Having the mindset that bigger is better, a couple of years ago I had a custom 4 core radiator with the maximum tubes and fins per sq in available made up. I had it made up as a VK Commodore crossflow radiator made to fit the LX tory. When installed in the turbo tory I felts that it was running warmer than what I was previously used to.
I decided to see whether this was my imagination or whether the myth that larger radiators can run hotter is true or not so I bought a stock 3 core VK radiator to compare.
The stats of both radiators are as follows
Custom 4 core $500, 12.5kg, 45 tubes top to bottom, 67mm thick, fins tightly packed
Stock 3 core $200,8kg, 35 tubes top to bottom, 52mm thick, fins not tightly packed
Verdict. The custom $500 radiator was a waste of money. The temps as per readout on the laptop (EMS) measuring from one point, and the dash gauge measuring from another point on the engine both indicate at cruise a 3 to 4 degree reduction in temp and basically back to where it used to be when I remember it. Basically I think the airflow thru the radiator is reduced once everthing is so tightly packed.
I know that this may sound like only a small temp drop but it definately demonstrates that big is not always better with radiators.
Radiator change results
Started by
turbotrana
, Mar 29 2006 01:05 PM
25 replies to this topic
#2
_Dirty Deeds_
_Dirty Deeds_
-
- Guests
Posted 29 March 2006 - 01:18 PM
Yep, totally agree. I went through a similar exercise with a HQ radiator ( in to LH Torana). The 4 core ran hotter than the 3 core.
I think a lot of it has to do with the efficiency of the radiator and how blocked it is. For the sake of $70, its worth getting your radiator cleaned at least every 5000 k's.
I think a lot of it has to do with the efficiency of the radiator and how blocked it is. For the sake of $70, its worth getting your radiator cleaned at least every 5000 k's.
#3
_devilsadvocate_
_devilsadvocate_
-
- Guests
Posted 29 March 2006 - 01:31 PM
Interesting stuff.
Im sure youve approached your test scientifically, but its a little uncertain as to the conditions during your comparison.
Was the temp measured at the bottom radiator hose outlet, top hose outlet, cylinder head, temp sensor? ambient temperature on both occasions was, was same? Actual coolant temp was? Thermostat temp is?
Were you running an engine fan or just using ram air?
Choice of crossflow radiator, why? would reduce available area of fins exposed to air in the torrie and be less effective than a vertical flow rad. Regardless, using cross flow both times makes comparing the cores valid.
Im sure youve approached your test scientifically, but its a little uncertain as to the conditions during your comparison.
Was the temp measured at the bottom radiator hose outlet, top hose outlet, cylinder head, temp sensor? ambient temperature on both occasions was, was same? Actual coolant temp was? Thermostat temp is?
Were you running an engine fan or just using ram air?
Choice of crossflow radiator, why? would reduce available area of fins exposed to air in the torrie and be less effective than a vertical flow rad. Regardless, using cross flow both times makes comparing the cores valid.
#4
_Herne_
_Herne_
-
- Guests
Posted 29 March 2006 - 01:41 PM
When I enquired about a new V8 radiator for my previous Torana I naturally enquired about 4 and 5 core as an alternative, the specialist I spoke to highly recommended the 3 core for superior cooling and advised me the 4 and 5 core would run hotter and also waste my money!
I can only agree with turbotorana's and Dirty Deeds practical experience in this matter!
Cheers
Herne
I can only agree with turbotorana's and Dirty Deeds practical experience in this matter!
Cheers
Herne
#5
rodomo
-
- Members
-
- 18,070 posts
To advertise here, call 13TORANA
- Name:R - O - B Dammit!
- Location:Way out west of Melbourne Awstraylya
- Joined: 10-December 05
Posted 29 March 2006 - 02:13 PM
Perhaps the 4/5 cores flow quicker and don't allow "time" to tranfer heat? 
RACV MAN
RACV MAN
#6
_devilsadvocate_
_devilsadvocate_
-
- Guests
Posted 30 March 2006 - 08:24 AM
Maybe more flow in larger core rad(or perhaps there are issues with turbulence), however, more flow always enhances heat transfer, not restrict it.........seePerhaps the 4/5 cores flow quicker and don't allow "time" to tranfer heat?
