jkarran
|
| posted on 1/2/07 at 10:28 AM |
|
|
Supercharged R1 management
Hello all, I'm new here but have lurked a bit for a couple of years.
Im fitting a CooperS M45 roots blower to my 2003 R1 motor. It will be intercooled and I plan to run roughly 10psi boost, CR will be 9.5:1. There will
be a manifold-vacuum opperated bypass valve to dump boost under low load conditions.
Does anyone have experience of forced induction on the R1?
I plan to use a PowerCommander to correct the fueling, perhaps with a higher pressure fuel rail to reduce peak injector duration. I'd like to
avoid running a second rail for a couple of reasons. Sounds like I can get a PC that will do the ignition timing as well (Might have a PCIII USB for
sale at bargain price if that's the case).
As I understand it the PC adds or subtracts a % of injector duration for each rpm/throttle site. The stock ecu uses: rpm/MAP and throttle position (+
some other terms like atmP, inletT, waterT) to adjust fueling. Does anyone know, will the stock ECU cope with positive MAP?
Sorry for the essay!
jk
|
|
|
|
|
Agriv8
|
| posted on 1/2/07 at 10:57 AM |
|
|
I would think the powercomander would do it.
You adjust the injector open via a table that runs RPM up the side and throttle across the top so you could say add + 10 fuel at throtle open 5% at
5000 rpm ect.
Power comander have also inroduced an in line switch box this may be able to be used to control an electronic dump system ( have a look on there
website - not played with one of these yet ).
Ignition timming not sure on that
Think there are some downloads of spec sheets on the powercomander site.
regards
Agriv8
Taller than your average Guy !
Management is like a tree of monkeys. - Those at the top look down and see a tree full of smiling faces. BUT Those at the bottom look up and see a
tree full of a*seholes .............
|
|
|
G.Man
|
| posted on 1/2/07 at 11:08 AM |
|
|
fuel pressure you can change with a good pump and a fuel pressure regulator.. often called boost valves for turbo cars..
Got mine from rally design..
PC3R will do fueling and ignition, but I havent checked if there is one for the FI R1, but I am assuming so..
I dont think there is a way of adjusting a stock R1 map, al the race bikes I know use either a PC3R or better, standalone ecu such as motec.
I am sure a megasquirt could be used as well...
Opinions are like backsides..
Everyone has one, nobody wants to hear it and only other peoples stink!
|
|
|
jkarran
|
 posted on 1/2/07 at 11:26 AM |
|
|
Cheers guys,
My concern is that, because of the recirculate valve the manifold pressure (and hence required fuel) will vary with engine load for a given rpm/tps
site in the PC map. It'll work fine if the R1 MAP sensor (and stock software) can cope with significant positive pressure, I'd assume
it'll cope fine with a couple of psi from the ram ducts on the bike airbox at 180mph.
Without the re-circulate valve, close the throttle at high rpm and.... boom  stalled blower and bent butterflies!
Desperately trying to avoid megasquirt, I love the idea (I'm an electronic engineer so it would be easy enough) but I can't stand the
thought of building another engine loom.
jk
|
|
|
BenB
|
| posted on 1/2/07 at 12:06 PM |
|
|
Not sure the ins and outs of the PC but don't forget if you have the injectors in the pressurised part of the inlet system the fuel injectors
will see a lower pressure
ie fuel @ 3 bar, inlet @ 1 bar, injectors see 2 bar..
Rising rate fuel regs can compensate for that if the PC can't compensate for the lower pressure.
How are you going to lower CR? Your plan sounds very like the one I've got for my ST1100 lump... Not sure I'll go that high on the PSI
though- presumably you're going to run RON98? Intercooler? Water injection?
|
|
|
jkarran
|
| posted on 1/2/07 at 02:36 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by BenB
ie fuel @ 3 bar, inlet @ 1 bar, injectors see 2 bar..
Rising rate fuel regs can compensate for that if the PC can't compensate for the lower pressure.
How are you going to lower CR? Your plan sounds very like the one I've got for my ST1100 lump... Not sure I'll go that high on the PSI
though- presumably you're going to run RON98? Intercooler? Water injection?
Maybe I'm missing something here... the FPR on the R1 (and most aftermarket ones?) give you x psi pressure over the reference, ie gauge pressure
referenced to manifold pressure so there's always x bar across the injector irrespective of boost pressure.
I use 97/98 RON anyway so that's no big deal. I'm using a fan fed intercooler so that should work even for big standing starts (even if
the clutch/gearbox won t  ) Not planning water/methanol injection it'd drop out in the intercooler which is a pity as it'd really seal
the rotors up nice for better efficiency.
