RHF55 compressor map

Riccio

New member
Hi guys, here I am again struggling with a new compressor. The goal is to avoid high RPM so as not to have reduction systems. The issue continues to be the 700 cc displacement so surging problems. From the maps found online I thought this supercharger looked interesting but I can't find the rotational speed for the compression ratio. Does anyone have information on this or alternatives?

Right now we are stuck with a TD04-13T that we need to get up to 80000 rpm.
 
I've been tied up with work - sorry. What size engine and how much power are you looking to support? 80,000 rpm under load isn't impossible, but it's not easy - unless your power goals are pretty low. One of our members here found a Sea-doo supercharger for really cheap - that might be a great option.
 
I've been tied up with work - sorry. What size engine and how much power are you looking to support? 80,000 rpm under load isn't impossible, but it's not easy - unless your power goals are pretty low. One of our members here found a Sea-doo supercharger for really cheap - that might be a great option.
Sorry for my late reply and thank you for your response. We need to supercharge a 700cc motorbikes engine. The problem is the low mass flow and the weight of the all system. If we choose a big impeller the weight is too high and it's difficult to find a product with a good compressor map for our purpose. Small impeller has low weight and are capable to build a good compression ratio at low mass flow but require high rpm. For now we decided to make a revolution multiplier with a belt similar to P2 in your videos. Sea-doo supercharger seems to be really interesting I'll check.
 
Somehow I didn't process the 700cc as the engine's displacement. I understand the need for compactness and weight in your application. You might be fine with the -04; I'm guessing your base engine power is in the 70hp range?

FWIW, I'm not loving the belt drive; I'd look to gearing. Check out 1/5 or 1/8 scale RC pinions and spur gears. The belt drive gets surprisingly hot even at my lower speeds.
 
Somehow I didn't process the 700cc as the engine's displacement. I understand the need for compactness and weight in your application. You might be fine with the -04; I'm guessing your base engine power is in the 70hp range?

FWIW, I'm not loving the belt drive; I'd look to gearing. Check out 1/5 or 1/8 scale RC pinions and spur gears. The belt drive gets surprisingly hot even at my lower speeds
are you referring to the flimsy trapezoidal 5mm pitch timing belt on the P2 whirring to turn that impeller close to 30k rpm? That one gets hot (and noisy!) due to mechanical friction of those teeth engaging...

6-10 rib accessory drive belts are being run all day long at crank speeds ... so e.g. a typical V2 / V3 SC with internal gearing ratio of 3.6:1 expects around 10-15k rpms at the input shaft to produce 36-54k rpms at the impeller?
(so a ~3x smaller input pulley than crank drive would get you there)

Looks like a good 300KV emotor @ 46V to the input shaft would get you there too ;) (and depending on pulley sizes you can adjust a bit up or down)

yea yea ... you need some margin for gearing losses (gear set losses and accessory belt losses, but I expect them to be MUCH smaller than with a timing belt which generates such friction)

oops ... sorry @OP ... more related to the direct/geared/belt drive topic!
 
Last edited:
The noise would actually be cool from the belt in my opinion... and it only happens when the SC is running so no big deal ?
 
are you referring to the flimsy trapezoidal 5mm pitch timing belt on the P2 whirring to turn that impeller close to 30k rpm? That one gets hot (and noisy!) due to mechanical friction of those teeth engaging...

6-10 rib accessory drive belts are being run all day long at crank speeds ... so e.g. a typical V2 / V3 SC with internal gearing ratio of 3.6:1 expects around 10-15k rpms at the input shaft to produce 36-54k rpms at the impeller?
(so a ~3x smaller input pulley than crank drive would get you there)

Looks like a good 300KV emotor @ 46V to the input shaft would get you there too ;) (and depending on pulley sizes you can adjust a bit up or down)

yea yea ... you need some margin for gearing losses (gear set losses and accessory belt losses, but I expect them to be MUCH smaller than with a timing belt which generates such friction)

oops ... sorry @OP ... more related to the direct/geared/belt drive topic!
Thank you for your detailed response. The belt is an HTD profile that seem more robust for this application. We know that it's not a good idea but nowdays appear to be a good try. For this reason the title of the thread is RHF55 for try to use big impeller with direct drive connection and buold the overpressure that we want (around 1.4 compression ratio) near 50k rpm. The problem is the weight of the all package. The BorgWarner K27 has the perfect compressor map that doens't have any problem with low mass flow but only the supercharger part weight around 6-7 kg.
 
Somehow I didn't process the 700cc as the engine's displacement. I understand the need for compactness and weight in your application. You might be fine with the -04; I'm guessing your base engine power is in the 70hp range?

