Hi guys,
I need an FRP for my fuel system upgrade. I\'m looking at Aeromotive, and I think th eone i need is a variant of the A1000, but I\'m a bit confused as Aeromotive list \'Fuel PRessure Regulators\' and \'Bypass Regulators\' - is this just another name for the same thing, a la BOV/Dump valve sort of thing?
If so, I\'m trying to figure out what i need.
There\'s the A1000 (P/N 13101): http://www.aeromotiveinc.com/products.php?prod=11
or the A1000-6 (P/N 13109)
http://www.aeromotiveinc.com/products.php?prod=10
It needs to connect to this:
(http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r30/Simon_r_hill/FDProject/DSC02854.jpg)
Which i got SH from Atomic Rex for a bargain price (Cheers guys)
Am i correct in thinking i just need P/N 13101?
I\'ll also need to connect what I have shown above to the stock fuel system - what else do i need? I\'m trying to get a full shopping list of everything I need so I don\'t need to order lots of tiddly little bits afterwards!
Sorry for all the n00b questions - suspension, I can do - fuel systems are a very new thing.
Any help hugely appreciated :)
Si
Glad you like the fuel rail :Thumbsup!
The fuel rails are running -6 (dash 6) lines, so you need to make sure that the FPR has 2 connectors that are both -6 and a vacuum hose connector to give the boost control.
I think the 13109 is the item you will need.
That was what I thought, cheers :) Vacuum is no worries.
I\'m looking into the -6 version right now.
I\'ve got my head around how it all connects up (I\'ve done fuel stuff before, just not on the FD\'s setup) I\'m just trying to figure out what adaptors i need :)
I\'m guessing I need a -6 female to female adaptor to hook it up to the FPR, and I then run flexible line (Injection hose, of course) back to the stock lines (I\'m not ripping the whole lot out and going braided yet ;))
There really is no point in going braided throughout....you cant run the 200 series in the car as it is porous so need to run the more expensive 800 series.
Run the outlet from the pump into the FRP -6 line to the fuel rail, the output to the fuel rail into the primary rail, and the output of that to the return line. We didn\'t use JIC fittings on the primary rail, hence the fittings. From memory I don\'t think it is very successful to try and fit JIC fittings to the Primary rail
Quote from: AtomicRex;570441There really is no point in going braided throughout....you cant run the 200 series in the car as it is porous so need to run the more expensive 800 series.
Run the outlet from the pump into the FRP -6 line to the fuel rail, the output to the fuel rail into the primary rail, and the output of that to the return line. We didn\'t use JIC fittings on the primary rail, hence the fittings. From memory I don\'t think it is very successful to try and fit JIC fittings to the Primary rail
Perfect - basically what I was planning but elucidated much more successfully :Giggle
Except for the rating of the lines - Nooo idea about them, just as well I\'m not doing that then!
Ta muchly :)
Quote from: AtomicRex;570441Run the outlet from the pump into the FRP -6 line to the fuel rail, the output to the fuel rail into the primary rail, and the output of that to the return line. We didn\'t use JIC fittings on the primary rail, hence the fittings. From memory I don\'t think it is very successful to try and fit JIC fittings to the Primary rail
The outlet of the pump does not go to the FPR, the RX7 and nearly every car as the FPR after the injectors. I dont think its a good idea to advise people if you dont know what your talking about.
2. The Primarys can take AN fittings, the location of the OMP injectors being an issue, its tight!
I dont really see the point in the push on line of the secondary rail, then going to a AN fitting, i\'d dump that and do it all in new rubber fuel hose, or do it all AN fittings, but that is a lot more work and expense.
Ross
Ok well seeing as this is a forum based around discussion I will put my point across so as to explain my reasonings:
When making up a fuel rail you do need to consider some sort of take-off for checking the baseline pressure, hence an FPR. This is something we both agree about.
The job of the FPR is to keep the pressure constant, so that each injector pulse delivers the same amount of fuel. Small changes in base fuel line pressure will give substantial changes in the fuel delivery from a given injector. Seeing as though the fuel pump can often surge and deliver a lot more fuel pressure than the system requires surely it is better to have the FPR before the rail, with the excess pressure returning to the tank.
I do agree with you that most diagrams on the internet put the FPR after the rail, but whats the point in venting extra pressure after the rail, surely it is better to vent it out before?
QuoteI do agree with you that most diagrams on the internet put the FPR after the rail, but whats the point in venting extra pressure after the rail, surely it is better to vent it out before?
My take on this is that the the FPR is the resistance in the fuel line to create a variable boost/vacuum pressure in the fuel line from the pump to the injectors. Unused fuel is then returned to the tank.
Placing the FPR before the injector rails will result in controlled pressure from the pump to the FPR, leaving uncontrolled low pressure at the injectors.
Surely if you put the fpr before the injectors your only controlling fuel line pressure and not the pressure the injectors recieve.
