SAE TECHNICAL

PAPER SERIES 2003-01-2277

Intake Design for Maximum Performance

Badih Jawad, Alin Dragoiu, Lorne Dyar, Kerry Zellner and Chris Riedel
Lawrence Technological University

Reprinted From: Advanced Spark-Ignition Engines and Gaseous Alternative Fuels

(SP-1792)

Future Transportation Technology Conference

Costa Mesa, California
June 23-25, 2003

400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001 U.S.A. Tel: (724) 776-4841 Fax: (724) 776-5760 Web: www.sae.org
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise,
without the prior written permission of SAE.

For permission and licensing requests contact:

SAE Permissions
400 Commonwealth Drive
Warrendale, PA 15096-0001-USA
Email: permissions@sae.org
Fax: 724-772-4891
Tel: 724-772-4028

For multiple print copies contact:

SAE Customer Service

Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada)
Tel: 724-776-4970 (outside USA)
Fax: 724-776-1615
Email: CustomerService@sae.org

ISSN 0148-7191
Copyright © 2003 SAE International

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE.
The author is solely responsible for the content of the paper. A process is available by which discussions
will be printed with the paper if it is published in SAE Transactions.

Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for presentation or publication by SAE should send the
manuscript or a 300 word abstract of a proposed manuscript to: Secretary, Engineering Meetings Board, SAE.

