SAE TECHNICAL

PAPER SERIES 2000-01-3090

Design of a Restricted Induction System for a

High Speed Four Cylinder Engine
Badih A. Jawad, Michael D. DeGain and Anthony P. Young Jr.
Lawrence Technological University

2000 Future Transportation

Technology Conference
Costa Mesa, California
August 21-23, 2000

400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001 U.S.A. Tel: (724) 776-4841 Fax: (724) 776-5760
The appearance of this ISSN code at the bottom of this page indicates SAEs consent that copies of the
paper may be made for personal or internal use of specific clients. This consent is given on the condition,
however, that the copier pay a $7.00 per article copy fee through the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc.
Operations Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 for copying beyond that permitted by Sec-
tions 107 or 108 of the U.S. Copyright Law. This consent does not extend to other kinds of copying such as
copying for general distribution, for advertising or promotional purposes, for creating new collective works,
or for resale.

SAE routinely stocks printed papers for a period of three years following date of publication. Direct your
orders to SAE Customer Sales and Satisfaction Department.

Quantity reprint rates can be obtained from the Customer Sales and Satisfaction Department.

To request permission to reprint a technical paper or permission to use copyrighted SAE publications in
other works, contact the SAE Publications Group.

All SAE papers, standards, and selected

books are abstracted and indexed in the
Global Mobility Database

No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, in an electronic retrieval system or otherwise, without the prior written
permission of the publisher.

ISSN 0148-7191
Copyright 2000 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE. The author is solely
responsible for the content of the paper. A process is available by which discussions will be printed with the paper if it is published in
SAE Transactions. For permission to publish this paper in full or in part, contact the SAE Publications Group.

Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for presentation or publication through SAE should send the manuscript or a 300
word abstract of a proposed manuscript to: Secretary, Engineering Meetings Board, SAE.

Printed in USA

Design of a Restricted Induction System for a
High Speed Four Cylinder Engine
Badih A. Jawad, Michael D. DeGain and Anthony P. Young Jr.
Copyright 2000 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc
ABSTRACT
Members of the 2000 Lawrence Technological University
Formula SAE (FSAE) team are currently developing a
new prototype intake system to be used on the new
Formula vehicle. The vehicle will be using a 600 cubic
centimeter four stroke Honda motorcycle engine. As
required by the rules of FSAE, the intake system must
be restricted to limit the engines potential to produce
power. Development work was done using a flow test
bench and engine dynamometer on all available
previous designs. The two best previous designs were
then compared to help determine the optimized
dimensions and geometry for the new design. After the
new prototype model was finished it was tested to
validate theoretical calculations and overall performance.
DESIGN OBJECTIVES
The design objectives for the 2000 intake manifold are
as follows:
Increase performance by reducing pressure losses
in the entire intake system.
Maximize the restrictors design to increase airflow
at lower pressure drops.
Eliminate the poor throttle response condition found
on previous LTU vehicles.
Improve the throttle body design to help eliminate
turbulence at wide open throttle.
Utilize runners of the correct length to improve the
tuning effects predicted by Helmholtz resonance
theory.
Produce the prototype model with a weight of less
than 6 pounds.
2000-01-3090
Lawrence Technological University
Incorporate a plenum design with equal air
distribution to all four cylinders.
INTRODUCTION
The new powertrain system uses a MoTeC Engine
Management System (EMS) to control the fuel injection
and ignition systems on our engine. Our engine is from
a Honda CBR 600 F3 motorcycle. This dual overhead
cam, inline four-cylinder, four stroke engine is desirable
for several reasons. First and foremost, this engine has
a very good power to weight ratio. With an aluminum
engine block and cylinder head the engine weighs only
132 lbs. and produces 90 horsepower in its stock
configuration. Second, the engines durability has been
proven through the testing of previous LTU vehicles.
Lastly, the engine uses a liquid-to-liquid heat exchanger
between the oil and the coolant, which helps reduce and
maintain the oils temperature.
There are a few rules and restrictions established by
FSAE to help eliminate vehicles that are unsafe or out of
control. The first rule of FSAE racing is that the engine
displacement volume must not exceed 610 cubic
centimeters and it must operate on the four stroke cycle.
The second rule of FSAE racing is that the intake system
must incorporate a single .787 in. diameter intake
restrictor to limit the amount of intake air potential. The
third rule of FSAE racing is that there must be a single
throttle used to control the engines power located
upstream of the air restrictor, and there are no throttles
allowed downstream of the restrictor.
Because the engines potential to produce power is
directly related to its ability to intake air and restrictors
purpose is to limit the engines intake air, the restrictor is
the most important component in the intake system.
Because the restrictors maximum airflow volume could
be achieved using the largest available naturally
aspirated engine, the 2000 team felt that some type of
supercharging would be unnecessary, costly, and cylinders because the streamlines are dissimilar [see
decrease overall reliability. figure 2].

