Re: [MC-CHASSIS-DESIGN] Inconel

[Carsten S.]

I heard, stainless steel for expansion chambers in 0.6mm (~.024") for
track and 1mm (~0.039") for street use no prob. Any other experiences
less than those numbers?

Any guess or experience for Inconel 625 , numbers seen down that link:

http://www.burnsstainless.com/TechArticles/Stainless_article/stainless_a
rticle.html


Cheers
Carsten (Aachen-Germany)


Jim Schneider schrieb:

> Well, if you catch him before he runs out, there is some Inconel bends
> on Ebay at .049" wall and different diameters and different bends.  No
> "U" bends but close.  Check out this seller
>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3002861567
> 57&viewitem=&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWAX%3AIT
>
> It is the 625 grade which is some of what Burns sells and is supposed to
> be header construction pieces from an IRL car team?  Maybe now as thin
> as the .032" or the .012" but tough stuff.  I would guess that you could
> run the .032" wall on most cycles without problems.  The .049" isn't
> going to be a real weight saver because I have run .049" mild steel on
> pipes before without any problems.  Limited to larger sizes!
>
> Swiss
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mc-chassis-design-bounces@...
> [mailto:mc-chassis-design-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Nik
> Halliwell
> Subject: Re: [MC-CHASSIS-DESIGN] alternate exhaustmaterials(was
> Chamberrolling revisited)
>
>
> Because of the info that Rick Hammond posted earlier, id highly suspect
> you can use thinner wall Inconel than what SS would be able to do.  I
> only say this because the article said F1 uses it.  Its inherently
> resilient to heat / pressure, and maintains 75% of its properties @
> 1200degF, which means its still hugely strong and not susceptible to
> swelling from the exhaust gas pressure.
>
> How thin you can actually go is anyones guess.  If anyone is able to get
>
> some info on its yield strength @ temps, that would be much appreciated.
> I could probably hit up a few contacts next week who supply the stuff,
> but i cant make any promises.
> A general inquiry to your local steel supplier could query HIS supplier
> and get some relevant data if you are prepared to wait a week, and
> probably have to throw a few coins for the data sheet on it.
>
>
> charly@... wrote:
>  
>> Hi Jim,
>>
>> well, as I surfed to some of Burns' pages today, I noticed a chart
>> with all needed. So yes, 5% more density, but have a look at the
>> strength, would outweight the density more than enough. Then it
>> depends just, what sheet thickness is available anyways and what will
>> still be able to be welded :-) ...
>> Take alook at the ned of this link at the table:
>>
>>    
> http://www.burnsstainless.com/TechArticles/Stainless_article/stainless_a
> rticle.html
>  
>> Cheers
>> Carsten (Aachen-Germany)
>>    
>
>
>  

[Matt Patterson-5]

SUS304 @ 0.7mm for race spannies gives good results.

Regards,

Matt.
www.tyga-performance.com



----- Original Message -----
From: Carsten S.
To: MC-CHASSIS-DESIGN Mailing List ; mc-engine@...
Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 1:25 AM
Subject: Re: [MC-CHASSIS-DESIGN] Inconel


  I heard, stainless steel for expansion chambers in 0.6mm (~.024") for
track and 1mm (~0.039") for street use no prob. Any other experiences less
than those numbers?

Any guess or experience for Inconel 625 , numbers seen down that link:

http://www.burnsstainless.com/TechArticles/Stainless_article/stainless_a
rticle.html
Cheers
Carsten (Aachen-Germany)


Jim Schneider schrieb:
Well, if you catch him before he runs out, there is some Inconel bends
on Ebay at .049" wall and different diameters and different bends.  No
"U" bends but close.  Check out this seller

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3002861567
57&viewitem=&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWAX%3AIT

It is the 625 grade which is some of what Burns sells and is supposed to
be header construction pieces from an IRL car team?  Maybe now as thin
as the .032" or the .012" but tough stuff.  I would guess that you could
run the .032" wall on most cycles without problems.  The .049" isn't
going to be a real weight saver because I have run .049" mild steel on
pipes before without any problems.  Limited to larger sizes!

Swiss

-----Original Message-----
From: mc-chassis-design-bounces@...
[mailto:mc-chassis-design-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Nik
Halliwell
Subject: Re: [MC-CHASSIS-DESIGN] alternate exhaustmaterials(was
Chamberrolling revisited)


Because of the info that Rick Hammond posted earlier, id highly suspect
you can use thinner wall Inconel than what SS would be able to do.  I
only say this because the article said F1 uses it.  Its inherently
resilient to heat / pressure, and maintains 75% of its properties @
1200degF, which means its still hugely strong and not susceptible to
swelling from the exhaust gas pressure.

How thin you can actually go is anyones guess.  If anyone is able to get

some info on its yield strength @ temps, that would be much appreciated.
I could probably hit up a few contacts next week who supply the stuff,
but i cant make any promises.
A general inquiry to your local steel supplier could query HIS supplier
and get some relevant data if you are prepared to wait a week, and
probably have to throw a few coins for the data sheet on it.


charly@... wrote:
  Hi Jim,

well, as I surfed to some of Burns' pages today, I noticed a chart
with all needed. So yes, 5% more density, but have a look at the
strength, would outweight the density more than enough. Then it
depends just, what sheet thickness is available anyways and what will
still be able to be welded :-) ...
Take alook at the ned of this link at the table:

    http://www.burnsstainless.com/TechArticles/Stainless_article/stainless_a
rticle.html
  Cheers
Carsten (Aachen-Germany)