6" SS EXHAUST STACK

[Joyce and Richard Hayden]

Kurt & David and others who might be following this discussion as I have.

When you introduced the Bernoulli's Equation into this discussion I figured it was time to ask my brother for help. He has some background with advanced math and has been helpful to another of our group in the past. I forwarded to him the messages at the bottom to give him some background and data that had already been offered. I notice now that this subject has died down somewhat so far today but here is his message to me anyway. I am not going to pretend that I understand all of it but it seems that going from 6" to 5" isn't going to be the end of the world. I know you two have Series 60 engines and I have the older 8v92 but the problem is the same and I have discovered a holds in the elbow that goes into the muffler. That elbow is probably unobtainable or if it is would be quite expensive. So, I was considering 5" as many others have.

Any, here is my brother Steve Hayden's response to me - unedited:

Brother,

You have stretched the limits of my memory on this one! The last time I thought about fluid flow and the Bernoulli Principal was probably 40 or so years ago. Not to worry; it is fun to fire up the old neurons. I'll try to answer your question below. The response isn't technically rigorous as some of your forum buddies may point out. It does seem to make sense though.

As I understand the question, it goes something like this. Does changing the diameter of the exhaust system on the bus from six inches to five inches result in any noticeable decrease in performance? I understand that the exhaust system runs from the manifolds to a turbocharger and then out through a muffler to the atmosphere. If one constricts the exhaust from the outlet of the turbocharger which results in a higher pressure at the output, then the turbocharger efficiency decreases. Have I got that about right?

If so, then the answer is changing from six inch diameter to five inch is very unlikely to result in any detectable decrease in performance. Here's the logic I used to reach this conclusion.

To make the calculation, one uses one of the forms of Bernoulli's Equation. I saw in one of the posts you sent me a reference to a nice discussion of Bernoulli's Equation. This discussion is correct in that it points out that Bernoulli's Equation is an energy conservation equation which means you can't get something for nothing. This equation only holds when no outside work is being done on the system nor is the system doing any work on the outside. Consequently, as was pointed out in the posting, the Bernoulli Equation applies to the ideal situation of, for example, non-compressible gas, laminar flow (non-turbulent), no friction with the pipe walls and so on.

Accounting for these non-ideal conditions from first principles is tedious and usually results in equations that cannot be solved in closed form. Engineers get around this by putting correction terms in the equation and then determining the coefficients of the correction terms by experimentation. This is a science within itself and not as easy as I just made it sound. Fortunately, engineers have been interested in fluid, including gas, flow in pipes for such applications as gas and oil pipelines and have derived equations for these applications. I did find an on-line calculator at http://www.pipeflowcalculations.com/ which I used to make my analysis.

Of course, I had to make some assumptions to plug into the calculator. With your help, I came up with the flowing. The amount of exhaust gas that must be expelled out the exhaust pipe per unit time was 24,000 liters/min. You estimated this from the displacement of the engine cylinders times the number of cylinders times the rpm of the engine. We also agreed that the length of pipe from the turbocharger to the exhaust outlet at 7 feet and the temperature of the exhaust at 500 F. I assumed the exhaust pipe was smooth with a roughness of lest than one thousandth of an inch. The local resistance coefficient which accounts for bends in the exhaust pipe and other local constraints was tougher. I used the calculator default value of 1 but also did a sensitivity analysis.

Since the pressure at the exhaust pipe outlet is atmospheric (14.7 psi), I calculated the pressure drop from the turbocharger outlet to atmosphere along the length of the exhaust pipe for different pipe diameters. The result is shown graphically below.

Note that the pressure drop axis is logarithmic. So the difference in pressure drop between a 5 and 6 inch diameter pipe is only about 0.15 psi. In fact, the pressure drop is less than 1 psi for exhaust pipes 3.5 inches and larger.

I did change the local resistance coefficient to see the effect. At the default value of 1 and for a 5 inch diameter pipe, the pressure drop is 0.25 psi. An order of magnitude less at 0.1 results in a pressure drop of 0.09 psi and an order of magnitude larger at 10, 1.8 psi.

I don't know what the pressure at the turbocharger input is but seems unlikely that a pressure change of 1 psi or less at the turbocharger output would result in a detectable decrease in performance. Perhaps someone on your forum has this number.

Since many systems are over designed to have a safety margin, it also seems to make sense that changing to 5 inch diameter from 6 inch should make little difference.

Hope this helps. Feel free to cut and paste onto the forum if you like. Any questions, you know where I live.

Steve

----- Original Message -----

From: "kguns@hughes.net"

To: "WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com"

Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 8:24 PM

Subject: [WanderlodgeForum] Re: 6" SS EXHAUST STACK

David,

A few days ago you were all for a straight pipe.

Now we have delved into the effects and merits of the, "Bernoulli
effect" it presumes that the density of the flowing gas is constant,
which will not necessarily be true in this application.

If this were a consideration and a factor in design and function
wouldn't this be a standard application on all exhausts, considering
today's drive for better performance Vs energy expended Vs
particulate
matter expelled Vs whatever else the EPA thinks we should be
ejecting from our exhaust pipes?

One factor you may have not considered are the exhaust blankets I
mentioned. They will retain the heat within the pipes thus increasing
the velocity of the exhaust creating an accelerated flow of gasses
through the tubes.

If I may present another observation, 5" exhaust systems are the
standard on all production class 8 trucks.

Furthermore and for the heck of it I don't believe that the trucker
that has 8" stacks on his rig has considered the, "Bernoulli effect"
in his choice at the Chrome Shop. Although it mat have an effect on
performance further than just looking cool. They do look good, no
doubt.

For the last four weeks I have queried Detroit Diesel, Custom Exhaust
Fabricators, Several OEM Exhaust Mfg.'s, Marine Exhaust Engineers &
Fabricators, My BB Guru, and anyone else that would lend an ear, and
no one has expressed any apprehension or regard in the respect to a
5" exhaust system. In fact all parties expressed their surprise in
respect as to why the system would change size at the muffler.

Several owners have modified their systems to 5" from end to end, and
have seen no change in performance. Positive or negative, In general
it was just a matter of convenience in acquiring parts, I won't get
into that. That has recently been beaten to death at the expense of
all parties involved

If there is someone who would like to further this debate with
Imperical evidence of the merits of, or placing a venturi somewhere
in this exhaust system I have pasted a site below where you can
formulate your calculations. I would love to see some evidence of a
positive effect, in which case I would have no problem in adding a
venturi crimp in the exhaust system.

Bernoulli Calculation

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/pber.html#beq

The calculation of the "real world" pressure in a constriction of a
tube is difficult to do because of viscous losses, turbulence, and
the assumptions which must be made about the velocity profile (which
affect the calculated kinetic energy). The model calculation here
assumes laminar flow (no turbulence), assumes that the distance from
the larger diameter to the smaller is short enough that viscous
losses can be neglected, and assumes that the velocity profile
follows that of theoretical laminar flow. Specifically, this involves
assuming that the effective flow velocity is one half of the maximum
velocity, and that the average kinetic energy density is given by one
third of the maximum kinetic energy density.

Now if you can swallow all those assumptions, you can model* the flow
in a tube where the volume flow rate is = cm3/s and the fluid density
is ñ = gm/cm3. For an inlet tube area A1= cm2 (radius r1 =cm), the
geometry of flow leads to an effective fluid velocity of v1 =cm/s.
Since the Bernoulli equation includes the fluid potential energy as
well, the height of the inlet tube is specified as h1 = cm. If the
area of the tube is constricted to A2=cm2 (radius r1 = cm), then
without any further assumptions the effective fluid velocity in the
constriction must be v2 = cm/s. The height of the constricted tube
is specified as h2 = cm.

The kinetic energy densities at the two locations in the tube can now
be calculated, and the Bernoulli equation applied to constrain the
process to conserve energy, thus giving a value for the pressure in
the constriction. First, specify a pressure in the inlet tube:
Inlet pressure = P1 = kPa = lb/in2 = mmHg = atmos.
The energy densities can now be calculated. The energy unit for the
CGS units used is the erg.

Inlet tube energy densities
Kinetic energy density = erg/cm3
Potential energy density = erg/cm3
Pressure energy density = erg/cm3
Constricted tube energy densities
Kinetic energy density = erg/cm3
Potential energy density = erg/cm3
Pressure energy density = erg/cm3


The pressure energy density in the constricted tube can now be
finally converted into more conventional pressure units to see the
effect of the constricted flow on the fluid pressure:

Calculated pressure in constriction =
P2= kPa = lb/in2 = mmHg = atmos.

This calculation can give some perspective on the energy involved in
fluid flow, but it's accuracy is always suspect because of the
assumption of laminar flow. For typical inlet conditions, the energy
density associated with the pressure will be dominant on the input
side; after all, we live at the bottom of an atmospheric sea which
contributes a large amount of pressure energy. If a drastic enough
reduction in radius is used to yield a pressure in the constriction
which is less than atmospheric pressure, there is almost certainly
some turbulence involved in the flow into that constriction.
Nevertheless, the calculation can show why we can get a significant
amount of suction (pressure less than atmospheric) with
an "aspirator" on a high pressure faucet. These devices consist of a
metal tube of reducing radius with a side tube into the region of
constricted radius for suction.

*Note: Some default values will be entered for some of the values as
you start exploring the calculation. All of them can be changed as a
part of your calculation.

