FASS Dyno Results

[turbo lcc]

RUN 5

After FASS



#ad

 

[turbo lcc]

RUN 6

After FASS



#ad

 

[turbo lcc]

Sorry for the size I scanned them in quickly and wanted you to be able to see all the details

 

[GIT-R-DONE]

Thanks

Great info, and thanks for posting the results. I am glad I wasnt the only one interested in doing this on my own.



Don

 

[PRout]

Action speaks so much louder than words.



Looks like 10 HP added by the FASS. Ill be darned...



That should equal about 1 psi of boost on the turbo as well.

 

[DJW]

Of improvements in engine efficiency etc. in Europe where fuel cost is extremly high, although I understand in France 50% of private cars are Diesel powered and Diesel half the price of Gasoline, even so all fuel is expensive, any improvement in fuel efficientcy would be followed closely. For Truckers another thought to ponder, in Britain Semis have a single axle duels, in the USA 2axle duels are the norm, in Australia 3 axle duels etc. the less than vexing puzzle is,they all haul the same gross tonage to wit 40 Tons, although the British may be cheating here as a British Imp. Ton contains 2240 lbs. Answer, Roads, or Quality thereoff. Incidently any tire after the first driver axle is recieving terrible punishment, so an Auzzie Trucker told me.

 

[Mike Ellis]

Product Analysis 101



1. Test results talk and BS walks.

2. FAITH is for church.

3. FEELINGS are for women to sit around and talk about over cookies and tea.

4. THINKING something works is not the same as KNOWING something works.

5. Ya pays yer money and ya takes yer chances... but factual data can help you take wise chances.



Brought to you by engineers - the other white meat

 

[How'dHeDoThat]

In NEED of a Fuel System before the upgrades????

Originally posted by 01_HO

Thanks cuda, my brother was in need of a fuel system before I instaled the upgrades, so this was a prime oppertunity for Dyno tests. I really need to thank turbolcc,Keith Livingstone(Forest City Diesel) Keith Summers(Mclain Summers Mid West Diesel)and Brad Ekstam(Owner of FASS system) These guys were on site to make sure the test I performed were correct and fair as I could possible acheive. I hope to have more results after Ive got all the BOMBing done on his truck. Hope I helped a little. Jeremy

So these gains could have been the result of just having adaquate fuel?



What do you mean was in need of upgrades before the tests?

Bad lift pump?

Low Psi?



Curious

James

 

[turbo lcc]

How'dHeDoThat



He means his brother has a TST box on order. The truck only has 9000 miles on it.

 

[CEkstam]

For all who are running the Fuel Air Separation System that claims the same features and benefits of the Fuel Preporator, please read the following.



A study of the "other system" results in a number of observations that may concern many of you, especially those using that system.



This "other system" has all of the patented features of the Fuel Preporator except one. This is the feature that allows automatic priming without loosening the fuel filter and facilitates the removal of virtually all air/vapor from the fuel under virtually all normal operating conditions. Analysis of the "other system" under high flow / high pressure conditions shows that air separation STOPS when the outlet pressure of the "other system" is at approximately 12psi or below. The higher the outlet pressure set to the engine, the sooner the air separation stops. Putting a clear line with proper lighting on the outlet to the engine and operating the "other system"under these conditions will verify this statement.



The "other system" has 17 parts that are identical and interchangeable with the old style Fuel Preporator. As the inventor of the Fuel Preporator, I am concerned that many are mislead to believe the "other system" functions identically as the Fuel Preporator. IT DOES NOT!



NOTE: A high flow pump has the potential to cavitate more than a low flow pump and produce a greater volume of vapor. The fuel pump on the "other system" has the same high flow pump as used on the old style Fuel Preporator. When operating the "other system" at higher pressures and at the higher engine speeds and fuel flow requirements the full flow of this pump is directed to your engine without separation of the air/vapor. Again, this increased volume of vapor is directed to your engine and your injector pump. This condition can have the same effect (high levels of vapor displacing the lubricant, the fuel) as when the original lift pump fails causing the failure of the injector pump.



