Welcome! Please use the navigational links to explore our website.
PartsASAP LogoCompany Logo Auction Link (800) 853-2651

Shop Now

   Allis Chalmers Case Farmall IH Ford 8N,9N,2N Ford
   Ferguson John Deere Massey Ferguson Minn. Moline Oliver

Harry Ferguson Tractors Discussion Forum
:

TO-30 manifold question

Welcome Guest, Log in or Register
Author 
Bill - SC

11-16-2005 09:49:35




Report to Moderator

The manifold on my TO-30 appears to be original - looks like the one in the parts manual. The section that connects to the exhaust pipe with a clamp broke away at some time in the past and the previous owner welded a piece of exhaust pipe, steel, in its place and then welded the exhaust pipe to his "adapter". Needless to say the welds are cracked and leaking and give one a dose of carbon monoxide if you hang close to the
carb. I have been unable to secure an original style manifold so as to keep it original as possible. The after market available is styled differently than the original. Rather than the exhaust section curving over the intake section and down the after market comes out and around the intake and surrounds the intake neck from the carb. How do you think this unit will function with the change in design? Has anyone intalled one of the after market manifolds? If so how did it perform? Maybe the design was made for a reason. Can anyone shed any light on this.

[Log in to Reply]   [No Email]
Bill - SC

11-17-2005 17:34:23




Report to Moderator
 Re: TO-30 manifold question in reply to Bill - SC, 11-16-2005 09:49:35  
Many thanks for all the replies. I feel more comfortable now going with the newer design after reading your comments.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Tim Tenn.

11-17-2005 05:58:07




Report to Moderator
 Re: TO-30 manifold question in reply to Bill - SC, 11-16-2005 09:49:35  
Bill , I installed the newer manifold and as gshadel said performance is fine. What I did like about the newer design is that you can use a 135 massey exhaust pipe and elimenate the adapter and bolt the pipe to the manifold. You get a much better seal.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Duner Wi

11-16-2005 16:41:52




Report to Moderator
 Re: TO-30 manifold question in reply to Bill - SC, 11-16-2005 09:49:35  
I believe I have a manifold such as you describe on my TO 20. I liberated it from my parts tractor. Anyway look down the hole where the carb. bolts on.
Mine had 2 different size holes so I drilled it out to the same size size as the carb. Seems to work as good as or better than the old original style manifold.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Jim in OH

11-16-2005 12:03:26




Report to Moderator
 Re: TO-30 manifold question in reply to Bill - SC, 11-16-2005 09:49:35  
Hi Bill, I have noticed the same thing.... What I think has happened is that the replacement manifold is styled more or less after the later MF models. In this newer approach, it appears that there is a deliberate attempt to keep the intake and exhaust more separated. Doing the "mental calculations" it appears to me that the old style was more for efficiency and cold weather operation where the Intake and Exhaust are more closely coupled so that more exhaust heat is intentionally transferred to the intake. This will (1) run hotter and make it run better in cold weather (better vaporization/ atomization), (2) be more economical (higher efficiency) in that some of the rejected heat is put back into the intake (3) reduce maximum available power since the maximum "charge" is reduced with the hot thinner air. I haven't put a TO30 on a dyno yet, but my bet is that the latter style manifold at least has the potential to give a little more power (if there are not other more restricive things that were done). I plan to check this....

Also, if you read some of the archived posts, people talk about frost forming on their manifold. Personally, I haven't seen much of this on my old style TO-30 manifold. And, I think that this is more likely with the new type (but no proof of such), although, no doubt, it can happen with either under the right conditions.

Jim

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Jerry/MT

11-16-2005 19:45:54




Report to Moderator
 Re: TO-30 manifold question in reply to Jim in OH, 11-16-2005 12:03:26  
Jim, I can assure you that the original equipment manifold frosts up on high humidity, cold days! It's happened to me plenty of times. Heating of the air of the engine will reduce the power by the square root of the absolute temperature ratio and will slightly reduce the air pressure delivered to the cylinder on the intake stroke. This later effect will be reduced somewhat by the charge cooling effect of the fuel but as usually happens with Mother Nature, you won't get anything for nothing!

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
JIm in OH

11-16-2005 20:21:41




Report to Moderator
 Re: TO-30 manifold question in reply to Jerry/MT, 11-16-2005 19:45:54  
... air/mixture density is inversely proportional to temperature (not the square root) so my "mental calculation" says that the power ratio is the ratio of absolute temperature (not the square root). That assumes fixed volume (displacement) and the same nominal pressure (the slight volumetric efficiency affect you mentioned). I"d be surprised if the temperature difference from one manifold to the other differs by 25 F so we are talking about 5% power differences...

