Engine Header Coating Comparison
Joe DeMonte,
Infrared Training Center (ITC)
ABSTRACT
Coatings on high-temperature exhaust manifolds and headers have been shown to increase engine
performance in some racing applications. Are all coatings equal? What is the effect of having this procedure
done on exhaust components? Three different coated tubular headers have been put to the test using an
infrared thermal imaging camera and a high-temperature thermocouple on a street-legal car that is used for drag
racing on the side. The answers have been determined.
Keywords: engine performance, coatings, exhaust components, racing, tubular headers,
infrared thermal imaging camera, high-temperature thermocouple.
INTRODUCTION
The use of Infrared technologies has opened up a wide array of applications in the automotive performance
industry. It was inevitable that we would test the variety of coatings that can be applied to headers and
determine their efficiency. In this test, we used two ceramic-coated headers and one electroless nickel-plated
set of headers from The Other Guys in California. One of the ceramic sets was coated with a titanium ceramic
finish, while the other was coated with an aluminized ceramic known only as “Afterburner.” Here are the
experimental setup parameters:
• Where: The test was performed in a climate controlled garage with radiant heated floors.
• Date: June 17, 2004.
• Air Temp: Air temperature was 78ºF.
• Test Equipment: The Infrared was taken with a FLIR ThermaCAM® S60 long wave imaging
radiometer. The contact temperatures were taken with an Omegaette HH306 Data Logger
Thermometer and an 88000 series high-temperature type K probe. All data taken from both
instruments can be digitally entered on to a computer for further analysis and graphing.
• The Car (Fig. 1): A 1998 Buick Regal GS was the test subject.
• The Car’s Mods: 1.9:1 full aluminum roller rockers; 3.2” supercharger pulley; ported and polished
supercharger; LS1 throttle body; cold air induction; 2.5” custom catback exhaust with a Ravin muffler;
160ºF thermostat; Autolite 104 plugs’; transmission oil cooler; and a digital horsepower custom PCM.
• The Car’s ¼ Mile Time prior to Headers: 13.2 at 103.5 mph.
InfraMation 2004 Proceedings ITC 104 A 2004-07-27
Figure 1. The Buick driving forward to stage at Pittsburgh Raceway
park after a good front wheel drive burnout!
THE TEST
The first set of coated headers tested was the Afterburner high-polished ceramic shown in Figure 2. The
second set was the titanium ceramic coating shown on the car in Figure 2. The third set was the electroless
nickel-plated headers also shown in Figure 2.
Afterburner
Titanium
Electroless
Nickel
Figure 2. Three different coatings used in the test. The top picture shows the
titanium installed and the Afterburner lying loose on top of the supercharger.
InfraMation 2004 Proceedings ITC 104 A 2004-07-27
AFTERBURNER-COATED HEADER TEST
The car had been outfitted with the Afterburner-coated headers back in April 2004. We had raced at two
events with those headers and put on nearly 5,000 miles of driving. The headers seasoned and kept their
efficiencies extremely well, and the picture in Figure 2 is of that same set of headers just removed on June
17, 2004 with the 5,000 miles on them.
Our test started with the car driven 2 miles to the garage and idling for 10 minutes at that point. With the car
idling and at proper operating temperatures, we began measuring the contact temperature with the
Omegaette. We were startled by how effective the car’s fans were in aiding the convective cooling of the front
header when they kicked on. See Figure 3 for the results of the peak-and-valley temperatures during a 9-
minute idling period.
Temperatures started around 540ºF with the fans off, and then they exponentially cooled when aided by the
forced convection increase provided by the fans to reduce the temperatures to 402ºF-407ºF over
approximately 3 minutes while they were on.
We then wanted to test a theory common among people using these coatings. It has been said that these
Afterburner-coated headers can be touched within 10 minutes of shutdown with your hands. Using 130ºF as a
common ground temperature that most people can touch, we timed the front header to see how long it took to
reach that temperature. Using Figure 3 again, you will see that it took just under 7 minutes.
CAUTION: The temperatures of the cross-over pipe and rear header took considerably longer to cool
to the touch (nearly 15 minutes) without the aid of the car’s fans, which ran for 6 minutes and 40
seconds after shutdown.
