Author Topic: Water pump impeller compatibility with other models (Read 21722 times)

rablack21 · « **Reply #15 on:** April 08, 2015, 06:25:21 AM »

I talked to Sam (Sameltoe) yesterday. He is going to send me an 89 impeller and shaft to use. So my intention will be to test a new high flow impeller (more flow than stock) and also to produce a new impeller shaft, as the 89 shafts are getting less common, out of stainless steel. Thanks Sam, for continuing to push this idea.

Tbone07 · « **Reply #16 on:** April 08, 2015, 10:22:54 AM »

What do we believe is the limiting factor here? Is it the speed of the water or the capacity of the system?

How do you calculate the optimal flow rate to dissipate the maximum amount of heat? I'm no engineer which is why I ask, sure is an interesting subject though

4WHLr · « **Reply #17 on:** April 08, 2015, 11:06:35 AM »

Check out 'splitstream' for some ideas too. It looks like they use a spacer to move the cover outwards, to fit a taller impeller in there, on some thumpers. Could be some adaptable ideas for you there.
Cool idea you have here!! LOL

rablack21 · « **Reply #18 on:** April 08, 2015, 11:07:59 AM »

Both can be a limiting factor. You are right, the trick is to "balance" the cooling system. Increasing the coolant flow rate will lower the radiator inlet temperature but raise radiator outlet temperature. There can come a point when the temps are so close together that it doesn't help the system. The major players when it comes to cooling are:
1. surface area across the radiator
2. air flow
3. coolant flow rate
4. specific heat of the fluid used.

To improve #1, you have to go to a larger radiator
To improve #2, you have to either ride faster, use a fan, or use shrouds that force extra air into the radiator fins
To improve #3, you have to increase the flow rate by a beneficial amount
To improve #4, you have to use a fluid that has a better specific heat than water/coolant mix. This one is difficult to change.
Right now, I am addressing #3. When I get time, I will move on to #2
With all of the rough cast surfaces in the clutch cover and cylinder jug, I see a lot of room for improvement to flow.

Quote from: Tbone07;52831

What do we believe is the limiting factor here? Is it the speed of the water or the capacity of the system?

How do you calculate the optimal flow rate to dissipate the maximum amount of heat? I'm no engineer which is why I ask, sure is an interesting subject though

rablack21 · « **Reply #19 on:** April 08, 2015, 11:25:12 AM »

Quote from: 4WHLr;52832

Check out 'splitstream' for some ideas too. It looks like they use a spacer to move the cover outwards, to fit a taller impeller in there, on some thumpers. Could be some adaptable ideas for you there.
Cool idea you have here!! LOL

Thanks for the idea! That is exactly what Boyesen does as well, but in a different way. The spacer idea would be very easy to do and would provide room for longer fins on the impeller. The longer fins would provide additional improvement.

JesseA420 · « **Reply #20 on:** April 08, 2015, 12:17:45 PM »

Quote from: rablack21;52833

With all of the rough cast surfaces in the clutch cover and cylinder jug, I see a lot of room for improvement to flow.

dont forget about that hose bung on the back of the cylinder, the machining on the inside of that thing is stopping up flow terribly. it is basically shaped like a "T" but outletting only coming in and going out the bottom and one side of the "T".

... on the ESR cylinders i mean, i dont know about cp water outlets.

Skeans1 · « **Reply #21 on:** April 08, 2015, 09:00:18 PM »

Is it possible the coolant is going too fast to actually pull heat from the exhaust side. Possibly put an exopy in the head and drill holes like a stock gasket.

rablack21 · « **Reply #22 on:** April 09, 2015, 08:22:52 AM »

Quote from: Skeans1;52863

Is it possible the coolant is going too fast to actually pull heat from the exhaust side. Possibly put an exopy in the head and drill holes like a stock gasket.

That would actually not be possible. There's no way that the flow could be fast enough not to pull "some" heat from the area. With that said, the flow on these pumps have never been a great deal. Which is why they produce almost zero flow when at idle. Yes, the flow is better as the revs go up, but it is still very slow. If you feel the inlet hose to the water pump when you have the engine revved up, you will still barely be able to tell that draw is taking place. You also can't notice any liquid movement in the radiator. In vehicles where you can visibly see down into the radiators, you will notice that when you rev up the engine, you will see the liquid moving. Obviously this is not a quantified measurement but give you some observations.

