pulsation dampner
#26
I looked into it and found out that the PD is to reduce the pulsations created by the pump. Not every system design needs a PD because the pusations may not be large enough to create a problem, though they may be used by the system designer anyway.
many american cars don't have it (such as your suv, stangs.... etc) don't have PD's cuz the injectors spray continuously, not like our 7s.
#27
Originally posted by Project84
I looked into it and found out that the PD is to reduce the pulsations created by the pump. Not every system design needs a PD because the pusations may not be large enough to create a problem, though they may be used by the system designer anyway. Maybe thats why aircraft fuel systems don't have them.
I looked into it and found out that the PD is to reduce the pulsations created by the pump. Not every system design needs a PD because the pusations may not be large enough to create a problem, though they may be used by the system designer anyway. Maybe thats why aircraft fuel systems don't have them.
And its is common for Ford to use a integrated PD/FPR on their cars. I would have to see a fluid schematic to tell you for sure if the exploder you have (which has had factory recalls for fuel lines popping and coming off) has one.
As NZ says, you can't compare a varible nozzle that limits flow to an injector which switchs on a off flow.
#28
Originally posted by Rex4Life
Batch-fire fuel systems, systems with three or more injectors on each fuel rail, or fuel systems that use high-flow injectors are especially susceptible to hydraulic pulsation, so it is especially important to use dampeners on these systems. One dampener should be used on the end of each fuel rail in the fuel system. This will ensure that pressure fluctuations do not alter the flow of fuel into the engine.
Last edited by Icemark; 11-30-03 at 01:03 PM.
#29
Originally posted by Project84
Ok, so why not re-route the whole fuel system? Maybe not a good idea for the guy who posted this thread cause he probably doesn't have 1680cc secondaries like me. Overkill. It would work, but overkill in this situation.
Ok, so why not re-route the whole fuel system? Maybe not a good idea for the guy who posted this thread cause he probably doesn't have 1680cc secondaries like me. Overkill. It would work, but overkill in this situation.
So then I hear fluid dynamics and I begin to wonder, whats this pulsation dampener really for? I'm an aircraft mechanic. Been working on different aircraft for 6 years. They got fluids in them. Their fuel systems are under way more pressure than that of a car. Why don't jet engines have them I ask myself. Yeah, jet engine fuel nozzles don't pulse like in a car, but that has nothing to do with the PD. I looked into it and found out that the PD is to reduce the pulsations created by the pump.
#30
Originally posted by Howi
many american cars don't have it (such as your suv, stangs.... etc) don't have PD's cuz the injectors spray continuously, not like our 7s.
many american cars don't have it (such as your suv, stangs.... etc) don't have PD's cuz the injectors spray continuously, not like our 7s.
#31
I've been searching, and researching almost every post on this subject in preparation of pulling, rebuilding, and installing the motor in my 1988 GTU.
At this time, I'm not looking for high performance gains, or putting in a standalone fuel injection system. I just want to perform as clean, reliable, and *safe* an installation as I can.
I'm concerned about the risk of fire if I simply replace the PD with a new OEM one and it fails. If I put in a Banjo bolt or elimination kit, that would elminate such a risk (with the installation of new fuel lines).
So... for stock or mildly modified cars, is the banjo bolt a permanent solution or not?
If not, excluding the science and terminology that has so passionately been used, why? What problems would arise?
Will using a new OEM 86-88 PD increase or decrease the risk of fire? (Risk of fire is the one thing that is making me consider elminating it.)
If the PD did fail and started leaking fuel, is there a way to keep raw fuel from ending up on the exhaust manifold? Could it be directed away?
Finally, regardless of what I do, where I can a get a set of stock fitting SS or rubber fuel lines?
At this time, I'm not looking for high performance gains, or putting in a standalone fuel injection system. I just want to perform as clean, reliable, and *safe* an installation as I can.
I'm concerned about the risk of fire if I simply replace the PD with a new OEM one and it fails. If I put in a Banjo bolt or elimination kit, that would elminate such a risk (with the installation of new fuel lines).
So... for stock or mildly modified cars, is the banjo bolt a permanent solution or not?