People with the fan override switch that keeps them on longer than that period should see cooler headers. But
Newton’s Law of Cooling is shown repeatedly in our actual data. Objects cool to their steady state
temperature on an exponential slope. This is due to the driving force of heat being the temperature difference
between the cooling medium and the actual object’s initial temperature. As the object cools, the ∆T
(temperature difference) becomes relatively smaller by comparison; therefore, the rate of the heat transfer
slows up. In other words, keeping the fans on longer does not continue to cool your vehicle at the same rate it
did when it was hot. They will become less effective over time.
T1 T2
600
550
500
450
400
Degree
350
300
250
200
150
4:30:45 AM T1:412 T2:OL
100
4:35 4:40 4:45
18 Fri Jun 2004 Time
Figure 3. Graphical results from Omegaette thermocouple on the Afterburner-coated headers
InfraMation 2004 Proceedings ITC 104 A 2004-07-27
TITANIUM-COATED HEADER TEST
Now for a look at the titanium ceramic coating and its ability to cool things down. We started again with the
car at idle after a short drive. Then, using the Omegaette thermocouple, we measured the peak-and-valley
temperature over the fan cycle. This time, we just took a look at two cycles. The data shows that the headers
ran hotter than the Afterburner coating allowed. Figure 4 has the data arranged for us, and you can see that
the peak temperature was 588ºF, over 40ºF hotter! That was one point, however, and not the whole picture.
The valley temperatures with the titanium were also hotter after the fans did their job. Compare the 402ºF-
407ºF for the Afterburner to 493ºF for the titanium. These cars will run closer to the valley temperature with air
flow around them. Therefore, when the car is cruising down the highway, the headers will run closer to that
lower temperature.
Ladies and Gentlemen, the Afterburner-coated headers ran nearly 90ºF cooler than titanium with the
air flowing across them from the fans!
On the “cool to the touch” test, the titanium lagged behind again. From an initial temperature of 572ºF, it took
over 30 minutes for the front header to cool to 130ºF. That was also with the fans on for 6 minutes and 40
seconds. That is pretty good evidence of why people say they can touch the Afterburner coating in a few
minutes compared to the stock manifolds and the titanium-coated headers.
T1 T2
600
550
500
450
400
Degree
350
300
250
200
150 12:45:03 AM T1:508 T2:OL
0:50 0:55 1:00 1:05 1:10 1:15
19 Sat Jun 2004 Time
Figure 4. Graphical results from Omegaette thermocouple on the titanium-coated headers
The most important data that we gained is not the most evident data from the graphical temperatures shown
in Figure 3 and Figure 4. It is in the radiant barrier test that we performed using a FLIR ThermaCAM S60
imaging radiometer during the time that we gathered contact temperature data. The FLIR ThermaCAM S60
detects infrared light from about 7.5 to 14 µm (micrometer) in wavelength. Infrared light is emitted from all
targets like visible light is emitted from a light bulb. The hotter the target, the more light comes from the
surface. The total amount of light can be quantified by using the Stefan-Boltzmann law:
InfraMation 2004 Proceedings ITC 104 A 2004-07-27
W = εσΤ4
where W = the total radiated power in Watts/cm2
ε = the emissivity of the surface
σ = the Stefan-Boltzman constant (5.67X10-12W/cm2K4)
T = the absolute temperature of the object in K
This light is also part of the spectrum responsible for radiant heat. Since the FLIR ThermaCAM S60 infrared
camera can detect this light or the intensity of the light, it will show us which coating is better for reducing the
radiation heat transfer from the coating surfaces to the surrounding underhood components…or which one is
better for keeping your engine bay cooler!
The Images shown in Figure 5 show several Infrared shots of the front header during the time that the
Omegaette was plotting the info from Figure 3.