This post is not intended to do anything other than to notify and educate those using or thinking of using the "other system" that it is not the same in function as the Fuel Preporator and may have and undesirable effect on your engine.



Thank you for your time,



Charles L. Ekstam

 

[turbo lcc]

dumb question

Perporator



So is the main difference in the two system the filter to remove the air??

 

[GIT-R-DONE]

So, any dates for the dyno testing yet?

 

[woodsrat]

perporator or fass

here is an idea for use a phone and settle your problems, instead of on a site we use for information and to meet new freinds. Not bicker over what seems to be something that should be settled in a private matter.



since i have finally got into this in my observations i know of several people running the FASS and to date have seen no problems. I have also seen several perporator systems come through my shop and have seen two systems go down twice in six months.



this is not a plug for anybody, it is my . 02 to the people that use this site for its intended purpose.

 

[How'dHeDoThat]

2 systems, TWICE in 6 months eh?

Oh yeah well I have seen 4 FASS systems go down 4 times in 3 months





Ok Just Kidding... .









What system are you running..... OH IC N/M



I am sure you have the documentation to show those TWO systems going down??? TWICE??? in 6 months



Interesting podium speech about what it should be and then that statement.....



What is interesting here this testing is for OUR information and not a poke at what system someone chose.



I have the Preporator and one of my best friends just ordered a FASS and YA we are having FUN with it!!!!



As he said "you don't like anything on my truck so I went with the FASS to keep it that way" It's all in fun!



Let the tests go down and see what claims are valid and what is not and try to keep the panties from getting too bunched up. LIFE is short and LIFE is GOOD!



If the Preporator makes 5 HP and the FASS makes 10 is anyone going to be upset? Visa Versa?



IMO I regret that the FASS is not participating in this testing as I feel the three guys doing the testing are certainly credible enough.



James

 

[CEkstam]

Re: Dyno Tests

For those following the posts, Preporator has now shipped one Fuel Preporator to the Mid TN TDR Group and two Preporators to the So. Cal Rattlin Rams. Another is being sent soon to JetPilot. We should be able to see some dyno results in the near future.



We have been discussing in these threads the effect of fuel vapor produced by pump cavitation and/or entrained air present in the fuel injection system, the relationship to horse power and torque output of the diesel engine and quantifying the results produced once the air and vapor has actually been removed.



The amount of air entrained in a liquid varies. It depends on viscosity or surface tension of the liquid, which is dependent on temperature, and the extent of agitation.



Pump cavitation and the volume of vapor produced through the accelerated vaporization of this event is dependent upon the level of vacuum produced within the cavity of the pump and the temperature of the liquid being pumped. The higher operating speed of the pump increases the vacuum, the higher temperature of the liquid increases the rate of vaporization and volume of vapors produced. The more air/vapor present between the injection system between the plunger and the nozzle, the greater the delay of the injection. The retarded injection timing produces a shortened powerstroke or burn time in the cylinder reducing the efficiency of the engine. Remove the air/vapor and the efficiency and power output is restored to the designed level.



The University of West VA. emission lab documented a torque rise off idle of 103% to 106%. They also documented a 6% rise over stock peak torque. These increases will vary dependent upon the type of fuel injection system of the target engine (unit injection vs distributor pump system). A unit injector has basically little more fuel in the high pressure part of the system than is injected, which is very little as compared to the distributor pump system with the plunger in the pump connected to the nozzle in the head through a long injector line.



This brings up a couple of points. First, the horsepower/torque output of the common rail '03 and '04 Cummins/Dodge will not be effected through changes in injection timing from the removal of air/vapor in the fuel, but will be effected by increasing the mass flow of fuel to the system and the pressure pumps ability to maintain rated pressure within the common rail. Increased power output of the 2002 and earlier Cummins will have the potential to enjoy a very noticeable increase based on restored injection timing. Remember, a greatly over-fueled engine will never be efficient, only powerful. To produce peak horsepower, precise injection timing is key. This starts with adequate fuel flow to meet the demand and pure fuel, no air vapor!!!