Printed in USA

Intake Design for Maximum Performance
Badih Jawad, Alin Dragoiu, Lorne Dyar, Kerry Zellner and Chris Riedel
Copyright © 2003 SAE International
ABSTRACT
The design of a race engine intake system involves
many design considerations. Two very important areas
of design are the intake manifold’s volume and
geometry. In considering these variables there are
several different possible intake configurations. Such
configurations will include single and dual plenum
designs, as well as volume transitions. Dynamometer
testing objectives will test different intake designs for the
best overall engine power by comparing the areas under
the engine power curve. Of the four intakes tested, the
2003 intake was found to make the best overall power.
INTRODUCTION
The horsepower output of an engine can be dramatically
improved through good intake design and manufacture.
The following pages display the test results and describe
the power characteristics of four different intake
manifolds that were built and run on individual racecars
from the past four years with a great degree of success.
This paper will test and choose the best intake based on
its power making characteristics.
The four intakes are described as the 2000, 2001, 2002,
and 2003 due to their year of design and manufacture.
The 2000 and 2003 intakes each consist of a single
plenum design while the 2001 and 2002 manifolds are of
a dual or divided plenum design. The intakes will be
used on a Honda CBR600F4i engine. They will also
draw air through a 20mm restrictor placed just behind
the throttle body. While peak power production was
considered, the total power or “area under the curve”
was given the greatest weight as it was the most
desirable characteristic. Since the dynamometer data
output was in a spreadsheet format, the power could be
integrated to give the area under the horsepower curve.
A percent difference in these areas was then noted and
used as a comparison between the four intake
manifolds.
DYNAMOMETER TESTING
For testing purposes, a SuperFlow SF-901 water-brake
engine dynamometer was driven directly off the front side
of the engine’s crankshaft. The engine dynamometer
2003-01-2277
Lawrence Technological University
determines the engine torque and horsepower production
over a range of engine speeds. Conditions of
atmospheric pressure, air temperature, humidity, engine
temperature, and dynamometer calibrations were all
carefully monitored. All horsepower and torque numbers
in this paper are to be considered SAE corrected based
on temperature, humidity, and barometric pressure.
During race conditions, the engine almost never drops
below 6500 revolutions per minute (rpm); therefore, all
tests were started at 6200 rpm and stopped close to
engine’s redline of 11,000 rpm. The overall area under the
horsepower curve was achieved by integrating the
horsepower curve using an approximation method. This
area is also expressed as a percentage of the areas of the
other intakes as well. This integration method was chosen
for power comparison rather than a peak value
comparison due to the overall power band requirements.
Often dynamometer runs are made in which one intake
might lose power in the upper rpm range compared to
another while gaining power down low or in the midrange
rpm. Instead of looking at the graphs and then trying to
decide if horsepower lost in one rpm range is more or less
than the horsepower gained in another, the total area
under the curve allows for a direct comparison of numbers
which in turn yields fewer errors.
It has been learned from previous racing experiences that
tuning for peak power is not always beneficial to turning
the fastest lap times in a competitive setting. Road
courses often involve tight turns and low speeds which
result in a peaky power band. This inconsistent band can
hurt overall performance by not providing enough
midrange power to quickly accelerate out of a corner.
Also, a peaky power band generally has a certain point,
commonly referred to as a “hit,” where engine power
starts increasing very rapidly. This “hit” can overwhelm the
tires and cause a loss of traction. Because of these
factors, the most important element that was considered
in dynamometer testing was the overall power production.
Peak numbers were considered but the greatest weight
was placed on area under the curve.
2000 INTAKE DESIGN
The 2000-intake design, displayed in figure 1, features
four bell-mouths, 90 degrees apart and centrally located,
which contribute to equal air distribution while minimizing
vena-contracta effects into the runners [1]. The 2000
intake attempts to equalize air distribution to all cylinders
via equal distance from the venturi outlet (plenum air
source) to runner origin to runner outlet to cylinder inlet
[2]. The air source position is at the top of the plenum,
as opposed to older designs where source and runner
origin were all located at the bottom or side of the
plenum. This allows for a more direct flow of air to reach
the runner origin. The funnel-shaped upper section of
the plenum is angled parallel to the flow of air inside the
plenum in an attempt to reduce or prevent turbulence
inside the manifold. The runners are all of equal length
and are sized for maximum inertial supercharging at
8000 rpm. The interior of the plenum and runners were
ground and mildly polished to ensure a straight, smooth
flow area. See figure 2 for an interior view of 2000
plenum. The 2000 intake made the best low end power
but lost significantly to the other intakes in the mid to
upper rpm range. The dynamometer results are shown
in figures 4 and 9. The peak power came in at 53 kW
(71.1 hp). When the horsepower curve was integrated, it
was found to be 10.6% less than the best producing
intake. While the 2000 intake has possibly the best
drivability characteristics, it also has the lowest area
under the curve and therefore it is not an ideal intake.
Figure 1: 2000 intake design
Figure 2: Interior view of plenum
2001 INTAKE DESIGN
The distinguishing aspect of the 2001 intake manifold
design is the use of dual plenums to eliminate the effects
of overlapping intake events. Due to the engine
configuration, there are times when the intake valves of
neighboring cylinders may be open at the same time.
During normal engine operation, an intake valve (V1) of
a given cylinder opens slightly before the piston reaches
top dead center to enable the valve to be fully open
when the piston starts descending. This occurs prior to
the completion of a similar event in a nearly charged
second cylinder, just before it’s intake valve (V2) closes.
When a single induction manifold joins the two cylinders,
the filling event of the second cylinder overlaps with that
of the first, causing interference and uneven filling
between cylinders. Flow to the initial cylinder is reduced
because of pressure caused by outgoing exhaust gases
[1,3]. The net effect is a reduction in potential cylinder
charge and decrease in engine power output. In an
effort to significantly reduce this effect, a dual plenum
manifold design was implemented and is featured in
figure 3.
Figure 3: Dual plenum intake manifold design
The dual plenum design combines cylinders that are 360
degrees out of phase in the firing order. This allows
cylinders with overlapping intake events to be separated
from each other in two equally dimensioned plenums.
The two plenums are then connected together to a
common converging/diverging venturi that makes up the
mandated restrictor. The 2001 intake made the highest
peak power with 62 kW (83.2 hp), and the area under
the engine power curve was larger than the 2000 by
6.2%. A comparison of the 2000 and 2001 intakes can
be seen in figure 4.
 2000 vs 2001 Inake
Plenum volume can also be varied through the use of a
65 pneumatically actuated butterfly valve located centrally
60
in the plenum. When closed, the butterfly valve
separates overlapping intake events. This is
55 accomplished by grouping the two pairs of cylinders that
Engine Power (kW)

50 are 360 degrees apart in the firing order into their

45
respective plenum just like the 2001 intake.

40 This separation allows for the airflow to reach maximum

35 velocity at low engine speeds. At high engine speeds, the
30 valve opens to cancel interfering pressure waves and
2001 power maximize flow, thus increasing power. The equal length
25 primary runners were tuned on the engine dynamometer
2000 power
20 for maximum inertial supercharging effects at 8000 rpm.

10200
10600
11000
6200
6600
7000
7400
7800
8200
8600
9000
9400
9800
Cylinder pairs with potentially overlapping events in a
Honda CBR600 F4 engine are corresponding cylinders
Engine Speed (rpm) beginning and ending their induction strokes. This occurs
in the firing order sequence 1-2-4-3. For this reason,
C1+C4 are fed by one plenum, and C2+C3 are fed by a
Figure 4: Comparison of 2000 and 2001 intakes second [4]. The design pairs the runners of cylinders that
are 360 degrees out of phase just like the 2001 intake.

