Carbon Fiber Intercooler pipes
09-28-2004, 01:21 PM
#4
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 4,887
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Carbon Fiber Intercooler pipes (Mpir3)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Mpir3 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">..looks nice but no real performance benefits 
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Performance benefits? What's that? I thought it was all about the BLang BlaNg!
BTW, how well does CF hold up to heat?
</TD></TR></TABLE>Performance benefits? What's that? I thought it was all about the BLang BlaNg!
BTW, how well does CF hold up to heat?
09-28-2004, 01:39 PM
#5
Honda-Tech Member
Re: Carbon Fiber Intercooler pipes (Finest)
Carbon fiber holds up perfectly fine to heat, look at the AIR IM for example. The performance benifit is that the carbon fiber dissapates heat and will mean lower IAT's. But then again that also is factored by how hot your IM gets as well (heat-soak).
IAT's should be a bit lower, but significant power gains should not be that abundant once the temperature's equilibrium is established if you do nothing to stop heat transfer to your IM.
I honestly don't think the power gains is going to justify the cost of the carbon fiber intercooler piping. I would much rather purchase the AIR intake manifold and run a less thermal conductive metal for the intercooler piping.... such as aluminum. There is also the alternative of coating your intercooler piping... or for you ballers out there you can heat wrap it.
IAT's should be a bit lower, but significant power gains should not be that abundant once the temperature's equilibrium is established if you do nothing to stop heat transfer to your IM.
I honestly don't think the power gains is going to justify the cost of the carbon fiber intercooler piping. I would much rather purchase the AIR intake manifold and run a less thermal conductive metal for the intercooler piping.... such as aluminum. There is also the alternative of coating your intercooler piping... or for you ballers out there you can heat wrap it.
09-28-2004, 02:37 PM
#6
Re: Carbon Fiber Intercooler pipes (PrecisionH23a)
I personally think that carbon fiber in a street car wouldn't last long, sure they would look great and all and dissapate a lot of heat but aluminum will do the same thing, heck I have yet to see a race car with carbon fiber intercooler pipes.
Aluminum works just great and dissapates a lot of heat plus the pipes are way lighter than the mild steel or stainless ones some people run, so aluminum is the way to go.
Aluminum works just great and dissapates a lot of heat plus the pipes are way lighter than the mild steel or stainless ones some people run, so aluminum is the way to go.
09-28-2004, 02:54 PM
#7
Member
Re: Carbon Fiber Intercooler pipes (PrecisionH23a)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by PrecisionH23a »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> The performance benifit is that the carbon fiber dissapates heat and will mean lower IAT's. But then again that also is factored by how hot your IM gets as well (heat-soak).
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Are you sure that carbon fiber maintains lower IAT's in the AIR manifold because it "dissapates heat" or does the carbon fiber used maintain lower IAT's because of the insulating qualities found within to not become heatsoaked?
We are not talking about Vapor Grown CArbon Fiber Here guys ... Carbon Fiber is an insulator in most forms .... VGCF is extremely conductive and would make the Manifold cost over $50 K if you tried to build one.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Are you sure that carbon fiber maintains lower IAT's in the AIR manifold because it "dissapates heat" or does the carbon fiber used maintain lower IAT's because of the insulating qualities found within to not become heatsoaked?
We are not talking about Vapor Grown CArbon Fiber Here guys ... Carbon Fiber is an insulator in most forms .... VGCF is extremely conductive and would make the Manifold cost over $50 K if you tried to build one.
Trending Topics
09-28-2004, 02:57 PM
#8
Junior Member
Re: Carbon Fiber Intercooler pipes (Finest)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Finest »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">BTW, how well does CF hold up to heat? </TD></TR></TABLE>
Had a CF can on my R6 for 4 years and you could hold on to it all day. Try that with a metal can...
Had a CF can on my R6 for 4 years and you could hold on to it all day. Try that with a metal can...
09-28-2004, 03:02 PM
#9
Honda-Tech Member
Re: Carbon Fiber Intercooler pipes (dasher)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by dasher »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Are you sure that carbon fiber maintains lower IAT's in the AIR manifold because it "dissapates heat" or does the carbon fiber used maintain lower IAT's because of the insulating qualities found within to not become heatsoaked?</TD></TR></TABLE>
Quoted from AIR because I am lazy.