The next step is to have the device that delivers pure fuel, free of air and vapor, and at the necessary pressure flow!



Fuel Preporator is the only device patented or not patented currently available that can deliver diesel fuel virtually free of air/vapor at any flow rate needed for most any diesel engine on the market today, large or small regardless of size, from the 20 cylinder EMD's to a two cylinder gen-set.



Thanks to the TDR Members that are giving their time to test the Fuel Preporators.





Charles L. Ekstam

 

[banshee]

Preporator,



So you're saying that on a 3rd Gen common rail motor, given sufficient fuel pressure (say 15 psi for both your system and a conventional fuel pump setup) there is no more power to be gained from running your system (thus removing the air)? I have heard this from other places and wanted to clarify.



Thanks,

John

 

[Peter Campbell]

If this is still about HP #- Use the "seat of the pants dyno" With real #s- a 1/4 mile track. Start stock. Do 1/2 hour of off roading- Immediately line up and do three runs. Put on one or the other systems, do another 1/2 hour of off roading, put weight in for the fuel burned/spilled (7 lbs per gallon ) and line up three more times, same driver same truck same day- do not tell the driver what his configuration is. Then the other system. same deal. If you want to get fancy do it again with a pusher pump system no air separation. If the truck started out bone stock with a failing lift pump, the numbers would be good- until you compared with the stock plus pusher. There would be some improvement even with the lift pump working right. The improvement may be very small with a pusher pump ( no air separation ). If the pressure is maintained high enough the air pockets and cavitation should be significantly decreased- not eliminated.

I for one think of the dyno as a measuring device- not the end all. Performance at its job is the real test of machinery. You do not drive dynos you drive vehicles. This was even mentioned in an old DC publication ( that is dodges Direct Connection , not Daimler Chrysler ) About people testing sprint engines with a 440 and quadra bog ( AKA quadrajet), the 440 on dyno did a good 150 HP more than the 383 with a small holly. The 383 with the small holly was faster-on the track- where they raced than on the dyno where the 440 did better. The 3/4 second of bog time and the extra tire spin and loss of traction slowed down the 440 car. How could I loose- my dyno sheet is better.

So shake the fuel ( off road ) and then test on a roadbed ( 1/4 mile). This would test the advetised characteristics of the system.

At work they handle the air entrainment concern with a " head tank " 10 feet above the engine. After the fuel forwarding pumps fill the 150 gallon head tank it can sit quietly and settle. Good for about 1/2 hour of run time. If you have a stationary power plant this works very well. Air pockets do not delay the injection event very much in a 900 RPM machine with a 1050 RPM redline. If you test the vehicle stationary ( not doing its designed job ) then the test does not factor in all the things that need to be tested. For an air filter comparison it is not loosing much accuracy, for a product designed to deal with fuel sloshing it is not testing much at all. Put the entire dyno jet on a shake table, that will properly simulate more of the conditions.

This seems to be common sense- at least to me. But one of the venders got severly flamed for suggesting that maintainig a vehicle stationary by strapping it to a dyno will negate most possible gains froma system designed for fuel slosh concerns, Then got flamed again because the G-tech is a accelerometer derived computer box, and not a real big impressive and expensive skid- when he wanted to test a VEHICLE IN MOTION.

Sorry to those that race thier dyno charts- it is only a measuring tool- with limitations.

 

[How'dHeDoThat]

GOOD POST!

Originally posted by Peter Campbell

If this is still about HP #- Use the "seat of the pants dyno" With real #s- a 1/4 mile track. Start stock. Do 1/2 hour of off roading- Immediately line up and do three runs. Put on one or the other systems, do another 1/2 hour of off roading, put weight in for the fuel burned/spilled (7 lbs per gallon ) and line up three more times, same driver same truck same day- do not tell the driver what his configuration is. Then the other system. same deal. If you want to get fancy do it again with a pusher pump system no air separation. If the truck started out bone stock with a failing lift pump, the numbers would be good- until you compared with the stock plus pusher. There would be some improvement even with the lift pump working right. The improvement may be very small with a pusher pump ( no air separation ). If the pressure is maintained high enough the air pockets and cavitation should be significantly decreased- not eliminated.