Kurt Horvath
95 PT 42
10AC

> > > >
> > > > --- In "WanderlodgeForum%40yahoogroups.com"
> > Forum%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > > Forum%40yahoogroups.com>, David Brady

> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Kurt,
> > > > >
> > > > > No thanks, I already have a stock muffler. Thanks for the
links,
> > > > > there's some pretty nifty items there. Be careful with
those fancy
> > > > > braided stainless steel pieces. They look sharp, but
they've always
> > > > > leaked on my turbocharged subaru wrx. Kurt, you've been
around
> > > > > a few over-the-road coaches, Prevost' and what not, what do
they
> > > > > run on their exhaust systems; i.e., expansion pipes, flex
pipe, etc.
> > > > >
> > > > > David Brady
> > > > > '02 LXi, NC
> > > > >
> > > > > Kurt Horvath wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > David, Would you like to take that brand new muffler off
my
> > > > hands???
> > > > > >
> > > > > > According to DD straight pipe & ECU will not have any
issues in
> > > > the
> > > > > > 95 vintage S 60.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > OEM built that pipe for BB ACAP - As Cheep As Possible -
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The original routing of the pipe leaves the turbo, source
of the
> > > > > > first failure, cracked the 1st 90 degree turn a short
straight run
> > > > > > 2nd. 90 degree turn, then into a double ball connector
that also
> > > > > > telescopes in and out. You can check out that piece of S--
-, sorry
> > > > > > engineering wonder here.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/downloads/DP_Catalog_03_pg70-
> > <http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/downloads/DP_Catalog_03_pg70->
> > > > <http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/downloads/DP_Catalog_03_pg70-

> > <http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/downloads/DP_Catalog_03_pg70->>
> > > > 89.pdf
> > > > > >
<http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/downloads/DP_Catalog_03_pg70-
> > <http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/downloads/DP_Catalog_03_pg70->
> > > > <http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/downloads/DP_Catalog_03_pg70-

> > <http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/downloads/DP_Catalog_03_pg70->>
> > > > 89.pdf>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Page 76 Double Ball Joint with Slip Joint Feature
Allowing Lateral
> > > > > > Movement length 16 to 18 inches mine measures 14 .55
inches at
> > > > > > present. This marvel allows for 10 degrees of angularity
360
> > > > degree
> > > > > > rotation 2" of offset 2" axial movement,. Hell the u
joints can't
> > > > > > move around that much. Besides it was hard clamped to the
mount
> > > > from
> > > > > > the engine in front of this connection not to mention
rusted to
> > > > the
> > > > > > point that it took an pneumatic impact chisel to get it
apart.. So
> > > > > > what's the point. You need flex in between the turbo and
the first
> > > > > > mount.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The Flex Connector with liner I choose is here at
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?
> > <http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?>
> > > > <http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?
> > <http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?>>
> > > > > > <http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?
> > <http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?>
> > > > <http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?
> > <http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?>>>
> > > > > >
> > > >
cPath=1022_1035_1064_1114&products_id=1008&osCsid=999d7ef5fdd15864bae3
> > > > > > 3db41abf5ef9
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The 2 90 degree turns were fabricated in that manner
because it's
> > > > not
> > > > > > easy to bend large diameter pipe in a single 180 degree
bend, thus
> > > > > > they weld 2 90's together, which is the industry standard
for
> > > > > > manufacturing a 180 degree turn in large pipe exhausts.
Well this
> > > > > > ain't the factory and we're not constrained by what is
easy. I
> > > > have
> > > > > > acquired a 14ga 180 degree U-Tube that has the same
external
> > > > > > dimensions as the original pipe. I'm not an engineer but I
> > > > reasonably
> > > > > > certain that with the remaining 90 degree bend and a 45
degree
> > > > bend
> > > > > > there will be sufficient back pressure.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There will also be a flexible pipe hanger mount behind
the Flex
> > > > > > connector mounted on the ceiling of the engine
compartment that
> > > > will
> > > > > > support the middle section of pipe and will allow for any
movement
> > > > > > and or torque that may be transferred to the pipe by the
motor.
> > > > The
> > > > > > original clamps for the muffler have to go as they are 6"
but the
> > > > > > rubber isolated mounting bars will remain and that's all
that was
> > > > > > there to begin with. So where's the rub? Bub!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Not to take anything away from the engineers that
designed the
> > > > Bird,
> > > > > > But there are some glaring deficiencies. 7 way trailer
plug, Air
> > > > > > Purge System, Watts valve, Accelerator and Brake peddles,
Front
> > > > Left
> > > > > > Shock Mount, Relay for Jake Brake, W/D Vent for Slendide
2000,
> > > > > > Installation of Refrigerator with inadequate convection,
The seat
> > > > > > belts mounted to floor instead of the seat, That reminds
me I
> > > > still
> > > > > > have to fix that one. Nothing like hitting a road
transition just
> > > > to
> > > > > > have the air ride seat bounce and the seat belts
automatically
> > > > adjust
> > > > > > for the slack then the air ride seat rebounds and the
belts try to
> > > > > > cut you in half at the waist. That's just the 95 PT 42.
I'm not
> > > > > > bitchin! I'm fixin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kurt Horvath
> > > > > > 95 PT 42
> > > > > > 10AC
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In "WanderlodgeForum%40yahoogroups.com"
> > Forum%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > > Forum%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > > > > Forum%40yahoogroups.com>, David Brady

> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Kurt,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I agree with Greg. I'm gonna keep mine stock. There's a
bunch
> > > > > > > of vibration and movement back there. I figure BB's been
> > > > building
> > > > > > > buses a whole lot longer than I have. Initially I'd
scratch my
> > > > > > > head when looking at the frame and support pieces, but
when
> > > > > > > you consider that something as big as a bus must twist
and flex,
> > > > > > > this flexibility needs to be designed in. Make one piece
> > > > stronger
> > > > > > > and you've created a stress raiser someplace else.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have a friend who transplanted a honda v-tech motor
into a
> > > > > > > lotus elise. Everything worked but the alternator
mount. The
> > > > mount
> > > > > > > insists on cracking. There can be some weird harmonics
and
> > > > > > > resonant frequencies going on that are difficult to
grasp and
> > > > > > > only trial and error and a 50 year track record of
building
> > > > buses
> > > > > > > can solve (unless you can model it and run high powered
> > > > > > > computer finite element analysis on it). He's still
fighting
> > > > that
> > > > > > > mount...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Okay, I'm off my soap box.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > David Brady
> > > > > > > '02 LXi, NC
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Gregory OConnor wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Kurt, try and figure why there were 4 bends. it may
be that
> > > > it was
> > > > > > > > engineered to alow for swing room between the 'hung
exhaust'
> > > > and
> > > > > > > > the 'torque reaction of the ruber mounted detroit'.
look at
> > > > the
> > > > > > roll
> > > > > > > > of the torque and see that there is a place for the
movement
> > > > to
> > > > > > twist
> > > > > > > > a union. I kinda think this movement was the problem
with the
> > > > > > > > resulting crack.
crack=result ;movement=cause ;facilitate
> > > > movement
> > > > > > > > =repair. may be that BB enginered it correct but
someone
> > > > > > > > overtightened a band to cure an exhaust leak???????
you also
> > > > got
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > keep the stack from cantilivering off of the maniford
with
> > > > your
> > > > > > new
> > > > > > > > design. Scavenging is one variable in fuel
efficiency. even
> > > > > > straight
> > > > > > > > pipes some time will result in lower fuel economy
because the
> > > > > > intake
> > > > > > > > variable get screwd. backpressure is mathed into the
computer.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------
----
> > > > > > ------
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> > > > > > > > Checked by AVG.
> > > > > > > > Version: 7.5.405 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1715 -
Release
> > > > Date:
> > > > > > 10/9/2008 12:00 AM
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > > > ------
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> > > > > > Checked by AVG.
> > > > > > Version: 7.5.405 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1715 - Release
Date:
> > > > 10/9/2008 12:00 AM
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> > > > Checked by AVG.
> > > > Version: 7.5.405 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1715 - Release
Date:
> > 10/9/2008 12:00 AM
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
------
> >
> > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> > Checked by AVG.
> > Version: 7.5.405 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1715 - Release Date:
10/9/2008 12:00 AM
> >
>

[Rob Robinson]

Richard I just replaced that elbow you are speaking of. It wasn't hard to find. In fact I had my supplier Mac Industrial Exhaust Vancouver BC modify it with a longer end on the end that goes into the pyro tube that goes directly into the turbo. Call me if you need more info 250 590-8050

2008/11/3 Joyce and Richard Hayden <"rhhayden@msn.com">

Kurt & David and others who might be following this discussion as I have.

When you introduced the Bernoulli's Equation into this discussion I figured it was time to ask my brother for help. He has some background with advanced math and has been helpful to another of our group in the past. I forwarded to him the messages at the bottom to give him some background and data that had already been offered. I notice now that this subject has died down somewhat so far today but here is his message to me anyway. I am not going to pretend that I understand all of it but it seems that going from 6" to 5" isn't going to be the end of the world. I know you two have Series 60 engines and I have the older 8v92 but the problem is the same and I have discovered a holds in the elbow that goes into the muffler. That elbow is probably unobtainable or if it is would be quite expensive. So, I was considering 5" as many others have.

Any, here is my brother Steve Hayden's response to me - unedited:

Brother,

You have stretched the limits of my memory on this one! The last time I thought about fluid flow and the Bernoulli Principal was probably 40 or so years ago. Not to worry; it is fun to fire up the old neurons. I'll try to answer your question below. The response isn't technically rigorous as some of your forum buddies may point out. It does seem to make sense though.

