DIY - Duramax Marinisation
01-29-2017, 04:47 PM
#141
Registered
Thread Starter
Hardin 3 Stage Pumps
Below is some corrected flow specs for the Hardin 3 stage pump installed on a Duramax engine. Did a little digging but couldn't find any actual pump details online, so a couple phone calls and Emails later received figures based off tests on their single stage version. These are pump shaft RPM not at crank. Looks reasonable, and similar to figures I found on bravo style single impeller pumps. However I've also been told those impellers top out somewhere around 35-40gpm??
1000 rpm: 11.5 gpm
1400 rpm: 15.5 gpm
2000 rpm: 22 gpm
[ATTACH=CONFIG]564232[/ATTACH]
I put that data into a spreadsheet using a calculation of both pulley sizes, and you get the following estimates.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]564233[/ATTACH]
These pumps are typically setup with single 1-1/4npt inlet and 3x1"npt outlets. Since Banks lists 80gpm requirement for his charge coolers at 3200 engine RPM, I'll need to dedicate two stages for feeding it first. Then out to the closed loop engine cooling system. The 3rd stage will be dedicated to feeding the oil coolers for engine, trans, and drive. At least that's the plans, dyno time needed to verify this layout.
1000 rpm: 11.5 gpm
1400 rpm: 15.5 gpm
2000 rpm: 22 gpm
[ATTACH=CONFIG]564232[/ATTACH]
I put that data into a spreadsheet using a calculation of both pulley sizes, and you get the following estimates.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]564233[/ATTACH]
These pumps are typically setup with single 1-1/4npt inlet and 3x1"npt outlets. Since Banks lists 80gpm requirement for his charge coolers at 3200 engine RPM, I'll need to dedicate two stages for feeding it first. Then out to the closed loop engine cooling system. The 3rd stage will be dedicated to feeding the oil coolers for engine, trans, and drive. At least that's the plans, dyno time needed to verify this layout.
02-16-2017, 12:17 PM
#142
Registered
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turbo,
That 80 gpm spec is quite generic.
its really about how many BTUs a guy wants to get out of his charge air. I ran some numbers a couple weeks ago, and believe it was about 150,000 btu's/hr that need to be shed to make piping hot charge air cold for a 6.6L
80 gallons/min = 664 lbs/min= 39,840lbs/hour
so that much water (80 gpm) will need to raise its temperature 3.76 degrees to carry that much heat away. (150k/39.8k)
half that much water (40gpm) will need to raise its temp 8 degrees to carry that much heat away....
put enough water through (301gpm) and it will only raise outlet water temp one degree... but at a certain point, it becomes a bit silly overkill, where you draw the line in the sand is just that. a line in the sand.
charge air temp will always be some amount hotter than the cooling water outlet temp, depending on your after coolers efficiency.
but there is a more dominant aspect of this that needs adressed and is somewhat out of the boaters control... what temp is the water that the boat is using?
A boat in 60 degree water with a 40gpm pump will cool the charge air the same as the same boat in 64 degree water with an 80 gpm pump...
exit water temp in either scnario will be roughly 68 degree, and the charge air will be a bit over that. that bit is on the cooler- not the pump.
without adressing what the water temp is that you are going to opperate in and what your target charge air temp is- 80 gpm is just another line drawn in the sand with no relavence.
Hmmmm one might ask if that extra 4 degrees of charge air cooling is worth double the pump?
That 80 gpm spec is quite generic.
its really about how many BTUs a guy wants to get out of his charge air. I ran some numbers a couple weeks ago, and believe it was about 150,000 btu's/hr that need to be shed to make piping hot charge air cold for a 6.6L
80 gallons/min = 664 lbs/min= 39,840lbs/hour
so that much water (80 gpm) will need to raise its temperature 3.76 degrees to carry that much heat away. (150k/39.8k)
half that much water (40gpm) will need to raise its temp 8 degrees to carry that much heat away....
put enough water through (301gpm) and it will only raise outlet water temp one degree... but at a certain point, it becomes a bit silly overkill, where you draw the line in the sand is just that. a line in the sand.
charge air temp will always be some amount hotter than the cooling water outlet temp, depending on your after coolers efficiency.
but there is a more dominant aspect of this that needs adressed and is somewhat out of the boaters control... what temp is the water that the boat is using?