Skeans1 · « **Reply #23 on:** April 09, 2015, 09:07:55 AM »

Another option could be an electric pump and just do away with the shaft bearing and impeller

udontknowme · « **Reply #24 on:** April 09, 2015, 09:31:19 PM »

lets say the rad had 10 large rows. what about 20 smaller rows instead and increase the water speed

rablack21 · « **Reply #25 on:** April 10, 2015, 07:36:30 AM »

Quote from: udontknowme;52904

lets say the rad had 10 large rows. what about 20 smaller rows instead and increase the water speed

The row size is generally not the customizable variable, it's the air fin pitch and shape. Unfortunately, we don't have any control over this and this is at the discretion of the cooler manufacturer. You can go with a smaller fine pitch which will increase cooling capability, but will also increase the possibility of clogging. Debris will not flow through the fins as easily. You can also change the fin shape, but going to a more efficient fin shape will also increase clogging probability. Those that never ride in the woods could probably get away with this change without issues. The fin pitch on my CBR radiator already appears to be fairly small. Not sure you could go any smaller without making it difficult to clean out mud and debris. That is why I am moving on with something that I can change. :topsecret:

Tbone07 · « **Reply #26 on:** April 10, 2015, 09:10:04 AM »

Quote from: rablack21;52920

The row size is generally not the customizable variable, it's the air fin pitch and shape. Unfortunately, we don't have any control over this and this is at the discretion of the cooler manufacturer. You can go with a smaller fine pitch which will increase cooling capability, but will also increase the possibility of clogging. Debris will not flow through the fins as easily. You can also change the fin shape, but going to a more efficient fin shape will also increase clogging probability. Those that never ride in the woods could probably get away with this change without issues. The fin pitch on my CBR radiator already appears to be fairly small. Not sure you could go any smaller without making it difficult to clean out mud and debris. That is why I am moving on with something that I can change. :topsecret:

I think we could have impellers and pump covers made pretty easily (by NPM perhaps?). That would keep the cost down and still improve flow. Especially at slow speeds

rablack21 · « **Reply #27 on:** April 10, 2015, 09:23:55 AM »

Quote from: Tbone07;52922

I think we could have impellers and pump covers made pretty easily (by NPM perhaps?). That would keep the cost down and still improve flow. Especially at slow speeds

I contacted Jeremy just yesterday. I will be getting a quote from him along with maybe one or two others about making a prototype and then on to producing them after that, if there is a demand for them. How do I setup a survey in this thread? I wanted to see how many might be interested in one of these when I get through with them.

udontknowme · « **Reply #28 on:** April 11, 2015, 01:00:05 AM »

Quote from: rablack21;52920

The row size is generally not the customizable variable, it's the air fin pitch and shape. Unfortunately, we don't have any control over this and this is at the discretion of the cooler manufacturer. You can go with a smaller fine pitch which will increase cooling capability, but will also increase the possibility of clogging. Debris will not flow through the fins as easily. You can also change the fin shape, but going to a more efficient fin shape will also increase clogging probability. Those that never ride in the woods could probably get away with this change without issues. The fin pitch on my CBR radiator already appears to be fairly small. Not sure you could go any smaller without making it difficult to clean out mud and debris. That is why I am moving on with something that I can change. :topsecret:

mylers can make most anything you want, so theres plenty of customization available. they also have a supercool series that is supposed to be condiderable improved over stock. never used one but thats what they claim. besides the improved pump and radiator ideas, im a believer in fans. alot of people simply dont generate sufficient airflow for the system to work properly. even with the best pump and most efficient rad, without air the whole system is useless.

rablack21 · « **Reply #29 on:** April 11, 2015, 08:25:52 AM »

Quote from: udontknowme;52954

mylers can make most anything you want, so theres plenty of customization available. they also have a supercool series that is supposed to be condiderable improved over stock. never used one but thats what they claim. besides the improved pump and radiator ideas, im a believer in fans. alot of people simply dont generate sufficient airflow for the system to work properly. even with the best pump and most efficient rad, without air the whole system is useless.

I agree. The hardest one of the three to control is the airflow. Unless you're using a fan, it has a condition. You have to go fast to get good airflow. I believe in the use of fans as well. But I just haven't seen a good way to hook a fan up to a cr 250 ignition, which I am currently running. But yes, more airflow would be ideal. Just hard to get it. lol.