intake manifold plans

[dbroselogan]

I'm looking for plans for a short block chevy intake manifold. I want to build one up in Solidworks to improve my skills and to have something precise on my resume. I also have a friend that will machine it for me so I can test it and add the testing to my resume. (This will be done at a Technical college in my town).

Can anyone help me with this or have any suggestions?

Thanks

 

[reidh]

I'd recommend going to the junkyard and purchasing one. This will further give you hands on experience with intricate measurements (radius, chamfer, etc.) It sounds trivial, but many designers today are ill prepared for this type of work.

-Reidh

 

[dbroselogan]

Ill prepared for cutting apart a part to see how it works, or taking measurements off of the part? I know I am not prepared to work in the industry until I develop my surfacing capability in Solidworks.

I am concerned about the dimensional error that will come in with standard measuring using calipers and such. I have seen some manifold designs with vortexes on a curve. I'm not sure I can measure that properly off of a part that has been sliced. I think I would lose too much at the cut site.

I will have the part in hand, as you suggest, but I believe I would create a better file with the drawings- at least until I have more skill with this type of product.

Thank you

 

[thundair]

The way I do it is to slice it up like a slice of bread and trace it on to a grid mylar.
Then take a compass protractor scale and what ever else you can use to put the slices into the sketch mode of a solid.
At that you take some artistic license to fair in the slices either curve to curve to create a surf or modify the solid body's to union them. Sorry this lingo is in CATIA but you get the idea.
My latest is a Norton motorcycle head which is now cut in halve (mirror) and is off to a real machine shop to cut into 1/4" slices. This will leave me the other half to obtain any missing data from the overall picture..
The final product will be an SLA then an investment casting

Cheers

I don't know anything but the people that do.

 

[MacGyverS2000]

If you're cutting into helixes and such, take the blade width into account when making your measurements... there will still be a bit of slop, but a lot less than if you didn't take it into account.

Dan - Owner

http://www.Hi-TecDesigns.com

 

[patprimmer]

A SBC manifold is not normally all that complicated.

Vortexes etc are normally only on aftermarket manifolds, and are just marketing spin.

The main parameters are packaging, port alignment, airflow, taper and cross sectional area.

Reasonably concentric radii of turns in the runner and good finish on the outside curve helps. Finish on inside rad is not critical and is therefore subject to marketing spin as visual alterations for marketing only do least damage there

Regards

eng-tips, by professional engineers for professional engineers
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

 

[thundair]

Just a thought of a simpler solution for your task.
That is to use the gasket dimensions to create your flanges and position them in space relative to the carb/intake flange.
So now you have the begging and end of each runner.
To obtain the runner configurations use the existing manifold and fill each runner with silicon cast. Use this to slice up always normal to contour.
This will allow you to use crv to crv to generate a surf. Now use thick surface to put a desirable wall thickness outward and it will start to look like an intake manifold....

Cheers

I don't know anything but the people that do.

 

[dbroselogan]

Thanks, that's a great idea. I can't wait to try it.

 

[dicer]

reidh, I agree.

"dbroselogan (Mechanical)I am concerned about the dimensional error that will come in with standard measuring using calipers and such."

If you knew the industry, you would know that calipers are not the way to dimensionally inspect precision parts.
Sorry to sound so coarse. Like the other guy said, too many ill prepared folks.

 

[dbroselogan]

That is true. I would rather use a laser scanner but don't have one available. I'm going to contact the Technical College in the automotive and also the machining department to see if they can help me. There might even be a scanner in the CAD dept.

Precision numbers are the only way to go. Even making blow-molded bottle designs, like I do now, is too imprecise for me. I like tolerance studies on tight tolerances.

 

[dicer]

A good old surface plate and height gauge will work just fine. And you don't have to spend hours to program it either. And will be quite precise, yeah as precise as any machine that would produce what ever it is you are trying to produce. All so called engineers should spend at least 2 years in a machine shop, so they can learn what a tolerance is all about. There is so much wasted time, and wasted dollars in scrapped parts for ridiculous tolerancing, to me it seems a default tolerance setting in the cad software, or just ignorance. Yeah belive me tolerancing is way different in the real world, as compaired to what you see on your computer screen.

 

[dbroselogan]

That is why I always work with the machinist or toolmaker after I have the initial layout of the part. We go over the part and decide on cuts, machine, and tolerancing, enough tolerancing for the job but not too much and tolerancing that works well for the machine or cut. With this I've gotten pretty good at getting just what they want even before the first look at.

 

[dicer]

Something else a wana be engineer show have to do. If it is in the automotive field, he/she should work for at least 2 years as a mechanic, see how do design a system that is easy to work on. And spend a bit of time in a fab shop as well. This way you get some hands on experience to actually see what it is like to work with material and mechanical systems. Its a bit different than pretty colored pictures on a computer screen.
"Work with machinist" You need to give it a try yourself, and not just the fun stuff. You should get to enjoy (sarcasticly) the frustrations of that job. The constant fight to maintain tolerances, finishes etc.
And honestly how many times does the machinist actually do the engineering for you? Or if it is a setting like say prototype engine work, how many times is it the assembly/builder/tech that is the real engineer in the project and finalizes the useable design, and of course never gets the recognition for his work.

 

[GregLocock]

"And honestly how many times does the machinist actually do the engineering for you? Or if it is a setting like say prototype engine work, how many times is it the assembly/builder/tech that is the real engineer in the project and finalizes the useable design, and of course never gets the recognition for his work.
"

You want salt and vinegar on your shoulder?

Because that chip's looking a bit unappetising.

Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[patprimmer]

How many times is an important point of detail carefully considered and optimised by the engineer, only to be ruined by the assembly/builder/tech, because he changes it for his own convenience without understanding the consequence of his action.

These things are best solved by mutual respect and consultation rather than by only considering one point of view. Chips on shoulders do not help this process at all.

Regards

eng-tips, by professional engineers for professional engineers
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

 

[MacGyverS2000]

dicer, so what should "wanna be" mechanics/machinists do before they're released into the wild, be engineers? As Pat pointed out, I can't count the number of times one of my wanna-be-an-engineer designs has been hacked to uselessness because the "mechanic" didn't understand the engineering behind the design.

We're all specialists in one form or another, but we become better worker bees the more we understand the details of other specialist's jobs. I have spent a great deal of time understanding the PC board manufacturing process so I can anticipate where my design might be changed on the factory floor... in return, I expect the manufacturer to know enough about my job not to change something critical. It's called experience, we all get it in one form or another, be it from a mentor or failed projects.

If the engineer was required to understand it all, though, there would be no reason to hire anything more than a monkey to run the mills, no?

Dan - Owner

http://www.Hi-TecDesigns.com

 

[thundair]

We have lost direction of the original question..

But I think we all agree there is a deference between design and engineering.. I have yet had a machinist or mechanic re-engineer something for me....

Cheers

I don't know anything but the people that do.