engines.
One of the surprises you'll run across if you read (too much?!) is that there can be TOO MUCH combustion chamber turbulence, that it can actually blow out the first stage of ignition and cause misfires. Would Singh's channels do this? Or, I should ask, WHICH of Singh's channels, since he seems to carve channels in lots of directions, not just straight at the plug.
I'm not saying that there is nothing to Singh's mods, or that the little guy can't still find something overlooked by the engineers. I'm saying that you can't arrive at solid answers the way Singh and his followers have been going at it, with seat-of-the-pants "testing", anecdotal "evidence", and no control at all over the numerous variables. If and when grooves, slots, et al, are effective, they will surely be effective only with a particular pattern on a particular combustion chamber with particular ports, and that you won't be able to make any general predictions from the particular results.
Well . . . intuition about what goes on in a combustion chamber doesn't seem to get us very far, at least not MY intuition. For instance, you might intuit that the spark plug ought to be aimed where the flow out of the intake valve would evidently go straight at the open plug. But Ford's latest small-block GT-40 Turbo heads aim the plug AWAY from the intake valve, and even shroud it quite a bit! Thinking about it AFTER seeing these heads might make you guess that the intake charge tumbles over the edge of the shrouding and into the plug, maybe. Another example is the dual -plug heads Thad mentions: what about those notorious "colliding flame-fronts" that abound in pop-science theories of detonation? If you believe them, dual plug heads should be terrible detonators, yet millions of uneventful air-miles have been flown behind dual-plug engines.
One of the surprises you'll run across if you read (too much?!) is that there can be TOO MUCH combustion chamber turbulence, that it can actually blow out the first stage of ignition and cause misfires. Would Singh's channels do this? Or, I should ask, WHICH of Singh's channels, since he seems to carve channels in lots of directions, not just straight at the plug.
I'm not saying that there is nothing to Singh's mods, or that the little guy can't still find something overlooked by the engineers. I'm saying that you can't arrive at solid answers the way Singh and his followers have been going at it, with seat-of-the-pants "testing", anecdotal "evidence", and no control at all over the numerous variables. If and when grooves, slots, et al, are effective, they will surely be effective only with a particular pattern on a particular combustion chamber with particular ports, and that you won't be able to make any general predictions from the particular results.
Thad":3i63x95r said:
I remember. One of the reasons pop-up pistons are not that prevalent anymore is because the tend to block combustion across the chamber. You have to cut a groove or channel just to get the flame from one side to the other. Dual plugs on a hemi are for just that purpose - light a fire on each side.
That's one of the downsides of a true hemi. It's hard to build high compression without a big dome.
Hi SS.Try BILLIONS of miles flown behind dual ignition set ups.Dual ign setups in AC were in use prior to WW2.Leo
A
Anonymous
Guest
Yeah, I think the OX-6 was the dual-ignition version of the famous OX-5, for one example.
Those OX series engines WERE beasts.HUGE engine.A local man had two of them.Leo
Seattle Smitty":124pl64a said:
This pretty much is what my thoughts are as well. I've had a difficult time trying to wrap my poor hillbilly brain around this concept and I keep coming up short.
Now if the piston could somehow move progressively ALONG the groove it would certainly force mixture out and toward the plug/whatever. Or if the groove were deeper at the outlet. But with a constant-depth/width groove it would seem like not much "pumping" action would take place.
The other thing is that any groove will only have effect when the piston is VERY close to the head. Trouble is, the piston has really slowed down by the time it gets close enough to do much pumping. And just how far along is the burn progression at TDC? I think is should be well under way by the time the piston gets anywhere near that point.
Of course any benefit would mainly be at WOT when pressures are high. This is when it "could" do the most good. Unless it blows the fire out. At idle there is virtually no compression so not much benefit there. Unless that is where the turbulence is most needed; to keep things properly mixed.
I dunno. I'm not ready to attack my 300 head with a die grinder just yet. A carefully taperd groove done with a milling machine would be the only way I would contemplate this modification.
I sure do wish it were for real.
Joe
I think this mod has some merrit. However, I also feel it shares a similar success story with other mods.
If the factory deck clearence is less than desirable or the chamber shape is less than desirable, then it will see more gains than an engine with a nice tight deck clearence. If you tighten up the deck and cut the grooves, the majority would be from the tight deck, as we have already learned.