Going to use a 2mm aluminium decompression plate on top of the head gasket to get the CR down. I don't like the loss of squish and it's
not the most elegant solution but it is fairly simple, if it causes problems then I'll have to look at shorter pistons/rods or machined
combustion chamber, problem is £££.
10psi does sound high but it should be ok with intercooling, low CR, cool plugs 98RON fuel and mapped ignition.
jk
|
|
|
chockymonster
|
| posted on 1/2/07 at 02:42 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by CaLviNx
Hi
You might have a hard time finding a PCIIIR.
Dynojet research stopped making them in last quarter of 2005, they have been replaced by the PCIIIUSB but you need to buy the fuel and ignition
modules separately as they don't come as a complete unit, and you might need the junction box to wire them together.
You can't get an ignition module for the 03 R1, it's a PC3R or nothing 
PLEASE NOTE - Responses on Forum Threads may contain Sarcasm and may not be suitable for the hard of Thinking.
|
|
|
BenB
|
| posted on 1/2/07 at 02:47 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by jkarran
quote:
Originally posted by BenB
ie fuel @ 3 bar, inlet @ 1 bar, injectors see 2 bar..
Rising rate fuel regs can compensate for that if the PC can't compensate for the lower pressure.
How are you going to lower CR? Your plan sounds very like the one I've got for my ST1100 lump... Not sure I'll go that high on the PSI
though- presumably you're going to run RON98? Intercooler? Water injection?
Maybe I'm missing something here... the FPR on the R1 (and most aftermarket ones?) give you x psi pressure over the reference, ie gauge pressure
referenced to manifold pressure so there's always x bar across the injector irrespective of boost pressure.
I use 97/98 RON anyway so that's no big deal. I'm using a fan fed intercooler so that should work even for big standing starts (even if
the clutch/gearbox won t ) Not planning water/methanol injection it'd drop out in the intercooler which is a pity as it'd really seal
the rotors up nice for better efficiency.
Going to use a 2mm aluminium decompression plate on top of the head gasket to get the CR down. I don't like the loss of squish and it's
not the most elegant solution but it is fairly simple, if it causes problems then I'll have to look at shorter pistons/rods or machined
combustion chamber, problem is £££.
10psi does sound high but it should be ok with intercooling, low CR, cool plugs 98RON fuel and mapped ignition.
jk
All sounds good. If the fuel reg is referenced its all good. Just need to make sure the pump can handle it....
I'm intrigued re the ali decompression plate- is there an advantage / disadvantage over the copper ones made by places like Ferriday? I'm
planning to use one of those on my install to get the comp down....
|
|
|
rf900rush
|
| posted on 1/2/07 at 03:35 PM |
|
|
Hi
I had wonder for a while on turbo or super chargers a an upgrade for My RF900.
How do you intend to drive the M45.
I seen drives taking from then Right hand cover (Crank timing sensor I think) on the Hayabusa's.
Do have any pitcures of your setup yet?
Martin
|
|
|
jkarran
|
| posted on 1/2/07 at 04:20 PM |
|
|
Regarding the decmp plate. I'm looking at the Ferriday ones, from what I've gathered from email correspondance, the main advantage of ally
over copper is the reduced electrolytic corrosion and better thermal-expansion matching. Sounds like either material works though. It just happens
that 2mm suits my application and is available in ally.
Re the power take off. I plan to machine up an extension that will bolt onto the crank nose on top of the timing trigger wheel, I'll fit a
longer dowel through the trigger wheel and into the extension to reduce the risk of it spinning. I'll almost certainly also add an extra support
bearing in the seal housing. Whether that will bolt onto the existing cover or a new fabricated one is open for debate once I have a closer look at
the strength of the cover.
Pully will be fabricated to suit the extension.
If I advance the trigger wheel a few degrees (by fileing welding up and re-drilling the indexing hole) it wont be hard to make a mapable delay device
to electronically adjust the spark timing, just a pain in the ass as I hate writing software  The stock ecu would (should... not sure about the
cam sensor?) never know it was getting an adjusted signal.
Some photos of progress so far at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/47666095@N00 and http://s118.photobucket.com/albums/o118/jkarran/
jk
|
|
|
hobbsy
|
| posted on 1/2/07 at 05:16 PM |
|
|
I too have a 2003 5PW R1 and an ex-Mini Cooper S M45 lying around and also a PC3R (bought with forced induction and therefore ignition timing control
in mind).
I wasn't planning on making a start for a while yet and had also toyed with the idea of a turbo instead, Mitsi turbo - similar setup to that
seen on http://www.turbo-bike.net/ except FI.