As I understand the question, it goes something like this. Does changing the diameter of the exhaust system on the bus from six inches to five inches result in any noticeable decrease in performance? I understand that the exhaust system runs from the manifolds to a turbocharger and then out through a muffler to the atmosphere. If one constricts the exhaust from the outlet of the turbocharger which results in a higher pressure at the output, then the turbocharger efficiency decreases. Have I got that about right?

If so, then the answer is changing from six inch diameter to five inch is very unlikely to result in any detectable decrease in performance. Here's the logic I used to reach this conclusion.

To make the calculation, one uses one of the forms of Bernoulli's Equation. I saw in one of the posts you sent me a reference to a nice discussion of Bernoulli's Equation. This discussion is correct in that it points out that Bernoulli's Equation is an energy conservation equation which means you can't get something for nothing. This equation only holds when no outside work is being done on the system nor is the system doing any work on the outside. Consequently, as was pointed out in the posting, the Bernoulli Equation applies to the ideal situation of, for example, non-compressible gas, laminar flow (non-turbulent), no friction with the pipe walls and so on.

Accounting for these non-ideal conditions from first principles is tedious and usually results in equations that cannot be solved in closed form. Engineers get around this by putting correction terms in the equation and then determining the coefficients of the correction terms by experimentation. This is a science within itself and not as easy as I just made it sound. Fortunately, engineers have been interested in fluid, including gas, flow in pipes for such applications as gas and oil pipelines and have derived equations for these applications. I did find an on-line calculator at http://www.pipeflowcalculations.com/ which I used to make my analysis.

Of course, I had to make some assumptions to plug into the calculator. With your help, I came up with the flowing. The amount of exhaust gas that must be expelled out the exhaust pipe per unit time was 24,000 liters/min. You estimated this from the displacement of the engine cylinders times the number of cylinders times the rpm of the engine. We also agreed that the length of pipe from the turbocharger to the exhaust outlet at 7 feet and the temperature of the exhaust at 500 F. I assumed the exhaust pipe was smooth with a roughness of lest than one thousandth of an inch. The local resistance coefficient which accounts for bends in the exhaust pipe and other local constraints was tougher. I used the calculator default value of 1 but also did a sensitivity analysis.

Since the pressure at the exhaust pipe outlet is atmospheric (14.7 psi), I calculated the pressure drop from the turbocharger outlet to atmosphere along the length of the exhaust pipe for different pipe diameters. The result is shown graphically below.

Note that the pressure drop axis is logarithmic. So the difference in pressure drop between a 5 and 6 inch diameter pipe is only about 0.15 psi. In fact, the pressure drop is less than 1 psi for exhaust pipes 3.5 inches and larger.

I did change the local resistance coefficient to see the effect. At the default value of 1 and for a 5 inch diameter pipe, the pressure drop is 0.25 psi. An order of magnitude less at 0.1 results in a pressure drop of 0.09 psi and an order of magnitude larger at 10, 1.8 psi.

I don't know what the pressure at the turbocharger input is but seems unlikely that a pressure change of 1 psi or less at the turbocharger output would result in a detectable decrease in performance. Perhaps someone on your forum has this number.

Since many systems are over designed to have a safety margin, it also seems to make sense that changing to 5 inch diameter from 6 inch should make little difference.

Hope this helps. Feel free to cut and paste onto the forum if you like. Any questions, you know where I live.

Steve

----- Original Message -----

From: "kguns@hughes.net"

To: "WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com"

Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 8:24 PM

Subject: [WanderlodgeForum] Re: 6" SS EXHAUST STACK

David,

A few days ago you were all for a straight pipe.

Now we have delved into the effects and merits of the, "Bernoulli
effect" it presumes that the density of the flowing gas is constant,

which will not necessarily be true in this application.

If this were a consideration and a factor in design and function
wouldn't this be a standard application on all exhausts, considering
today's drive for better performance Vs energy expended Vs

particulate
matter expelled Vs whatever else the EPA thinks we should be
ejecting from our exhaust pipes?

One factor you may have not considered are the exhaust blankets I
mentioned. They will retain the heat within the pipes thus increasing

the velocity of the exhaust creating an accelerated flow of gasses
through the tubes.

If I may present another observation, 5" exhaust systems are the
standard on all production class 8 trucks.


Furthermore and for the heck of it I don't believe that the trucker
that has 8" stacks on his rig has considered the, "Bernoulli effect"
in his choice at the Chrome Shop. Although it mat have an effect on

performance further than just looking cool. They do look good, no
doubt.

For the last four weeks I have queried Detroit Diesel, Custom Exhaust
Fabricators, Several OEM Exhaust Mfg.'s, Marine Exhaust Engineers &

Fabricators, My BB Guru, and anyone else that would lend an ear, and
no one has expressed any apprehension or regard in the respect to a
5" exhaust system. In fact all parties expressed their surprise in

respect as to why the system would change size at the muffler.

Several owners have modified their systems to 5" from end to end, and
have seen no change in performance. Positive or negative, In general

it was just a matter of convenience in acquiring parts, I won't get
into that. That has recently been beaten to death at the expense of
all parties involved

If there is someone who would like to further this debate with

Imperical evidence of the merits of, or placing a venturi somewhere
in this exhaust system I have pasted a site below where you can
formulate your calculations. I would love to see some evidence of a
positive effect, in which case I would have no problem in adding a

venturi crimp in the exhaust system.

Bernoulli Calculation

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hba...r.html#beq


The calculation of the "real world" pressure in a constriction of a
tube is difficult to do because of viscous losses, turbulence, and
the assumptions which must be made about the velocity profile (which

affect the calculated kinetic energy). The model calculation here
assumes laminar flow (no turbulence), assumes that the distance from
the larger diameter to the smaller is short enough that viscous
losses can be neglected, and assumes that the velocity profile

follows that of theoretical laminar flow. Specifically, this involves
assuming that the effective flow velocity is one half of the maximum
velocity, and that the average kinetic energy density is given by one

third of the maximum kinetic energy density.

Now if you can swallow all those assumptions, you can model* the flow
in a tube where the volume flow rate is = cm3/s and the fluid density
is ñ = gm/cm3. For an inlet tube area A1= cm2 (radius r1 =cm), the

geometry of flow leads to an effective fluid velocity of v1 =cm/s.
Since the Bernoulli equation includes the fluid potential energy as
well, the height of the inlet tube is specified as h1 = cm. If the
area of the tube is constricted to A2=cm2 (radius r1 = cm), then

without any further assumptions the effective fluid velocity in the
constriction must be v2 = cm/s. The height of the constricted tube
is specified as h2 = cm.

The kinetic energy densities at the two locations in the tube can now

be calculated, and the Bernoulli equation applied to constrain the
process to conserve energy, thus giving a value for the pressure in
the constriction. First, specify a pressure in the inlet tube:
Inlet pressure = P1 = kPa = lb/in2 = mmHg = atmos.

The energy densities can now be calculated. The energy unit for the
CGS units used is the erg.

Inlet tube energy densities
Kinetic energy density = erg/cm3
Potential energy density = erg/cm3
Pressure energy density = erg/cm3

Constricted tube energy densities
Kinetic energy density = erg/cm3
Potential energy density = erg/cm3
Pressure energy density = erg/cm3


The pressure energy density in the constricted tube can now be

finally converted into more conventional pressure units to see the
effect of the constricted flow on the fluid pressure:

Calculated pressure in constriction =
P2= kPa = lb/in2 = mmHg = atmos.

This calculation can give some perspective on the energy involved in

fluid flow, but it's accuracy is always suspect because of the
assumption of laminar flow. For typical inlet conditions, the energy
density associated with the pressure will be dominant on the input
side; after all, we live at the bottom of an atmospheric sea which

contributes a large amount of pressure energy. If a drastic enough
reduction in radius is used to yield a pressure in the constriction
which is less than atmospheric pressure, there is almost certainly
some turbulence involved in the flow into that constriction.

Nevertheless, the calculation can show why we can get a significant
amount of suction (pressure less than atmospheric) with
an "aspirator" on a high pressure faucet. These devices consist of a
metal tube of reducing radius with a side tube into the region of

constricted radius for suction.

*Note: Some default values will be entered for some of the values as
you start exploring the calculation. All of them can be changed as a
part of your calculation.

Kurt Horvath

95 PT 42
10AC

> > > >
> > > > --- In "WanderlodgeForum%40yahoogroups.com"

> >
> > > > , David Brady


> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Kurt,
> > > > >
> > > > > No thanks, I already have a stock muffler. Thanks for the

links,
> > > > > there's some pretty nifty items there. Be careful with
those fancy
> > > > > braided stainless steel pieces. They look sharp, but
they've always
> > > > > leaked on my turbocharged subaru wrx. Kurt, you've been

around
> > > > > a few over-the-road coaches, Prevost' and what not, what do
they
> > > > > run on their exhaust systems; i.e., expansion pipes, flex
pipe, etc.
> > > > >

> > > > > David Brady
> > > > > '02 LXi, NC
> > > > >
> > > > > Kurt Horvath wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > David, Would you like to take that brand new muffler off

my
> > > > hands???
> > > > > >
> > > > > > According to DD straight pipe & ECU will not have any
issues in
> > > > the
> > > > > > 95 vintage S 60.