RACV MAN
cooling
cooling1
Edited by devilsadvocate, 30 March 2006 - 08:26 AM.
#7
_TORANR AMORE_
_TORANR AMORE_
-
- Guests
Posted 30 March 2006 - 09:33 AM
The 4 core Aussie Desert Cooler that I bought only did a little bit better than the standard 4 core that I previously had but it was hard to tell in the difference of weather that I had used both of them. You also have to consider the temperature that your thermostat opens at, which will affect how long the water spends inside the radiator for it to cool down, until it then travels into the motor.
The 4 core was HEAPs better than the 3 core that the motor originally had, but when changing the radiators I also change thermostats and fans etc.
Bigger radiators eliminate heat better than smaller ones, they would have to. The rest is up to design and materials used and fans used etc. I mean, when you think about it in terms of volume difference, there is a big difference for (an arbitrary) example if you add 2 litres of boiling water to 3 litres of cold water OR add 2 litres of boiling water to 2 litres of cold water in a container with less outer surface area to dissipate heat.
Heat energy is ultimately transferred from the steel to the air and like devil said the better the flow the better the transfer just like the better the flow of air through the radiator (stronger fan) the more air that is available in a shorter time to transfer the heat.
The design of he radiator is a combination of it acting merely as a big heatsink as well as allowing the water within it to travel as much as possible inside it exposing itself to as much of the metal surface area as possible within a certian timeframe (which you can control by using various thermostats on your engine with different opening temperatures.
However, when the thermostat is closed, this is supposed to allow time for the hot water in the radiator to cool down (end of flow arguement and relies on volume + surface area + air speed velocity through the radiator). I don't think it is actually flowing at this time, but only when the thermostat has opened again and pushes it back into the engine.
I have taken thermostats completely out of engines that were real bad cookers and it 'seemed' to have worked but I'm not sure if it made any real difference. It certianly gave me third degree burns though forgetting about it and opening the cap.
<_<
The 4 core was HEAPs better than the 3 core that the motor originally had, but when changing the radiators I also change thermostats and fans etc.
Bigger radiators eliminate heat better than smaller ones, they would have to. The rest is up to design and materials used and fans used etc. I mean, when you think about it in terms of volume difference, there is a big difference for (an arbitrary) example if you add 2 litres of boiling water to 3 litres of cold water OR add 2 litres of boiling water to 2 litres of cold water in a container with less outer surface area to dissipate heat.
Heat energy is ultimately transferred from the steel to the air and like devil said the better the flow the better the transfer just like the better the flow of air through the radiator (stronger fan) the more air that is available in a shorter time to transfer the heat.
The design of he radiator is a combination of it acting merely as a big heatsink as well as allowing the water within it to travel as much as possible inside it exposing itself to as much of the metal surface area as possible within a certian timeframe (which you can control by using various thermostats on your engine with different opening temperatures.
However, when the thermostat is closed, this is supposed to allow time for the hot water in the radiator to cool down (end of flow arguement and relies on volume + surface area + air speed velocity through the radiator). I don't think it is actually flowing at this time, but only when the thermostat has opened again and pushes it back into the engine.
I have taken thermostats completely out of engines that were real bad cookers and it 'seemed' to have worked but I'm not sure if it made any real difference. It certianly gave me third degree burns though forgetting about it and opening the cap.
<_<
#8
Tiny
-
- Administrators
-
- 10,018 posts
Oh My, Don't you post alot
- Name:Tiny
- Location:Sydney
- Joined: 04-February 07
Posted 30 March 2006 - 10:10 AM
Turbotorana and Deeds have both experienced it and i tend to subscribe to the theory of the reduction in airflow through the tightly packed core is what leads to a warmer temp even though it SHOULD be able to dissipate more heat.
Thats why when i had the choice, i went for a PWR alloy. 2 core only, the tubes are ovalised, theyre 1" along the length of the oval, and they also have dimples on them to help turbulate the water so it tumbles and touches more of the tube.
