Author Topic: M42/M44 ITB Kit Design  (Read 298642 times)

Puksuttaja

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Receive: 1
  • Posts: 12
  • Freshly Registered!
    • View Profile
Re: M42/M44 ITB Kit Design
« Reply #210 on: October 25, 2015, 11:50:59 AM »
I still don't see the kit in www.racehead.com.au website, well i guess it will pop up in time. But what I have understood is that the kit is now up for sale in some sort of RHDs re-sellers Taiwan page at http://www.alluringarage.com/products/rhd-for-bmw-m42m44-itb-kit

I have no clue what it says in Taiwan (or chinese whatever they speak in there, can someone translate? :D) in the page, but then somehow I bumped in to this in their page: http://www.alluringarage.com/rhdengineering/rhd-technical-documents/12284.html So does this mean that I have to buy a separate item for the kit to fit M44 because it has a different idle control than the M42? Is the Idle motor fitting piece already developed? I could use a little info here :)
« Last Edit: October 25, 2015, 12:00:10 PM by Puksuttaja »

lambertius

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Receive: 25
  • Posts: 182
  • Freshly Registered!
    • View Profile
Re: M42/M44 ITB Kit Design
« Reply #211 on: October 25, 2015, 05:46:12 PM »
I still don't see the kit in www.racehead.com.au website, well i guess it will pop up in time. But what I have understood is that the kit is now up for sale in some sort of RHDs re-sellers Taiwan page at http://www.alluringarage.com/products/rhd-for-bmw-m42m44-itb-kit

I have no clue what it says in Taiwan (or chinese whatever they speak in there, can someone translate? :D) in the page, but then somehow I bumped in to this in their page: http://www.alluringarage.com/rhdengineering/rhd-technical-documents/12284.html So does this mean that I have to buy a separate item for the kit to fit M44 because it has a different idle control than the M42? Is the Idle motor fitting piece already developed? I could use a little info here :)

I'll do a proper write up on the installation and all the parts soon  :)

I've been pretty busy, in the process of buying my first apartment at the moment!

I'll ask Rama when he will list it on his main website, but from what I remember he has to organise a few things before it is actually available. Rama is based in Thailand, so it would make sense that he would test the release there first. He also just had his first kid, so he has been pretty hung up on that at the moment!

Puksuttaja

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Receive: 1
  • Posts: 12
  • Freshly Registered!
    • View Profile
Re: M42/M44 ITB Kit Design
« Reply #212 on: October 26, 2015, 04:36:58 AM »
Ahh, okay well that explains a lot of things. I thought it was all happening in Australia :D But no rush, I'm just very curious. Thanks for all the info!  :)

djmossm42

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Receive: 0
  • Posts: 14
    • View Profile
Re: M42/M44 ITB Kit Design
« Reply #213 on: October 26, 2015, 08:45:07 AM »
I still don't see the kit in www.racehead.com.au website, well i guess it will pop up in time. But what I have understood is that the kit is now up for sale in some sort of RHDs re-sellers Taiwan page at http://www.alluringarage.com/products/rhd-for-bmw-m42m44-itb-kit

I have no clue what it says in Taiwan (or chinese whatever they speak in there, can someone translate? :D) in the page, but then somehow I bumped in to this in their page: http://www.alluringarage.com/rhdengineering/rhd-technical-documents/12284.html So does this mean that I have to buy a separate item for the kit to fit M44 because it has a different idle control than the M42? Is the Idle motor fitting piece already developed? I could use a little info here :)

Try Google chrome and use the translate page option.  Some things don't translate directly but you can work it out.

lambertius

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Receive: 25
  • Posts: 182
  • Freshly Registered!
    • View Profile
Re: M42/M44 ITB Kit Design
« Reply #214 on: October 28, 2015, 12:00:54 AM »
Hello guys!

So I've decided to make a post showing you how to assemble (or rather how I assembled) the kit! It will be slightly different for everyone depending on the level of work you do for your engine.