I for one think of the dyno as a measuring device- not the end all. Performance at its job is the real test of machinery. You do not drive dynos you drive vehicles. This was even mentioned in an old DC publication ( that is dodges Direct Connection , not Daimler Chrysler ) About people testing sprint engines with a 440 and quadra bog ( AKA quadrajet), the 440 on dyno did a good 150 HP more than the 383 with a small holly. The 383 with the small holly was faster-on the track- where they raced than on the dyno where the 440 did better. The 3/4 second of bog time and the extra tire spin and loss of traction slowed down the 440 car. How could I loose- my dyno sheet is better.

So shake the fuel ( off road ) and then test on a roadbed ( 1/4 mile). This would test the advetised characteristics of the system.

At work they handle the air entrainment concern with a " head tank " 10 feet above the engine. After the fuel forwarding pumps fill the 150 gallon head tank it can sit quietly and settle. Good for about 1/2 hour of run time. If you have a stationary power plant this works very well. Air pockets do not delay the injection event very much in a 900 RPM machine with a 1050 RPM redline. If you test the vehicle stationary ( not doing its designed job ) then the test does not factor in all the things that need to be tested. For an air filter comparison it is not loosing much accuracy, for a product designed to deal with fuel sloshing it is not testing much at all. Put the entire dyno jet on a shake table, that will properly simulate more of the conditions.

This seems to be common sense- at least to me. But one of the venders got severly flamed for suggesting that maintainig a vehicle stationary by strapping it to a dyno will negate most possible gains froma system designed for fuel slosh concerns, Then got flamed again because the G-tech is a accelerometer derived computer box, and not a real big impressive and expensive skid- when he wanted to test a VEHICLE IN MOTION.

Sorry to those that race thier dyno charts- it is only a measuring tool- with limitations.

Good Post Peter... ...



Looks like the dyno will get the "first" test.



JL

 

[CEkstam]

Dyno VS in-use testing

Thanks for the excellent post!!!



Your points are well taken, I might add that your suggestions as to the manner of testing without the drivers knowledge an/or the sequence of the changes is very similar to the procedures used in numerous fuel tests for 'over the road' trucking, SAE Tests. Most would not want however to spend the time and money to complete such a series of tests.



I would like to comment about the engines referred to as the 900 rpm engines. You are correct about the degree of change one would think a given volume of air/vapor or saturation level of entrained air would have on the performance of these engines, however, after visiting a considerable number of vessels using these engines and analyzing their fuel storage/filtration systems and plumbing as I have you would probably change your mind as I did. These engines have an exceptionally large flow requirement and a very inadequate supply system. Even with a pressure head from an elevated day tank mounted 16 feet above the pump cavitation was still unbelievably excessive. A 415 GPH flow requirement through a 1/2 inch ID line requires a lot of pressure to eliminate cavitation.



One of the missions of Fuel Preporator International is to educate the users of diesel engines as to the effects of an inadequate fuel supply and filtration system on the performance and emission output of the diesel and how to improve on these issues through the use of our air/fuel separation device. We have just received word that the $1,750,000. 00 allocated in the '04 Federal Budget for military testing of the Fuel Preporator has been distributed. Testing at the Missouri University, Rolla Engineering School will soon be giving certified performance characteristics effected on the diesel engine by the Fuel Preporator through the removal of air/vapor from the fuel and the ensuing restoration of injection timing to designed specifications.



Fuel Preporator is a great product for the fueling needs of the 5. 9 Cummins as it is with all diesel engines, however, it is more importantly an answer for the emission problems associated with the diesel engine on the National and Global level.



Trains, planes and automobiles (diesel powered of course), Fuel preporator has something for all!!!



Thanks Peter,



Charles L. Ekstam

 

[Proram]

Prep.

For those following the posts, Preporator has now shipped one Fuel Preporator to the Mid TN TDR Group and two Preporators to the So. Cal Rattlin Rams. Another is being sent soon to JetPilot.

And Doug scores yet another freebee...





Pro