All i can say is... it works a damn treat! Standard HQ size and layout and has the trans cooler in the bottom too.(never used)
Lots of good theories, and thanks for keeping it civil! and thanks turbotorana for telling us about your experiences mate!
Thats why when i had the choice, i went for a PWR alloy. 2 core only, the tubes are ovalised, theyre 1" along the length of the oval, and they also have dimples on them to help turbulate the water so it tumbles and touches more of the tube.
All i can say is... it works a damn treat! Standard HQ size and layout and has the trans cooler in the bottom too.(never used)
Lots of good theories, and thanks for keeping it civil! and thanks turbotorana for telling us about your experiences mate!
#9
_MYLJ_
_MYLJ_
-
- Guests
Posted 30 March 2006 - 11:35 AM
I have been through several cooling systems on my car to try and keep the temp down, now being a burnout car the issues are a bit different as you have no air flow through the radiator apart from the electric fans, but maybe some of the things I've discovered will be of interest.
originally the car had a worked small block with a Factory 4 core with a medium/fine set of fins (as in not the finest but not the standard course core)
this system with two thermo fans (front mounted push type fans) seemed to work fine and it was only at the end of a 3 minute burnout that it was getting real hot (240+) cruising etc it would sit around 200.
When the big block went in (with the same cooling system) it cooked all the time
even tried several different temprature thermostats ,as soon as you started it the temp would keep rising till it boiled itself a cup of tea. Came of the burnout pad at summernats 17 at 280 degrees F.
cooked the headgaskets and made a general mess of itself !!!
once the motor was fixed I looked for something else (couldn't afford an alloy one at the time)
so I tried a fine finned 5 core (brand new) useless,
ran even hotter than before even with a extra thermo pulling air from behind. Started to look at all sorts of things then and air flow through the raidiator was definately an issue. If you put a sheet of plastic over the grill (with the fans switched on) it would only just suck it up against the grill and the amount of air you could feel coming through the rear of the raidiator felt minimal (with the plastic removed from the grill)
so back to plan "A", had the 4core re-cleaned. bought a set of AU Falcon thermofans, mounted them up (even sealed the edges with silicon) now with these fans it tried to suck the plastic sheet through the grill, Much better amount of air flowing through the raidiator core
lots better, but it still kept having very fluctuation temperature (it would bounce around between 190 and 250 . and it didn't make any difference if you babied it around it still fluctuated all the time.
Sollution------- fitted a "Milidon" high flow thermostat (its rated to open at 160 degrees) no more spikes in temp
it still got warm in a burnout but not to the point of cooking itself (just a slow gradual increase from 160 at the start of a run, and finishing up around 240 after about a 3 minute burnout run) and cruising it sits on 170, so thats how I've left it for now. I do have an alloy Desert cooler sitting in its box but I'm not convinced it will keep it any cooler (and its too pretty to put in the HQ I'm saving it for the Chevelle)
One thing I have not covered is the changes to the "Tuning set-up" of the engine that we have made as well that have also helped reduce temp
It use to have a 1050 dominator carby on it (too big) too much fuel = more temp
fitted my trusty old 750 double pumper noticed a difference straight away, engine is far more responsive and much crisper( not labouring under all that fuel) and definately helped slow the temp rises.
only other thing was a new ignition system (with an advance curve much more suited to the engines caracteristics)
So for me the best set up I've used so far is the 4 core with the AU fans and the high flow thermostat , but the one thing I cannot stress enough is the state of tune of the motor , a motor that is too lean (or too rich) or has over advanced (or exsessively retarded) timing , will run hot . Period !
only other thing is fuel, only ever run premium or better!!!!!!! standard unleaded is a no no , particularly if temp is an issue
originally the car had a worked small block with a Factory 4 core with a medium/fine set of fins (as in not the finest but not the standard course core)
this system with two thermo fans (front mounted push type fans) seemed to work fine and it was only at the end of a 3 minute burnout that it was getting real hot (240+) cruising etc it would sit around 200.