Why carbon fiber? Carbon fiber composites are often used for visual effect rather than for functionality. As a matter of opinion, we agree with many that the natural finish of carbon fiber can be a bonus, but we refuse to build products for appearance alone. The fact is, fiber reinforced composites’ properties can be tailored for the individual application to optimize performance. In the case of our induction components, the following design considerations were made:
¥ Strength: Under extreme boost conditions or backfires, the stress on a manifold is tremendous. Compound that with high temperatures and the material requirements are extreme. Properly designed carbon fiber reinforcement, combined with a specially developed epoxy resin, achieves strength much higher than that of aluminum or steel. A similar injection molded plastic manifold would require a very thick wall to achieve the strength necessary for boosted applications and would therefore be much heavier.
¥ Weight: At less than 4.5 pounds versus 16.5 pounds for a cast aluminum manifold… what more do we need to say.
¥ Shape control: Our unique Lost Core Resin Transfer Molding (LCRTM) process provides an economical way to produce shapes with smooth external and internal walls. Very tight tolerances can be held as well. Our process is similar to the one utilized by automotive manufacturers to produce injection molded plastic manifolds, but with the highest performance materials and much lower tooling costs.
¥ Heat capacity: Heavier metal induction components absorb heat that is transferred to the intake airstream; thus robbing power. Carbon fiber composites have unique thermal properties that can be tuned. Specific heat is the measurement of how much thermal energy a material can hold (J / (g x C°)). Pound for pound, carbon/epoxy composites have about the same specific heat value as aluminum. However, being much lighter and by tailoring the properties, we are able to effectively reduce the heat capacity by approximately 87% over a stock manifold.
¥ Cost: Yes, cost. In addition to high material and labor costs, our induction components require a tremendous investment in tooling, capital equipment and development. Conventional cast aluminum manifolds are much cheaper to produce, but do not perform as well in the areas mentioned above. However, a quality custom sheet metal or CNC race manifold can easily be two to three times the cost of our manifolds (and may perform worse).
Quoted from AIR because I am lazy.
Why carbon fiber? Carbon fiber composites are often used for visual effect rather than for functionality. As a matter of opinion, we agree with many that the natural finish of carbon fiber can be a bonus, but we refuse to build products for appearance alone. The fact is, fiber reinforced composites’ properties can be tailored for the individual application to optimize performance. In the case of our induction components, the following design considerations were made:
¥ Strength: Under extreme boost conditions or backfires, the stress on a manifold is tremendous. Compound that with high temperatures and the material requirements are extreme. Properly designed carbon fiber reinforcement, combined with a specially developed epoxy resin, achieves strength much higher than that of aluminum or steel. A similar injection molded plastic manifold would require a very thick wall to achieve the strength necessary for boosted applications and would therefore be much heavier.
¥ Weight: At less than 4.5 pounds versus 16.5 pounds for a cast aluminum manifold… what more do we need to say.
¥ Shape control: Our unique Lost Core Resin Transfer Molding (LCRTM) process provides an economical way to produce shapes with smooth external and internal walls. Very tight tolerances can be held as well. Our process is similar to the one utilized by automotive manufacturers to produce injection molded plastic manifolds, but with the highest performance materials and much lower tooling costs.
¥ Heat capacity: Heavier metal induction components absorb heat that is transferred to the intake airstream; thus robbing power. Carbon fiber composites have unique thermal properties that can be tuned. Specific heat is the measurement of how much thermal energy a material can hold (J / (g x C°)). Pound for pound, carbon/epoxy composites have about the same specific heat value as aluminum. However, being much lighter and by tailoring the properties, we are able to effectively reduce the heat capacity by approximately 87% over a stock manifold.
¥ Cost: Yes, cost. In addition to high material and labor costs, our induction components require a tremendous investment in tooling, capital equipment and development. Conventional cast aluminum manifolds are much cheaper to produce, but do not perform as well in the areas mentioned above. However, a quality custom sheet metal or CNC race manifold can easily be two to three times the cost of our manifolds (and may perform worse).