Through multiple stages of restrictor design and testing

the 2000 prototype was improved to flow its maximum
capacity of 132 cubic feet per minute at a pressure drop
of 25 inches of water achieving 90 percent of its
maximum at a pressure drop of 13 inches of water.
The 2000 design processes are broken down into three
distinct phases; development, design, and prototype
validation.

DEVELOPMENT

Initial testing determined that the two best intake

systems from previous L.T.U. Formula teams were used
in the 1995 and 1999 vehicles. Figure 2- 1995 Plenum Design.

The most recent design used on the 1999 vehicle

featured a butterfly valve 1.65 inch throttle body.
Directly downstream was the nozzle style restrictor,
which incorporated a 4.5 inch diffuser cone expanding to
an inner diameter of 1.58 inches. The plenum geometry
features four runners equally spaced from the restrictors
exit located at the bottom portion of the domed plenum.
This plenum shape requires incoming air to make a 180
degree turn to enter the runners [see figure 1].
The total plenum volume was measured to be 1400
cubic centimeters, equal to 2.3 times the engine
displacement. The 6 inch long runners have 2.25 inch
entrance bellmouths and an inner diameter of 1.37
inches which would predict a tuning peak located around
8600 rpm.
Results of the flow testing showed that the 1999 design
could flow 87 normalized cubic feet per minute at a
pressure drop of 25 inches and a valve lift of .324 inches
and the 1995 design could flow 91 normalized cubic feet
per minute at the same pressure drop and valve lift.
Flow testing also showed that the 1999 design has equal
air distribution between cylinders unlike the 1995 design
which favors the two cylinders closest to the restrictors
exit. Flow testing also revealed that a 1.65 inch throttle
body only offers part throttle restriction up to 35%
throttle actuation.

2000 DESIGN

In order to improve on the poor throttle response

Figure 1- 1999 Plenum Design.
The total plenum volume was measured to
cubic centimeters, equal to 3.5 times the
displacement. The 10.5 inch runners have
diameter of 1.25 inches which would predict
peak located around 8200 rpm.
experienced on a 1.65 in. throttle body the 2000 design
incorporates a 1.25 in. throttle body. By reducing the
throttle body area from 2.15 square inches to 1.22
square inches, the new throttle body offers part throttle
restriction at up to 82% throttle actuation. In order to
eliminate any possible turbulence caused from the
butterfly style valve at wide open throttle, the 2000
be 2100
design moved to a barrel design [see figure 3].
engines
an inner
a tuning

The intake system used on the most successful L.T.U.

Formula car was from the 1995 vehicle. It also uses a
butterfly valve 1.65 in. throttle body. The venturi style
restrictor uses a 5 in. long diffuser cone expanding to an
inner diameter of 1.86 inches. The log style plenum has
four straight runners with the restrictors exit located
between cylinders two and three. This plenum design
does not equally distribute the air between all four
Figure 3- 2000 Throttle Body Design.
2
Unlike a butterfly valve, a barrel valve at wide open
throttle has no obstructions in the airflow path through
the throttle body.