When the big block went in (with the same cooling system) it cooked all the time
even tried several different temprature thermostats ,as soon as you started it the temp would keep rising till it boiled itself a cup of tea. Came of the burnout pad at summernats 17 at 280 degrees F.cooked the headgaskets and made a general mess of itself !!!
once the motor was fixed I looked for something else (couldn't afford an alloy one at the time)
so I tried a fine finned 5 core (brand new) useless,
ran even hotter than before even with a extra thermo pulling air from behind. Started to look at all sorts of things then and air flow through the raidiator was definately an issue. If you put a sheet of plastic over the grill (with the fans switched on) it would only just suck it up against the grill and the amount of air you could feel coming through the rear of the raidiator felt minimal (with the plastic removed from the grill)so back to plan "A", had the 4core re-cleaned. bought a set of AU Falcon thermofans, mounted them up (even sealed the edges with silicon) now with these fans it tried to suck the plastic sheet through the grill, Much better amount of air flowing through the raidiator core
lots better, but it still kept having very fluctuation temperature (it would bounce around between 190 and 250 . and it didn't make any difference if you babied it around it still fluctuated all the time.Sollution------- fitted a "Milidon" high flow thermostat (its rated to open at 160 degrees) no more spikes in temp
it still got warm in a burnout but not to the point of cooking itself (just a slow gradual increase from 160 at the start of a run, and finishing up around 240 after about a 3 minute burnout run) and cruising it sits on 170, so thats how I've left it for now. I do have an alloy Desert cooler sitting in its box but I'm not convinced it will keep it any cooler (and its too pretty to put in the HQ I'm saving it for the Chevelle)One thing I have not covered is the changes to the "Tuning set-up" of the engine that we have made as well that have also helped reduce temp
It use to have a 1050 dominator carby on it (too big) too much fuel = more temp
fitted my trusty old 750 double pumper
noticed a difference straight away, engine is far more responsive and much crisper( not labouring under all that fuel) and definately helped slow the temp rises.only other thing was a new ignition system (with an advance curve much more suited to the engines caracteristics)
So for me the best set up I've used so far is the 4 core with the AU fans and the high flow thermostat , but the one thing I cannot stress enough is the state of tune of the motor , a motor that is too lean (or too rich) or has over advanced (or exsessively retarded) timing , will run hot . Period !
only other thing is fuel, only ever run premium or better!!!!!!! standard unleaded is a no no , particularly if temp is an issue
#10
Tiny
-
- Administrators
-
- 10,018 posts
Oh My, Don't you post alot
- Name:Tiny
- Location:Sydney
- Joined: 04-February 07
Posted 30 March 2006 - 11:41 AM
Great points Steve, and i know youve been through everything! To keep a burnout car cool is no mean feat!
The high flow thermostat is one thing that i didnt think of.. I must admit though, ive put 2 into the monaro and theyre the ONLY thermostat's i'll use! I just use normal Tridon ones, they make high flow Chev thermostats and most places have them on the shelf!
Cheers mate!
The high flow thermostat is one thing that i didnt think of.. I must admit though, ive put 2 into the monaro and theyre the ONLY thermostat's i'll use! I just use normal Tridon ones, they make high flow Chev thermostats and most places have them on the shelf!
Cheers mate!
#11
_devilsadvocate_
_devilsadvocate_
-
- Guests
Posted 30 March 2006 - 11:52 AM
Burn outs, wouldnt heavy duty engine fans(dare I suggest) be your best option for keeping things cool when youve really got the motor working hard and no ram air?
#12
_MYLJ_
_MYLJ_
-
- Guests
Posted 30 March 2006 - 12:06 PM
do you mean a mechanical original style fan or electric fans?Burn outs, wouldnt heavy duty engine fans(dare I suggest) be your best option for keeping things cool when youve really got the motor working hard and no ram air?
I run AU falcon electric thermofans.
I don't run a stock type mechanical fan for several reasons..........
1. at high rpm the fan blades distort and do not flow properly IMPO
2. I run without a bonnet during competions (helps reduce engine bay temp) and they dont let you run a stock fan and no bonnet (I think you can if its got a metal shroud)
3. they break at high rpm (I've seen it happen)
4. there is no room to fit it with the big block and the big raidiator
5. they rob horse power and add extra load to the fan belts (and I dont know if they fit with gilmer drives)
6. there bloody ugly
#13
_devilsadvocate_
_devilsadvocate_
-
- Guests
Posted 30 March 2006 - 12:45 PM
i meant a mechanical fan, that was suitable for high rpm or clutch speed limited.