2002 INTAKE DESIGN The 2002 intake only employs one butterfly valve as
opposed to the two that are used on the 2001. The
The 2002 intake manifold has been referred to as a larger single valve has roughly the same cross section
second-generation variable plenum intake and can be as the two on the 2001 intake. The single valve helps
seen in figure 5. To optimize performance, changes to reduce the complexity and weight on the 2001 intake by
the plenum were made to maximize power and maintain eliminating the linkage necessary to open two butterfly
a flat torque curve. Different combinations of butterfly valves.
valve location, plenum volume, and runner lengths were
considered in order to maximize flow [5]. A 1-into-4 The 2002 intake made slightly lower peak power than
separator or splitter was utilized to allow for a direct flow the 2001 with 60.8 kW (81.5 hp). The area under the
of air through the plenum into the runners. curve however, was 0.8% higher. The power curves
between the two were very similar as well with the 2002
making more power than the 2001 in the lower to mid
range rpm. A comparison of the two intakes can be seen
in figure 6.

2001 vs 2002 Intake

67
62
57
52
Engine Power (kW)

47

Figure 5: Solid model of second-generation variable 42

intake. 37
32 2002power
One of the attempted improvements over the first
27
generation manifold was to employ a four-way splitter on 2001power
top of the plenum. The goal was to reduce manifold 22
6200
6600
7000
7400
7800
8200
8600
9000
9400
9800
10200
10600
11000

turbulence by reducing the sharp bend that the air would

have to make as it enters the top of the plenum and
travels to the individual runners. The intake manifold is Engine Speed (rpm)
also ground smooth and mirror polished internally.
Figure 6: Comparison of 2001 and 2002 intakes.
 are not matched, then a loss of power will result.
2003 INTAKE Because of the complex nature of previous manifolds, it
was difficult if not impossible to change plenum volume
The 2003 intake signaled a complete shift in the after the manifold had been built. Because of the fact
direction of intake design compared to the previous that the 2003 intake was easily modified, it allowed us
years. The general trend throughout the previous years circumvent this problem by fine-tuning the final volume
had been towards a more complicated intake using on the dynamometer. The 2003 intake represents the
servo actuated butterflies and variable plenums. The best match of intake and exhaust tuning working
2003 intake represented a shift toward much simpler together to make the best overall power.
designs. The 2003 intake simply consists of a cylindrical
plenum to which the four intake runners are attached. The result was that the 2003 intake had the largest area
The venturi is attached to the top of the plenum in a under the curve. At 61.7 kW (82.7 hp), it didn’t have the
similar way as the 2001 intake. The intake can be seen highest peak power though. A comparison between the
in figure 7. There are bell mouths at the top of the 2002 and 2003 intakes can be seen in figure 8.
runners like the other manifolds in order to reduce vena- Additional power gains may be had in the future by
contracta effects. No effort was made, however, to building an intake that separates overlapping intake
separate overlapping intake events. The 2003 intake is events yet is still simple enough to fine tune plenum
made completely out of aluminum like the others except volume on the dynamometer.
that it can be manufactured very quickly.
2002 vs 2003 Intake
65
60
55
50
Engine Power (kW)
45
40
35 2003 power
30
2002 power
25
20
6200
6600
7000
7400
7800
8200
8600
9000
9400
9800
10200
10600
11000
Engine Speed (rpm)

Figure 8: Comparison of 2002 and 2003 Intakes

Figure 7: Solid model of the 2003 intake

Because of its simple plenum design, the plenum can be
easily modified after the manifold is built by simply
cutting and re-welding. Because of this, the plenum
volume was built slightly larger than specified and then
run on the dynamometer. The plenum volume was then
reduced and the manifold was run again on the
dynamometer. This process continued until the manifold
produced the best overall power.
DYNAMOMETER RESULTS
The dynamometer comparison of the three intakes can
be seen in figure 9. The 2001 made the highest peak
power of 62 kW (83.2 hp). When considering the area
under the horsepower curve, though, the 2003 intake is
the best, beating the next closest by 3.93%. A
comparison of areas can be in the table 1.