> > > > > >
> > > > > > OEM built that pipe for BB ACAP - As Cheep As Possible -
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The original routing of the pipe leaves the turbo, source

of the
> > > > > > first failure, cracked the 1st 90 degree turn a short
straight run
> > > > > > 2nd. 90 degree turn, then into a double ball connector
that also
> > > > > > telescopes in and out. You can check out that piece of S--

-, sorry
> > > > > > engineering wonder here.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/download...g_03_pg70-

> > <http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/download...g_03_pg70->

> > > > <http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/download...g_03_pg70-


> > <http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/download...g_03_pg70->>

> > > > 89.pdf
> > > > > >
<http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/download...g_03_pg70-

> > <http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/download...g_03_pg70->

> > > > <http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/download...g_03_pg70-


> > <http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/download...g_03_pg70->>

> > > > 89.pdf>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Page 76 Double Ball Joint with Slip Joint Feature
Allowing Lateral
> > > > > > Movement length 16 to 18 inches mine measures 14 .55

inches at
> > > > > > present. This marvel allows for 10 degrees of angularity
360
> > > > degree
> > > > > > rotation 2" of offset 2" axial movement,. Hell the u

joints can't
> > > > > > move around that much. Besides it was hard clamped to the
mount
> > > > from
> > > > > > the engine in front of this connection not to mention

rusted to
> > > > the
> > > > > > point that it took an pneumatic impact chisel to get it
apart.. So
> > > > > > what's the point. You need flex in between the turbo and

the first
> > > > > > mount.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The Flex Connector with liner I choose is here at
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?

> > <http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?>

> > > > <http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?

> > <http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?>>

> > > > > > <http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?

> > <http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?>

> > > > <http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?

> > <http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?>>>

> > > > > >
> > > >
cPath=1022_1035_1064_1114&products_id=1008&osCsid=999d7ef5fdd15864bae3
> > > > > > 3db41abf5ef9
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The 2 90 degree turns were fabricated in that manner

because it's
> > > > not
> > > > > > easy to bend large diameter pipe in a single 180 degree
bend, thus
> > > > > > they weld 2 90's together, which is the industry standard

for
> > > > > > manufacturing a 180 degree turn in large pipe exhausts.
Well this
> > > > > > ain't the factory and we're not constrained by what is
easy. I
> > > > have

> > > > > > acquired a 14ga 180 degree U-Tube that has the same
external
> > > > > > dimensions as the original pipe. I'm not an engineer but I
> > > > reasonably

> > > > > > certain that with the remaining 90 degree bend and a 45
degree
> > > > bend
> > > > > > there will be sufficient back pressure.
> > > > > >

> > > > > > There will also be a flexible pipe hanger mount behind
the Flex
> > > > > > connector mounted on the ceiling of the engine
compartment that
> > > > will

> > > > > > support the middle section of pipe and will allow for any
movement
> > > > > > and or torque that may be transferred to the pipe by the
motor.
> > > > The

> > > > > > original clamps for the muffler have to go as they are 6"
but the
> > > > > > rubber isolated mounting bars will remain and that's all
that was
> > > > > > there to begin with. So where's the rub? Bub!

> > > > > >
> > > > > > Not to take anything away from the engineers that
designed the
> > > > Bird,
> > > > > > But there are some glaring deficiencies. 7 way trailer

plug, Air
> > > > > > Purge System, Watts valve, Accelerator and Brake peddles,
Front
> > > > Left
> > > > > > Shock Mount, Relay for Jake Brake, W/D Vent for Slendide

2000,
> > > > > > Installation of Refrigerator with inadequate convection,
The seat
> > > > > > belts mounted to floor instead of the seat, That reminds
me I
> > > > still

> > > > > > have to fix that one. Nothing like hitting a road
transition just
> > > > to
> > > > > > have the air ride seat bounce and the seat belts
automatically

> > > > adjust
> > > > > > for the slack then the air ride seat rebounds and the
belts try to
> > > > > > cut you in half at the waist. That's just the 95 PT 42.

I'm not
> > > > > > bitchin! I'm fixin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kurt Horvath
> > > > > > 95 PT 42
> > > > > > 10AC

> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In "WanderlodgeForum%40yahoogroups.com"

> >
> > > >

> > > > > > , David Brady

> > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Kurt,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I agree with Greg. I'm gonna keep mine stock. There's a

bunch
> > > > > > > of vibration and movement back there. I figure BB's been
> > > > building
> > > > > > > buses a whole lot longer than I have. Initially I'd

scratch my
> > > > > > > head when looking at the frame and support pieces, but
when
> > > > > > > you consider that something as big as a bus must twist
and flex,

> > > > > > > this flexibility needs to be designed in. Make one piece
> > > > stronger
> > > > > > > and you've created a stress raiser someplace else.
> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I have a friend who transplanted a honda v-tech motor
into a
> > > > > > > lotus elise. Everything worked but the alternator
mount. The
> > > > mount

> > > > > > > insists on cracking. There can be some weird harmonics
and
> > > > > > > resonant frequencies going on that are difficult to
grasp and
> > > > > > > only trial and error and a 50 year track record of

building
> > > > buses
> > > > > > > can solve (unless you can model it and run high powered
> > > > > > > computer finite element analysis on it). He's still

fighting
> > > > that
> > > > > > > mount...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Okay, I'm off my soap box.
> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > David Brady
> > > > > > > '02 LXi, NC
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Gregory OConnor wrote:
> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Kurt, try and figure why there were 4 bends. it may
be that
> > > > it was
> > > > > > > > engineered to alow for swing room between the 'hung

exhaust'
> > > > and
> > > > > > > > the 'torque reaction of the ruber mounted detroit'.
look at
> > > > the
> > > > > > roll

> > > > > > > > of the torque and see that there is a place for the
movement
> > > > to
> > > > > > twist
> > > > > > > > a union. I kinda think this movement was the problem

with the
> > > > > > > > resulting crack.
crack=result ;movement=cause ;facilitate
> > > > movement
> > > > > > > > =repair. may be that BB enginered it correct but

someone
> > > > > > > > overtightened a band to cure an exhaust leak???????
you also
> > > > got
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > keep the stack from cantilivering off of the maniford

with
> > > > your
> > > > > > new
> > > > > > > > design. Scavenging is one variable in fuel
efficiency. even
> > > > > > straight

> > > > > > > > pipes some time will result in lower fuel economy
because the
> > > > > > intake
> > > > > > > > variable get screwd. backpressure is mathed into the

computer.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------
----
> > > > > > ------

> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> > > > > > > > Checked by AVG.
> > > > > > > > Version: 7.5.405 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1715 -

Release
> > > > Date:
> > > > > > 10/9/2008 12:00 AM
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >

> > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > > > ------
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.

> > > > > > Checked by AVG.
> > > > > > Version: 7.5.405 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1715 - Release
Date:
> > > > 10/9/2008 12:00 AM
> > > > > >

> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.

> > > > Checked by AVG.
> > > > Version: 7.5.405 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1715 - Release
Date:
> > 10/9/2008 12:00 AM
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >

> > ----------------------------------------------------------
------
> >
> > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> > Checked by AVG.
> > Version: 7.5.405 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1715 - Release Date:

10/9/2008 12:00 AM
> >
>

--
Rob, Sue & Merlin Robinson
94 WLWB

[Gregory OConnor]

Way cool. I stopped following the thread when it got mathy. Sounds
like your brother reads the exhaust as over max flow 'as it is' and
even at 5 inch, max threshold is not reached. do the calcs account
for air at intake then the expanded air volumn after the piston
fires hot? not that it matters much.
I can see first hand that exhaust mods make a big diff on my dirt
bikes. and always figured they must show some result whith folks
making expensive aftermarket changes on new diesel pu trucks. I
guess Kurt is thinking the bluebird is undersized like pickup trucks
and stock bikes are also. there has to be some data on this as the
series 60's have been tuned up to major horse power in boats. I
think ending all the turbulance caused by a cracked pipe has to be a
big improvement on Kurts economy. Building a modified exhaust wont
prove comparison to a stock exhause because Kurts has a flaw. (there
is no control)increased hp and low end torque over that engineered
is something I fear will prove issue with a 5 speed 50,000 lb bus.
unless you build it for economy and turn off some horses to that
proven ability of the allison.

Greg94ptca

[Joyce and Richard Hayden]

Rob,

The elbow I'm going to have to replace is the one that is 90deg+ going into the muffler. It's not a standard 90deg bend. My pyro tube is just down wind of the turbo in the 180deg bend. The exh. exits on the curb side.

Dick Hayden - '87 PT 38 - Lake Stevens, WA

----- Original Message -----

From: "wander.rob@gmail.com"

To: "WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com"

Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 12:25 PM

Subject: Re: [WanderlodgeForum] Re: 6" SS EXHAUST STACK

Richard I just replaced that elbow you are speaking of. It wasn't hard to find. In fact I had my supplier Mac Industrial Exhaust Vancouver BC modify it with a longer end on the end that goes into the pyro tube that goes directly into the turbo. Call me if you need more info 250 590-8050

2008/11/3 Joyce and Richard Hayden <"rhhayden@msn.com">

Kurt & David and others who might be following this discussion as I have.