09-28-2004, 05:33 PM
#10
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Carbon Fiber Intercooler pipes (PrecisionH23a)
as long as your charge temps aren't 300+ deg it would hold fine ( i only had piping on the TB side of the IC, if you temps are over 300+ deg there, you have other issues)....You can't deny the Bling...all i need now is The AIR manifold and CF valve cover 
09-28-2004, 05:42 PM
#12
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 4,887
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Carbon Fiber Intercooler pipes (Mpir3)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Mpir3 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
</TD></TR></TABLE>
SESSY! But where does the BOV go? On the FMIC endtank?
</TD></TR></TABLE>SESSY! But where does the BOV go? On the FMIC endtank?
09-28-2004, 05:47 PM
#13
Who is Mr Robot?
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: ATL - Where the Pimps and Players dwell
Posts: 21,474
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes
on
10 Posts
Re: Carbon Fiber Intercooler pipes (Finest)
anywhere but that pipe. If i had one of those i would probably put it on the hotside pipe right before the intercooler.
09-28-2004, 07:15 PM
#14
Member
Re: Carbon Fiber Intercooler pipes (PrecisionH23a)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by PrecisionH23a »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
¥ Heat capacity: Heavier metal induction components absorb heat that is transferred to the intake airstream; thus robbing power. Carbon fiber composites have unique thermal properties that can be tuned. Specific heat is the measurement of how much thermal energy a material can hold (J / (g x C°)). Pound for pound, carbon/epoxy composites have about the same specific heat value as aluminum. However, being much lighter and by tailoring the properties, we are able to effectively reduce the heat capacity by approximately 87% over a stock manifold.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
AIR is speaking about specific heat here and not thermal conductivity.
The ability for a material to "dissipate heat" has to do with its thermal conductivity and not the specific heat.
The Carbon Fiber used in the AIR manifold(and 99.9% of CF sold) has a thermal conductivity similar to Stainless steel (13 w/m-K) which make for a poor ability to dissipate heat. This means that every other Aluminum IM compared to the AIR IM actually dissipates heat better because aluminum has a thermal conductivity of 231 w/m-K.
Now the AIR IM is better despite not being able to dissipate heat as efficiently because:
1) works like an insulator and resists picking up the heat from the head in the first place.
2) despite the carbon fiber matrix's similar specific heat to Al - 0.902 J/g C ; The AIR IM store 87 % less heat than an Al IM because the inherent strength of CF allows a much thinner walls therefore less mass to store the heat energy within.
The only exception to this is certain types of Vapor Grown Carbon Fibers which are extremely expensive and hard to produce. Last I check rates were $400-600 per gram in powder form and you could only purchase small quantities.
Here is the interesting part .... certain types of heat treated VGCF's have thermal conductivities of 1,950 w/m-K !!! Compare that with Al - 231 w/m-K and copper 394 w/m-K !!!
¥ Heat capacity: Heavier metal induction components absorb heat that is transferred to the intake airstream; thus robbing power. Carbon fiber composites have unique thermal properties that can be tuned. Specific heat is the measurement of how much thermal energy a material can hold (J / (g x C°)). Pound for pound, carbon/epoxy composites have about the same specific heat value as aluminum. However, being much lighter and by tailoring the properties, we are able to effectively reduce the heat capacity by approximately 87% over a stock manifold.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
AIR is speaking about specific heat here and not thermal conductivity.
The ability for a material to "dissipate heat" has to do with its thermal conductivity and not the specific heat.
The Carbon Fiber used in the AIR manifold(and 99.9% of CF sold) has a thermal conductivity similar to Stainless steel (13 w/m-K) which make for a poor ability to dissipate heat. This means that every other Aluminum IM compared to the AIR IM actually dissipates heat better because aluminum has a thermal conductivity of 231 w/m-K.
Now the AIR IM is better despite not being able to dissipate heat as efficiently because:
1) works like an insulator and resists picking up the heat from the head in the first place.
2) despite the carbon fiber matrix's similar specific heat to Al - 0.902 J/g C ; The AIR IM store 87 % less heat than an Al IM because the inherent strength of CF allows a much thinner walls therefore less mass to store the heat energy within.
The only exception to this is certain types of Vapor Grown Carbon Fibers which are extremely expensive and hard to produce. Last I check rates were $400-600 per gram in powder form and you could only purchase small quantities.