FWIW, I'm not loving the belt drive; I'd look to gearing. Check out 1/5 or 1/8 scale RC pinions and spur gears. The belt drive gets surprisingly hot even at my lower speeds.
It's not a bad idea we have discussed it but I think a good lubrication system is required and the centering unlike the belt has to be done properly.
 
I'm thinking about trying the gear drive setup, but using two or three motors all driving the same impeller gear. Much cheaper and more compact. And I wouldn't worry about lube on the gears - RC cars don't, and we're not running anywhere near as long as they do.
 
I'm thinking about trying the gear drive setup, but using two or three motors all driving the same impeller gear. Much cheaper and more compact. And I wouldn't worry about lube on the gears - RC cars don't, and we're not running anywhere near as long as they do.

weellll ... I would worry about the lubing ... the bearing rating for those shaft rpms needed are all "wet"!
(the SC crowd even introduces external oil coolers, especially for closed systems.)
I know the RC crowd is whirring some 80k shaft rpms with tiny bearings for their extreme record breaking builds. Do I want to scrap as much material as they do? (regularly!) ... IN a CAR?

We are trying to solve all kinds of electrical problems, undersize, compromise then spend the mula for the right battery pack, cabling, controller motor (iteratively with some collateral loss).
Do we really want to go the "try and error" route for the mechanical part as well? SC mechanics have evolved with lots of engineering over a relatively long time period...

But then again: what bearings are being used in Turbos? (oil bath there too? :unsure: )
 
Last edited:
Turbos generally use journal bearings, which require an oil film; there are some ball bearing units, and they tend to last longer simply because they don't need nearly as much lubrication. Pretty much all of the superchargers I've run personally were self-contained, oil-filled units. None had external coolers, and I've had no internal drive failures. I know VMP and Kenne Bell have/had externally cooled gear drives, but I don't know anyone who's actually run one.

In the sledgehammer's case (no pun intended), I'm running angular contact bearings, unsealed, with just some Kluber isoflex nbu-15 grease in them. I have yet to actually re-lube them, and there's really nothing to keep the grease in place; yet enough of it is staying there.

As for the RC guys, they generally don't use any sort of oil in the gears - they're out in the open. Our setups are in many ways less demanding - much shorter run times, virtually no shock loads, relatively constant speed/load once accelerated, etc. There are some downsides to running in a oil bath or even a lightly greased setup like mine. For gears, very high rpm + oil is a bad idea because the oil has to get progressively thinner the faster you go - there's less time between teeth to shed the oil, and the gears end up trying to compress the oil, which is of course essentially uncompressible, creating what can end up being very high side loads on the the rotating parts. In the case of ball bearings (this is straight from the Kluber engineers), you can hit a point where the balls no longer roll, but start to slide - which is the opposite of what you actually want; and leads to friction, heat and eventual failure, even though there is plenty (actually too much) lube. Which is why they were fine with me using their grease on unsealed bearings; just being aware that it's a maintenance point (they actually gave me an estimated interval to re-lube - and under light use, they recommended trying about once a year).

Also, the experiments with the belt driven unit has shown me flaws with extreme-speed belt drives too. All of this is why my initial (successful) e-boost endeavors relied on not only no belts or gears (after building a number of supercharger belt drives from scratch, down to even making my own tensioners out of necessity; having experienced violent failures causing significant damage); here's one of my favorites from years past - a custom setup using a Hyabusa steering damper filled with 50 weight oil, some ball bearings, steel and a spring from a porch swing (not what's in the picture; that came later after testing):

BeltDrive2.jpg

Anyway, my point is all of this stuff is what drew me to direct drive and the now-infamous hex drive coupling - which allows for high speed operation and a tiny bit of misalignment. I think for a gear drive setup, our best bet is to accept that they are a wear item, even s they should last a good long time, and at least 1 if not both should be made from a material that doesn't rely on the need for continual lube, since that can cause the problems I outlined above. Think of this - the gears in my lathe aren't lubed, and have basically a "life of the machine" life, even though they're made from steel - though of course they don't see crazy high speed. Materials that I would be interested in considering would be bronze, iron (the graphite in iron is an excellent lube - which is why when you machine iron, you don't need a cutting oil), perhaps even some composites - like nylon, carbon-impregnated nylon, etc. Iron and composites would also function as mechanical fuses too - I'd rather the gears fail than the impellers and having the engine ingest a ton of metal as a result.

But in any case, I think we're likely to find that for our purposes, as long as we view the gears as wear items and use reasonable material (I bet even steel would eventually polish itself to relatively low friction levels), going without an oil bath is actually the more reliable way to go.

After all, most engines use one of these 3 types of oil pumps; and they're all basically gear based:
micro-annular-fig-1.JPG

And at our running rpms, we're basically going to just end up pumping any sort of wet lube out anyway to the point of cavitation.