Getting the drive right is the thing that concerns me the most. Plus the M45 will take a bit of driving and not the most efficient unit, will it
provide enough for the good side of 200bhp without heating up the air too much? They can't be that good a unit if all these people are
replacing them on their Mini's - surely they'd just spin them faster with a smaller pulley if they weren't already close to their
efficiency limit?
I could well be wrong as I haven't looked into it that much yet.
The low down grunt would be good though, but that said bike engines love revs and so do turbo's - work really well looking at the power / torque
graphs I've seen.
A custom fanimold to bolt a turbo on often seems like less work than taking off a supercharger drive...
Please keep in touch (I'll send you a U2U later) as I'd love to know your progress - taking a look at your photos now.
|
|
|
hobbsy
|
| posted on 1/2/07 at 06:19 PM |
|
|
Other thing with the PC3 (USB or 'R' I've heard is that you can't make adjustments in real time unless you have the
"Tuning Link" kit which IIRC only PowerCommander dealers have access to. So your average rolling road place or if you had a go yourself
with a wideband lambda you'd have to do a run / visit load sites and log what the fuelling / power is doing then go back to the map, make the
changes you think then upload it and try again to see if you got it right.
With a realtime mapping system as you know you can get the rollers to hold it on a load site and then tweak the fuelling / ignition there and then to
optimise the AFR / power / EGT etc.
If you can't do it realtime then that means a lot more time on the rollers and rolling road time ain't cheap.
I'm also not sure what the situation is with he PC3R and Tuning Link - I need to do more research. Seems like a bit of a limitation. I think
what a lot of the bikers do is use it with a known race exhaust (eg Akvropovic (sp?)) and upload an existing optimised map to the PC that
they've downloaded.
|
|
|
G.Man
|
| posted on 1/2/07 at 07:12 PM |
|
|
Yes you are right, you cannot do the fueling in real time, but you can tweak and upload while the engine is running..
Of course, you can always map on the road, cheaper than a roling road
Opinions are like backsides..
Everyone has one, nobody wants to hear it and only other peoples stink!
|
|
|
hobbsy
|
| posted on 1/2/07 at 08:14 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by G.Man
Yes you are right, you cannot do the fueling in real time, but you can tweak and upload while the engine is running..
Of course, you can always map on the road, cheaper than a roling road
Bit of a limitation though even if it is a piggyback unit - the Greddy E-manage unit I used on my ~370bhp 200SX was also a piggyback unit and similar
money but could be mapped in realtime.
The Tuning Link thing actually does more than what I first said in that it uses live data from the dyno to assist you in tuning. Why they can't
give you a live remap I don't know.
As for mapping on the road thats what I meant when I said "have a go yourself with a wideband lambda".
The PC3R / USB units are cheaper than standalone management and better than the Techlusion unit I have on it at the moment (has a few pots that you
adjust with a screwdriver - no PC interface!) but once you've factored in a lot of extra rolling road time (if you want to get it accurately
mapped) the total price might not be that much less than a standalone unit / MegaSquirt (lot more work to fit though).
|
|
|
G.Man
|
| posted on 1/2/07 at 08:30 PM |
|
|
I agree it is, it's useful for most applications in that there are a lot of base maps to pick from tho, this makes things easier when you arnt
dealing with forced induction..
Isnt a supercharger far more linear than a turbo tho? So maybe a boost to the fuel rail pressure is the best way to start?
Opinions are like backsides..
Everyone has one, nobody wants to hear it and only other peoples stink!
|
|
|
jkarran
|
| posted on 2/2/07 at 10:37 AM |
|
|
I'd done a couple of long ish reply which were deleted (not logged in as it turns out) last night! Grrr...
I hadn't realised the PC wasn't real time mappable, that's 'good' to know, definitely leaning more toward MS and a
second fuel rail now. Just need to figure out if I can drive the 4 ignition coils without resorting to wasted spark, sounds like I can having scanned
the MS forums but I'm not sure exactly how yet.
Whatever I do, I am now resigned to chopping my engine loom about, ah well, it's better than settling for a bad compromise to avoid 5hrs
work.
To anyone looking at the M45 blower for their bike motor, do your research and calculations very carefully, the gains (on paper) aren't huge. If
you want big power, look elsewhere, I just fancied a unique project.
jk
|
|
|
hobbsy
|
| posted on 2/2/07 at 06:08 PM |
|
|
Bummer about your deleted posts. You said about 25% gain in torque, do you predict a similar gain in horsepower or will it heat the air up too much
at higher speeds?
Assuming 25% gain on both thats something like 200bhp and 100ft/lb, so similar to a NA tuned Busa? How much weight do you think it will add in total
inc intercooler etc?