Here is the interesting part .... certain types of heat treated VGCF's have thermal conductivities of 1,950 w/m-K !!! Compare that with Al - 231 w/m-K and copper 394 w/m-K !!!
09-29-2004, 03:07 AM
#15
Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,058
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Carbon Fiber Intercooler pipes (dasher)
You talking about carbon/carbon?
Production is at around $250 per kilogram for medium quality CC, but getting it shaped is the problem ... you can't mold it, you need to "grow" it into shape.
Production is at around $250 per kilogram for medium quality CC, but getting it shaped is the problem ... you can't mold it, you need to "grow" it into shape.
09-29-2004, 05:53 AM
#19
Member
Re: Carbon Fiber Intercooler pipes (ZoRG)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ZoRG »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">You talking about carbon/carbon?
Production is at around $250 per kilogram for medium quality CC, but getting it shaped is the problem ... you can't mold it, you need to "grow" it into shape.</TD></TR></TABLE>
there are many different types of VGCF's ... Im talking about high purity VGCF like Pyrograf-I.... it may have come down in price a little since i last checked but is still much more expensive then what you list.
the price goes up with higher purity .... and you need very high quality to achieve good thermoconductivity...
give me a second and i'll look through my correspondence to tell you a quote of medium quality Pyrograf-I I have from the director of R&D at Applied Sciences...
Production is at around $250 per kilogram for medium quality CC, but getting it shaped is the problem ... you can't mold it, you need to "grow" it into shape.</TD></TR></TABLE>
there are many different types of VGCF's ... Im talking about high purity VGCF like Pyrograf-I.... it may have come down in price a little since i last checked but is still much more expensive then what you list.
the price goes up with higher purity .... and you need very high quality to achieve good thermoconductivity...
give me a second and i'll look through my correspondence to tell you a quote of medium quality Pyrograf-I I have from the director of R&D at Applied Sciences...
09-29-2004, 06:04 AM
#20
Member
Re: Carbon Fiber Intercooler pipes (dasher)
ok here is the email for more info....
keep in mind that some VGCF with extremely high puritites are much more expensive than this ...
Responding to your recent questions about Pyrograf
>I'm interested in either your Pyrograf I or Pyrograf III VGCF products for testing purposes on a new prototype my employer is developing. Our company is interested in testing the suitability of this product in a new heat sink application due to its high thermo conductive properties. Which product would be most suitable in low pressure vacuum molding or RTM molding?
I you are looking for high thermal conductivity, then Pyrograf-I is the best choice. Polymer composites with K in excess of 600 W/m-K have been demonstrated for the best direction of a 1-D architecture. Pyrograf-III, which is a nanofiber, has too many fiber interfaces for efficient thermal conductivity. With this material, K values more like 5 - 10 W/m-K are expected.
>What epoxy would be most suitable to wet the matrix for the highest possible thermo conductivity?
I don't understand the question. I think of epoxy, or other polymer as the matrix. The surface of Pyrograf-I is pretty inert, and will probably not be very well wet by polymers with high surface energy.
> Are Prepreg fabrics available?
No. Pyrograf-I comes in mats of aligned fiber. Individual fibers are typically only a few centimeters long. It is possible to make up rigid preforms using a carbonizable binder.
>Has the effective thermal conductivity been tested with cured epoxy molds?
The best results in polymer matrices are in excess of 600 W/m-K in the best direction. I do not recall if any of those were epoxy, but the thermal conductivity should not depend strongly on the type of polymer. In designing a composite, you can treat the fiber as having an effective thermal conductivity of about 1400 W/m-K. It's really 1950, but thte 1400 value accounts for breaks and interfaces typical of composites
Pyorgraf-I is currently relatively expensive ~$1500/lb, and in low supply, 10s to 100s of grams. We expect to scale up production over the next year.
keep in mind that some VGCF with extremely high puritites are much more expensive than this ...
Responding to your recent questions about Pyrograf
>I'm interested in either your Pyrograf I or Pyrograf III VGCF products for testing purposes on a new prototype my employer is developing. Our company is interested in testing the suitability of this product in a new heat sink application due to its high thermo conductive properties. Which product would be most suitable in low pressure vacuum molding or RTM molding?