To begin with, I have my 3D printed small volume airbox. I had this printed at Shapeways out of ABS. In order to prevent any debris getting sucked into the engine I thoroughly cleaned it, sanded it, cleaned it sprayed with fill-primer, sanded it, primed it, sanded it and then eventually coated it with engine enamel. The airbox reaches about 60 degrees during heavy driving from radiated heat and ABS will remain rigid up until 180 degrees.

The bosses that you see on the part are mounting points for vacuum lines. These will not be on the product from Rama, these were something I did for myself personally because I wanted the kit to fit a certain way.

My only concern is the longevity of the product as it goes through heat cycling, but I made a very thick design to try to mitigate this. Only time will tell. The below photos show the unusual shape of the trumpets, placement relative to the inlet and significant change in volume from ~8 liters to ~2.9 litres. There was a noticeable change in torque and power which I will get onto later (short version is you may be interested in doing this if it's on the street, but not if its on the track). I have a bunch of sim results as well as animation regarding it.








Actually getting started with the install:

I will assume for the sake of this that you can remove your existing manifold or find a tutorial regarding that yourself. Just a tip for the E36 guys, getting the wiring off the alternator can be a pain. In this case we'll actually be removing and disposing of the little wiring box that sits in the manifold, so if you want to make it easier on yourself you can fully remove that part as part of uninstalling the original manifold.

Once it is all apart you will need to start by thoroughly cleaning the surface of the ports. Any garbage left on them from an old gasket or silicone will risk a vacuum leak. You can see the crud left on mine.




In this photo you can see that I've exposed some wiring that runs to the ICV, Crank Sensor and Cam Sensor. I also have a lot of hoses to deal with. One of the particularly odd hoses is the hose that runs coolant into the PCV valve. The purpose of this hose is to prevent the valve from gunking up. It will no go unused, so I cut the hose to an appropriate length then joined both ends with a hose joiner.



You can see the join made between cylinders 2 and 3.




I covered the wiring in split tubing then electrical tape to prevent water ingress.





One of the more fun parts was tapping a fitting for my brake booster. Originally we tapped this on the front side of the engine due to ease, but I didn't like how it looked so I moved it. There is no need to do this step, you could achieve the same thing by mounting the booster line very close to any cylinder (it won't work if you go into the vacuum block). This won't be tapped by from Rama unless you specifically request it - but its easy enough to do yourself with a hand drill and a NPT/BSP tap (depending on the hose fitting you use). I used an L-shaped fitting so that I could get the hose super snug in the back of the engine bay. In the photos below you can see how I ran the hose, and where I blocked off the old tap at the front of the engine.





Putting the manifold on itself is easy. The hardest part is getting the fuel hoses through the gap between cylinder 3-4. You will need to place stand-offs on for your fuel rails (some hollow pipe cut to size). Their length may vary depending on your purpose. The manifold fits both the OEM air-shroud injectors and standard injectors.





Be patient installing your injectors, and use some WD40 to help get everything in. This is probably the 'hardest' part of the install.

I removed all the original injector hoses because I wanted to run the air shroud to the other side of the engine bay. This was done to stay tidy, no other reason.




Getting your ITBs ready is a bit of a trick when you're using the vacuum bypass for the ICV. Here you will need to get a non-hardening silicone sealant and apply it around the edge of the butterfly. You will need to open and close it a few times to make sure you've covered the entire edge, which you can see from the marks where the edge hits the surface. You will also need to spray the surface with WD40 once the sealant is applied so that the throttle doesn't 'stick'. This is important, try and drive the car normally for a few days because the silicone will 'set' a bit over time with heat. While it's at its softest, you can actually ruin your seal from the high velocity air at high RPM. This will make your idle strange.




Getting the throttle bodies in is a fun game. There are all the levers and connectors which you can read about on Rama's site. In the below pictures you can see that I moved all the hoses so that I could neatly place the throttle cable (unlike with the prototype fitment). I've also place the TPS and  attached hoses to the throttle bypass under the manifold into a vacuum block. I've also hooked up the FPR into the vacuum block. Rama has a few different designs of block, I liked this one purely for neatness.