Yes if you allow the line to vent back to the tank....but what about if you capped the end of the line? Then you are allowing the rail to be at a constant pressure, and it is full regulated. Stick a schrader valve in the system if you want to depressurise the system at anytime
Also with heat soak if you put the PFR in the away from the engine bay, you are keeping the fuel that returns to the tank a lot cooler.
If you were to avoid this idea I will concede that you would have to put the PFR after the rail otherwise you would be running the rail on atmospheric pressure as it would be venting directly to the tank.
Good way to waste an afternoon looking at fuel systems though :)
Out of interest what is the stock base pressure ?
I\'m going to be doing an install in the next month, hopefully :Giggle Using rails I designed :D
Shaun
Depends on the flow rate of your injectors. Ours are running at 42psi
Quote from: FD3UK;570533My take on this is that the the FPR is the resistance in the fuel line to create a variable boost/vacuum pressure in the fuel line from the pump to the injectors. Unused fuel is then returned to the tank.
Placing the FPR before the injector rails will result in controlled pressure from the pump to the FPR, leaving uncontrolled low pressure at the injectors.
Thats what i have always thought,never heard of a pump spiking?but then if it did then the fpr would regulate it that is whats its for.
So you think its OK to advise someone to do something that your limited experience/reasoning suggests is the correct way, rather than the way that has been used for numerous years and been proven reliable and safe?
Well Actually the idea came from ATL who build fuel systems for the F1 teams....but you know what, I\'ll phone Williams and tell them to chat to you.
I dont think the initial poster wants advice on experimental F1 fuel systems, I dont think he has that budget.
Im not against different ways of doing things, but this guy is modifying his own car, so the best advice to give him is the tried a tested advice.
Also Jon, I dont think that your system would actually work as you say the last rail as a return line? Was your initial post just a mistake and you got the FPR in the wrong place?
Hiya Ross
Ok I admit I got confused between the 2 systems, and I wrongly suggested you should put the FPR before the rail. When you mentioned this, I realised my error!! I\'m sorry, we all mistakes, I\'m sure even you\'ve made the odd mistake once in your life?
So to clarify....
There are 2 systems you could put in your car:
The first has the pump feeding the rails, and the FPR regulating the pressure after the rails.
The second, which it isn\'t an experimental system, and its how we are going to be running the fuel system in our own cars this year.
Basically the line runs from the fuel pump through to the rail and then capped at the end. The FPR sits on the bulkhead and vents anything above base pressure back to the fuel tank. It is a very simple system, and prevents hot fuel from going back to the tank.
As the fuel increases in temperature it also increases the pressure, this will effect the mapping.
So it wasn\'t, or isn\'t an experimental design. I think it is quite a sensible design. You have to agree it has its merits?
If it wasn\'t for the loss of pressure in the lines it would make even better sense to have the FPR next to the tank as that would minimise the amount of hose you would need to run. So a compromise needs to be met.
Respect for admitting your mistake.
I have heard about this fuel system before, my biggest reservation being that it has not been used before in any volume, why havent more tuners, or manufacturers employed this system?
Yes you could use the FPR near the tank, which, I would only do this type of sytem if this was a possibility, as otherwise I dont see the tangeble benefits?
Hi All
Below are a couple of links that should help clear up any confusion,
One is a diagram of how to plumb and the second is the explanation of how a regulator operates,
http://www.fuelsystem.co.uk/PBV-INST.pdf
http://www.shyauto.com/Downloads/RX0707.pdf
Hope this helps,
This thread has turned into some interesting reading :D
Out of interest could you put a small radiator in the return line to take the heat out of the returning fuel ?
Shaun
Quote from: shaunwil;570799This thread has turned into some interesting reading :D
Out of interest could you put a small radiator in the return line to take the heat out of the returning fuel ?
Shaun
You would do this not on the return but on the feed as it would possibly result in a cooler charge leading to more horse power,
Particular in hot country\'s serious Drag racers often use an open top can with the fuel line inside shaped as a coil on the outer wall inside of the can then they pack the inside with dry ice to cool the fuel as it passes by,
As a side bar, F1 non refueling could be interesting and instead of decreasing costs, why, because last time they outlawed refuling teams came up with elaborate ways of cooling the fuel so it would contract and let them put more fuel into the tank than it would normaly take,
Lot of em still ran out though,
Quote from: DRAGON;570775Respect for admitting your mistake.
Thanks:Thumbs-up
If nothing else, by me making a mistake everyone has questioned why it is done the way it is...good way to learn...even if it is a tad embarrassing :Hammer
Quote from: DRAGON;570775I have heard about this fuel system before, my biggest reservation being that it has not been used before in any volume, why haven\'t more tuners, or manufacturers employed this system?
Yes you could use the FPR near the tank, which, I would only do this type of system if this was a possibility, as otherwise I don\'t see the tangible benefits?
I think one reason is that the rail would always be live, hence my earlier suggestion of a schrader valve at the end to release the pressure. That might put the manufactures off, but as for the tuners...cant think why more haven\'t tried it. Hopefully it will prove a success.