Label Uncorrected
Value
IR: Date of 6/17/2004
Creation
IR: Time of 4:35:29 PM
Creation
IR Image 1 208.0 °F
Label Uncorrected
Value
IR: Date of 6/17/2004
Creation
IR: Time of 4:36:34 PM
Creation
IR Image 2 217.7°F
InfraMation 2004 Proceedings ITC 104 A 2004-07-27
Label Uncorrected
Value
IR: Date of 6/17/2004
Creation
IR: Time of 4:37:27 PM
Creation
IR Image 3 214.4°F
Figure 5. Infrared images showing the thermal patterns of the Afterburner-coated set of headers
The actual temperatures for the Infrared images are shown in Table 1.
Image # Actual Temperature Uncorrected IR
(Thermocouple) Temperature
IR Image 1 512ºF 208ºF
IR Image 2 455ºF 217ºF
IR Image 3 421ºF 214ºF
Table 1. Afterburner-coated header temperatures. Comparison between thermocouple readings and
uncorrected IR readings. Used to determine Afterburner coating emissivity.
Notice that the Infrared uncorrected temperatures DO NOT correlate with the actual temperatures taken with
the Omegaette contact thermocouple. THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT!! What this means is that the ability of
the Afterburner coating to radiate heat to infrared to the camera is low. How low? My calculations, using the
FLIR ThermaCAM S60 to measure the coating emissivity (ε, the efficiency of a surface to radiate and part of
the Stefan-Boltzman law), show it to be from 0.18 to 0.26 in value throughout the many surface textures. That
is extremely good for those higher temperatures. Though the temperatures are high, the emissivity is low, and
the radiated power is the combination of the two, as given by the Stefan-Boltzmann equation.
Now we need to find the emissivity of the titanium-coated headers. Figure 6 shows three Infrared images for
this type of header.
InfraMation 2004 Proceedings ITC 104 A 2004-07-27
Label Uncorrected
Value
IR: Date of 6/18/2004
Creation
IR: Time of 12:44:16 PM
Creation
IR Image #4 554.1°F
Label Uncorrected
Value
IR: Date of 6/18/2004
Creation
IR: Time of 12:44:29 PM
Creation
IR Image #5 549.1°F
Label Uncorrected
Value
IR: Date of 6/18/2004
Creation
IR: Time of 12:44:37 PM
Creation
IR Image #6 525.3°F
Figure 6. Infrared images showing the thermal patterns of the titanium-coated set of headers
InfraMation 2004 Proceedings ITC 104 A 2004-07-27
Now we perform the same emissivity correction using the FLIR ThermaCAM S60 to calculate the efficiency of
the titanium coating to protect the under hood components from radiant heat. Here is the data:
Image # Actual Temperature Uncorrected IR
(Thermocouple) Temperature
IR Image 4: 588ºF 554ºF
IR Image 5: 582ºF 549ºF
IR Image 6: 556ºF 525ºF
Table 2. Titanium-coated header temperatures. Comparison between thermocouple readings and
uncorrected IR readings. Used to determine titanium coating emissivity.
The calculations show the brand-new, no-mileage titanium is already in the high 0.8 emissivity range. The
value shows to be around 0.86. This is significant when it comes to lowering your under hood temperatures.
The last big point is to go back to the Stefan-Boltzmann law and then use it to simply define how impressive
the Afterburner coating is from the standpoint of radiant power. Why did I even show that law? To explain that
the 0.2 from the Afterburner is not just 60% better than the titanium coating; it is EXPONENTIALLY BETTER!
Afterburner: Emitted radiant power per cm2 ------.0861W/cm2
Titanium: Emitted radiant power per cm2 ----------.5596W/cm2
Electroless Nickel-Plated Header Test
Our last set of headers tested was the electroless nickel-plated headers. The same battery of tests was
completed, and the results were not surprising. See Figure 7 for the contact temperatures, but keep in mind
that the first few minutes of the graphical data were not used in this comparison, due to the fact that we
needed to move the thermocouple during collection.
The contact data shows that the maximum temperature with the engine idling and at normal operating
parameters was considerably higher than both of the ceramic-coated sets. Table 3 compares the peak
temperatures for the three sets.
Coating Peak Temperature
Afterburner 548ºF
Titanium 588ºF
Nickel 609ºF
Table 3. Peak temperature results summary for the three header types
The ceramic used in both the Afterburner and titanium applications helps to insulate from conductive heat.