I hooked up the crank vent to a catch can, and then I placed an in line PCV valve between the catch can and the vacuum block. Unfortunately this doesn't generate enough vacuum and my oil cover started leaking from the pressure. If you want to run your oil fumes back into the intake (you should because it prevents water getting into your oil, plus its illegal in a lot of areas) you will need to run the PCV valve directly into a cylinder like I did the brake booster.

You can also see the adapter block with the ICV in the bottom right. This is only relevant to the M44 guys since the M42 uses an inline ICV. My ICV adapter is different to the one Rama made since I had to get mine done before he started manufacturing the parts.



Getting all the spacers on is easy.




I measured the resistance of the DISA when I removed it and purchased a resistor which I placed in the DISA plug to make the computer think it is still there.  You can see it wrapped in electrical tape in the above photo. You can see where I tapped the air fittings into my 3D printed parts, and ran the hoses to the ICV and the injector shrouds. You can also see a piece of rubber between my two plenum halves which I bought and cut to size as a gasket.

I tied the temp sensor around my air filter.



That is pretty much it. I've changed a few ways the hoses have run since then to make it neater, but otherwise its the same as this!



Ask questions if you have any, and I'll start working on my next post.

AlpineM

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Receive: 0
  • Posts: 2
  • Freshly Registered!
    • View Profile
Re: M42/M44 ITB Kit Design
« Reply #215 on: October 28, 2015, 05:09:26 PM »
When you get a chance, could you do a post that is an overview of the benefits of this kit, and summarizes the other upgrades (exhaust, muffler, side resonator, etc.) that should be done in order to have a proper setup and take advantage of the ITB kit and see gains in power?

Also, the thread is too long for me to find the post I'm thinking of, but is it true that the intake runners would have to be shorter for a LHD car? (e30) And if so how would that affect the performance?

I've been following the thread for quite a while but there's been so much information over such a long period of time and its difficult to keep track of everything that's been said.

Thanks

lambertius

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Receive: 25
  • Posts: 182
  • Freshly Registered!
    • View Profile
Re: M42/M44 ITB Kit Design
« Reply #216 on: November 05, 2015, 08:01:46 AM »
When you get a chance, could you do a post that is an overview of the benefits of this kit, and summarizes the other upgrades (exhaust, muffler, side resonator, etc.) that should be done in order to have a proper setup and take advantage of the ITB kit and see gains in power?

Also, the thread is too long for me to find the post I'm thinking of, but is it true that the intake runners would have to be shorter for a LHD car? (e30) And if so how would that affect the performance?

I've been following the thread for quite a while but there's been so much information over such a long period of time and its difficult to keep track of everything that's been said.

Thanks

You'll be pleased to know that I have been planning to do that for a while. The intention is that once I've completed the car I will be updating the original post with all the significant details.

The upcoming video https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWUP1B1CN0WXN_tALe6RzGg will also have a lot of the details included into it.

To specifically answer your question about LHD- yes, they will be shorter, but they're still in the 'operational' range in that you will notice the improvement. I've extended the intake length and reduced my pulse chamber volume to suit my specific requirements. Basically LHD, the power will come on from 4500 RPM+, whereas I've pushed mine all the way down to 3000 RPM! To be clear, I've basically capped the top-end to achieve this, but my car is primarily street, so I wanted a less peaky power band. It will become clear when I post the dyno results from the last batch of testing!

wazzu70

  • Nasty Nick
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Receive: 18
  • Posts: 671
    • View Profile
Re: M42/M44 ITB Kit Design
« Reply #217 on: November 08, 2015, 12:44:12 PM »
Great work as always. I am really impressed by the quality of this kit and the fact Rama has actual maths behind what he does. I am dreaming of getting this kit on my own personal car, but I have to get it up and running again first :)

FWIW if the airbox you printed does not hold up, you can look at using "Windform" material from CRP. Its specifically made for this application and is commonly used in motorsport. Only catch is it requires an SLS machine which is less common than the FDM machines. Maybe you used this material because of Ramas MS experience, but I just assumed you used ABS from an FDM machine since that is standard :) Many teams print full intake manifolds from the windform material because its faster/easier/cheaper than casting.
-Nick
91 E30 M42 with VEMS

aimran

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Receive: 0
  • Posts: 2
  • Freshly Registered!
    • View Profile
Re: M42/M44 ITB Kit Design
« Reply #218 on: November 10, 2015, 09:15:05 PM »
Wow, great work! I've been researching into M50 ITBs and those guys doing kits or bolting on M3 ITBs onto their M5Xs don't even come close to what you've done here. 

