why does it say its a supercharger?

[KeRmIt]

stooooooopid

[Matra et Alpine]

I'm fully aware of that. - I figured this way I might actually shut you up but I should've known that would never happen

jsut trying to keep you on-topic

[Alastor]

Matra and Alastor:

Regardless of which of you two nitpicks thinks is correct:


You'll notice it says "Vortech" on the sides of all of them. This means that they are all superchargers in both senses of the term, as the company does not and has never produced any turbochargers.

You are definitely right, but sometimes it is just fun to argue ;-)

THat's a perfect example of our division over a common language

Exhaust gas driven superchargers over here are ALWAYS TURBOchargers.

If there is a common usage of supercharger to cover turbos as well it's a US-thing probably driven by the much wider use of superchargers there. Turbos are more common over here so their entymology is stronger.

The division is not regional, it is between common language and technical language.

Technically speaking, a supercharger is any device that pressurizes the intake above atmospheric pressure. Therefore, turbochargers are a special type of supercharger. The probably is likely due to the fact that there is not special distinction for non-exhaust driven superchargers.

This division between common language and technical language occurs frequently, for example see weight transfer and load transfer.

well to be ACCURATE CS, the first should say supercharger driven by external means and second should say driven by exhaust gasses.

As a modern turbo is manufactured as a single unit then it's not really just a supercharger.

It's like saying a leaf is a tree A leaf is a leaf and a tree has leaves. It doesn't make a tree a leaf or a leaf a trea

See above.

or do you call the fan on the window demister on the car a supercharger too ? What about the office fan that keeps you cool in summer - a supercharger ?? The all "pressurise air" and yet are NOT called superchargers.

The fan on the window demister is not pressurizing the intake it is therefore not a supercharger.

Could a fan be used to pressure the intake….maybe. To figure that out we would have to determine the difference between a fan and supercharger.

A fan is a device that is design to operate with low pressure rise and create various fluid flow rates, where the fluid is a gas.

A compressor is designed to operate with high pressure rise and at a variety of flow rates (again only uses gases).

So technically a fan could be used to pressure the intake, however the pressure increase will be very small compared to that of a compressor. This is why all practical supercharges incorporate a compressor and not a fan.

On a side note, notice that both the fan and compressor create flow not pressure. A true fan, compressor, and even pump (similar to compressor, except uses liquids) only creates flow, and the pressure after the device is due to restriction (i.e. piping, valves, etc).

[Matra et Alpine]

The division is not regional, it is between common language and technical language.

Technically speaking, a supercharger is any device that pressurizes the intake above atmospheric pressure. Therefore, turbochargers are a special type of supercharger. The probably is likely due to the fact that there is not special distinction for non-exhaust driven superchargers.

Yes BUT as was pointed out WHEN a unit is manufactured as a SINGLE DEVICE then common and technical language makes it a TURBOcharger.
Ther is no seperation of the driven and driving impellor unit.
THAT was what I was pointing out and there IS a regional difference. That's why this conversation is on-going

The fan on the window demister is not pressurizing the intake it is therefore not a supercharger.

See the problem with giving extremem analogies is that sometimes we refuse to see them
The piping AFTER the fan in a demister IS pressurized. TECHNICALLY

A fan is a device that is design to operate with low pressure rise and create various fluid flow rates, where the fluid is a gas.
A compressor is designed to operate with high pressure rise and at a variety of flow rates (again only uses gases).

and why they can be the smae as one persons low pressure is another persons high mate worked in BP refinery.

So technically a fan could be used to pressure the intake, however the pressure increase will be very small compared to that of a compressor. This is why all practical supercharges incorporate a compressor and not a fan.

and why it was said earlier as you have now typed yourself that a fan is a compressor and supercharger only very inefficient ones

On a side note, notice that both the fan and compressor create flow not pressure. A true fan, compressor, and even pump (similar to compressor, except uses liquids) only creates flow, and the pressure after the device is due to restriction (i.e. piping, valves, etc).

Again correct because you are using practical limits to differentiate.
BUT on the in side of afan there IS alower pressure and the exit there IS a higher pressure.
So if only pressure is used to decide then all fans are compressors ( the same is not always true as a roots truly COMPRESSES the gas IN the twin screw IIRC !!

[Coventrysucks]

well to be ACCURATE CS, the first should say supercharger driven by external means and second should say driven by exhaust gasses.

They are both superchargers though.

As for ceiling fans etc.- supercharge: increase the pressure on a gas or liquid.

So yes, anything that pressurises the air could be categorised as a supercharger, although they commonly refer to something which results in a very high pressure.