#14
_TORANR AMORE_
_TORANR AMORE_
-
- Guests
Posted 30 March 2006 - 12:47 PM
Gotta agree with all of that there, and mechanical fans are crap and have only one advantage (they always spin and don't use electricity). I've butchered a radiator with one that somehow flexed at high rpm and when I took it off another car running a stock 308, it revved so freely and quickly, more responsive and I couldn't beleive the difference.
AU Falcon twin fans or equivalent are the best and I've heard good things about them. I bought a set for the TORRY. I should've installed them prior to the drag day at heathcote, the car wouldn't have overheated so much after that burnout. It had a single large davies craig electric fan on it which is only fine for any other circumstances. The cooling system also is using a 160 degree thermostat (From memory I think).
I'm gonna try a couple of different radiators on the Hatch, but when that motor ran, I'm told it ran cool with a standard 5 core.
What is the best radiator that people here can reccomend for a worked 5litre that is not over-expensive? Brand? Type?
AU Falcon twin fans or equivalent are the best and I've heard good things about them. I bought a set for the TORRY. I should've installed them prior to the drag day at heathcote, the car wouldn't have overheated so much after that burnout. It had a single large davies craig electric fan on it which is only fine for any other circumstances. The cooling system also is using a 160 degree thermostat (From memory I think).
I'm gonna try a couple of different radiators on the Hatch, but when that motor ran, I'm told it ran cool with a standard 5 core.
What is the best radiator that people here can reccomend for a worked 5litre that is not over-expensive? Brand? Type?
#15
rodomo
-
- Members
-
- 18,070 posts
To advertise here, call 13TORANA
- Name:R - O - B Dammit!
- Location:Way out west of Melbourne Awstraylya
- Joined: 10-December 05
Posted 30 March 2006 - 03:52 PM
I have read and understand:
Cooling and
Cooling 2
Points to ponder:
Cooling 1 made no mention of the molecule being reheated on lap 2 of the cooling system or does he mean it did 2 laps of the radiator before it exited?
Cooling 2 made no mention of replacing heat exchangers with bigger capacity ones rather than altering flow speed through existing exchangers.
RACV MAN
Cooling and
Cooling 2
Points to ponder:
Cooling 1 made no mention of the molecule being reheated on lap 2 of the cooling system or does he mean it did 2 laps of the radiator before it exited?
Cooling 2 made no mention of replacing heat exchangers with bigger capacity ones rather than altering flow speed through existing exchangers.
RACV MAN
#16
_Torana482HP_
_Torana482HP_
-
- Guests
Posted 30 March 2006 - 04:15 PM
crap, i bought i 5 core for me torry for when i have me worked 308 in it.
i hope it dosent cook or else ill be pissed.
i hope it dosent cook or else ill be pissed.
#17
Tiny
-
- Administrators
-
- 10,018 posts
Oh My, Don't you post alot
- Name:Tiny
- Location:Sydney
- Joined: 04-February 07
Posted 30 March 2006 - 06:58 PM
Torana482: Keep a close eye on the guage mate! it may work fone for your application, but more often than not the airflow through them is too limited!
Cheers!
Cheers!
#18
turbotrana
-
- Members
-
- 156 posts
Forum Member
- Joined: 03-January 06
Posted 30 March 2006 - 10:38 PM
In response to the QsInteresting stuff.
Im sure youve approached your test scientifically, but its a little uncertain as to the conditions during your comparison.
Was the temp measured at the bottom radiator hose outlet, top hose outlet, cylinder head, temp sensor? ambient temperature on both occasions was, was same? Actual coolant temp was? Thermostat temp is?
Were you running an engine fan or just using ram air?
Choice of crossflow radiator, why? would reduce available area of fins exposed to air in the torrie and be less effective than a vertical flow rad. Regardless, using cross flow both times makes comparing the cores valid.
