TOPIC: Vortices Video

The Secret of Golf Balls Revealed - YouTube

This shows the vortices created by air encountering the dimples on a golf ball. A wonderful animation/computer model. I'd love to see something like this for our groove.

Ok, picking this back up after a year and a half because innovation has brought us here.

If you click on some of the videos in the sidebar of YouTube when this one plays (or if you've selected AutoPlay), they'll get into discussions of Reynolds number, which is a ratio of laminar to turbulent flows. (actually, that might be backwards - Reynolds Number is expressed as a whole number rather than a ratio. 400,000 rather than 400,000:1)
Ron's described vortices being created by the groove since the beginning, now we have Juan Reyes' TB taking that a step further, generating microvortices PREGROOVE that seem to enhance it. I'm speculating along the lines of tossing more of the mass of laminar air into the airflow headed for the groove, sooner..."stoichiometry" of (for?) "gasoline" being 14.7 masses of air to one mass of gas.

I'm no physicist or aerodynamicist, or heck, even any kind of scientifically-based engineer, but from what I can tell, we're making the inertial energy of an incoming (laminar) airstream much more kinetic (turbulent) with the groove (and these vortices), and that makes our engines more powerful and efficient and clean. so if the little dimples make lots of little vortices of air move, the groove (a big, specifically-shaped dimple) must make the energy of the air mass from those wee vortices REALLY kinetic, or really turbulent, or have a really high reynolds number.

Yes, I'm sure somebody's saying "wait...doesn't more air mean more fuel for more power?" Remember - we're not putting more air into the system; we're just making what's already there do different things and that means we get different results...(better results than the factory designed, it turns out). It seems that the answer to "why does the Groove work" is if we break up the smooth laminar air into more turblent air, we are possibly mixing atomized/vapourized fuel better than it has before for a possibly denser, more evenly mixed air charge. And that's not even talking about the other parts of The Power System modifications, or taking them into account.

Digging in on the Dimples...I just watched the video ( Thanks Dr Dude!) plus another in the youtube feed. What I take away from these reinforces my earlier impressions from material Juan shared w/ me. Thanks Juan Reyes!

The first thing I got from what Juan shared is that a layer of higher pressure forms from the vortices that hug the golfball. This reduces the low pressure area in the balls' wake. But implied in this to me is the high pressure layer close to the dimpled surface. This is a change in the condition of that air, close to the surface that is dimpled.

One big difference is that the golfball presents the round surface that faces the travel direction. So you have the dimples engaging the airflow at different angles. The TB bore walls are parallel to the airflow, so
I don't know how effective they are in this case. However I would expect at least some interactions. Here's an idea: if we create a bit higher pressure air layer along the bore walls, we may then be packing that much more air into the Groove's vortices. I doubt that there would be any change in incoming air mass from the MAF and air filter. But, if the dimples add a higher fraction of the incoming air INTO the Groove, then that ought to increase the manifold vacuum (decrease the pressure). Intensifying the "slingshot effect".

Next idea- if the dimples DO create an increase in air pressure along the TB bore walls, well I can see how this might help the Groove. This is all in my mind's eye, we have no scientific way to measure it. Except by before/after testing. Juan is the only one here with anything like that now...

Tracy G

If we vortex our air flow in the air intake tube, counter clockwise direction is the ideal flow. Do the opposite and you'll smell fuel on the tail pipe. Counter clockwise flow is North if it is a magnet. We verified this on testing and it is easy to make a do-it-yourself vanes using cans that convey airflow this way at the entrance part of the intake tube. This helps reduce the intake stroke load due to inefficient air flow.

@Vernie "easy to make a do-it-yourself vanes using cans"

And how?

-Kim

There's a commercial product available for this:
I bought and tried one before I discovered the groove. that should give you an indication of my experience.

Vernie - you're quite specific when you discuss directionality (Clockwise/counterclockwise); in the case of fluid flows, like the air in an intake, are they not subject to the effect of the earth's rotation, like the Coriolis effect?

The direction works the same (tested in the US, Southeast Asia, India...), location did not matter. It is all about the energy charge and the fluid flow efficiency.

The example photos works on a Honda Jazz air intake.

ADMIN COMMENT:
Vernie, please add descriptions for the pics. I used th "Insert" button to place them in the post. Otherwise, everyone has to download each pic... Ron, Gadgetman

Each vane is 1/2 inch by 1 3/4" with a 45 degrees angle cut.


Folded into a curve that convey an air flow. Air entry is from left to right of the device on the photo.


Final device.


One can scale up the vane size for bigger intake tubes.

So indenting the walls of the intake pipe in the style of golf ball seems like a good idea. With a hot iron tool or something?

