Arrab, are you seriously suggesting that I am dismissing the importance of the pipe on a 2T? I didn't call pipes gobbledegook, I called that badly written post gobbledegook....
No, of course not - but since you didn't mention the potential of resonance and exhaust tuning in your 'actual analysis' I introduced it into the discussion - albeit clumsily, in a "pathetic", "badly written post" replete with "gobbledegook".
Why the hostility all of a sudden again? we're quite aware by now that you called that "badly written post" "gobbledegook" and when I asked you to state
why you believed this to be the case, you managed to do so in a brief disjointed sentence (including misquoting it twice), adding that it's difficult to scroll back on your phone. Such disjointed barely comprehensible replies are another reason I suggested Skype. Therefore I am completely justified in questioning your powers of comprehension. In fact, everything that you queried from that 'badly written post', correct me if I'm wrong I have substantiated, including furnishing you with a link when requested - and even offered to discuss it with you in real time. Please explain why it is badly written and which parts, bar 'non-isentropic stimulation [sic]', you deem to be gobbledegook. Thanks.
However, in your defence...
What's non-isentropic stimulation when it's at home?
Granted - guilty as charged your honour. That should have read non-isentropic
simulation. My bad - and the original typo reoccured when I cut and pasted it from your post querying it. Entirely my fault, apologies - you were absolutely right to call ........ in that regard.
The only reason I even mentioned this is because you brought up CFD. You're familiar with isentropic flow right? For compressible flows with little or small flow turning, such reversable flow means the entropy is constant (second law of thermodynamics). The change in flow properties are then yielded by the isentropic relations allowing computational calculations as to the predict the overall performance characteristics of a power unit. Sorry if this sounds patronising...I assure you that isn't my intent, I'm desperately trying to avoid any future allegations of "gobbledegook". You agree the purpose of isentropic modelling, obviously as a control, extrapolates idealised conditions in order to facilitate comparisons to the real process?
Basic stuff, although I admit my Euler equations are quite rusty, but from having studied applied climatology and meteorology a long time ago I am aware of the disadvantages of purely isentropic approach so this made perfect sense to me - (obviously synoptic weather systems are not entirely adiabatic). Similarly an engine encounters friction and transfer of heat and matter. The simulation of the exhaust gas temperature, not just as a bulk mean value recorded in the middle of the pipe system, but everywhere throughout the pipe at every instant of time, is a vital issue if the simulation is to accurately phase the dynamic events within a tuned exhaust pipe - and because the flow is not gradual, it requires non isotropic modelling. Unsteady gas flow behaviour due to the sectional branching and ducting of an engine result in non-isentropic effects which yield data relating to energy and momentum at each section. There are several papers on this subject, but like I said, I also recall Moriwaki being credited with such inquiry.
Once again, I apologise for the confusion, my fault entirely - Dr.No vindicated.
You were posting all sorts of techy sounding stuff (in an apparent attempt to show off your knowledge or to baffle us with ........)
Ouch!! Well I once admitted to reading books by Neil Spalding which you then derisively dismissed as rudimentary coffee table mechanics. What I posted wasn't sophisticated in the slightest - all very basic stuff. Like I said, I do have several large bookcases - one of which is dedicated to motorcycles and racing, but only one bible when it comes to the anatomy and tuning of a two stroke engine. We all have different learning styles. I learn from asking questions...lots of questions, of those ostensibly more knowledgeable than myself - in part the reason I wanted to skype you. Because I am attracted to the theoretical, I read voraciously but with a strong kinesthstic inclination I ensure that I then 'do' - that is where possible, practice what I learn. I did however concede this...
I have a very large bookshelf. However, the Doc knows much more than I do in a hands on sense
"An apparent attempt to show off or baffle us..." (-no pun intended I'm sure) "...with ........". Not at all, and I'm genuinely regretful if it came across like that. It was merely to simulate, er, I mean stimulate, discussion and discourse, which is I thought the purpose of an internet forum. As many will testify, I am only too willing to step out from behind the anonymity of a keyboard and any insinuation of a wall of search engines and a bulwark of multiple wiki pages. If much of my knowledge originates from literature then that is something I value - even if it has the shortcomings of not being applied knowledge. I will also maintain that for the large part, similar to yourself, it comes from experience, an inquisitive nature and has been imparted by those infinitely more informed and accomplished than myself.
