FLOW BENCH TESTING & CFD ANALYSIS
The Dinan intake system outflows the factory setup by over 12% at 28″ of H2O and averages 14% greater flow across all the tested scenarios. This translates into the ability to support higher power levels (ie: future-proofing the intake as a restriction to your future goals). The chart shown below is the summation of individual CFM measurements for both OEM driver and passenger intake tracts and in the case of the Dinan flow measurements, both boxes joined with the shared plenum. Utilizing a central plenum as opposed to two separate intake paths created a challenge in comparing the flow measurements of stock vs. Dinan on the bench but one that needed to be done to ensure the viability of the preferred symmetrical design. Numerous test sets to challenge and/or verify the data were used which included the following setups:
- 1 turbo inlet blocked with both filter sides open.
- 1 turbo inlet blocked with one filter inlet blocked.
- 1 turbo inlet blocked with the plenum blocked 2″ past the opposite turbo inlet to as closely simulate the OEM individual pathways as possible.
With each successive test it became apparent that no matter the combination, the CFM measurement itself was largely unaffected by the shared plenum regardless of how much extra volume on the opposing side of the path was being utilized. In fact, between all 3 setups, the difference in CFM was within 2% across the entire range. Additional tables breaking down the individual driver and passenger banks are also supplied for those looking for more minute detail.
OEM DRVR. | OEM DRVR. | OEM DRVR. | OEM PASS. | OEM PASS. | OEM PASS. | OEM TOTAL |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IN. H20 | MBAR | CFM | IN. H20 | MBAR | CFM | CFM |
5 | 972 | 180 | 5 | 973 | 148 | 328 |
10 | 959 | 258 | 10 | 961 | 215 | 473 |
20 | 933 | 371 | 20 | 937 | 309 | 680 |
25 | 920 | 420 | 25 | 925 | 347 | 767 |
28 | 912 | 447 | 28 | 918 | 368 | 815 |
30 | 906 | 465 | 30 | 913 | 380 | 845 |
40 | 879 | 540 | 40 | 889 | 445 | 985 |
DINAN DRVR. | DINAN DRVR. | DINAN DRVR. | DINAN PASS. | DINAN PASS. | DINAN PASS. | DINAN TOTAL |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IN. H20 | MBAR | CFM | IN. H20 | MBAR | CFM | CFM |
5 | 973 | 216 | 5 | 973 | 175 | 391 |
10 | 960 | 304 | 10 | 961 | 250 | 554 |
20 | 935 | 426 | 20 | 938 | 352 | 778 |
25 | 921 | 476 | 25 | 925 | 395 | 871 |
28 | 915 | 503 | 28 | 918 | 413 | 916 |
30 | 910 | 523 | 30 | 914 | 429 | 952 |
40 | 884 | 606 | 40 | 890 | 500 | 1106 |
In addition to flow bench testing, CFD analysis was also utilized to ensure the central plenum did not cause unnecessary turbulence that could cause a reduction in flow properties. The point where the 2 flow paths met within the shared pathway particularly was of great interest and under intense scrutiny. With some minor tweaks to the design the flow paths remained largely distinct from one another despite the shared space.