# Trying to achieve turbonormalizing the home-built way

Discussion in 'Firewall Forward / Props / Fuel system' started by geosnooker2000, Aug 11, 2019.

### Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes Forum by donating:

1. Aug 20, 2019

### rv6ejguy

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jun 26, 2012
Messages:
3,749
2,777
Location:
I read about this on VAF a while back. May be so, but in this realm, perhaps being conservative is safer, given the possible outcome?

Would be interesting to see how the Barber Pole is driven in a Boeing. I think on King Airs I flew, it was strictly moved with pressure altitude. I am guessing both Beech and Boeing have done extensive instrumented testing to explore flutter limits to receive certification. I recall watching a YT vid of Airbus testing the A380 for flutter. A bit hairy.

Hope to see both you guys at Reno again this year.

Last edited: Aug 20, 2019
2. Aug 20, 2019

### SVSUSteve

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Aug 21, 2007
Messages:
3,855
916
Location:
Indianapolis, IN
Thank you! And just remember, if it’s above your pay grade, it’s in low earth orbit above mine.

pictsidhe likes this.
3. Aug 20, 2019

### SVSUSteve

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Aug 21, 2007
Messages:
3,855
916
Location:
Indianapolis, IN
Rolls-Royce has a video of the original design for mounting one of the Trent engines (I think it was the 900 for the 380) fluttering during a test flight. It’s absolutely terrifying to see. I am not sure if it’s publicly available. One of my friends who works for them as an engineer showed it to me.

4. Aug 20, 2019

### BoKu

#### Well-Known MemberHBA Supporter

Joined:
Aug 16, 2013
Messages:
2,251
2,807
Location:
Western US
SVSUSteve likes this.
5. Aug 20, 2019

### Turd Ferguson

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Mar 14, 2008
Messages:
4,684
1,637
Location:
Upper midwest in a house
geosnooker2000, here's one you can deciper:

Indicated speed is 265 (or mach .78). The barber pole (redline), not really Vne but close enough, is 288 (Mach .85). At the top of the MFD on the right side you can see the TAS is 460. And the best part is the groundspeed of 603. That's a good go-home leg.

mcrae0104 likes this.
6. Aug 20, 2019

### BJC

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Oct 7, 2013
Messages:
9,360
6,131
Location:
97FL, Florida, USA
Yes.

Go to the link in post 62 for a discussion.

BJC

SVSUSteve and BoKu like this.
7. Aug 20, 2019

### geosnooker2000

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Mar 30, 2019
Messages:
100
10
Location:
Somerville, TN
All this "why" is interesting and all, but the "how" is what this thread is supposed to be about. And I don't mean increasing Vne. Please look at the thread title and respond accordingly.
I have been (lightly) reprimanded here before for "thread creep", as have many of you. And I agree with the reasoning. For the sake of others searching for subject matter, let's keep things where they belong. I specifically went and started a thread in the aerodynamics sub-forum for this Vne stuff so that we could get back to economically turbonormalizing an 0-320 here.
To allay y'all's fears, I do not intend to operate my Ch 640 outside the speed limitations stated by Zenair. It WOULD be nice if they published whether or not that 175MPH is IAS or TAS, but I'm going to take it as TAS until proven otherwise. If that means that I have a plane that is capable of flying to 20K, but it would be dangerous to exceed 16K, I will set an operating limit inside the POH of 16K. Or 15K. Or whatever it turns out to be to get to about 160TAS. The point of this exercise is that by the designer's own admission, the plane (normally aspirated at max gross) will not get even close to performance limits, at least until you hang a 540 on the front. That is going in the opposite direction of what I want to try. I want to try an 0-320 and achieve better cruise performance as a function of altitude, not brute force.
Now, I WILL say, what Mr. Farnham has suggested in the SDS systems DOES interest me. $5700 is a chunk. But it sounds like it checks all the boxes of what I am trying to achieve. To borrow a phrase from Mr. Jon Croke, "Now Baaaack to [turbonormalizing]" 8. Aug 20, 2019 ### BBerson ### BBerson #### Well-Known MemberHBA Supporter Joined: Dec 16, 2007 Messages: 11,701 Likes Received: 2,201 Location: Port Townsend WA Title is "turbo normalizing" the "Homebuilt way". Is " supercharger normalizing" a Homebuilt way? 9. Aug 21, 2019 ### geosnooker2000 ### geosnooker2000 #### Well-Known Member Joined: Mar 30, 2019 Messages: 100 Likes Received: 10 Location: Somerville, TN I would say so for the most part since supercharger normalizing isn't that common among the modern certificated GA fleet? As long as you are trying to do it with automotive parts, I'd say you are following the spirit of what I'm trying to do. Or at least, non-TSO'ed parts. I think the overall point here is, an APV costs somewhere in the neighborhood of$1700. That's ridiculous for a part that probably is worth about $100 or$200 when you take out all of the BS liability insurance costs associated with it just because it goes on a plane instead of a car. Multiply that times all of the components in a Turbo system. That's what I'm trying to avoid.