...and name drops followed by a Little Golden Books explanation of pulses in a pipe. wow.
Name drops??!! - How delightfully ironic since barring Zoot, you are absolutely the worst culprit for that in the entire history of this forum. You sound very bitter and resentful Doc. It's a great shame. And it's also a great shame that you can't 'jump back' and read again how this thread originated and evolved - particularly in view of the respect that I have afforded to you - which is now diminishing exponentially in proportion to your post count. I found it very odd that in your self proclaimed 'actual analysis' you failed to mention resonance and exhaust tuning which is a topic that greatly interests me. 'Little Golden Books explanation'?? As I said, I composed that post at work, it wasn't perfect, it was off the top of my head and I am humbled and chastened by your superiority on the subject and equally admonished over my"pathetic", "badly written" "........" post which was replete with "gobbledegook" and unpalatable, regurgitated "word soup".
You made a bollocks claim and are now dishing up word soup to try to bolster your "credentials".
Credentials? - It's an online internet racing forum for ..... sake. The only thing we accrue on here is arbitrarily conferred FB style 'likes' and a post count that indicates we really should have better things to do wth our time. I have few credentials that I am proud of but I come here because I enjoy motorcycle racing, I have some very close friends on this forum and I find the insight beneficial and the mutual camaraderie admittedly as enjoyable as the occasional conflict.
What 'bollocks claim"? You mean the one you originally disagreed with?
I recall reading an interview with Harald Bartol I think who was of the opinion that mechanically the 500cc bikes had so much further potential
Bollocks claims? - I can think of quite a few, how about your suggestion that the AMA only ever produced one half assed GP World Champion in the form of Nicky Hayden?
You probably think Kaaden invented spannies via doodlebugs...
Weak. No I really don't, but we could start a new thread about Werner Von Braun's isentropic flow equations for the V2 if you like.
As for skype, Like I said, I don't use it.
Fair enough, but you could. It was merely a suggestion, a possibility, to avoid the lag involved in our posts and the fact that I'm perfectly happy to talk about this and clarify my points in real time with not so much as a bookshelf in sight - given the accusation of badly articulated poorly plagiarised 'bollocks' and gobbledegook posted on here.
Maybe ask the guy you reckon invented the internet to help?
I used the term flippantly, loosely, lazily, inaccurately and incorrectly. No single person 'invented the internet'. However, I do think that through HTML,Tim Berners Lee made a massive contribution to the navigation of the internet and his subsequent development of The World Wide Web is what most people today consider the "Internet" or a series of sites and pages that are connected with links and as so defined its operation. Your correction, to which I had no objection to, was duly noted at the time.
On the other hand if you are going to dismiss my posts as 'gobbledegook', 'pathetic' and '........' then don't misquote them or misappropriate the content as you did earlier. Again, that simply leads me to cast aspersions upon your powers of comprehension which as this thread will testify are already highly questionable and cannot be solely attributed to your use of a phone to access this forum.
But again, we can keep sniping or can converse about engines. Offer is still open.
And similarly the offer of Skype is still open, which is not technically beyond one such as you. Socially, maybe. We were in fact 'conversing about engines', until you butted in with this inflammatory, indignant and somewhat wounded post. Something I said? Raw nerve maybe? Yeah I do find it astonishing that in your 'actual analysis' you neglected to mention exhaust tuning. Regarding sniping, following my initial shot across the bows in my reply to yourself and cliché, you now appear to be the one launching everything from doodlebugs to ad hominem assaults. I am merely defending my stance, but as such, I agree to a ceasefire. This attrition is in the interest of no one.
Regarding the lack of inertia dyno testing at Aprilia, could you provide a source? I'm not surprised that it was resisted given the potency of their RS racing machines, although Suzuki had such a sub optimal bike once armed with the necessary data, Willing was able to very quickly extract more power and perhaps remedial performance enhancements. Not only did they get access to the transient dyno at KR, they also used the chassis testing rig in the absence of any stiffness figures from Suzuki. To think of the injuries that Schwantz had suffered through sheer determination to ride around the problems and a determination to win regardless of what the bike was or wasn't doing.