Anyone knows if a similar kit would be worthwhile to develop for the M5Xs?  I'm referring to Lambertius' earlier comment that M50s were basically M42s with 2 extra cylinders tacked on.

Edit: Silly me it seems the M50 kit has already been done ! I'm heading down to Aus to take a look at it.
« Last Edit: November 10, 2015, 11:10:27 PM by aimran »

lambertius

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Receive: 25
  • Posts: 182
  • Freshly Registered!
    • View Profile
Re: M42/M44 ITB Kit Design
« Reply #219 on: November 11, 2015, 08:14:11 AM »
Wow, great work! I've been researching into M50 ITBs and those guys doing kits or bolting on M3 ITBs onto their M5Xs don't even come close to what you've done here. 

Anyone knows if a similar kit would be worthwhile to develop for the M5Xs?  I'm referring to Lambertius' earlier comment that M50s were basically M42s with 2 extra cylinders tacked on.

Edit: Silly me it seems the M50 kit has already been done ! I'm heading down to Aus to take a look at it.

I haven't played with the M50 kit personally, but I hear that the performance improvement is similar to what has been achieved here. Oh, and it does sound bullshit awesome as well :)

bflan2001

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Receive: 0
  • Posts: 112
    • View Profile
Re: M42/M44 ITB Kit Design
« Reply #220 on: November 11, 2015, 05:46:58 PM »
I would be putting it into an e21 so I would probably have to be the guinea pig  :-\

aimran

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Receive: 0
  • Posts: 2
  • Freshly Registered!
    • View Profile
Re: M42/M44 ITB Kit Design
« Reply #221 on: November 12, 2015, 07:31:14 PM »
I haven't played with the M50 kit personally, but I hear that the performance improvement is similar to what has been achieved here. Oh, and it does sound bullshit awesome as well :)

Rofl.  Thank you.  My Aus trip looks shaky now.  Shame though because I had planned to hand carry the parts back to Malaysia to avoid the darned import taxes on car parts (this is to encourage local manufacturing).

benz-tech

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Receive: 15
  • Posts: 242
    • View Profile
Re: M42/M44 ITB Kit Design
« Reply #222 on: November 12, 2015, 09:46:45 PM »
Lambertius:
If you run into tuning issues, may I very highly suggest the under-rated Apexi SAFCII. Combined with some obd2 monitoring, you can enrichen the top end without affecting the closed-loop operation. My engine performs comparatively poor (with the expected basic maps) at light throttle apps because of the inefficiency of my cams and E30 intake. The DME learned this poor efficiency for the overall running. It's possible that your ITB's are less efficient at low rpm as well. If the DME Learns that, it will compound the issue with the more air avail at high rpm. Eg: stock eng at 0 fuel trim. ITB's are, say minus 3% less efficient (below 4K rpm)  which is where the DME learns it.  I believe that translates into a 3% lower fuel map at high rpm.
Pi is apparently the multiplier for your engine swap budget as well.

lambertius

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Receive: 25
  • Posts: 182
  • Freshly Registered!
    • View Profile
Re: M42/M44 ITB Kit Design
« Reply #223 on: December 01, 2015, 07:03:11 AM »
I've just updated the first post with some Christmas cheer, so check it out if you didn't notice it!

I also have a new post to complete for tomorrow that a lot of you will like  ;D


lambertius

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Receive: 25
  • Posts: 182
  • Freshly Registered!
    • View Profile
Re: M42/M44 ITB Kit Design
« Reply #224 on: December 02, 2015, 02:25:43 AM »
Alright, so what happened with my reduced volume airbox?