10. Aug 21, 2019

### pictsidhe

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jul 15, 2014
Messages:
6,476
1,678
Location:
North Carolina
There's a lot of super-normal people here

OK, OK. I'll make an on-topic comment, just to derail the thread

If you boost an engine and keep to its original power, you should be fine. You will likely need to blow extra air through the fins to keep it cool at altitude, but the innards will be seeing sea level stresses. If you boost to 15psi absolute, it'll run about sea level power. It will gain a little due to lower back pressure on the exhaust. Assuming you size the turbo properly...

geosnooker2000 likes this.
11. Aug 24, 2019

### TFF

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Apr 28, 2010
Messages:
11,451
3,182
Location:
Memphis, TN
The biggest problem you are going to have is the low boost you want to run. Tons of waist gates for cars on the market. Most are about more boost and spool up. The only other consideration is unlike racing where you want the waste gate closed until boost is exceeded, you want it controlled like a production auto where boost is always bleed, where you have excess until you get to your critical altitude. Waist gate closes progressively the height you go. Probably two waist gates. One for control, one for overboost runaway set 3-4 psi above control.

12. Aug 24, 2019

### pictsidhe

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jul 15, 2014
Messages:
6,476
1,678
Location:
North Carolina
Use an ECU controlled type wastegate. A controller for that would not be complicated. I'd be surprised if someone didn't already make one.
If they don't, well, maybe I should?

13. Aug 24, 2019

### Hot Wings

#### Well-Known MemberHBA Supporter

Joined:
Nov 14, 2009
Messages:
6,217
2,192
Location:
Rocky Mountains
That is the path I'd take too. But then we run into the old 'which is more reliable, mechanical or electrical?' question. Lots of beliefs and emotional comfort levels involved with that debate.
It's why I didn't offer this option way back when the thread started.

14. Aug 25, 2019

### pictsidhe

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jul 15, 2014
Messages:
6,476
1,678
Location:
North Carolina
Well,
Well, you could hook up a wastegate to a vacuum referenced pressure actuator, but they are hard to find.

15. Aug 25, 2019

### Hephaestus

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jun 25, 2014
Messages:
967
211
Location:
YMM
In theory this would be a lovely scenario for a vgt and let the ECU manage it with a wastegate solely as a engine saver.

16. Aug 25, 2019

### poormansairforce

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Mar 28, 2017
Messages:
583
122
Location:
Just an Ohioan
Um, how about operating it manually? No failures.

17. Aug 25, 2019

### Hot Wings

#### Well-Known MemberHBA Supporter

Joined:
Nov 14, 2009
Messages:
6,217
2,192
Location:
Rocky Mountains
You mean other then the pilot?

It is odd how the most flexible and adaptable system on the plane can also be the greatest source of failure.

poormansairforce and pictsidhe like this.
18. Aug 25, 2019

### rv6ejguy

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jun 26, 2012
Messages:
3,749
2,777
Location:
You guys are overthinking what's been done simply and reliably for decades on the automotive world. Get a Tial automotive WG with the lightest springs available, add a cockpit mounted \$25 mini air regulator to provide control pressure to the top chamber- done.

Same basic gear that most racers are running at Reno except they have much higher spring pressure in the wastegates.

poormansairforce likes this.
19. Aug 25, 2019

Joined:
Jul 15, 2014
Messages:
6,476