When you introduced the Bernoulli's Equation into this discussion I figured it was time to ask my brother for help. He has some background with advanced math and has been helpful to another of our group in the past. I forwarded to him the messages at the bottom to give him some background and data that had already been offered. I notice now that this subject has died down somewhat so far today but here is his message to me anyway. I am not going to pretend that I understand all of it but it seems that going from 6" to 5" isn't going to be the end of the world. I know you two have Series 60 engines and I have the older 8v92 but the problem is the same and I have discovered a holds in the elbow that goes into the muffler. That elbow is probably unobtainable or if it is would be quite expensive. So, I was considering 5" as many others have.

Any, here is my brother Steve Hayden's response to me - unedited:

Brother,

You have stretched the limits of my memory on this one! The last time I thought about fluid flow and the Bernoulli Principal was probably 40 or so years ago. Not to worry; it is fun to fire up the old neurons. I'll try to answer your question below. The response isn't technically rigorous as some of your forum buddies may point out. It does seem to make sense though.

As I understand the question, it goes something like this. Does changing the diameter of the exhaust system on the bus from six inches to five inches result in any noticeable decrease in performance? I understand that the exhaust system runs from the manifolds to a turbocharger and then out through a muffler to the atmosphere. If one constricts the exhaust from the outlet of the turbocharger which results in a higher pressure at the output, then the turbocharger efficiency decreases. Have I got that about right?

If so, then the answer is changing from six inch diameter to five inch is very unlikely to result in any detectable decrease in performance. Here's the logic I used to reach this conclusion.

To make the calculation, one uses one of the forms of Bernoulli's Equation. I saw in one of the posts you sent me a reference to a nice discussion of Bernoulli's Equation. This discussion is correct in that it points out that Bernoulli's Equation is an energy conservation equation which means you can't get something for nothing. This equation only holds when no outside work is being done on the system nor is the system doing any work on the outside. Consequently, as was pointed out in the posting, the Bernoulli Equation applies to the ideal situation of, for example, non-compressible gas, laminar flow (non-turbulent), no friction with the pipe walls and so on.

Accounting for these non-ideal conditions from first principles is tedious and usually results in equations that cannot be solved in closed form. Engineers get around this by putting correction terms in the equation and then determining the coefficients of the correction terms by experimentation. This is a science within itself and not as easy as I just made it sound. Fortunately, engineers have been interested in fluid, including gas, flow in pipes for such applications as gas and oil pipelines and have derived equations for these applications. I did find an on-line calculator at http://www.pipeflowcalculations.com/ which I used to make my analysis.

Of course, I had to make some assumptions to plug into the calculator. With your help, I came up with the flowing. The amount of exhaust gas that must be expelled out the exhaust pipe per unit time was 24,000 liters/min. You estimated this from the displacement of the engine cylinders times the number of cylinders times the rpm of the engine. We also agreed that the length of pipe from the turbocharger to the exhaust outlet at 7 feet and the temperature of the exhaust at 500 F. I assumed the exhaust pipe was smooth with a roughness of lest than one thousandth of an inch. The local resistance coefficient which accounts for bends in the exhaust pipe and other local constraints was tougher. I used the calculator default value of 1 but also did a sensitivity analysis.

Since the pressure at the exhaust pipe outlet is atmospheric (14.7 psi), I calculated the pressure drop from the turbocharger outlet to atmosphere along the length of the exhaust pipe for different pipe diameters. The result is shown graphically below.

Note that the pressure drop axis is logarithmic. So the difference in pressure drop between a 5 and 6 inch diameter pipe is only about 0.15 psi. In fact, the pressure drop is less than 1 psi for exhaust pipes 3.5 inches and larger.

I did change the local resistance coefficient to see the effect. At the default value of 1 and for a 5 inch diameter pipe, the pressure drop is 0.25 psi. An order of magnitude less at 0.1 results in a pressure drop of 0.09 psi and an order of magnitude larger at 10, 1.8 psi.

I don't know what the pressure at the turbocharger input is but seems unlikely that a pressure change of 1 psi or less at the turbocharger output would result in a detectable decrease in performance. Perhaps someone on your forum has this number.

Since many systems are over designed to have a safety margin, it also seems to make sense that changing to 5 inch diameter from 6 inch should make little difference.

Hope this helps. Feel free to cut and paste onto the forum if you like. Any questions, you know where I live.

Steve

----- Original Message -----

From: "kguns@hughes.net"

To: "WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com"

Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 8:24 PM

Subject: [WanderlodgeForum] Re: 6" SS EXHAUST STACK

David,

A few days ago you were all for a straight pipe.

Now we have delved into the effects and merits of the, "Bernoulli
effect" it presumes that the density of the flowing gas is constant,
which will not necessarily be true in this application.

If this were a consideration and a factor in design and function
wouldn't this be a standard application on all exhausts, considering
today's drive for better performance Vs energy expended Vs
particulate
matter expelled Vs whatever else the EPA thinks we should be
ejecting from our exhaust pipes?

One factor you may have not considered are the exhaust blankets I
mentioned. They will retain the heat within the pipes thus increasing
the velocity of the exhaust creating an accelerated flow of gasses
through the tubes.

If I may present another observation, 5" exhaust systems are the
standard on all production class 8 trucks.

Furthermore and for the heck of it I don't believe that the trucker
that has 8" stacks on his rig has considered the, "Bernoulli effect"
in his choice at the Chrome Shop. Although it mat have an effect on
performance further than just looking cool. They do look good, no
doubt.

For the last four weeks I have queried Detroit Diesel, Custom Exhaust
Fabricators, Several OEM Exhaust Mfg.'s, Marine Exhaust Engineers &
Fabricators, My BB Guru, and anyone else that would lend an ear, and
no one has expressed any apprehension or regard in the respect to a
5" exhaust system. In fact all parties expressed their surprise in
respect as to why the system would change size at the muffler.

Several owners have modified their systems to 5" from end to end, and
have seen no change in performance. Positive or negative, In general
it was just a matter of convenience in acquiring parts, I won't get
into that. That has recently been beaten to death at the expense of
all parties involved

If there is someone who would like to further this debate with
Imperical evidence of the merits of, or placing a venturi somewhere
in this exhaust system I have pasted a site below where you can
formulate your calculations. I would love to see some evidence of a
positive effect, in which case I would have no problem in adding a
venturi crimp in the exhaust system.

Bernoulli Calculation

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/pber.html#beq

The calculation of the "real world" pressure in a constriction of a
tube is difficult to do because of viscous losses, turbulence, and
the assumptions which must be made about the velocity profile (which
affect the calculated kinetic energy). The model calculation here
assumes laminar flow (no turbulence), assumes that the distance from
the larger diameter to the smaller is short enough that viscous
losses can be neglected, and assumes that the velocity profile
follows that of theoretical laminar flow. Specifically, this involves
assuming that the effective flow velocity is one half of the maximum
velocity, and that the average kinetic energy density is given by one
third of the maximum kinetic energy density.

Now if you can swallow all those assumptions, you can model* the flow
in a tube where the volume flow rate is = cm3/s and the fluid density
is ñ = gm/cm3. For an inlet tube area A1= cm2 (radius r1 =cm), the
geometry of flow leads to an effective fluid velocity of v1 =cm/s.
Since the Bernoulli equation includes the fluid potential energy as
well, the height of the inlet tube is specified as h1 = cm. If the
area of the tube is constricted to A2=cm2 (radius r1 = cm), then
without any further assumptions the effective fluid velocity in the
constriction must be v2 = cm/s. The height of the constricted tube
is specified as h2 = cm.

The kinetic energy densities at the two locations in the tube can now
be calculated, and the Bernoulli equation applied to constrain the
process to conserve energy, thus giving a value for the pressure in
the constriction. First, specify a pressure in the inlet tube:
Inlet pressure = P1 = kPa = lb/in2 = mmHg = atmos.
The energy densities can now be calculated. The energy unit for the
CGS units used is the erg.

Inlet tube energy densities
Kinetic energy density = erg/cm3
Potential energy density = erg/cm3
Pressure energy density = erg/cm3
Constricted tube energy densities
Kinetic energy density = erg/cm3
Potential energy density = erg/cm3
Pressure energy density = erg/cm3


The pressure energy density in the constricted tube can now be
finally converted into more conventional pressure units to see the
effect of the constricted flow on the fluid pressure:

Calculated pressure in constriction =
P2= kPa = lb/in2 = mmHg = atmos.

This calculation can give some perspective on the energy involved in
fluid flow, but it's accuracy is always suspect because of the
assumption of laminar flow. For typical inlet conditions, the energy
density associated with the pressure will be dominant on the input
side; after all, we live at the bottom of an atmospheric sea which
contributes a large amount of pressure energy. If a drastic enough
reduction in radius is used to yield a pressure in the constriction
which is less than atmospheric pressure, there is almost certainly
some turbulence involved in the flow into that constriction.
Nevertheless, the calculation can show why we can get a significant
amount of suction (pressure less than atmospheric) with
an "aspirator" on a high pressure faucet. These devices consist of a
metal tube of reducing radius with a side tube into the region of
constricted radius for suction.

*Note: Some default values will be entered for some of the values as
you start exploring the calculation. All of them can be changed as a
part of your calculation.