Previous manifolds were designed using Helmholtz Intake Area % of Total % Difference
equations to determine the proper plenum volume [6].
The calculations, however, can only predict an rpm 2000 283970 89.37 10.63
range in which maximum inertial supercharging will take
place [7]. When the past manifolds were built and tested, 2001 302850 95.32 4.68
the maximum inertial supercharging may come a little
earlier or later in the rpm range than desired. It is 2002 305240 96.07 3.93
important that maximum inertial supercharging happen
at around a specified rpm because the exhaust is 2003 317730 100.00 0.00
designed for this rpm as well. If the intake and exhaust
 Table 1: “Area under the curve” comparison
A plot of the volumetric efficiencies is given in figure 11. Volumetric Efficiency Comparison
160
In the graphs, it can be seen where each manifold

Volumetric Efficiency (%)

delivers the greatest inertial supercharging. Although the 140
2000 intake was designed for a maximum at 8000 rpm,
120
Helmholtz resonance tuning was not considered at the
time of design so its maximum missed the 8000rpm 100
mark quite drastically. The 2001 and 2002 intakes have
80
maximums close to the calculated 8000 rpm. The
volumetric efficiencies are very similar with the 2001 60 2002
intake doing slightly better at the higher rpm. This may 2000
be due to the fact that two butterflies located at the ends 40
2001
of the plenums might help yield slightly less turbulent air 20
2003
than a large valve located centrally. It was decided
before testing that greater weight would be given to the 0

6200
6600
7000
7400
7800
8200
8600
9000
9400
9800
10200
10600
11000
area under the horsepower curve instead of the peak
power number. So while the 2001 intake made the
highest peak power, it would not be the ideal intake Engine Speed (rpm)
manifold. By looking at figure 9, it is easy to see why.
The 2001 intake only outperforms the others at the very
top and in a very narrow rpm range. Everywhere else, it Figure 10: Comparison of volumetric efficiencies
loses power to the 2003 and 2002 intakes. Referring to
the graph in figure 10, it can be seen that the 2003
intake clearly outperforms the other everywhere but at a CONCLUSION
narrow high rpm range. Even then, it loses only 0.37 kW
(0.5 hp) to the 2001 intake. Choosing the best intake for a particular racecar is
always a compromise. Picking the manifold that makes
the best peak power may not always be the most
Final Intake Comparison desirable choice. If the car is to be driven on a very tight
65 track with few straights and many low speed turns, then
a broad power band will make the car faster than a
60 narrow, peaky one. The car on which the manifolds are
55 used on will be driven on such a course. In extreme
Engine Power (kW)

cases, a peaky power band can actually make a car

50
slower because a car on a tight course spends most of
45 its time in the mid range rpm. A peaky power band can
40 cause a lack of traction if it has a large horsepower “hit”.
It also makes the car more difficult to drive and requires
35 2000 power
a skilled to drive the car well. In the case of a collegiate
2001 power design series where the driver must be enrolled
30
2002 power university students, driver skill can vary greatly and the
25 chances of finding a highly skilled driver being rare. The
2003 power
20 best manifold is chosen by integrating the horsepower
curve to obtain the area under the curve and comparing
10400

11000
6200

6800

7400

8000

8600

9200

9800

that area to the areas from the other manifolds. Using

Engine Speed (rpm) this method, the 2003 intake comes out ahead. In peak
power, it loses to the next closest manifold by only 0.5
hp but in terms of area under the curve, it beats the next
Figure 9: Dynamometer comparison of all intake closest intake by 3.93%. The results are clear and the
manifolds. 2001 intake manifold is chosen for the car.
REFERENCES

1. Heinz Heisler. Advanced Engine

Technology. London. The Bath Press, 1995.

2. Jawad, Badih A., Degain, Michael D., and

Young, Anthony P., Jr., “Design of a Restricted
Induction System for a High Speed Four
Cylinder Engine”, SAE 2000-01-3090.

3. Charles F. Taylor, “The Internal-Combustion

Engine in Theory and Practice” Cambridge,
Mass. M.I.T Press, 1985.

4. Jawad, Badih A., Lounsbery, Amelia L., Hoste,

Jeffrey P. “Evolution of Intake Design for a Small
Engine Formula Vehicle” SAE 2001-01-1211.

5. Jameson, Renee T., and Hodgins, Patrick A.,

“Improvement of the Torque Characteristics of a
Small, High-Speed Engine Through the Design
of Helmholtz-Tuned Manifolding,” SAE 900680.

6. John B. Heywood, Internal Combustion Engine

Fundamentals. McGraw-Hill, 1988.

7. Jawad, Badih A., Hoste, Jeffrey P., Johnson,

Brian E. “Formula SAE Dual Plenum Induction
System Design,” SAE 2002-01-0457.