[Alastor]

Yes BUT as was pointed out WHEN a unit is manufactured as a SINGLE DEVICE then common and technical language makes it a TURBOcharger.
Ther is no seperation of the driven and driving impellor unit.
THAT was what I was pointing out and there IS a regional difference. That's why this conversation is on-going

I agree, in that I call turbochargers what they are, which is turbochargers. However, if someone were to call a turbocharger a supercharger they technically would be correct. On the other hand the opposite is not always true. A turbocharger is a supercharging device.

There is a separation of driven and driving impellor units, just not at the most general definition of the word. The general definition includes all mechanical devices, even those without impellers.

I still do not think this is a regional thing, since just about everyone on this side of the globe would probably agree with you, lol.

See the problem with giving extremem analogies is that sometimes we refuse to see them
The piping AFTER the fan in a demister IS pressurized. TECHNICALLY

I agree that the piping after the demister is pressurized, but the piping after the demister is not the engine’s intake which is what a supercharger pressurizes.

and why they can be the smae as one persons low pressure is another persons high mate worked in BP refinery.

What is does BP stand for?

Again correct because you are using practical limits to differentiate.
BUT on the in side of afan there IS alower pressure and the exit there IS a higher pressure.
So if only pressure is used to decide then all fans are compressors ( the same is not always true as a roots truly COMPRESSES the gas IN the twin screw IIRC !!

Actually, all fans will compress (change the density) the fluid to some extend but it is usually considered negligible, whereas a compressor will create large changes in fluid density. It is an industry standard to measure fan and compressor performance by the exit pressure and corresponding flow rate.

[ZemoButts]

stooooooopid

ever wonder how Tupac Died?

[my porsche]

if it hasnt already been said, which im sure it has turbo chargins is simply a from of supercharging. turbo is run off of the exhaust end of the engine, and superchargers off of belts

supercharging is basically any forced induction

[Matra et Alpine]

I agree, in that I call turbochargers what they are, which is turbochargers. However, if someone were to call a turbocharger a supercharger they technically would be correct. On the other hand the opposite is not always true. A turbocharger is a supercharging device.

Agreed. not disputed. It was the term Turbocharger which is accepted as the name FOR a supercharger when driven driectly by exhaust gasses. ( Getting back to the initial point )
However, in FULL technical terms the compressor side is actually a "forced induction device" as m_p said

There is a separation of driven and driving impellor units, just not at the most general definition of the word.

eh ? The impellor of the exhaust side and inlet side are DIRECTLY connected. They share the shaft.

I still do not think this is a regional thing, since just about everyone on this side of the globe would probably agree with you, lol.

hmm. Hand't been my experience in the past when there was usually confusion over how a turbocharger actually worked especially on imagined speed differential between the turbine and compressor sections.

I agree that the piping after the demister is pressurized, but the piping after the demister is not the engine’s intake which is what a supercharger pressurizes.

The example was given to show that "supercharger" is too wide a definition anyway. Your premise seems founded on teh view that ANY forced induction msut be called a supercharger. Which is possibly why you want to call the comrpessor side of a turbo a supercharger ? I think it's that premise that causes the discontinuity

What is does BP stand for?

British Petroleum. Who now own Amoco. He now travels the world setting up their training programs for new graduates and apprentices. He also consults for others in the oil industry. At the end for those guys EVERYTHING is a "pump" just for different materials, desnities, pressures, flow rates

Actually, all fans will compress (change the density) the fluid to some extend but it is usually considered negligible, whereas a compressor will create large changes in fluid density. It is an industry standard to measure fan and compressor performance by the exit pressure and corresponding flow rate.

correct and why fans were brought in to the fun
And as said at the end of the day they are actually all just pumps.

[Egg Nog]

Matra is ridiculously stubborn

Maybe if we all pitch in and buy enough beer to get him hammered we can actually get him to admit that he's wrong for once

[Matra et Alpine]

Matra is ridiculously stubborn

Maybe if we all pitch in and buy enough beer to get him hammered we can actually get him to admit that he's wrong for once

but I'm not

However we are discussing SEMANTICS which makes solid definitions harder and gets down to general usage.

The beer will always be recevied grategully though You can't afford enough to get ME hammered

[Egg Nog]

I take it you're a fan of conceptual arguments because you can always just re-define to avoid losing?

[ZemoButts]

i made the thread but now i've lost intrest

[Matra et Alpine]

I take it you're a fan of conceptual arguments because you can always just re-define to avoid losing?

not really

a fan of finding the agreements.
Which needs exploration and debate.
Which needs clarification and expansion.
Which takes up post-space.
Which if you dont' like you know how to leave a thread

Finally a fan of avoiding anyone making a fool of themselves by at some point in the future saying to an engine designer that it's a supercharger when clearly what it is is a turbocharger

or of the million and one other things that are often too simplified and then get a life of their own to later be though to be 'fact'.

It's NEVER about winning or losing but I know most dont' see it that way