A boat in 60 degree water with a 40gpm pump will cool the charge air the same as the same boat in 64 degree water with an 80 gpm pump...
exit water temp in either scnario will be roughly 68 degree, and the charge air will be a bit over that. that bit is on the cooler- not the pump.
without adressing what the water temp is that you are going to opperate in and what your target charge air temp is- 80 gpm is just another line drawn in the sand with no relavence.
Hmmmm one might ask if that extra 4 degrees of charge air cooling is worth double the pump?
02-18-2017, 04:30 AM
#143
Registered
Thread Starter
Gale is known for being tight lipped on technical details from his personal research projects. Especially on pieces he's never officially released yet. But he's also been doing forced induction since I was a kid, and I'm no spring chicken... So if your lucky enough to get him to come off a few of those pieces, his crew will supply the info if you ask.
Those intakes came with a bag of bolts and a Banks sticker, that's it. After a couple calls, I was told the unofficial flow volumes and in/out air temp differences from his dyno runs. The only data missing, and I forgot to ask about, is water temps in and out of the charge cooler. It's a double pass on the water side, so I would be tickled with only a 4 degree increase on the outlet side. Cause next stop is the main engine closed loop cooler.
I'll hit the transfer tubes with an IR thermometer while on the dyno and get some exact numbers. If these cupronickle cooler cores are as efficient as I've read, I'll bet that water temp raises more like 30-40 degrees. My old aluminum single pass cooler at 650hp got pretty warm to the touch on the exit side.
Those intakes came with a bag of bolts and a Banks sticker, that's it. After a couple calls, I was told the unofficial flow volumes and in/out air temp differences from his dyno runs. The only data missing, and I forgot to ask about, is water temps in and out of the charge cooler. It's a double pass on the water side, so I would be tickled with only a 4 degree increase on the outlet side. Cause next stop is the main engine closed loop cooler.
I'll hit the transfer tubes with an IR thermometer while on the dyno and get some exact numbers. If these cupronickle cooler cores are as efficient as I've read, I'll bet that water temp raises more like 30-40 degrees. My old aluminum single pass cooler at 650hp got pretty warm to the touch on the exit side.
02-18-2017, 02:26 PM
#144
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Yes your on the right track as to how to place the weight and maximize inertia. Within two constraints on size, diameter an thickness. 
Max diameter is set by what will clear the starter. And thickness is clearance on back side to bell housing. The face typically needs to be within set known value that provides proper coupler spline alignment with transmission shaft. In the last two pictures of damper above, I have it bolted up both ways to measure where these splines land.
We can't go much larger than stock on our diameter, and clearance to back side is also tight. I added some meat there on those flywheels above, then after test fitting,, cut .0120" of it back off them cause they hit. Here is the Solidworks design we started with.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]564125[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]564126[/ATTACH]
Those are very similar to the actual externally balanced flywheel we scanned. To gain extra weight, we added as much meat as possible to the center and picked up an extra 10lbs overall. If you want a lighter total, you would start removing meat from the center to have less impact on the final inertia value. So a 45lb unit would look similar to the example above. However, you would need to run a different damper with larger bolt patter now. I was shooting for the largest mass possible that fit the size constraints, and left clearance for springs on the damper. This is it...
[ATTACH=CONFIG]564127[/ATTACH]
One last factor to consider. These new Billet cranks with internal balancing weigh in about 25-30lbs heavier than a stock Dmax crank. Loaded up with Mallory. Over 200lbs of total spinning mass per engine on my builds.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]564129[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]564130[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]564131[/ATTACH]
So...
Max diameter is set by what will clear the starter. And thickness is clearance on back side to bell housing. The face typically needs to be within set known value that provides proper coupler spline alignment with transmission shaft. In the last two pictures of damper above, I have it bolted up both ways to measure where these splines land.
We can't go much larger than stock on our diameter, and clearance to back side is also tight. I added some meat there on those flywheels above, then after test fitting,, cut .0120" of it back off them cause they hit. Here is the Solidworks design we started with.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]564125[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]564126[/ATTACH]
Those are very similar to the actual externally balanced flywheel we scanned. To gain extra weight, we added as much meat as possible to the center and picked up an extra 10lbs overall. If you want a lighter total, you would start removing meat from the center to have less impact on the final inertia value. So a 45lb unit would look similar to the example above. However, you would need to run a different damper with larger bolt patter now. I was shooting for the largest mass possible that fit the size constraints, and left clearance for springs on the damper. This is it...