If not, excluding the science and terminology that has so passionately been used, why? What problems would arise?
Will using a new OEM 86-88 PD increase or decrease the risk of fire? (Risk of fire is the one thing that is making me consider elminating it.)
If the PD did fail and started leaking fuel, is there a way to keep raw fuel from ending up on the exhaust manifold? Could it be directed away?
Finally, regardless of what I do, where I can a get a set of stock fitting SS or rubber fuel lines?
#33
Originally posted by cluosborne
I've been searching, and researching almost every post on this subject in preparation of pulling, rebuilding, and installing the motor in my 1988 GTU.
At this time, I'm not looking for high performance gains, or putting in a standalone fuel injection system. I just want to perform as clean, reliable, and *safe* an installation as I can.
I'm concerned about the risk of fire if I simply replace the PD with a new OEM one and it fails. If I put in a Banjo bolt or elimination kit, that would elminate such a risk (with the installation of new fuel lines).
So... for stock or mildly modified cars, is the banjo bolt a permanent solution or not?
If not, excluding the science and terminology that has so passionately been used, why? What problems would arise?
Will using a new OEM 86-88 PD increase or decrease the risk of fire? (Risk of fire is the one thing that is making me consider elminating it.)
If the PD did fail and started leaking fuel, is there a way to keep raw fuel from ending up on the exhaust manifold? Could it be directed away?
Finally, regardless of what I do, where I can a get a set of stock fitting SS or rubber fuel lines?
I've been searching, and researching almost every post on this subject in preparation of pulling, rebuilding, and installing the motor in my 1988 GTU.
At this time, I'm not looking for high performance gains, or putting in a standalone fuel injection system. I just want to perform as clean, reliable, and *safe* an installation as I can.
I'm concerned about the risk of fire if I simply replace the PD with a new OEM one and it fails. If I put in a Banjo bolt or elimination kit, that would elminate such a risk (with the installation of new fuel lines).
So... for stock or mildly modified cars, is the banjo bolt a permanent solution or not?
If not, excluding the science and terminology that has so passionately been used, why? What problems would arise?
Will using a new OEM 86-88 PD increase or decrease the risk of fire? (Risk of fire is the one thing that is making me consider elminating it.)
If the PD did fail and started leaking fuel, is there a way to keep raw fuel from ending up on the exhaust manifold? Could it be directed away?
Finally, regardless of what I do, where I can a get a set of stock fitting SS or rubber fuel lines?
To top it off you have the fuel delivery issues as mentioned above.
Yeah there are people that say they have driven for years with a banjo bolt without any problems, but there are also people that have blown engines or bust fuel lines. Could they be related??? Hard to say, but do you want to be the guinea pig? There have been proven and duplicable issues however (when a PD is not used) on other cars.
Mazda put a PD on, because they felt the injection system required it and they have built and tested a lot more cars than any of us have.
It is very very very unlikely that a new PD would fail, in less than 50-100K miles unless there is another issue (such as high under hood temps from replacing the stock fan with some insufficient one, or a oversized turbo and no heat shielding, or other similar problems).
New fuel line can be found almost anywhere. Remember SS ones should be fuel line specific and covered with some sort of protection to prevent sand, grit, and dust from getting in between the SS braids when SS lines are used on a street vehicle.
#34
Open up! Search Warrant!
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,838
Likes: 3
From: Kicking down doors in a neighborhood near you
Originally posted by Howi
my i ask where did you "look into" to get this info?
my i ask where did you "look into" to get this info?
Yo, I'm done with this. Y'all do your own thing and I'm gonna do mine.
#38
Thread Starter
Rotary Enthusiast
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 845
Likes: 1
From: Virginia Beach
Originally posted by sectachrome
they should last 10+ years, i dont see the big deal in just replacing it with another PD. theyre not even expensive.
they should last 10+ years, i dont see the big deal in just replacing it with another PD. theyre not even expensive.
late
#40
Originally posted by sectachrome
they should last 10+ years, i dont see the big deal in just replacing it with another PD. theyre not even expensive.
they should last 10+ years, i dont see the big deal in just replacing it with another PD. theyre not even expensive.