I dont run a thermostat, I cut the thermostat head off so I just have the thermostat base which gives a smaller hole to slow the water down.
The temp differences were measured while cruising, so no thermo fan was on.
There is a reason why crossflow radiators are meant to be better than downflow. Its got something to do with pressures in the system and location of radiator cap. I am no expert on this, just following something I read on years ago and mostly forgotten.
I also put in REDLINE water wetter in after the first testing of temps to see if its any good. I think this stuff is only really of benefit when the system is really hot and starting to boil. Then it may help, but at cruise It may??? have helped 1 deg but not certain.
Please note that all these results are not scientifically done, but just good old observation and changing one thing at a time.
#19
_devilsadvocate_
_devilsadvocate_
-
- Guests
Posted 31 March 2006 - 12:40 PM
Thanks for all of the ^. So take it no engine fan. So with lots of ram air(at cruise) the 5core ran hotter. Ive got a theory, which Ill keep to myself for the moment.....In response to the Qs
I dont run a thermostat, I cut the thermostat head off so I just have the thermostat base which gives a smaller hole to slow the water down.
The temp differences were measured while cruising, so no thermo fan was on.
There is a reason why crossflow radiators are meant to be better than downflow. Its got something to do with pressures in the system and location of radiator cap.
I also put in REDLINE water wetter in after the first testing of temps to see if its any good. I think this stuff is only really of benefit when the system is really hot and starting to boil.
Please note that all these results are not scientifically done, but just good old observation and changing one thing at a time.
Re crossflow, the only advantage I know of, is that the rad cap can be placed on the opposite side of the rad to the water pump, and this stops the rad cap popping the cap at high revs, not something ive noticed in a conventional system. Other than that, radiators are generally constructed to fill the hole, using minimum sized top and bottom tanks for the sake of economy of manufacture, and/or to max the exposed fins to the hole, which will typically see a crossflow installed if the car is low and wide.
Redline water wetter, Ive posted heaps about that b4, but basically agree with ^
Not scientifically done? changing one variable at a time......thats part of good scientific method.
#20
makka
-
- Members
-
- 3,559 posts
A m��se once bit my sister
- Name:Cohen
- Location:ya daughters place
- Joined: 08-November 05
Posted 31 March 2006 - 01:48 PM
the main advantage of crossflow radiators is more about their packaging than anything else. in the evolution of cars the shape of the radiator has gone from being relatively tall and skinny (think 1928 ford) to being a lot lower and wider, as the height of the front of cars has reduced. as this happened the size of the end tanks grew, as they went all the way along the longest sides of the radiator. so the car designers moved the tanks to the sides of the radiator, this gave the same area of fins on the radiator, but a smaller total surface area.
#21
myss427
View Garage
-
- Members
-
- 1,636 posts
Forum Fixture
- Location:Canberra
- Car:427 hatch, CV8 Monaro, Ve SSV ute. Was part owner A9X sedan until he sold it without telling me!
- Joined: 17-November 05
View Garage
Posted 31 March 2006 - 03:03 PM
I have an aluminium 2 x 1inch tube radiator in my car for cruising, but I tried a nissan skyline plastic aluminium 1 core for drag racing. Much lighter again and it made little difference on cooling. So maybe the thiner radiator has some merit, because I know how hard it iis to keep a big block cool.
#22
_devilsadvocate_
_devilsadvocate_
-
- Guests
Posted 31 March 2006 - 07:43 PM
Good that you read those links, but I take it by your quest you're still sceptical?I have read and understand:
Cooling and
Cooling 2
Points to ponder:
Cooling 1 made no mention of the molecule being reheated on lap 2 of the cooling system or does he mean it did 2 laps of the radiator before it exited?
Cooling 2 made no mention of replacing heat exchangers with bigger capacity ones rather than altering flow speed through existing exchangers.
RACV MAN
I �think� what he alluded to was that if the molecule did two laps of the radiator and engine, in the same time as it took to do one lap, then the molecule would have been in contact with both rad and engine for the same time in both scenarios.
This explanation isn�t complete, it really only shows that speeding it up wont have any effect on contact time with the rad or engine. It doesn�t explain why speeding it up actually �increases� cooling.