[ATTACH=CONFIG]564127[/ATTACH]
One last factor to consider. These new Billet cranks with internal balancing weigh in about 25-30lbs heavier than a stock Dmax crank. Loaded up with Mallory. Over 200lbs of total spinning mass per engine on my builds.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]564129[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]564130[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]564131[/ATTACH]
So...
Thanks for posting pictures of the build looks great.
02-19-2017, 02:39 AM
#145
Registered
Thread Starter
Short answer, I sure hope so.. LOL.
Actually I brought that up with Callies, when asking them to weld the mallory slugs into the throws for good measure. They felt that was overkill, stating it's extremely rare they could break or back out. I've not seen a weighted Dmax crank break in they way your thinking, but at least 2 I know of walked the slugs out into the block. Neither were the internally ballanced Callies 4330V billet versions.
I have good bit more faith in their work after touring the manufacturing facility last fall. The QC4v crank is produced there, along with couple more well known OEM marine units. So hard to argue with those kinda endorsements. But this whole internally balanced aspect is fairly new to the Dmax platform. Spawn from a growing pile of busted stock cranks being logged online over the years. Majority feel it's due to the crappy harmonics, a overlap design flaw, and torsional twist at the crank ends. Solution, move that extra weight to the center and see if it keeps the end from snapping off. 5yrs ago I never even re-balanced my stock crank after going to heavier pistons. These ones are balanced within a gram, after accounting for oil weight..
On the rev's, by comparison to what the majority of these new internal balanced cranks being purchased will see, 4500R is very conservative. No real advantage to spinning a diesel over that unless your drag racing or something. Goal here was build bottom ends for 1600hp use, spin them unloaded a bit higher than stock, and fuel limit to about 60% of max power loaded. About the same concept GM follows in the production trucks from what I've seen.
02-19-2017, 10:53 AM
#146
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
If callies did it I am sure you are good. At pri show once and we where talking to crower and the guy balanced a crank for don garlits and almost killed him by making the Mallory slugs to close to each other. So when I saw your picture that's what came to mind. Figured I would share that story.
02-19-2017, 08:24 PM
#147
Registered
Thread Starter
I'm totally with ya on that.
If a stock Dmax crank breaks, your out a crank and maybe a block worst case. My buddy drove his boat back into a marina and spent two days testing and diagnosing before he noticed the damper wobbling. It was still firing on all 8. When a mallory loaded crank breaks, you typically don't have to look hard for the problem...
I considered putting a scatter shield under these pans. But Callies claims they've never had a slug back out or break off a throw. Ok then,, tack weld those in for me I said. LOL
[ATTACH=CONFIG]564920[/ATTACH]
If a stock Dmax crank breaks, your out a crank and maybe a block worst case. My buddy drove his boat back into a marina and spent two days testing and diagnosing before he noticed the damper wobbling. It was still firing on all 8. When a mallory loaded crank breaks, you typically don't have to look hard for the problem...
I considered putting a scatter shield under these pans. But Callies claims they've never had a slug back out or break off a throw. Ok then,, tack weld those in for me I said. LOL
[ATTACH=CONFIG]564920[/ATTACH]
02-20-2017, 10:09 AM
#148
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
I'm totally with ya on that.
If a stock Dmax crank breaks, your out a crank and maybe a block worst case. My buddy drove his boat back into a marina and spent two days testing and diagnosing before he noticed the damper wobbling. It was still firing on all 8. When a mallory loaded crank breaks, you typically don't have to look hard for the problem...
I considered putting a scatter shield under these pans. But Callies claims they've never had a slug back out or break off a throw. Ok then,, tack weld those in for me I said. LOL
[ATTACH=CONFIG]564920[/ATTACH]
If a stock Dmax crank breaks, your out a crank and maybe a block worst case. My buddy drove his boat back into a marina and spent two days testing and diagnosing before he noticed the damper wobbling. It was still firing on all 8. When a mallory loaded crank breaks, you typically don't have to look hard for the problem...