Kurt Horvath
95 PT 42
10AC

> > > >
> > > > --- In "WanderlodgeForum%40yahoogroups.com"
> >
> > > > , David Brady

> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Kurt,
> > > > >
> > > > > No thanks, I already have a stock muffler. Thanks for the
links,
> > > > > there's some pretty nifty items there. Be careful with
those fancy
> > > > > braided stainless steel pieces. They look sharp, but
they've always
> > > > > leaked on my turbocharged subaru wrx. Kurt, you've been
around
> > > > > a few over-the-road coaches, Prevost' and what not, what do
they
> > > > > run on their exhaust systems; i.e., expansion pipes, flex
pipe, etc.
> > > > >
> > > > > David Brady
> > > > > '02 LXi, NC
> > > > >
> > > > > Kurt Horvath wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > David, Would you like to take that brand new muffler off
my
> > > > hands???
> > > > > >
> > > > > > According to DD straight pipe & ECU will not have any
issues in
> > > > the
> > > > > > 95 vintage S 60.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > OEM built that pipe for BB ACAP - As Cheep As Possible -
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The original routing of the pipe leaves the turbo, source
of the
> > > > > > first failure, cracked the 1st 90 degree turn a short
straight run
> > > > > > 2nd. 90 degree turn, then into a double ball connector
that also
> > > > > > telescopes in and out. You can check out that piece of S--
-, sorry
> > > > > > engineering wonder here.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/downloads/DP_Catalog_03_pg70-
> > <http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/downloads/DP_Catalog_03_pg70->
> > > > <http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/downloads/DP_Catalog_03_pg70-

> > <http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/downloads/DP_Catalog_03_pg70->>
> > > > 89.pdf
> > > > > >
<http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/downloads/DP_Catalog_03_pg70-
> > <http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/downloads/DP_Catalog_03_pg70->
> > > > <http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/downloads/DP_Catalog_03_pg70-

> > <http://www.dynaflexproducts.com/downloads/DP_Catalog_03_pg70->>
> > > > 89.pdf>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Page 76 Double Ball Joint with Slip Joint Feature
Allowing Lateral
> > > > > > Movement length 16 to 18 inches mine measures 14 .55
inches at
> > > > > > present. This marvel allows for 10 degrees of angularity
360
> > > > degree
> > > > > > rotation 2" of offset 2" axial movement,. Hell the u
joints can't
> > > > > > move around that much. Besides it was hard clamped to the
mount
> > > > from
> > > > > > the engine in front of this connection not to mention
rusted to
> > > > the
> > > > > > point that it took an pneumatic impact chisel to get it
apart.. So
> > > > > > what's the point. You need flex in between the turbo and
the first
> > > > > > mount.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The Flex Connector with liner I choose is here at
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?
> > <http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?>
> > > > <http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?
> > <http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?>>
> > > > > > <http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?
> > <http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?>
> > > > <http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?
> > <http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?>>>
> > > > > >
> > > >
cPath=1022_1035_1064_1114&products_id=1008&osCsid=999d7ef5fdd15864bae3
> > > > > > 3db41abf5ef9
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The 2 90 degree turns were fabricated in that manner
because it's
> > > > not
> > > > > > easy to bend large diameter pipe in a single 180 degree
bend, thus
> > > > > > they weld 2 90's together, which is the industry standard
for
> > > > > > manufacturing a 180 degree turn in large pipe exhausts.
Well this
> > > > > > ain't the factory and we're not constrained by what is
easy. I
> > > > have
> > > > > > acquired a 14ga 180 degree U-Tube that has the same
external
> > > > > > dimensions as the original pipe. I'm not an engineer but I
> > > > reasonably
> > > > > > certain that with the remaining 90 degree bend and a 45
degree
> > > > bend
> > > > > > there will be sufficient back pressure.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There will also be a flexible pipe hanger mount behind
the Flex
> > > > > > connector mounted on the ceiling of the engine
compartment that
> > > > will
> > > > > > support the middle section of pipe and will allow for any
movement
> > > > > > and or torque that may be transferred to the pipe by the
motor.
> > > > The
> > > > > > original clamps for the muffler have to go as they are 6"
but the
> > > > > > rubber isolated mounting bars will remain and that's all
that was
> > > > > > there to begin with. So where's the rub? Bub!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Not to take anything away from the engineers that
designed the
> > > > Bird,
> > > > > > But there are some glaring deficiencies. 7 way trailer
plug, Air
> > > > > > Purge System, Watts valve, Accelerator and Brake peddles,
Front
> > > > Left
> > > > > > Shock Mount, Relay for Jake Brake, W/D Vent for Slendide
2000,
> > > > > > Installation of Refrigerator with inadequate convection,
The seat
> > > > > > belts mounted to floor instead of the seat, That reminds
me I
> > > > still
> > > > > > have to fix that one. Nothing like hitting a road
transition just
> > > > to
> > > > > > have the air ride seat bounce and the seat belts
automatically
> > > > adjust
> > > > > > for the slack then the air ride seat rebounds and the
belts try to
> > > > > > cut you in half at the waist. That's just the 95 PT 42.
I'm not
> > > > > > bitchin! I'm fixin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kurt Horvath
> > > > > > 95 PT 42
> > > > > > 10AC
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In "WanderlodgeForum%40yahoogroups.com"
> >
> > > >
> > > > > > , David Brady

> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Kurt,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I agree with Greg. I'm gonna keep mine stock. There's a
bunch
> > > > > > > of vibration and movement back there. I figure BB's been
> > > > building
> > > > > > > buses a whole lot longer than I have. Initially I'd
scratch my
> > > > > > > head when looking at the frame and support pieces, but
when
> > > > > > > you consider that something as big as a bus must twist
and flex,
> > > > > > > this flexibility needs to be designed in. Make one piece
> > > > stronger
> > > > > > > and you've created a stress raiser someplace else.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have a friend who transplanted a honda v-tech motor
into a
> > > > > > > lotus elise. Everything worked but the alternator
mount. The
> > > > mount
> > > > > > > insists on cracking. There can be some weird harmonics
and
> > > > > > > resonant frequencies going on that are difficult to
grasp and
> > > > > > > only trial and error and a 50 year track record of
building
> > > > buses
> > > > > > > can solve (unless you can model it and run high powered
> > > > > > > computer finite element analysis on it). He's still
fighting
> > > > that
> > > > > > > mount...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Okay, I'm off my soap box.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > David Brady
> > > > > > > '02 LXi, NC
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Gregory OConnor wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Kurt, try and figure why there were 4 bends. it may
be that
> > > > it was
> > > > > > > > engineered to alow for swing room between the 'hung
exhaust'
> > > > and
> > > > > > > > the 'torque reaction of the ruber mounted detroit'.
look at
> > > > the
> > > > > > roll
> > > > > > > > of the torque and see that there is a place for the
movement
> > > > to
> > > > > > twist
> > > > > > > > a union. I kinda think this movement was the problem
with the
> > > > > > > > resulting crack.
crack=result ;movement=cause ;facilitate
> > > > movement
> > > > > > > > =repair. may be that BB enginered it correct but
someone
> > > > > > > > overtightened a band to cure an exhaust leak???????
you also
> > > > got
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > keep the stack from cantilivering off of the maniford
with
> > > > your
> > > > > > new
> > > > > > > > design. Scavenging is one variable in fuel
efficiency. even
> > > > > > straight
> > > > > > > > pipes some time will result in lower fuel economy
because the
> > > > > > intake
> > > > > > > > variable get screwd. backpressure is mathed into the
computer.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------
----
> > > > > > ------
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> > > > > > > > Checked by AVG.
> > > > > > > > Version: 7.5.405 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1715 -
Release
> > > > Date:
> > > > > > 10/9/2008 12:00 AM
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > > > ------
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> > > > > > Checked by AVG.
> > > > > > Version: 7.5.405 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1715 - Release
Date:
> > > > 10/9/2008 12:00 AM
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> > > > Checked by AVG.
> > > > Version: 7.5.405 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1715 - Release
Date:
> > 10/9/2008 12:00 AM
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
------
> >
> > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> > Checked by AVG.
> > Version: 7.5.405 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1715 - Release Date:
10/9/2008 12:00 AM
> >
>

--
Rob, Sue & Merlin Robinson
94 WLWB

[Tom McCarthy]

Pete, I do not think our Jacobs brake is exhaust based at all. It is
an engine brake that uses the compression of the DD60 to "brake." It
shut down fuel to certain cylinders at the upstroke that normally is
pushed by combustion. This is as far out on the limb with mechanics
that I am willing to go. This is based on an FMCA DD seminar on DD
60 Jacobs braking.

TTS McCarthy
Poway, CA

--- In WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com, Pete Masterson
wrote:
>
> Having recently replaced my muffler (at great expense) -- had I to
do
> it over again, I'd have switched over to a 5" system from turbo to
> stack. As others have stated, it's 5" at the turbo outlet and the
> standard in the heavy truck industry is 5".
>
> The only performance difference I notice (between the old blown
out
> muffler and the new one) is that the exhaust-type Jake brake seems
to
> be slightly less effective.
>
> Pete Masterson
> '95 Blue Bird Wanderlodge WBDA 42
> aeonix1@...
> On the road at Hohenwald, TN (Natchez Trace Parkway)
>
>
>
> On Oct 31, 2008, at 11:24 PM, Kurt Horvath wrote:
> > <snip>
> > For the last four weeks I have queried Detroit Diesel, Custom
Exhaust
> > Fabricators, Several OEM Exhaust Mfg.'s, Marine Exhaust
Engineers &
> > Fabricators, My BB Guru, and anyone else that would lend an ear,
and
> > no one has expressed any apprehension or regard in the respect to
a
> > 5" exhaust system. In fact all parties expressed their surprise in
> > respect as to why the system would change size at the muffler.
> >
> > Several owners have modified their systems to 5" from end to end,
and
> > have seen no change in performance. Positive or negative, In
general
> > it was just a matter of convenience in acquiring parts, I won't
get
> > into that. That has recently been beaten to death at the expense
of
> > all parties involved
> >
>

[Pete Masterson]

Tom,

I appreciate your explanation ... but it is a reality that the
"engine braking" performance seems to be less effective after the new
muffler than before. Perhaps this is a matter of perception (as it is
_not_ as loud) but I suspect that the increased back-pressure in the
exhaust system is making the engine braking slightly less effective.