This is much harder to explain, I�ll have a go:
If the flow of coolant through the radiator is slow then yes, it comes out of the bottom of the radiator a lot cooler than if the coolant was moving fast.
The coolant has time to cool, perhaps entering the top at 90C and cooling to 80C by the time its half way down the radiator. (Unfortunately this rate of cooling wont be maintained due to �Newton�s law of cooling�, rate of cooling is proportional to the temp above the surroundings) and not as much temp drop would occur in the coolant traveling through the bottom half of the rad, perhaps only losing a further 5C.
The amount of cooling occurring in the bottom half of the radiator can be seen to be far less than than in the top half, the bottom half isn�t working so well because it is closer to the temp of the surroundings.
By making the water flow through the rad as fast as possible, ensures that the all rad stays significantly higher than the surroundings and is therefore able to transfer more heat as per Newton�s law.
I know it sounds contradictory, the slow moving example we have a temp diff of 15C, however, the prob is in the time its taken to do that, the water inside the engine would have heated up a lot more than that 15C as the surface temps of the motor are considerable hotter.
The second case, fast flowing water may enter the rad at 90 and exit at 88C. Only a 2C drop, not much? Because it is hot all the way along the rad, more heat is removed(the air coming off the radiator will be hotter), and correspondingly the water hasn�t had as much time to heat up while going through the engine.
That�s as good as I can do�., it�s a difficult concept.
#23
rodomo
-
- Members
-
- 18,070 posts
To advertise here, call 13TORANA
- Name:R - O - B Dammit!
- Location:Way out west of Melbourne Awstraylya
- Joined: 10-December 05
Posted 31 March 2006 - 11:48 PM
Yes! You are correct!
I am sceptical and believe that there is a threshold where flow and heat tranfer is preportional too cooling.
I do not believe that more flow increases cooling in all cases. (Original topic)
I know that I would rather have a standard radiator, than the equivilant radiator capacity in the form of a tube between the top and bottom hose with the equivilant area of fins and air flow (lets take it to its extreem) as I believe it would be more efficient.
I base my theory on experience rather than science, and things I read off the net posted by other "scientists". Lets face it, one bloke was arguing with engineers that "should know better" .
I agree it is a difficult concept and that is why I believe there is a threshold.
RACV MAN
I am sceptical and believe that there is a threshold where flow and heat tranfer is preportional too cooling.
I do not believe that more flow increases cooling in all cases. (Original topic)
I know that I would rather have a standard radiator, than the equivilant radiator capacity in the form of a tube between the top and bottom hose with the equivilant area of fins and air flow (lets take it to its extreem) as I believe it would be more efficient.
I base my theory on experience rather than science, and things I read off the net posted by other "scientists". Lets face it, one bloke was arguing with engineers that "should know better"
.I agree it is a difficult concept and that is why I believe there is a threshold.
RACV MAN
Edited by rodomo, 01 April 2006 - 12:01 AM.
#24
_devilsadvocate_
_devilsadvocate_
-
- Guests
Posted 01 April 2006 - 12:49 AM
Yes, there is a "threshold" if you like in this situation, the rate of cooling reaches an upper limit as the coolant circulates faster and faster, however, there is no reversal in the trend.
We all live by Newton's laws of physics and so far (provided we keep things at less than light speeds) no one person has found fault in any of them, so Ill be sticking with him on this one, I have gathered some "data" from real cooling situations that go with the flow too.
We all live by Newton's laws of physics and so far (provided we keep things at less than light speeds) no one person has found fault in any of them, so Ill be sticking with him on this one, I have gathered some "data" from real cooling situations that go with the flow too.
Edited by devilsadvocate, 01 April 2006 - 01:01 AM.
#25
Tiny
-
- Administrators
-
- 10,018 posts
Oh My, Don't you post alot
- Name:Tiny
- Location:Sydney
- Joined: 04-February 07
Posted 01 April 2006 - 05:22 PM
I wonder wether the design of the actual cooling core would make a difference? I know intercoolers use a bar and plate design cause its more efficient... Are there different radiator core types? Would something like this overcome this whole drama?
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