A carb and manifold combo that doesn't atomise the fuel very well, might see more improvement.
One of his claims, was the ability to run the engine at low RPMs in a higher gear without pinging and knocking. I think Lazyjw has already acheived that with a well thought out combo. So this engine wouldn't benifit as much, if any.
If the factory deck clearence is less than desirable or the chamber shape is less than desirable, then it will see more gains than an engine with a nice tight deck clearence. If you tighten up the deck and cut the grooves, the majority would be from the tight deck, as we have already learned.
A carb and manifold combo that doesn't atomise the fuel very well, might see more improvement.
One of his claims, was the ability to run the engine at low RPMs in a higher gear without pinging and knocking. I think Lazyjw has already acheived that with a well thought out combo. So this engine wouldn't benifit as much, if any.
A
Anonymous
Guest
I see what Thad is saying, that the actual effect, instead of a puff of air/fuel at the sparkplug, might be a channeled blast AWAY from the combustion chamber as the flame-front expands. There's irony for you! Or maybe BOTH events take place in rapid succession, squirt in, squirt out. Maybe Thad's outward blast through the channel would then serve to further pressurize and clear the squishband of unburned gasses. How far can we extend this speculation?!! We could offer Singh a whole bunch of plausible-sounding techno-blather for his website.
Perhaps I shouldn't say anything; I'm the guy who is "golf-balling" (dimpling) various surfaces in my new 300, whenever I get a chance. Today I did some dimpling on an 18hp Onan that I'm rebuilding for my welder. Y'all are gonna help me spread wild claims about dimpling, right??
Perhaps I shouldn't say anything; I'm the guy who is "golf-balling" (dimpling) various surfaces in my new 300, whenever I get a chance. Today I did some dimpling on an 18hp Onan that I'm rebuilding for my welder. Y'all are gonna help me spread wild claims about dimpling, right??
Absolutely! We had a hail storm awhile back, maybe we could get some of the damaged cars into the wind tunnel. 
I think, in keeping with the hundred pound rule, there are lots of small gains that can be added. If you have built your engine with attention to detail, the extra gains will be small. While we are on the subject of small gains, I want to know how you are going to get the dimples in those grooves.
It would be so nice to have a small dyno in the back yard, to be able to prove or dispell these mods.
I think, in keeping with the hundred pound rule, there are lots of small gains that can be added. If you have built your engine with attention to detail, the extra gains will be small. While we are on the subject of small gains, I want to know how you are going to get the dimples in those grooves.
It would be so nice to have a small dyno in the back yard, to be able to prove or dispell these mods.
Be nice if your name was Rockefeller,too.Hehehehe.By the by,I seem to slightly remember how HP was figured BEFORE dynos came along.A weight of 2000lb was raised one ft in one minute(IIRC) to measureHP.Raise it for a SHORTER lengeth of time and divide the difference.There`s your "back yard dyno".Leo
feeding?
A
Anonymous
Guest
Dimpled grooves . . . the mind boggles.
The trouble is that even with a dyno none of us could do any meaningful scientific testing with all the controlled conditions and isolated variables because we all are busy making a living. You have to have some sympathy for Singh on this point, since it is obvious from his website that he has the same problem. I think he is trying to generate some buzz and some cash so that he can pursue his ideas. In my case, I won't be able to prove a thing with my dimples (other than whether the water/alky injection will keep them free of carbon). I greatly admire and envy David Vizard for having got to a position where he can do meaningful dyno testing of his ideas. I would dearly love to see our Deano get to a similar situation; just think of how we all could pester him with our zany projects!!
The trouble is that even with a dyno none of us could do any meaningful scientific testing with all the controlled conditions and isolated variables because we all are busy making a living. You have to have some sympathy for Singh on this point, since it is obvious from his website that he has the same problem. I think he is trying to generate some buzz and some cash so that he can pursue his ideas. In my case, I won't be able to prove a thing with my dimples (other than whether the water/alky injection will keep them free of carbon). I greatly admire and envy David Vizard for having got to a position where he can do meaningful dyno testing of his ideas. I would dearly love to see our Deano get to a similar situation; just think of how we all could pester him with our zany projects!!
UhhhhhhhhhhhThad.Use your vehicle.I`m quite sure that the math could be worked out fairly easy.Leo