Here is an explanation of what a "Jake Brake" engine compression
braking system is:

A compression release engine brake uses an extra lobe on the camshaft
to open a second exhaust valve at the top of the compression stroke.
The stem of this valve telescopes during normal operation so the
valve remains closed, but is locked at full length by a solenoid when
the engine brake is engaged so that the valve opens as directed by
the cam. This releases the compressed air in the cylinder preventing
it from returning its energy back to the piston and accordingly, the
vehicle speed is reduced.

The driver controls consist of an on/off switch and, sometimes, a
multi-position switch that controls the number of cylinders on which
the brake is active. When the compression release engine brake is
turned on, it will activate when the driver releases the accelerator.
There are also switches on the clutch and accelerator pedals that
will deactivate the compression brake when the clutch is disengaged
or the accelerator is pressed.

Without doing a LOT more research in my DD documentation than I care
to do at the moment, I can't say for certain exactly how the DD
Series 60 engine braking system is designed, or if it is a true
engine compression system braking system as described above.
(However, the control system described seems to reflect the
operational characteristics of the system on my coach.)

As installed on the BB, it is pretty obvious (due to the noise level
reduction after installation) that the engine braking exhaust is
dumped through the exhaust system. Originally, many over-the-road
trucks dumped the compression braking exhaust directly without
passing through the exhaust system (since there are no noxious fumes
or much heat (compared to the burnt fuel under power) are present,
the routing issue isn't as important). This caused the very loud
"blat-blat-blat" sound (once) commonly heard from large trucks as
they decelerated -- resulting in restrictive local ordinances
restricting use and in many states, requirements that "engine
braking" systems pass through a muffler.

In my research, I note that DD Series 60 engines built after 2000
"have a new-design engine braking system." I also note that there was
a recall on the '95 (and possibly later year BBs) where the 2-4-6
cylinder system was rewired to only have "low" and "high", due to a
flaw in the DDEC and/or other control systems. (I presume the low and
high are 2 cyl or 6 cyl engine compression braking.) You can see if
the "fix" was applied to your coach by examining the solenoids on the
upper-right (as you face it) of the front power center where you will
see one of the three associated with the engine braking system "wired
out."

Pete Masterson
'95 Blue Bird Wanderlodge WBDA 42
aeonix1@...
On the road at



On Nov 6, 2008, at 12:14 AM, Tom McCarthy wrote:

> Pete, I do not think our Jacobs brake is exhaust based at all. It is
> an engine brake that uses the compression of the DD60 to "brake." It
> shut down fuel to certain cylinders at the upstroke that normally is
> pushed by combustion. This is as far out on the limb with mechanics
> that I am willing to go. This is based on an FMCA DD seminar on DD
> 60 Jacobs braking.
>
> TTS McCarthy
> Poway, CA
>
> --- In WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com, Pete Masterson
> wrote:
>>
>> Having recently replaced my muffler (at great expense) -- had I to
> do
>> it over again, I'd have switched over to a 5" system from turbo to
>> stack. As others have stated, it's 5" at the turbo outlet and the
>> standard in the heavy truck industry is 5".
>>
>> The only performance difference I notice (between the old blown
> out
>> muffler and the new one) is that the exhaust-type Jake brake seems
> to
>> be slightly less effective.
>>
>> Pete Masterson
>> '95 Blue Bird Wanderlodge WBDA 42
>> aeonix1@...
>> On the road at Hohenwald, TN (Natchez Trace Parkway)
>>
>>
>>

[Kurt Horvath]

Here we are 6 weeks after our last posts on my exhaust build. I
should have some photos today rain permitting.

Some forum members brought up several points that I had not fully
considered or researched.

Some of the mods are a 90 degree turnout pipe up top, a 30 degree
miter cut with a rain visor and a drain tube on the necks bottom
inside curve of the turn out. This should keep most of the rain out.

Not being able to decide on exactly which type of exit I wanted I
have built, two types the 90 I just described and a straight stack
with a rain cap.

Yes David the same as on your JD, At least I polished it up.

If you look at your PT's exhaust it's a straight shot from the
exhaust opening straight into your motor. Systems with mufflers have
water traps and some have drains as well, small holes drilled into
the bottom of the muffler. I opted out of a muffler, for a straight
stack, so some sort of rain trap had to be created that would not
interfere with the exhaust gas flow and trap and drain rain
accumulation of any proportions. A 5" hole can accumulate a lot of
water in a daily south Florida afternoon rain, day after day sooner
or later your going to fill the block with water. According to
Detroit this is a problem. DUH!!! Detroit used the words Catastrophic
Failure several times.

This first post has a photo of the test drain trap. Look on the Home
Page for photo in Bumpersbird Album last pic. What you are looking at
is the drain section with the garden hose on full flow. 5 gallons per
min. As you can see it gets most of the flow. The section of tube on
the ground has been cut down to 6" long with a 3.5" electric exhaust
dump valve installed on a flange to open and close the water trap. At
this point it is manually operated by a rocker switch or a by a
remote key fob.

I'm working on a thermal activated switch that will close the valve
upon heating or a sensor that will open the valve if it detects water
in the trap. The surest method of operation is to open it when parked
and close it before you crank up the motor

Some of my modification will most likely raise some eyebrows, and the
commentary which when taken in the proper context may led to another
modification.

Most likely NOT a this stage, unless of course someone spots a
glaring defect or error in my build.

I'm ready to install the new pipes and go somewhere in the coach,
she's been in the barn since Aug. On the up side I have gotten
several large fix's and rebuilds done on her since I knew she would
sitting for a while.

Comments, criticism, suggestions, jokes, remarks, welcomed.

Currently this is a prototype for my coach, a direct replacement for
the 95-96 PT42's is in the works. It will be built Stainless Steel
and will be a direct bolt in application, to replace the OEM parts.



Kurt Horvath
95 PT 42
10AC

[Wallace Craig]

Kurt, I am probably the last person on earth that you should tale advise from about anything mechanical. Having said that; can you not install a flap at the end of the exhaust that is weighted to stay closed when the engine is not operating? I know I have seen it on truck applications. Keep Tennessee clean & green, maybe I will get back that way sometime soon. Fuel is $2.44 at Racetrack in Azle. Happy holidays. Wallace Craig 95 WLWB 42 Azle, Texas --- On Thu, 12/4/08, Kurt Horvath wrote: From: Kurt Horvath Subject: [WanderlodgeForum] Re: 6" SS EXHAUST STACK To: WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, December 4, 2008, 8:58 AM Here we are 6 weeks after our last posts on my exhaust build. I should have some photos today rain permitting. Some forum members brought up several points that I had not fully considered or researched. Some of the mods are a 90 degree turnout pipe up top, a 30 degree miter cut with a rain visor and a drain tube on the necks bottom inside curve of the turn out. This should keep most of the rain out. Not being able to decide on exactly which type of exit I wanted I have built, two types the 90 I just described and a straight stack with a rain cap. Yes David the same as on your JD, At least I polished it up. If you look at your PT's exhaust it's a straight shot from the exhaust opening straight into your motor. Systems with mufflers have water traps and some have drains as well, small holes drilled into the bottom of the muffler. I opted out of a muffler, for a straight stack, so some sort of rain trap had to be created that would not interfere with the exhaust gas flow and trap and drain rain accumulation of any proportions. A 5" hole can accumulate a lot of water in a daily south Florida afternoon rain, day after day sooner or later your going to fill the block with water. According to Detroit this is a problem. DUH!!! Detroit used the words Catastrophic Failure several times. This first post has a photo of the test drain trap. Look on the Home Page for photo in Bumpersbird Album last pic. What you are looking at is the drain section with the garden hose on full flow. 5 gallons per min. As you can see it gets most of the flow. The section of tube on the ground has been cut down to 6" long with a 3.5" electric exhaust dump valve installed on a flange to open and close the water trap. At this point it is manually operated by a rocker switch or a by a remote key fob. I'm working on a thermal activated switch that will close the valve upon heating or a sensor that will open the valve if it detects water in the trap. The surest method of operation is to open it when parked and close it before you crank up the motor Some of my modification will most likely raise some eyebrows, and the commentary which when taken in the proper context may led to another modification. Most likely NOT a this stage, unless of course someone spots a glaring defect or error in my build. I'm ready to install the new pipes and go somewhere in the coach, she's been in the barn since Aug. On the up side I have gotten several large fix's and rebuilds done on her since I knew she would sitting for a while. Comments, criticism, suggestions, jokes, remarks, welcomed. Currently this is a prototype for my coach, a direct replacement for the 95-96 PT42's is in the works. It will be built Stainless Steel and will be a direct bolt in application, to replace the OEM parts. Kurt Horvath 95 PT 42 10AC ------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WanderlodgeForum/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WanderlodgeForum/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:WanderlodgeForum-digest@yahoogroups.com mailto:WanderlodgeForum-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: WanderlodgeForum-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[Kurt Horvath]

Hi Wallace,

I looked into several options, the one I liked most was bi-metalic
valves. That's a strip of metal that expands and contracts when
heated and cooled. It's used in some muffler applications. When it's
cold it leaves a gap over a hole when heated it contracts and covers
the opening. Easy few parts automatic operation, simular to what you
described. The current prototype can be modified in this manner. The
electric valve can be removed and a flange can be put in it's place
with any type of device from a bung with a plug to the exhaust dump
valve to drain away the water. I wanted the trap to be capable of
draining away an possible water flow that might be encountered. Five
gallons a min. is most likly more than enough, unless that little son
of gun Murphy shows up. L.O.L. Of course the rain cap will do the job
but it's not a very attractive option, The 90 degree turn out pipe
also works well but I've been trying to delete as many turns in the
pipes as possible. The system that will be offered to the general
public is a direct replacement of OEM parts for your coach, The
photos that will be posted soon are of the exhaust going into my
coach.