But, where I am, inexpensive is not what the dealer charges...$215CDN
#45
I know of at least half a dozen FC owners with banjo bolts, and they have zero problems. The amount of rubber fuel line already in the car is enough to dampen any pulsations in the fuel rail. These cars all run stock sized injectors, so I dunno how a large (i.e 1600's) injector system would react to a banjo bolt - it doesn't matter as high performance motors running 1600's (under standalone EMS) control all would easily have a parallel rail system with an aftermarket FPR.
We can argue this back and forth, and I don't see nay-sayers prove a banjo bolt will cause fires due to loosening hoses. I know Mazda's PD design will eventually fail - no one can deny that. I know the banjo bolt works through my experience, and that's good enough proof of that.
Remember, the sheer volume of fuel throughout the fuel system damps itself - we're not talking glycol-based brake fluids here.
Keep in mind that the fuel injectors all switch to batch. I think fuel system running sequential injection are more susceptible to pulsations due to injectors firing out of phase?
Also, that "water column shock" analogy is only remotely applicable here. The primaries are not dead-ended - the pulses can still travel upstream, where it will eventually hit the fuel filter, or downstream into the secondaries. The secondaries are almost the same, but the pulse can either hit the primaries or back out the FPR. Remember, there's a SHORT LENGTH OF HOSE that connects the two rails, so that is a damper in itself.
We can over-analyze the whole scenario, and it still comes down to a $10 banjo bolt, or a $100+ piece of junk that WILL leak in the future. It's your choice.
-Ted
We can argue this back and forth, and I don't see nay-sayers prove a banjo bolt will cause fires due to loosening hoses. I know Mazda's PD design will eventually fail - no one can deny that. I know the banjo bolt works through my experience, and that's good enough proof of that.
Remember, the sheer volume of fuel throughout the fuel system damps itself - we're not talking glycol-based brake fluids here.
Keep in mind that the fuel injectors all switch to batch. I think fuel system running sequential injection are more susceptible to pulsations due to injectors firing out of phase?
Also, that "water column shock" analogy is only remotely applicable here. The primaries are not dead-ended - the pulses can still travel upstream, where it will eventually hit the fuel filter, or downstream into the secondaries. The secondaries are almost the same, but the pulse can either hit the primaries or back out the FPR. Remember, there's a SHORT LENGTH OF HOSE that connects the two rails, so that is a damper in itself.
We can over-analyze the whole scenario, and it still comes down to a $10 banjo bolt, or a $100+ piece of junk that WILL leak in the future. It's your choice.
-Ted
Last edited by RETed; 02-11-04 at 05:17 PM.
#46
i,ve been an aircraft mechanic/ inspector for goin on 20 years, and i,ve never heard of these otto/ brayton cycles you guys are talkin about. Is that something in the school textbooks? Our jet's cycle is 1)suck 2)squeeze 3)bang 4) blow!!! on a related subject, anybody know if the o-ring on the fuel press reg is the same size as the injector o-rings? Just r/r my PD too, and can't stand putting 16 year old o-rings back in!
#48
Originally posted by RETed
We can over-analyze the whole scenario, and it still comes down to a $10 banjo bolt, or a $100+ piece of junk that WILL leak in the future.
We can over-analyze the whole scenario, and it still comes down to a $10 banjo bolt, or a $100+ piece of junk that WILL leak in the future.
Originally posted by WAYNE88N/A
i,ve been an aircraft mechanic/ inspector for goin on 20 years, and i,ve never heard of these otto/ brayton cycles you guys are talkin about. Is that something in the school textbooks? Our jet's cycle is 1)suck 2)squeeze 3)bang 4) blow!!!
i,ve been an aircraft mechanic/ inspector for goin on 20 years, and i,ve never heard of these otto/ brayton cycles you guys are talkin about. Is that something in the school textbooks? Our jet's cycle is 1)suck 2)squeeze 3)bang 4) blow!!!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ls1swap
3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002)
17
06-03-24 04:25 PM
rx7speed811
3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002)
7
02-22-02 12:40 PM