I considered putting a scatter shield under these pans. But Callies claims they've never had a slug back out or break off a throw. Ok then,, tack weld those in for me I said. LOL
[ATTACH=CONFIG]564920[/ATTACH]
04-15-2017, 06:25 PM
#149
Registered
Thread Starter
Marine Electronic Throttle
Converting any modern automotive based engine platforms to marine use, one must modify some OEM pieces to fit a boat. This could be common pieces like a marine starter or alternator. Often the automotive wiring harness needs to be modified for stand alone engine use. Typically wiring modifications are required to make it start and run with the boats ignition switch or shifter neutral safety. Luckily that's usually all ready wired up from a previous marine engine install.
When dealing with modern automtive EFI gas or diesel, the old throttle cable is no longer used. For example, everything from GM is now drive by wire technology. A TPS is now mounted on the floor pedal. As where MEFI or aftermarket ECM options still offer a throttle body option with cable connection. So what to do when your diesel setup doesn't have a place to bolt a throttle cable...
To date the easiest ways around this no cable connection issue has been just mount an accelerator pedal out of a car or truck in the engine bay and connect the cable. That's how my Duramax boat was rigged back in 2007, and while it works, had issues. First thing I noticed about this setup was a much shorter range of motion. Not a huge deal, but for docking it was seriously annoying. A single stick setup you had to be careful changing gears or it would jump 500Rpm when shifting. After a week or two of that, I decided to fix the issue. Only option was to extend the length of the automotive pedal mounted in the engine compartment so stroke was longer at the helm. It worked, but was kinda crude. Here is a couple pics showing this modified pedal setup mounted on the transom.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]566371[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]566372[/ATTACH]
Since all the new boats are sporting electronic throttles, I figured lets just modify something out there for Duramax swaps going forward. Then at the Miami Boat Show I was chatting with the guys from Livorsi. They showed me a prototype marine throttle with programmable dual range potentiometer built in. Sure beats my idea of taking an APPS or TPS from a truck and bolting it to the marine controls..
After a few conversations and emails, the Livorsi crew sent me a new stick to test. One programed with voltage slopes that match GM's Duramax E35B ECM I had on the bench. Since different automotive OEM's often run different voltage slope configurations, one can't just assume what works on a Cummins will also work on a LS or the Duramax engines. I had the ability to modify the slopes using EFIlive software if need be, but everything looked to match perfectly. Then I verified these values again using my friends Snap-On scan tool to be certain it worked as OEM design.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]566373[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]566374[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]566375[/ATTACH]
After slopes were verified, a member here ordered one for his twin Duramax setup. This clean design incorporates cables shifters for Velvet Drive transmissions, and the new electronic throttles to match his ECM's. This same setup should work with about any automotive ECM after we verify the slopes.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]566376[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]566377[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]566378[/ATTACH]
When dealing with modern automtive EFI gas or diesel, the old throttle cable is no longer used. For example, everything from GM is now drive by wire technology. A TPS is now mounted on the floor pedal. As where MEFI or aftermarket ECM options still offer a throttle body option with cable connection. So what to do when your diesel setup doesn't have a place to bolt a throttle cable...
To date the easiest ways around this no cable connection issue has been just mount an accelerator pedal out of a car or truck in the engine bay and connect the cable. That's how my Duramax boat was rigged back in 2007, and while it works, had issues. First thing I noticed about this setup was a much shorter range of motion. Not a huge deal, but for docking it was seriously annoying. A single stick setup you had to be careful changing gears or it would jump 500Rpm when shifting. After a week or two of that, I decided to fix the issue. Only option was to extend the length of the automotive pedal mounted in the engine compartment so stroke was longer at the helm. It worked, but was kinda crude. Here is a couple pics showing this modified pedal setup mounted on the transom.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]566371[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]566372[/ATTACH]
Since all the new boats are sporting electronic throttles, I figured lets just modify something out there for Duramax swaps going forward. Then at the Miami Boat Show I was chatting with the guys from Livorsi. They showed me a prototype marine throttle with programmable dual range potentiometer built in. Sure beats my idea of taking an APPS or TPS from a truck and bolting it to the marine controls..