Kurt Horvath
95 PT 42
10AC












--- In WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com, Wallace Craig
wrote:
>
> Kurt, I am probably the last person on earth that you should tale
advise from about anything mechanical. Having said that; can you not
install a flap at the end of the exhaust that is weighted to stay
closed when the engine is not operating? I know I have seen it on
truck applications.
> Keep Tennessee clean & green, maybe I will get back that way
sometime soon. Fuel is $2.44 at Racetrack in Azle.   Happy holidays.
>
>
> Wallace Craig
> 95 WLWB 42
> Azle, Texas
>
> --- On Thu, 12/4/08, Kurt Horvath wrote:
>
> From: Kurt Horvath
> Subject: [WanderlodgeForum] Re: 6" SS EXHAUST STACK
> To: WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Thursday, December 4, 2008, 8:58 AM
>
> Here we are 6 weeks after our last posts on my exhaust build. I
> should have some photos today rain permitting.
>
> Some forum members brought up several points that I had not fully
> considered or researched.
>
> Some of the mods are a 90 degree turnout pipe up top, a 30 degree
> miter cut with a rain visor and a drain tube on the necks bottom
> inside curve of the turn out. This should keep most of the rain
out.
>
> Not being able to decide on exactly which type of exit I wanted I
> have built, two types the 90 I just described and a straight stack
> with a rain cap.
>
> Yes David the same as on your JD, At least I polished it up.
>
> If you look at your PT's exhaust it's a straight shot from the
> exhaust opening straight into your motor. Systems with mufflers
have
> water traps and some have drains as well, small holes drilled into
> the bottom of the muffler. I opted out of a muffler, for a straight
> stack, so some sort of rain trap had to be created that would not
> interfere with the exhaust gas flow and trap and drain rain
> accumulation of any proportions. A 5" hole can accumulate a lot of
> water in a daily south Florida afternoon rain, day after day sooner
> or later your going to fill the block with water. According to
> Detroit this is a problem. DUH!!! Detroit used the words
Catastrophic
> Failure several times.
>
> This first post has a photo of the test drain trap. Look on the
Home
> Page for photo in Bumpersbird Album last pic. What you are looking
at
> is the drain section with the garden hose on full flow. 5 gallons
per
> min. As you can see it gets most of the flow. The section of tube
on
> the ground has been cut down to 6" long with a 3.5" electric
exhaust
> dump valve installed on a flange to open and close the water trap.
At
> this point it is manually operated by a rocker switch or a by a
> remote key fob.
>
> I'm working on a thermal activated switch that will close the valve
> upon heating or a sensor that will open the valve if it detects
water
> in the trap. The surest method of operation is to open it when
parked
> and close it before you crank up the motor
>
> Some of my modification will most likely raise some eyebrows, and
the
> commentary which when taken in the proper context may led to
another
> modification.
>
> Most likely NOT a this stage, unless of course someone spots a
> glaring defect or error in my build.
>
> I'm ready to install the new pipes and go somewhere in the coach,
> she's been in the barn since Aug. On the up side I have gotten
> several large fix's and rebuilds done on her since I knew she would
> sitting for a while.
>
> Comments, criticism, suggestions, jokes, remarks, welcomed.
>
> Currently this is a prototype for my coach, a direct replacement
for
> the 95-96 PT42's is in the works. It will be built Stainless Steel
> and will be a direct bolt in application, to replace the OEM parts.
>
>
>
> Kurt Horvath
> 95 PT 42
> 10AC
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>

[David Brady]

Kurt,



Capturing water and funneling it away in a vertical exhaust

stack bus application, where the engine is the lowest point

is not easy. How 'bout if we turn the problem on its head and

exit the exhaust downward and out the rear bumper, thereby

eliminating the stack completely? This is cheaper (less stainless

steel), better flowing (maybe fewer bends, but lots shorter),

and the water problem is solved.



David Brady, (of Brady Bucket Water Trap Fame!)

'02 LXi, NC



Kurt Horvath wrote:

Hi Wallace,



I looked into several options, the one I liked most was bi-metalic

valves. That's a strip of metal that expands and contracts when

heated and cooled. It's used in some muffler applications. When it's

cold it leaves a gap over a hole when heated it contracts and covers

the opening. Easy few parts automatic operation, simular to what you

described. The current prototype can be modified in this manner. The

electric valve can be removed and a flange can be put in it's place

with any type of device from a bung with a plug to the exhaust dump

valve to drain away the water. I wanted the trap to be capable of

draining away an possible water flow that might be encountered. Five

gallons a min. is most likly more than enough, unless that little son

of gun Murphy shows up. L.O.L. Of course the rain cap will do the job

but it's not a very attractive option, The 90 degree turn out pipe

also works well but I've been trying to delete as many turns in the

pipes as possible. The system that will be offered to the general

public is a direct replacement of OEM parts for your coach, The

photos that will be posted soon are of the exhaust going into my

coach.



Kurt Horvath

95 PT 42

10AC



--- In "WanderlodgeForum%40yahoogroups.com",
Wallace Craig

...> wrote:

>

> Kurt, I am probably the last person on earth that you should tale


advise from about anything mechanical. Having said that; can you not

install a flap at the end of the exhaust that is weighted to stay

closed when the engine is not operating? I know I have seen it on

truck applications.

> Keep Tennessee clean & green, maybe I will get back that way

sometime soon. Fuel is $2.44 at Racetrack in Azle. Happy holidays.

>

>

> Wallace Craig

> 95 WLWB 42

> Azle, Texas

>

> --- On Thu, 12/4/08, Kurt Horvath "kguns@..." wrote:

>

> From: Kurt Horvath "kguns@..."

> Subject: [WanderlodgeForum] Re: 6" SS EXHAUST STACK

> To: "WanderlodgeForum%40yahoogroups.com"

> Date: Thursday, December 4, 2008, 8:58 AM

>

> Here we are 6 weeks after our last posts on my exhaust build. I

> should have some photos today rain permitting.

>

> Some forum members brought up several points that I had not fully

> considered or researched.

>

> Some of the mods are a 90 degree turnout pipe up top, a 30 degree

> miter cut with a rain visor and a drain tube on the necks bottom

> inside curve of the turn out. This should keep most of the rain

out.

>

> Not being able to decide on exactly which type of exit I wanted I

> have built, two types the 90 I just described and a straight stack


> with a rain cap.

>

> Yes David the same as on your JD, At least I polished it up.

>

> If you look at your PT's exhaust it's a straight shot from the

> exhaust opening straight into your motor. Systems with mufflers

have

> water traps and some have drains as well, small holes drilled into


> the bottom of the muffler. I opted out of a muffler, for a
straight

> stack, so some sort of rain trap had to be created that would not

> interfere with the exhaust gas flow and trap and drain rain

> accumulation of any proportions. A 5" hole can accumulate a lot of


> water in a daily south Florida afternoon rain, day after day
sooner

> or later your going to fill the block with water. According to

> Detroit this is a problem. DUH!!! Detroit used the words

Catastrophic

> Failure several times.

>

> This first post has a photo of the test drain trap. Look on the

Home

> Page for photo in Bumpersbird Album last pic. What you are looking


at

> is the drain section with the garden hose on full flow. 5 gallons

per

> min. As you can see it gets most of the flow. The section of tube

on

> the ground has been cut down to 6" long with a 3.5" electric

exhaust

> dump valve installed on a flange to open and close the water trap.


At

> this point it is manually operated by a rocker switch or a by a

> remote key fob.

>

> I'm working on a thermal activated switch that will close the
valve

> upon heating or a sensor that will open the valve if it detects

water

> in the trap. The surest method of operation is to open it when

parked

> and close it before you crank up the motor

>

> Some of my modification will most likely raise some eyebrows, and

the

> commentary which when taken in the proper context may led to

another

> modification.

>

> Most likely NOT a this stage, unless of course someone spots a

> glaring defect or error in my build.

>

> I'm ready to install the new pipes and go somewhere in the coach,

> she's been in the barn since Aug. On the up side I have gotten

> several large fix's and rebuilds done on her since I knew she
would

> sitting for a while.

>

> Comments, criticism, suggestions, jokes, remarks, welcomed.

>

> Currently this is a prototype for my coach, a direct replacement

for

> the 95-96 PT42's is in the works. It will be built Stainless Steel


> and will be a direct bolt in application, to replace the OEM parts.

>

>

>

> Kurt Horvath

> 95 PT 42

> 10AC

>

>

> ------------------------------------

>

> Yahoo! Groups Links

>

No virus found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.552 / Virus Database: 270.9.13/1827 - Release Date: 12/3/2008 5:41 PM