Well, after the original results were so promising I couldn't just stop there... I did a bit of reading digging up some papers on plenum volume and found that generally speaking there seemed to be an 'ideal' volume for most engines. From what I could discern, it seemed that you can achieve maximum peak power running you intake into open atmosphere, and peak torque with an ideal volume pulse chamber. The only way to determine this is experimentally, though you could do a reasonable guess based on engine displacement.

I started by simulating the original pulse chamber - which had a volume of approximately 9 Litres. The main reason for the large volume was the size of the trumpets that Rama manufactures. They needed to fit inside the chamber, so they dictate the size of the chamber. The main issue with the box was fitment, I found it a pain in the ass to work with basically - so that was the tipping point for me to try and see if I could refine the design (keeping in mind mine was the prototype). I discussed the situation with Rama, and he had started manufacturing 30mm tall trumpets, so I decided to design my new intake chamber with maximum torque in mind. I decided to use the smallest trumpets he had, and use the extra space give to extend the length of the intake marginally.

The next question was how I would manufacture my airbox, and since 3D printing was the most cost-effective I decided to go with that. With the miracle of 3D printing and CAD I decided to go hardcore and try refining the trumpet shape as well.


In the below videos you can see the significant difference in intake velocity as air is ingested. This is due to seceral reasons:

  • The reduced volume allows the intake stream to 'attach' to the flow into the trumpet, acting like a continuous inlet. This means that the velocity carried into the intake isn't lost but instead contributes its momentum to the intake cycle.
  • The curvature significantly evens out the velocity profile down the intake. It is clearer on the 3D videos, where you can see the turbulence as the air spins down the trumpet.
  • The larger volume has a tendency to fill the chamber rather than the cylinders, and the air that fills the cylinders is drawn from the free volume around it. If you look at the small box, you can clearly see (in the 3D simulations) that the air forms very direct paths into each cylinder. Its a small change, but in theory it should mean that the air entering the velocity stacks has a higher velocity (more momentum, better cylinder filling).

9.0L https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Re81nyTM8Uc
9.0L https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5B0CFqaDhcM
2.9L https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pieu--Byb1Q
2.9L https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYOxCz8qSAY

So what are the results?

Well the sim results seemed to indicate that the small box would ingest more air:



There is a lot of nonsense in that picture due to the limitations of the software, but from iteration 500 onwards, you can see a slightly MAF for the smaller volume intake. So I decided to give it a try and see what happened!



So basically it was a successs!

You can see that even though it was months later, the results in peak power are almost identical, and there is a significant improvement in low-end torque. I promise you that I noticed it as soon as I got the car running.

Now there are two really interesting things to take from this:

  • You can see that I've basically reduced the volume as much as I can without losing power. The telltale is that at Maximum RPM the power dips slightly which is what you would expect to see if there isn't enough air in the pulse chamber to continue feeding the cylinders. It is very likely that I have hit the maximum torque volume for the engine's current setup, without losing peak power. In short, this is the street option.

    From these results Rama has actually reduced the volume of the original pule chamber so what you're buying will have a ~7.0L volume. This was done because the peak capabilities for that volume are much higher than what I've done (for people who want to race or implement further modifications) but the smaller volume significantly improved fitment.
  • The most interesting thing is easily the significance of the torque improvement. For those of you don't recall, the results from the exhaust swap basically swapped power from low down for power up top.



    What is interesting is that it is in almost the exact same location as the improvement from the airbox. Because the muffler is too loud for street use, I'll be swapping it out with the OEM muffler for anything but track days. After the results though, I'm curious to see what happens - since it is reasonable to assume that the power from the airbox and the OEM muffler down low will add together. If this happens there should be a significant improvement in the street drivability of the car with ~12% improvement in in low end power and 16% increase up top. What gets me really curious though, is the now defunct DISA. I could conceivably use that to trigger a relay to open a valve in the exhaust so that I can get the extra torque from the OEM muffler, which will then switch to a straight pipe at high RPM for more power - all still while using the OEM computer and tune...

There is still more testing going on. Unfortunately I ran out of time last time I had access to my car to finalise the intake combinations. Rama also gave me a set of tapered trumpets and a few other shiny parts, which will hopefully be getting tested in January!