After a few conversations and emails, the Livorsi crew sent me a new stick to test. One programed with voltage slopes that match GM's Duramax E35B ECM I had on the bench. Since different automotive OEM's often run different voltage slope configurations, one can't just assume what works on a Cummins will also work on a LS or the Duramax engines. I had the ability to modify the slopes using EFIlive software if need be, but everything looked to match perfectly. Then I verified these values again using my friends Snap-On scan tool to be certain it worked as OEM design.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]566373[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]566374[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]566375[/ATTACH]
After slopes were verified, a member here ordered one for his twin Duramax setup. This clean design incorporates cables shifters for Velvet Drive transmissions, and the new electronic throttles to match his ECM's. This same setup should work with about any automotive ECM after we verify the slopes.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]566376[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]566377[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]566378[/ATTACH]
05-11-2017, 08:16 AM
#150
Registered
Thread Starter
Finally getting caught up on the twin turbo build where I can post some relevant info again. Currently plumbing in the turbos with oiling and coolant lines. Nice thing about modifying these engines for a boat, you can relocate the turbo or turbo"s" in this case out of the lifter valley area. Along with improving on GM's oiling and oil return designs.
A few pages back I posted some pics of the medium duty upper oil pan modifications I'm testing. This medium duty pan has two 3/8NPT ports, one on each side. When adding the new windage tray / baffle, I also welded deflectors over these two NPT holes to direct turbo drain back straight to the lower oil pan. Here is how that all ties together with this twin turbo setup.
Inside the upper oil pan the turbo return oil enters at the red arrow, and is deflected directly down towards a 1/2" hole [not opened in photo] between upper and lower pans. This keeps most of it from getting blown around by air flow off the crank. And since it's straight from the turbos, it's also gonna be the hottest oil in the engine now. So better to get it back to the lower pan to be sent out for cooling quickly.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]567302[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]567303[/ATTACH]
To route the oil from the turbos, we only need to use a good rubber line of sufficient size, with no kinks or air trap bends. This oil returns by gravity only, so straighter the better. For my setup I went with 1/2" NPT adapters out of the turbos, into -10AN line. Larger twins or a single turbo typically requires a 3/4" return line.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]567305[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]567306[/ATTACH]
Those are bolted up to the turbos with supplied gasket. On the bottom side I used a 3/8" to -10AN swivel 90. That allows for movement when installing and routing the lines. I chose to run them where each line can be secured to the block with a rubber protected clamps. The line I used here has a nylon covering over a mild inner steel braid. Looks nice, easier to work with than full braided, but wouldn't stand for much chafing action..
[ATTACH=CONFIG]567307[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]567308[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]567309[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]567311[/ATTACH]
Speaking for chafing, T-bolt style clamps are great, until you cut yourself on one, or stick one in your kneecap as I did.this past week. Simple fix, grab a pack of 6mm vacuum caps from the local parts store. Never jab yourself again on one, for less than $2.00...
[ATTACH=CONFIG]567312[/ATTACH]
A few pages back I posted some pics of the medium duty upper oil pan modifications I'm testing. This medium duty pan has two 3/8NPT ports, one on each side. When adding the new windage tray / baffle, I also welded deflectors over these two NPT holes to direct turbo drain back straight to the lower oil pan. Here is how that all ties together with this twin turbo setup.
Inside the upper oil pan the turbo return oil enters at the red arrow, and is deflected directly down towards a 1/2" hole [not opened in photo] between upper and lower pans. This keeps most of it from getting blown around by air flow off the crank. And since it's straight from the turbos, it's also gonna be the hottest oil in the engine now. So better to get it back to the lower pan to be sent out for cooling quickly.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]567302[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]567303[/ATTACH]
To route the oil from the turbos, we only need to use a good rubber line of sufficient size, with no kinks or air trap bends. This oil returns by gravity only, so straighter the better. For my setup I went with 1/2" NPT adapters out of the turbos, into -10AN line. Larger twins or a single turbo typically requires a 3/4" return line.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]567305[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]567306[/ATTACH]
Those are bolted up to the turbos with supplied gasket. On the bottom side I used a 3/8" to -10AN swivel 90. That allows for movement when installing and routing the lines. I chose to run them where each line can be secured to the block with a rubber protected clamps. The line I used here has a nylon covering over a mild inner steel braid. Looks nice, easier to work with than full braided, but wouldn't stand for much chafing action..
[ATTACH=CONFIG]567307[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]567308[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]567309[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]567311[/ATTACH]
Speaking for chafing, T-bolt style clamps are great, until you cut yourself on one, or stick one in your kneecap as I did.this past week. Simple fix, grab a pack of 6mm vacuum caps from the local parts store. Never jab yourself again on one, for less than $2.00...
[ATTACH=CONFIG]567312[/ATTACH]