This turned out to be way too long, and as always, I may be wrong, but I'm certainly willing to put my money and time where my mouth is to find out for sure.
 
And yet the Rotrex supercharger kit you can get for my car comes with gear oil and a oil cooler for it.

For sure it will work with or without oil.. the question is for how long... But in our case since we wont run the SC for very long so it probably doesn't matter to much..

One other thought surely it would be significantly quieter with gear oil ?
 
Guys I appreciate your messages very much. I know avviously that going with direct drive is best. That's why I proposed to use compressors with larger diameters in order to have lower speeds and good overpressures then without a reduction system or multiplication of revolutions. For example, the BorgWarner K27 is perfect because we only need 1.3 compression ratio and it gives us that around 50000 rpm. And here is the reason for the thread title since it seems to be an alternative to the latter.
Trying again to go direct intake with the TP 4060-CM, replacing the bearings this time but having it work with the TD04 at 80000 rpm still seems to me not a good idea but better than the belt for sure.
In previous posts I mentioned the word "we" just because I don't have full control over the final decision. I know the belts will not hold up or be highly inefficient but I have to do it anyway.
 
MSA - Actually, all of the major centrifugal manufacturers now how oil filled units - Vortech, Procharger, Torqstorm and your Rotrex. I have seen a good number of failures of these units, almost all in the gear drive. Procharger is particularly bad about this; but they undersize their gear drives in some instances for class reasons. And while all of those units have essentially 1 high speed component, our setups are all high speed (or high and higher speed) components. I would say the percentage of boost vs. time the "conventional" units are just spinning with the engine is at least 100-1 in drag applications, and probably 1000-1 in street applications. We get rid of those multipliers completely.

But again whenever I go off on a tangent like this, keep in mind, I base it on my experiences. And when I'm prognosticating, I could be wrong. Which is why I like seeing everyone go in different directions - that increases our chances of finding optimal ways to go.
 
MSA - Actually, all of the major centrifugal manufacturers now how oil filled units - Vortech, Procharger, Torqstorm and your Rotrex. I have seen a good number of failures of these units, almost all in the gear drive. Procharger is particularly bad about this; but they undersize their gear drives in some instances for class reasons. And while all of those units have essentially 1 high speed component, our setups are all high speed (or high and higher speed) components. I would say the percentage of boost vs. time the "conventional" units are just spinning with the engine is at least 100-1 in drag applications, and probably 1000-1 in street applications. We get rid of those multipliers completely.

But again whenever I go off on a tangent like this, keep in mind, I base it on my experiences. And when I'm prognosticating, I could be wrong. Which is why I like seeing everyone go in different directions - that increases our chances of finding optimal ways to go.

yes i know and so was my old cars super charger.. however in the post i replied to you seemed to spend most of the time poo pooing the idea of a oiled gear box.. despite there being many cases where they are oiled
 
As a X RC club champion i feel i can talk about their unique requirements.

1662676708425.png


In the RC world you wouldn't oil any bearings or gears (well in my day and off road vechcals )

For bearings if you oil them.
* That attracted dirt , which was worse that dry.
* They were harder to turn than without oil.. this can be seen if you take one of those "spinners" that were a fad for a while and oiled them they wouldn't spin for very long at all after that.

For gears being oiled..
* no one would do that because it increased the resistance to truing just like the bearings... As a side note they were never metal ( aluminum ) on metal gears. they would normally have "plastic" idlers

The reason to Oil is to increase the service life of all the components... But doing so comes at a cost of increased rolling resistance. NO ONE who wants to win will take increased service life over Winning

Another reason to oil RC parts is for noise reduction ... But there again who cares.. the aim is to win..

We need to stay in context.. RC races were like 4minutes long and you'd get 3 runs a week.. Nothing to worry about service life..
If things needed replacing you'd re place them it wasn't difficult or costly to do so.

A side note on motors which never have bearings rated for their speeds... there again their usage is so low AND you would replace the motor often anyway because their managements would get slowly demagnetized due to the heat...SO there again if you want to win your regularly replacing the motors because of that before the bearings would fail.

Back to us...
We can certainly run dry everything... The reasons for running them wet would be to increase their service life AND to reduce their noise..
Noise reduction on steel on steel straight cut gears could be good enough of a reason alone lol, that would probably come at a cost of some efficiency though.
 
you seemed to spend most of the time poo pooing the idea of a oiled gear box..
Don't want to create drama but you "poo poo" my charging set up with the BMS and I did it anyway and it work fine.
Sometime I don't like the way other solve their shaft to impeller problem in the perspective of a machiniste, but at the end, you make your set up and if it work, it work!
He's trying to give you infos and datas, he's not saying that is a super bad idea
 
Top