The coated electroless nickel headers do not have that advantage and ran hotter in this test.
InfraMation 2004 Proceedings ITC 104 A 2004-07-27
T1 T2
650
600
550
500
450
Degree
400
350
300
250
200
150 3:31:18 AM T1:629 T2:OL
3:35 3:40 3:45 3:50 3:55 4:00
17 Sat Jul 2004 Time
Figure 7. Graphical results from Omegaette thermocouple on the Nickel coated headers
As far as cooling to 130ºF after the engine was shut down and the car was at its peak temperature, the nickel
finish allowed the front header next to the fan to cool to the touch in about 25 minutes. They were still 186.5ºF
when the fans stopped. If you are worried about engine temperatures during staging for another race,
compare the nickel to the Afterburner and titanium in this table:
Coating Temperature at cooling fan
shut-off (6 minutes and 40 sec)
Afterburner 126ºF
Titanium 150ºF
Nickel 186ºF
Table 4. Cooldown temperature results summary for the three header
types
How does the Infrared data compare to the thermocouple contact data for the nickel? Observe Figure 8.
InfraMation 2004 Proceedings ITC 104 A 2004-07-27
Label Uncorrected
Value
IR: Date of 7/16/2004
Creation
IR: Time of 3:29:05 PM
Creation
IR Image #7 226.1°F
Label Uncorrected
Value
IR: Date of 7/16/2004
Creation
IR: Time of 3:30:45 PM
Creation
IR Image #8 245.9°F
Label Uncorrected
Value
IR: Date of 7/16/2004
Creation
IR: Time of 3:31:12 PM
Creation
IR Image #9 234.9 °F
Figure 8. Infrared images showing the thermal patterns of the nickel-coated set of headers
InfraMation 2004 Proceedings ITC 104 A 2004-07-27
Time to look at the emissivity values of the nickel plating using the FLIR ThermaCAM S60. Here is the data:
Image # Actual Uncorrected IR
Temperature Temperature
IR Image 7 560ºF 226ºF
IR Image 8 609ºF 246ºF
IR Image 9 575ºF 235ºF
Table 5. Nickel-coated header temperatures. Comparison between
thermocouple readings and uncorrected IR readings. Used to determine
nickel coating emissivity.
This time, the nickel plating uncorrected infrared temperatures track along with rising and falling actual
temperatures. The approximate radiant efficiency is 0.23 on this set. Not bad at all, but it was expected, since
bare, clean metal is best when it comes to radiant barriers. We had just over 1,000 miles on these prior to the
test to season them to a bluish color.
How do these stack up in radiant efficiency?
Afterburner: Emitted radiant power per cm2 -----.0861W/cm2
Titanium: Emitted radiant power per cm2 -----.5596W/cm2
Nickel: Emitted radiant power per cm2 -----.1620W/ cm2
CONCLUSION
This is a simple radiant power comparison, and we have to remember that the surface area, geometric shape,
and temperature difference between the radiant exchange components also affect the efficiency. However, it
is safe to say that the titanium ceramic coating radiates at nearly 6.5 times better in the 7.5-14 µm spectrum
than the Afterburner coating when they are at running temperature. Also, the nickel is about two times more
able to give off radiation. Couple this with the higher running temperatures of both the titanium and nickel
compared to the Afterburner, and you have hotter under hood temperatures due to heat transfer by
conduction and convection and radiation to the surroundings.
Without the use of the infrared thermal imaging camera, this test would not have been easily done. I look
forward to testing more coatings with the infrared thermal imaging camera to truly see which one performs
the way I need it to for controlling heat under my race car’s hood. I choose the Afterburner, hands down.
REFERENCES
For more info on infrared and aftermarket performance, check out the following companies:
• FLIR Systems, Inc. URL: http://www.flir.com/.
• The Other Guys Headers. URL: http://www.theotherguysproducts.com/.
• GFWCPerformance. URL: http://www.gfwcperformance.com/.
InfraMation 2004 Proceedings ITC 104 A 2004-07-27