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Jerry/MT

11-17-2005 17:41:43




Report to Moderator
 Re: TO-30 manifold question in reply to JIm in OH, 11-16-2005 20:21:41  
There is a little more to it then density only, Jim. Airflow is the product of density x flow area x velocity.The normalized airflow is written as absolute airflow x square root of the absolute temperature divided by the pressure. At any given corrected rpm (rpm divided by square root of the absolute temperaure) the normalized airflow is a constant. The absolute airflow is then the product of the normalized airflow x the pressure in the induction system divided by the square root of the absolute temperature. Since the power scales with airflow,it's proportional to the square root of the absolute temperature. By the way the absolute tempertaure is degrees Rankine is 459.7 + air tempertaure in oF. So if for example, the intake air is heated to 100F in one manifold and to 125 F in another manifold, the difference in airflow, given the same manifold pressure would be (559.7/584.70)^0.5 which is 0.978 which is a 2.2 % reduction in airflow due to a 4.5% increase in temperature.

Regards,
Jerry/MT, a retired Propulsion Engineer.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Jim in OH

11-18-2005 09:41:06




Report to Moderator
 Re: TO-30 manifold question in reply to Jerry/MT, 11-17-2005 17:41:43  
You might re-think that... This is not a propulsion problem. There is no such thing as "corrected RPM" in vehicles that are not using thrust (props, jets, etc.)... In this case the engine is directly coupled to the load and RPM is directly proportional to the load "speed" (whether PTO or Drawbar) and just something you measure.... It is as simple as this: Output power of a piston engine is proportional to the mass rate of air-fuel mixture that you can draw (or push) into it in. Assuming full throttle (no changing inlet geometry), the amount (mass rate) that you put in has a very simple relationship that is a volume (Displacment*RPM/2) times density... And since the volumes for cold and hot are the same and density varies as inverse temperature, I maintain that an inverse linear ratio (not square root) is still the correct relationship... Jim

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Jerry/MT

11-18-2005 17:24:49




Report to Moderator
 Re: TO-30 manifold question in reply to Jim in OH, 11-18-2005 09:41:06  
Jim, since you don't believe me, here's another source. Reference: "Internal Combustion Engines Analysis and Practice" by E.F. Obert, 2nd Edition, p.44, eq 2-14
"The SAE agreed upon dry air at 60F and 29.92 in Hga (14.696 psia)as representing standard conditions with an empirical correction factor in the form of CF = 29.92/pambient *(Tambient/520)^0.5.
where, CF = the correction factor for brake work or brake power, pambient =the ambient pressure in in Hga and Tambient= the absolute temperature of air entering the engine..... " (Please note tht ^0.5 indicates the square root.)
There are more rigorous methods in developing these nondimensional or corrected performance variables (e.g. Buckingham's Pi Theory) but It's a little more involved . The more modern version would use 518.7 R as the temperture reference condition, i.e. 59 F. Incidently,your equation is wrong. It needs to be multiplied by volumetric efficency
You, sir, may believe what you want.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Jim in OH

11-18-2005 19:41:57




Report to Moderator
 Re: TO-30 manifold question in reply to Jerry/MT, 11-18-2005 17:24:49  
I said it was proportional to, not equal to.. I assumed the volumetric efficiency was the same for both cases(and therefore its affect is the same for both cases and cancels)... It is the fact that the real world frictional affects (including volumetic efficiency differences) make the empirical correction smaller than my simple theoretical one (remember, this started out as a mental calculation" that neglects all of these.. not the research project has been the result.) Also... as an engineer, you will appreciate that had I taken the time to include all of the frictional affects in a rigorous theoretical way, it might end up looking like the empirical equation, but I would still be working one it while you have finished testing it and getting a better one built.... :) Jim

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Jerry/MT

11-18-2005 17:06:22




Report to Moderator
 Re: TO-30 manifold question in reply to Jim in OH, 11-18-2005 09:41:06  
Jim, since you don't believe me, here's another source. Reference: "Internal Combustion Engines Analysis and Practice" by E.F. Obert, 2nd Edition, p.44, eq 2-14
"The SAE agreed upon dry air at 60F and 29.92 in Hga (14.696 psia)as representing standard conditions with an empirical correction factor in the form of CF = 29.92/pambient *(Tambient/520)^0.5.
where, CF = the correction factor for brake work or brake power, pambient =the ambient pressure in in Hga and Tambient= the absolute temperature of air entering the engine..... " (Please note tht ^0.5 indicates the square root.)
There are more rigorous methods in developing these nondimensional or corrected performance variables (e.g. Buckingham's Pi Theory) but It's a little more involved . The more modern version would use 518.7 R as the temperture reference condition, i.e. 59 F.

