wesley_uk2k
|
| posted on 12/7/05 at 10:59 PM |
|
|
My custom Fuel Tank - Comments Please (with pics)
I've drawn up some plans for a fuel tank. If anyone can see any potential problems with the internal swirl pot or baffles, please can you
suggest changes. The last thing I want, is to get the thing made and find it doen't work properly.
At the bottom, I've posted an image of an internal swirl pot, to give you an idea of what I'm aiming to achieve. The whole thing will be
made from 16swg aluminium
Roughly how many holes should I have in the baffles and how big should they be?
p.s. This isn't designed for a book chassis.
.JPG)
|
|
|
|
|
clbarclay
|
| posted on 12/7/05 at 11:59 PM |
|
|
The holes in baffels must be big enough to allow feul to pass through them quicker than the feul will enter the tank. Other wise the tank will fill
unevenly.
Make sure there is a hole at the very top of each baffel to prevent an air lock and the tank not being able to filling fully.
Purely curiosety, but whats the origin of the photographed swirl pot?
[Edited on 13/7/05 by clbarclay]
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 13/7/05 at 07:31 AM |
|
|
looks like one from an Opel Manta, but I may be wrong!
|
|
|
wesley_uk2k
|
| posted on 13/7/05 at 08:03 AM |
|
|
I'm sure where I got it from said it was Ford based. Not entirely sure though.
One last question, can the pipe to the engine go straight into the high pressure pump and then to the engine? or will it need a low pressure pump
first to bring the fuel up?
Does the pump go as near to the tank as possible?
|
|
|
Mix
|
| posted on 13/7/05 at 09:17 AM |
|
|
I would not extend the baffles to the top of the tank, (probably stop about 40mm short), this gets around the issues highlighted earlier of trapping
air and difficulty filling.
Mick
I would also make the feed to the pump a gravity one, ie from the bottom of the swirl pot through the bottom (or close to) of the tank
[Edited on 13/7/05 by Mix]
|
|
|
wesley_uk2k
|
| posted on 13/7/05 at 10:38 AM |
|
|
Mick: The trouble is that the tank is about as low as anything could go, and I don't really want to raise it.
I'm definatly doing your suggestion about not going right to the top with the baffles. I hadn't thought about the filling up process.
Also, I suppose that the baffles aren't as important as they normally are, as I've got the internal swirl pot. I think I should err on
the side of caution and make the holes fairly big.
|
|
|
Mix
|
| posted on 13/7/05 at 10:47 AM |
|
|
How about coming through the side of the tank near to the bottom ?
Mick
|
|
|
Bob C
|
| posted on 13/7/05 at 11:17 AM |
|
|
So that's how you do a swirl pot - makes perfect sense & is clearly far more practical than the bizzarre schemes I had in my head.
This site is a mine of information!
Bob C
|
|
|
wesley_uk2k
|
| posted on 13/7/05 at 11:21 AM |
|
|
I didn't have a clue either until I stumbled across that image.
Mick: I originally had the flow to the engine going out of the bottom on the front face of the tank. Not sure why I changed it really. Will
it just make it easier for the pump?
Also, will I just need the one pump?
|
|
|
Donuts
|
| posted on 13/7/05 at 11:34 AM |
|
|
this may be a stupid question but, what does the swirl pot do? is it like the baffles - to stop fuel starvation during long fast corners?
Fly Like a mouse, Run Like a cushion, Be the small Bookcase
|
|
|
Mix
|
| posted on 13/7/05 at 11:40 AM |
|
|
My reason for having the pump gravity fed is that the pumps use fuel as a lubricant and running them 'dry' can lead to rapid wear / break
up / siezure.
As for how many pumps, normal practice is one low pressure one high pressure, but I'm investigating using the return from the regulator to
'power' a jet pump.
All of the above assumes an injection system.
Mick
|
|
|