In order to minimize the pressure drop required to obtain

the restrictors maximum flow rate of 130 cubic feet per
minute, several different designs were tested. Rapid
Prototyped models of varying diffuser cone lengths with
similar exit diameters and similar entrances were
created. As expected, longer diffusers with lower exit
approach angles produced more airflow at lower
pressure drops because of effects of airflow separation.
It was determined that relatively large improvements in
airflow could be made with diffuser cone lengths up to
approximately ten inches. Due to packing restraints, the
longest diffuser cone that could be packaged was eleven
inches in without radically redesigning the plenum [see
figure 4].

Figure 6- 2000 Plenum Design.

Each runner is equally offset 1.25 inches from the center

of the plenum allowing packaging for a 2.25 in.
bellmouth with a .5 inch radius. In order to make all of
the runners identical, two 45 degree bends with a 2.5 in.
radius were necessary on each runner to fit the cylinder
head. The runners have an overall length of 10.92
inches and an inner diameter of 1.33 inches. Helmholtz
resonate frequency calculations conclude that the tuning
peaks for this system is located at 2200 and 7400
engine rpm (See Apendix A For Derivation).

Figure 4- 2000 Intake Design PROTOTYPE VALIDATION

The 2000 prototype intake design was tested to verify all

theoretical calculations with actual data. The intake
testing was done using both a flow bench and an engine
dynamometer.

Flow bench testing produces data correlating the

Figure 5- 2000 Restrictor Design.
In order to incorporate both the equal air distribution
found on the 1999 design and the increased flowrates of
the 1995 design, the 2000 design features equally
spaced runners from the restrictors exit and the use of
bellmouths on the runners. The 2000 design uses a
conical plenum to smooth the transition at the restrictor
and provides a much more direct streamline than all
previous designs [see figure 5].
pressure drop across the intake system to the volume
flow rate of air passing through it. The first phase of flow
bench testing was to flow the restrictor independent of
the rest of the intake system. The initial data collected
on the rapid prototype restrictors was used to determine
the correct dimensions for the 2000 design, but was not
suited for comparison testing. Accurate comparison
testing should be done on the same day to eliminate
calibration differences and use the same adapters and
setup. The results of the restrictor testing are shown
graphically in chart 1.

3
 Restrictor Performance

140

120

100
Volume Flowrate, NCFM

80

60

40

2000 venturi restrictor

20 1999 nozzle restrictor
1996 venturi restrictor
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Test Pressure, In H20

Chart 1- Restrictor Performance

The second phase of flow bench testing, was to flow the Chart 3- 2000 Intake Design Dynamometer Performance.
entire intake system. All testing was performed using
the same unmodified cylinder head and the complete
intake system including the restrictor and the throttle
body. The results of the intake system flow testing are
shown in chart 2.

Intake System Performance

Pressure Valve lift Volume

drop flowrate
In H2O inches NCFM
2000 intake 25 0.324 94
25 0.261 92
50 0.324 125
50 0.261 124
1995 intake 25 0.324 91
25 0.261 90
50 0.324 120
50 0.261 118 Chart 4- 1995 Intake Design Dynamometer Performance.
1999 intake 25 0.324 87
25 0.261 86
50 0.324 116
50 0.261 115

Chart 2- Intake System Performance.