You, sir, may believe what you want.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Jim in OH

11-18-2005 19:13:50




Report to Moderator
 Re: TO-30 manifold question in reply to Jerry/MT, 11-18-2005 17:06:22  
Hi Jerry… I concede that your correlation will give a better answer. I didn’t realize that you were including all real world losses and presenting an empirical correlation….. we were comparing apples and oranges…. The correction that you are referring to is, of course, an “empirical” factor determined by actual testing that takes into account all of the volumetric losses that I ignored to get a “theoretical” factor… SAE J609 and SAE J1349 give similar equations to what you gave but again, these are based on actual measurements with internal losses included… (which of course is better than theoretical ones for real world use…) and it is not unusual for me to make that mistake from time to time. I almost always am involved in the theoretical world and rely on people like you to bring me back to reality once in a while… Thanks! glad that we had this discussion, I learned something from it…. Jim P.S. I think that the Buckingham Pi Theory would only show you that the temperature ratio and pressure ratio were the applicable parameters in the function (not what exponent best followed the data). Tests would determine that 0.5 was the best fit….

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Jerry//MT

11-19-2005 10:09:18




Report to Moderator
 Re: TO-30 manifold question in reply to Jim in OH, 11-18-2005 19:13:50  
Jim, While Obert's reference states the CF is an "...emperical correlation..", an examination of Shapiro's "The Dynamics and Thermodynamics of Compressible Fluid Flow" (a real classic but not the only source of the derivation)has the derivation of corrected flow (W * sq Root To/Po*A) as a function of the ratio stagnation pressure (po) to static pressure. This is a general relationship for all thermally perfect gases (i.e they obey the relationship p*v=R*T), for isentropic processes (not our case) and is always valid at a point in the flow field. The expression can also be cast as a function of Mach Number of the flow or as Velocity/sq root T.
The relationship that you proposed would apply if the volumetric efficiency were unity, which is never the case in a normally aspirated Otto cycle engine.

Further, Buckingham's Pi Theory, will in fact,lead to the same conclusion of the flow relationship as per Shapiro, though using a slightly different derivation methodology. One sup with system of linear equations with the exponents of the postulated variables as the unknowns. This system of equations is then solved for the correct values of the exponents.

Enjoyed the discussion!

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Jim in OH

11-19-2005 18:36:17




Report to Moderator
 Re: TO-30 manifold question in reply to Jerry//MT, 11-19-2005 10:09:18  
HI Jerry.. I am familar with Shapiro, and compressible flow... In fact, it is because I was thinking that the Mach number in the intake was so low, that compressible effects could be ingnored and I went straight to my simple thinking.... I'd have to look at my spreadsheet again but I think that it was about 100 fps in the manifold or about M~0.1, so I am not sure that the 0.5 exponet in this correction has anything to do with compressible flow.. I think that it is emperical, at least SAE calls it that...

And I have done the Buckingham Pi also, but as you know, getting the solution presumes that you have the correct equations and that the solution can be adequately represented by powers of the non-dimensional parameters... not always the case. Almost always, the exponets of the solution will be determined empirically.. examples friction factors, heat transfer correlations, etc.

Anyway, I ejoyed it also.. Jim

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Jerry/MT

11-19-2005 21:21:32




Report to Moderator
 Re: TO-30 manifold question in reply to Jim in OH, 11-19-2005 18:36:17  
Jim, Check out you copy of Shapiro and look in the Section on Isentropic Flow. You'll find the equation for coreected flow expressed several different way but ALWAYs W*sq rt To/Pt*A. AT the sonic condition for a specific heat ratio of 1.4, it becomes a constant = 0.5314 lbs/sec - sq rt oR/psia-in^2. Don't think I could forget that number if I wanted to.
Regards



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
gshadel

11-16-2005 11:42:59




Report to Moderator
 Re: TO-30 manifold question in reply to Bill - SC, 11-16-2005 09:49:35  
Bill, I installed an aftermarket manifold when I rebuilt my TO 2 years back. I don't care for the new styling compared to the old, but I haven't noticed any impact on the operation of my TO.

The new manifold lined-up fine on the block,lined-up fine to my stock 1 piece exhaust/muffler, and didn't have any trouble installing the carb.

I couldn't get a socket on a couple manifold nuts because of the casting clearance. I had to guess-timate the torque freehand with an open end wrench on those, but was able to get it okay.

I think I may have read in a post some time back that the design change had something to do with changes in casting technique, maybe to reduce cost, but don't know that to be fact.

George

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
[Options]  [Printer Friendly]  [Posting Help]  [Return to Forum]   [Log in to Reply]

Hop to:


TRACTOR PARTS TRACTOR MANUALS
We sell tractor parts!  We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today. [ About Us ]

Home  |  Forums


Copyright © 1997-2023 Yesterday's Tractor Co.

All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy

TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters

Website Accessibility Policy