Hey, I've been thinking about this for couple of days:

If you drill a hole in the intake tube, pass the MAF. Would it not create strong suction into the TB?
Drill at a sharp angle toward the TB. I imagine it would create even stronger air flow w/out MAF registering any extra air.

What do you guys think?

'03 Focus- my first impression re: drilling a hole in the intake air duct is...it's an un-filtered air leak. I doubt it doing any good, though I'm not dissing ya here!

Heck, I guess, get a spare air inlet duct from the boneyard, and try it, if ya like. But just a simple hole, without any air filtration, lets in dirt, and I bet the ECU may set a code. Or if you put the hole in your existing air duct, and it doesn't work out, seal it w/ Gorilla Tape.

To me, all discussion of inlet air vortex generators, and other mods to the air inlet duct (besides adding in a nipple for a PCV re-route, etc.)

Are all rather meaningless--'cause we already have the most effective technique to alter the Induction Dynamics.... the Gadgetman Groove!

On the Other Hand... I'm extremely interested in the Keshe copper nano-coated coils for the Plasma ignition boost. In fact, I scored a bit of solid copper wire today... we'll see!

BTW- THANKS to Vernie for that, I've been thinking about that all day!

Tracy G

The application of gadgetman groove is behind the throttle plate - other than the wave it creates, it helps improve efficiency of flow. The vortex vanes on the air intake tube is for efficiency on the flow of air in that area specially right after the air filter.

Any smaller holes along the tube except they are in huge numbers that in total of lesser resistance to the main hole of the intake tube are smaller in flow compared to the main tube. The air flow priority is on a path of lesser resistance. Adding the vanes to rotate the air flow counter clockwise going towards the throttle body is a method of accelerating the flow - reducing intake stroke load. This is similar to creating a vortex of water for it to come out fast from a 2 liter soft drink bottle.

Nothing is nonsense when you understand what you are doing. In every aspect of any technology, understanding is the most important part. One can understand more by actual testing, experience it, check on it yourself and by doing so you can learn a lot more other than answering your own questions. In research, the journey towards an objective is the most important part, the objective is simply a goal mark and can be changed according to whatever important findings you have along the way.

03FocusZX3 wrote: indenting the walls of the intake pipe in the style of golf ball seems like a good idea. With a hot iron tool or something?

A Gadgetman tried something similar: rather than the divots being in the intake tube, he drilled them with a ball cutter bit in his dremel on the upstream side of the butterfly of the TB itself to great effect. That's downstream of the MAF, so the MAF didn't see more air and pump more fuel, but the (sticky laminar air from the inside of the tube) thrown into the airstream by the divots was registered by the O2 sensors downstream and leaned out fuel delivery a bit more than the groove itself. Maybe that extra mass of air enhanced the effect of the groove from the extra pressure exerted on it. It was a GM truck with TBI...Tracy will be able to link to it because he was interested having sold the guy the bits - a first groove, I think!!!

Vernie and Greg- Though Greg has discarded his Tornado vortex device, he has been spot on with quite a good deal of tech stuff here. Vernie has brought fresh ideas and good introspection to the discussion. I heartily welcome that!

Re: the golfball dimples that Juan Reyes used in Grooving his GM V6 TB...Well, Juan really went to town with them. And overall it sounded like they gave an increase in positive results. I'm still interested in trying them myself. To date, we have no real solid ground of varied experimentation with 'em. My guesstimate is that the dimples increase the sticky boundary layer along the TB bore wall. Honestly, the actual effects of this is conjecture on my part.

A counter-clockwise vortex spin imparted to the incoming airmass sounds like it can do good things as well. Maybe, as long as the vortex generator homemade Tornado type insert doesn't itself impede airflow. OR cause any other counter-effects.

The thing is, to me- I have seen great benefit from the Groove, and the additional Power System mods. I'm willing to have an open mind on any mods, that either bring proof, or show good theoretical promise. That's what we do after all!

I lack a proper engine to test much of our ideas on. Almost everyone has something newer (Injected!) to play with than I do. I already have a full Plasma Ignition on my Subie, that is an order of magnitude ( I believe) higher up the scale than most anyone else has. What I drive daily is a bit like a biplane with Rocket Assist ( there's a Visual for ya!).

Anyhow, I Think you guys have a tighter theoretical grip on the minute airflow dynamics than I do. So I will watch with interest what you both say. Ignition is the area I feel most sure of, along with the theory of Wave Form tech. ( the Groove itself).

I want to try the nano-coated copper coil trick pretty bad. IF this can generate anything towards what my Subie has, without all that involved mod, then I'm all about doing it!

Tracy G