After the flow bench testing was complete the different

intake designs were then tested using an engine
dynamometer. All engine dynamometer testing was
done using a water brake style dynamometer driven
directly off the front side of the engines crankshaft. To
assure good accuracy constant conditions of
atmospheric pressure, air temperature, humidity, engine
temperature, and dynamometer calibrations were
carefully monitored. The same unmodified cylinder
head, camshafts, and engine block were used during all
testing. As expected based on the flow bench testing,
the 2000 intake design produced the most torque of the Chart 5- 1999 Intake Design Dynamometer Performance
three designs tested as shown in the three graphs below
[see charts 3,4,and 5].
CONCLUSION
4
By combining theoretical calculations with flow bench Southfield, Michigan.
and dynamometer testing, the 2000 intake design has
successfully met all its design objectives. The 2000 APPENDIX A
prototype intake system provides improved throttle
Restrictor Calculations
response, increased restrictor performance, equal air
distribution, and improved system performance with
Mass Flow Rate at Choked Condtion
reduced pressure losses. The following provisions have
allowed for an increase in engine output torque by 6 foot
Assuming Isentropic compressive flow, K = 1.4, at
pounds, an overall torque gain of 30%.
standard atmospheric conditions, and 100% volumetric
efficiency
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
P/Po = .52828; /o = .63394; T/To = .8333; Mach 1
The authors would like to acknowledge Roush Industries
for the generous equipment contributions making the where Po & o are stagnation pressure and density of
above testing possible. We would also like to thank air
David Darbyshire and Microsolid Solutions for their
ongoing support with the three dimensional solid = .63394o = 1.508e-3 lbm/ft^3
modeling software, Solidworks, and its counterparts. The
authors would also like to thank all of the previous LTU Temperature at Throat (T) = .8333To =.8333*530R
FSAE teams for the effort that produced all of the T = 442.2R
excellent designs of the past.
Velocity at Throat (V) = Ma*(RTK)^.5
CONTACTS V = (1.0)*( (1.716e3)*(441.2)*(1.4)) = 1029.5 ft/sec

Any questions concerning this paper may be directed to
Dr. Badih Jawad at: JAWAD@ltu.edu, Michael DeGain
at: MD81048@ltu.edu, or Anthony Young at:
AY78815@ltu.edu. Dr. Jawad is the LTU FSAE faculty
advisor and a professor of mechanical engineering at
Lawrence Technological University. Michael DeGain
and Anthony Young are both mechanical engineering
students at Lawrence Technological University and are
also members of the 2000 Formula SAE team.
Velocity exiting the Restrictor (v)
v = (.075 lb/ft^3)(130 NCFM)(60 sec/min) = 223 ft/sec
Mass flow rate (m) = VA
m = (1.5087e-3lbm/ft^3)*(223 ft/sec)*((.7874/2)^2)
m = .1635 lbm/s
Reynolds Number at the Throat

REFERENCES Reynolds Number at Throat (Re) = (VD)/

Re = (1029.5 ft/sec * .0656 ft * 2.38e-3 lbm/ft^3)/3.74e-7
1. Jameson, Renee T., and Hodgins, Patrick A., Re = 4.29e5
Improvement of the Torque Characteristics of a
Small, High-Speed Engine Through the Design of
Helmholtz-Tuned Manifolding, SAE 900680 Reynolds Number at Exit (Re) = (VD)/
2. Sches, Celine, and Guilian, Stephane, Modeling of Re = (223 ft/sec * .0656 ft * 2.38e-3 lbm/ft^3)/3.74e-7
the Fuel Behavior in the Intake Manifold of a Port- Re = 2.36e5
Injected Spark-Ignition Engine, SAE 972992
3. Eversman, Walter, and White, John A., Jr.,Accoustic Required Engine Air Flow @11,000 RPM
Modeling and Optimization of Induction System
Components, SAE 951261
4. Plint, Michael, and Martyr, Anthony., Engine Volumetric Airflow (Q) = RPM*Velocity / 2
nd
Testing: Theory and Practice, P; 93-161, 2 Edition, Q = (11,000 rev/min * 2.1189e-3 ft^3) / (60 sec * 2) =
Society of Automotive Engineers, 1999 Q = 1.94 ft^3 / sec
5. Blair, Gordon P., Design and Simulation of Four-
Stroke Engines, Ch; 2, Society of Automotive Flowrate (m) = Q = (1.94 ft^3/sec * 32.2 lbm/slug *
Engineers, 1999
6. Moran, Michael J., and Shapiro, Howard N., 2.329e-3 lug/ft^3)
Fundamentalsrd
of Engineering Thermodynamics, P;
423-441, 3 Edition, John Wiley and Sons, 1995 m = .1455 lbm/sec
7. Pulkrabek, Williard W.,Engineering Fundamentals
of the Internal Combustion Engine, Ch; 5, Prentice-
Hall, Inc., 1997
8. 1993 LTU FSAE Team, 1993 Formula SAE Final
Report, Lawrence Technological University,
Southfield, Michigan.
9. 1995 LTU FSAE Team, 1995 Formula SAE Final Choked Flow
Report, Lawrence Technological University,
Southfield, Michigan. Choke RPM = 2m / V
10. 1999 LTU FSAE Team, 1999 Formula SAE Final
Report, Lawrence Technological University, RPM = (2 rev * 60 sec * .1635 lbm/s) / (2.329e-3
5
slug/ft^3 * 32.2 lbm/slug * 1min * 2.1189e-3 ft^3) A=ab+a + 1
RPM = 12,347 RPM A = 14.246

