Daimler-Benz 601/603/605 supercharger location conducive to 2-stage supercharging

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

gjs238

Tech Sergeant
1,889
329
Mar 26, 2009
I was thinking that the side-mounted DB supercharger might be conducive to 2-stage supercharging.
My idea is to mount a second side-mounted supercharger - one on each side of the engine.
This leaves space for inter and/or aftercooling.

I'm wondering if this layout facilitates 2-stage supercharging better than other layouts.
For example, the V-1710 was rather awkward to setup with 2-stage supercharging. It ended up with a rather bulky shaft-driven 2nd stage supercharger.
 
Keeping them compact was a requirement for both the 603LA and 605L motors, but these used a blower inside a blower didn't they, still on the one side. Dunno why.

For the bulkiest blower setup I've ever seen, can't remember the aircraft name but it had a 605A driving the second stage blower for two 603 motors in a three engine job, using two thrust engines. Now that's getting complicated with your blower setup.
 
Above is a drawing from a patent lodged by Daimler Benz in 1938 showing the two-stage supercharging arrangement for the DB601C/D engine intended for the Hs 128 high altitude aircraft.

So, the idea had been thought about, pre-war.
 
If the 2,000 hp DB605D engine powered the Ta-152 rather then the larger and heavier Jumo213 engine that might be a good idea. Placing a smaller engine in the Fw-190 engine compartment might allow room for the intercooler plumbing. However I doubt it would fit in a Me-109.
 
The development target for the Ta152 was upwards of 2300PS however. As it was Dietmar says a switch from the Jumo to the 603LA was planned for the 152H for this reason Mar45.


Hey Jerry, was that the engine which had the engine air intake through the prop hub?
 
Last edited:
Yes, this is exactly what I had in mind!
 
For example, the V-1710 was rather awkward to setup with 2-stage supercharging. It ended up with a rather bulky shaft-driven 2nd stage supercharger.

The shaft extension drive was so that the auxialiary compressor could have different gearing and use a fluid coupling to vary the speed to compensate for altitude. Early 2 stage Allisons had the carb on the auxiliary supercharger, but later reverted to the carb on the engine supercharger enabling the core engine to be common with turbocharged versions. That is, they used the same engine supercharger (not necessarily gearing) and carby, but could not use intercooling or aftercooling.

Here's a bulky 2 stage setup - the R-2800-32W

http://www.enginehistory.org/P&W/R-2800-32W.jpg

That had a single speed engine supercharger, and two side mounted, variable speed (fluid coupling) auxiliary superchargers.

The two side mounted superchargers fed a pair of air to air intercoolers, which then fed the updraft carby.
 

Allison had developed an intercooled V-1710, the -119 (F32R). It was installed in the XP-51J. A drawing dated October 12th 1944 is featured in the page 187 of 'Vee's for victory', along with photo of engine. WEP = 1720 HP at 20700 ft (wet), MIL = 1200 HP at 30000 ft.
 

That's an aftercooler.

And required a special carby.
 
Okay, it's an aftercooler. So the capability to be aftercooled was there, in contrast to the opposite statement.
 

The DB 600 series was far less reliant on supercharging for power than other engines of the war; it relied on a high compression ratio for power and efficiency; hence the supercharger did not have to supply as much boost. The early super chargers of the DB series were probably not that efficient, though it didn't matter, they were a smaller proportion of engine load.

You will find an engine called the DB628 which had an supercharger with a variable impellor wrapped around the main gearbox, the outlet of this was then ducted to the standard side mounted supercharger; so these were completely independant supercharger drives. I would say it was not produced due to the extra effort required to change ove production.
 

The DB 600 series was far less reliant on supercharging for power than other engines of the war; it relied on a high compression ratio for power and efficiency; hence the supercharger did not have to supply as much boost. The early super chargers of the DB series were probably not that efficient, though it didn't matter, they were a smaller proportion of engine load.

You will find an engine called the DB628 which had an supercharger with a variable impellor wrapped around the main gearbox, the outlet of this was then ducted to the standard side mounted supercharger; so these were completely independant supercharger drives. I would say it was not produced due to the extra effort required to change ove production.
 

Users who are viewing this thread