Running standard 200 hose, as it isn\'t smooth bore, I think you would run the risk of frictional losses within the pipe....I might ask Goodridge if they have any figures on this. The 811 hose is a smooth bore, so should allow the FPR to be mounted by the tank, and as we can run the hose within the car, the run should be shorter and cheaper than running a second line for the return.
Our new 110L tanks are mounted in the bins, which keeps the hose run even shorter :)
The tanks are rather nice....Dry breaks, twin fillers, twin collectors, fully baffled and foam filled. Don\'t weigh too much either. Cheap too if anyone is interested in a conversion!!
I did toy with the idea of cooling the fuel, if you could employ something similar to the cooling of a fridge and wind the pipes around the fuel line? Sticking another radiator in line isn\'t very easy as it requires an air supply, and you don\'t want to create extra runs for yourself.
Surely you could place it in a vented area around the rear axle and have the air vented out of the back of the car ??
Shaun
I guess you could...this is similar to where we ran the rad for the diff cooler last year.
As we are running the tanks inside, then it would mean taking the fuel backwards to bring it forwards again. Plus the car has a diffuser at the rear and a flat floor...so not easy to tap into an air flow
Ross give kerim a ring about this way of doing the fuel system, its a neat solution!! saves alot of circulating from rear to front back to rear!
, why havent more tuners, or manufacturers employed this system?
cause most dont think about it!
1 thing not mentioned...you need to run a vac pipe back to the FRP....but the difference in cost of this over the braided fuel pipe...
I did do some research today...in between wiring the garage....so cold in the garage!
Here is a bit:
Returnless Fuel Systems
Have been adopted by several motor manufacturers and differ from the conventional by having a delivery pipe only to the fuel rail with no return flow back to the tank.
The returnless systems, both the mechanical and the electronic versions, were necessitated by emissions laws. The absence of heated petrol returning to the fuel tank reduces the amount of evaporative emissions, while the fuel lines are kept short, thus reducing build costs.
Mechanical Returnless Fuel Systems
The ‘returnless’ system differs from the norm by having the pressure regulator inside the fuel tank. When the fuel pump is activated, fuel flows into the system until the required pressure is obtained; at this point ‘excess’ fuel is bled past the pressure regulator and back into the tank.
The ‘flow and return’ system has a vacuum supply to the pressure regulator: this enables the fuel pressure to be increased whenever the manifold vacuum drops, providing fuel enrichment under acceleration.
The ‘returnless’ system has no mechanical compensation affecting the fuel pressure, which remains at a higher than usual 44 to 50 psi. By increasing the delivery pressure, the ECM (Electronic Control Module) can alter the injection pulse width to give the precise delivery, regardless of the engine load and without fuel pressure compensation.
Electronic Returnless Fuel Systems
This version has all the required components fitted within the one unit of the submersible fuel pump. It contains a small particle filter (in addition to the strainer), pump, electronic pressure regulator, fuel level sensor and a sound isolation system. The electronic pressure regulator allows the pressure to be increased under acceleration conditions, and the pump’s output can be adjusted to suit the engine\'s fuel demand. This prolongs the pump’s life as it is no longer providing a larger than required output delivery.
The Electronic Control Module (ECM) supplies the required pressure information, while the fuel pump’s output signal is supplied in the form of a digital squarewave. Altering the squarewave’s duty cycle affects the pump’s delivery output.
To compensate for the changing viscosity of the fuel with changing fuel temperature, a fuel rail temperature sensor is installed. A pulsation damper may also be fitted ahead of or inside the fuel rail.
its the best way to do the fuel system to me, the aeromotive regs have built in dampers, will make enginebay alot neater as well
Quote from: AtomicRex;570774The second, which it isn\'t an experimental system, and its how we are going to be running the fuel system in our own cars this year.
Basically the line runs from the fuel pump through to the rail and then capped at the end. The FPR sits on the bulkhead and vents anything above base pressure back to the fuel tank. It is a very simple system, and prevents hot fuel from going back to the tank.
As the fuel increases in temperature it also increases the pressure, this will effect the mapping.
So it wasn\'t, or isn\'t an experimental design. I think it is quite a sensible design. You have to agree it has its merits?
If it wasn\'t for the loss of pressure in the lines it would make even better sense to have the FPR next to the tank as that would minimise the amount of hose you would need to run. So a compromise needs to be met.
Since the fuel rail end is now capped. Do you have any concerns regarding debris that gets past the fuel filter, there is no circulation of fuel back to the tank. What I\'m thinking is, the capped end of the fuel rail could become a place to trap debris and in time clog the injectors. Expecially the injector on the furthest end of the rail. Do you feel this could be a potential problem with this system or debris shouldn\'t be any diffrent then the returned system I use now?
This is a good read. I like the idea of cooler fuel, cleaner engine bay, less material to move fuel, less weight and cost for my budget racecar.
I guess you run that risk regardless. If the item is going to go past the fuel filter, then it will run the risk of going into the injector regardless of the circulation or not.
To me it is down to the type of filters you run in your system. You should always be running a basic filter within the tank to prevent the pick pieces being picked up 90microns, but then have a good filter before the pump We use a 25 micron filter for that.