Helmholtz Resonate Frequency Tuning Peaks B= Sqrt(A^2 4ab)

B = 11.972
Intake Port Inductance
C = 2ab * I1 * C1 where I1 is the sum of the runner and
Minor Port Dia. = .886; Major Port Dia. = 1.39; Minor injector port inductance and C1 corresponds to the
Port Length = 1.31; Major Port Length = 2.22 cylinder effective volume.
C = 1696.02
Inductance of Major port (I3) = L3/A3 = 1.464in^-1
Inductnace of Min Ports (I1) = (I2) = L2/A2 = 2.126 in^-1 F1=.00583s^-1
Total Induction = I1 + I2 + I3 = 5.716 in^-1 F2 = .0197 s^-1

Intake Runner Inductance Resonate Frequency of Total Runner Length to Valve

Q = 1.94 ft^3/sec = 3352 ft^3/min Fp=1/2*Sqrt(1/(I1*C1)

Area of Runner = Q/V = 1.336 in Fp = .021

Inductance (I4) = L/A = .7851 in^-1 Cs = Sqrt(KRT)

Cs = 1128 ft/sec
Plenum Inductance
Np = 77Cs * Sqrt(A/L*Vd) * Sqrt((R-1) / (R+1))
Inductance of Plenum Top (I5) = L/A = 5.43e-2 in^-1 Np = 8007.79 RPM
Inductance of Bottom Plenum (I6) = L/A = .045 in^-1
Total Plenum Inductance = I5 + I6 = .099 in^-1 Frequency Ratios

Throttle Body Inductance X1 = F1/Fp = .2747

Inductance of Throttle Body (I7) = L/A = 2.548 in^-1 X2 = F2/Fp = .928

Restrictor Inductance N1 (First Tuning Peak) = X1 * Np = 2199.7 RPM

Average Diameter of Inlet = 1.01 N2 (Second Tuning Peak) = X2 * Np = 7431.2 RPM

Average Diameter of Outlet = 1.3937

Total Induction = L(Inlet Length)/A(Avg. Inlet Dia.) +

L(Outlet Length)/A(Avg. Outlet Dia.) = 10.802 in^-1

Inductance Ratio

Inductance Ratio (a) = (L/A)2 / (L/A)1 where (L/A)2 is

the sum of the throttle body, restrictor, and plenum
inductance. (L/A)1 is the sum of the runner and injector
port inductance.

(a) = 1.0464

Capacitance Ratio

Capacitance Ration (b) = (V2/Vd) * 2(R-1) / (R+1) where

Vd is the displacement volume, V2 is the secondary
volume, and R is the compression ratio.

(b) = 11.659

From the characteristic equations for the resonate

circuit, two roots F1 and F2 may be found.

F1,F2 =1/2 * Sqrt((A B)/C)

6