For it to be worth the hassle I was thinking 225 to 250bhp which according to that URL I was posting is still feasible and hopefully reasonably
reliable from a turbo R1 which standard bottom end etc just a compression drop.
In a BEC weighing <450Kg's that would give a healthy >500bhp/ton Which is better than a <1000bhp (just) >2ton Bugatti Vernon
Except you wouldn't have 4wd and all that to crack 3 seconds to 60 consistently
|
|
|
jkarran
|
| posted on 2/2/07 at 09:23 PM |
|
|
Without going mad on the boost (~10psi) my calculations come out at about 205bhp peak, that's real horsepower at the clutch ie including SC
drive losses.
The calculations are based on a book I have, forced induction performance tuning by A Graham Bell. They include the effect of pully ratio, leakage in
the SC, charge heating, intercooling density gain, intercooler pressure drop, intercooler efficiency, SC power useage, atm P, atm T, altitude, power
loss due to decompressing the engine and probably some terms I've forgotten
The big uncertainties are how much power the engine could make in its decompressed state (if it were normally aspirated) as this is the basic block
upon which you build, not the ~165bhp stock motor. This is the main reason the gains aren't more impressive. Looking at a Fazer might give me an
idea how much a detuned R1 will make.
At 1 bar it'll make (according to calculation) ~235bhp and inlet temperature is still just about under control (underbonnet temp will soar
though due to the IC location). I'd rather have 200-210bhp that doesnt melt than 240 that does. Improved IC efficiency would make this feasable
(water spray and or injection?).
It was never going to be a big power project, if I wanted big power then turbo or NOS would have been the obvious choice.
There'lll be lots of power to be found if the gearbox and clutch hold up and I still want more.
I might also consider junking the Quaife transfer box which should increase performance and robustness. One to think about anyway especially as it
would nicely offset the 20 or so kilos I've added.
jk
ps that covers most of the lost posts
|
|
|
hobbsy
|
| posted on 3/2/07 at 02:24 PM |
|
|
I have the same book - its good isn't it.
Still very interested in your progress. Are you fabricating all the bits yourself? What are you doing on the intake side of things - airbox around
the existing throttle bodies or a plenum with a single throttle body?
|
|
|
jkarran
|
| posted on 4/2/07 at 09:11 PM |
|
|
I'm planning a welded ally plenum that will also be the top tank of an integrated intercooler. I've made all the bits but I'm still
psyching myself up to buy a tig setup to put it together That all sits on the standard throttle bodies, the only mod I plan to them is connecting
the flat slide diaphragms to manifold pressure.
Check out the photos I linked to on pg 1 for a better idea how I'm plumbing it.
jk
|
|
|
G.Man
|
| posted on 5/2/07 at 06:31 AM |
|
|
Fazer isnt really a detuned R1, more a restricted R1 as is uses smaller bore carbs/tb's and slightly different head/camshafts...
It is capable of making the same power and torque with a few mods... so I would imagine the calculations will yield similar potential?
Opinions are like backsides..
Everyone has one, nobody wants to hear it and only other peoples stink!
|
|
|
clutch_kick
|
| posted on 6/2/07 at 03:23 PM |
|
|
What size/make are the R1 03+ Injectors?
Anyone got a clue as to what sort of trigger the ECU uses to read engine speed?
|
|
|
tks
|
| posted on 6/2/07 at 03:56 PM |
|
|
the mcu
has a couple of sensors
- cam shaft
- crank shaft.
it will defo use the crank shaft for timeing and for rpm
and the camshaft to calculate Sequential injection point.
Tks
The above comments are always meant to be from the above persons perspective.
|
|
|
clutch_kick
|
| posted on 6/2/07 at 10:39 PM |
|
|
Ah it uses a secondary input. I'm trying to figure out if i can wire the stock sensors to a Haltech E11 ecu ... if it's not such a big
deal then it might be fun to turbo the R1 engine ... 220-230bhp ... nothing too drastic ... just enough to give you a receding hairline 
|
|
|
jkarran
|
| posted on 6/2/07 at 10:55 PM |
|
|
Crank sensor is a 2 wire job, probably variable reluctance on an 8-0 trigger wheel, details of the trigger wheel timing are in the official service
manual.
Cam sensor is a 3 wire item, pwr, gnd and signal out, probably hall effect.
No reason why you couldn't tap into those so long as the extra ECU inputs were high impedance and you were careful about grounding to avoid
creating a big interference gathering loop which would potentially upset your stock sensor readings. You should also be able to tap into the MAP
sensor though wether you could use it or not would depend very much on whether you could calibrate the new ecu to work with it.
jk
|
|
|