I you are looking for high thermal conductivity, then Pyrograf-I is the best choice. Polymer composites with K in excess of 600 W/m-K have been demonstrated for the best direction of a 1-D architecture. Pyrograf-III, which is a nanofiber, has too many fiber interfaces for efficient thermal conductivity. With this material, K values more like 5 - 10 W/m-K are expected.
>What epoxy would be most suitable to wet the matrix for the highest possible thermo conductivity?
I don't understand the question. I think of epoxy, or other polymer as the matrix. The surface of Pyrograf-I is pretty inert, and will probably not be very well wet by polymers with high surface energy.
> Are Prepreg fabrics available?
No. Pyrograf-I comes in mats of aligned fiber. Individual fibers are typically only a few centimeters long. It is possible to make up rigid preforms using a carbonizable binder.
>Has the effective thermal conductivity been tested with cured epoxy molds?
The best results in polymer matrices are in excess of 600 W/m-K in the best direction. I do not recall if any of those were epoxy, but the thermal conductivity should not depend strongly on the type of polymer. In designing a composite, you can treat the fiber as having an effective thermal conductivity of about 1400 W/m-K. It's really 1950, but thte 1400 value accounts for breaks and interfaces typical of composites
Pyorgraf-I is currently relatively expensive ~$1500/lb, and in low supply, 10s to 100s of grams. We expect to scale up production over the next year.
09-29-2004, 10:06 AM
#21
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: so cal, USA
Posts: 4,516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Carbon Fiber Intercooler pipes (Finest)
umm, if you wanted something to dissipate heat faster, try and get ic piping made of copper. look at heatsinks for processors..the best coolers out there for processors is made of copper. aluminum absorbs heat faster, but it holds it longer. copper just gets rid of it faster.
i might be wrong, but i think i remember correctly with how each metal works. dont quote me on this.
i might be wrong, but i think i remember correctly with how each metal works. dont quote me on this.
09-29-2004, 10:11 AM
#22
Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 2,202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Carbon Fiber Intercooler pipes (newgsr)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by newgsr »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> heck I have yet to see a race car with carbon fiber intercooler pipes.
.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Good thought and all but half the **** we do here on Honda-Tech has never been used on race cars...
Ever seen a race car with Rota GT3s red with a polished lip?
Honda-Tech does ridiculous **** cause we love Hondas and want to be a step ahead of the game..
Aluminum is fine. If you want bling - do the CF, post pics and wait for the bandwagon to show up..
.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Good thought and all but half the **** we do here on Honda-Tech has never been used on race cars...
Ever seen a race car with Rota GT3s red with a polished lip?
Honda-Tech does ridiculous **** cause we love Hondas and want to be a step ahead of the game..
Aluminum is fine. If you want bling - do the CF, post pics and wait for the bandwagon to show up..
09-29-2004, 10:16 AM
#23
Member
Re: Carbon Fiber Intercooler pipes (eMpAtHy)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by eMpAtHy »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">umm, if you wanted something to dissipate heat faster, try and get ic piping made of copper. look at heatsinks for processors..the best coolers out there for processors is made of copper. aluminum absorbs heat faster, but it holds it longer. copper just gets rid of it faster.
i might be wrong, but i think i remember correctly with how each metal works. dont quote me on this.</TD></TR></TABLE>
you are mostly correct ... with the exception that copper dissipates and absorbs heat faster than Al ... but Al has about 3 times the specific heat as Cu therefore Al retains more heat energy....
you do not want your IM made of a material that dissipates heat faster however.. thats what an intercooler is for; what ends up happening is the heat soaked IM will dissipate heat retained into the incoming air which isn't good ... it is better to make IM out of CF or Plastic as they do nowadays (insulators).
i might be wrong, but i think i remember correctly with how each metal works. dont quote me on this.</TD></TR></TABLE>
you are mostly correct ... with the exception that copper dissipates and absorbs heat faster than Al ... but Al has about 3 times the specific heat as Cu therefore Al retains more heat energy....
you do not want your IM made of a material that dissipates heat faster however.. thats what an intercooler is for; what ends up happening is the heat soaked IM will dissipate heat retained into the incoming air which isn't good ... it is better to make IM out of CF or Plastic as they do nowadays (insulators).
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
