Richard Paul

iTrader: (5)

For the 10th or 12th time guys water does not add power by itself. It can help you get some of the power you already have safely out to the flywheel. It puts out the fire when it is out of control. Abnormal combustion will destroy the engine. You must keep it in check. When you have gotten past the pressure the fuel can handle the water injection can be used to help make usefull power. That is why it will do nothing for your NA engine.

Water does not burn but it takes up room. So if you can't use it, drink it. Adding alcohol is a good idea as it does burn and takes away more heat. It has it's problems though. These are usefull tools for those who need them and know what they are doing.

Carbon, I'm happy to have you around. We need a grade A chem student. On the other hand I don't like you being here as one day you will have to correct me. I was not the good Chem student, in fact I can't remember being there.

carbonRX8

iTrader: (1)

Amen.



It has been some time for me too; though maybe not as long as you! :D

Nemesis8

iTrader: (3)

I had 3 hours of Chem Eng. at Missouri-Rolla back in '80

Richard Paul

iTrader: (5)

You mean 3 units don't you?

Ole Spiff

"Sillyness" [sic]? Since you can't be a total idiot based on the rest of your post, and I assume you've had at least some history and know about steam locomotives and the impact steam engines had on the country for oh, at least 100 years... I have to inquire as to what you were referring to with that comment.

r0tor

iTrader: (1)

The gas turbines at my power plant have a sweet water fogging system that can raise output by almost 15% - mostly due to the increase of mass flow (denser air) but also because compressor (axial flow ) efficiency raises dramatically.

10kRPMS

what no pics

carbonRX8

iTrader: (1)

Um...those engines were coal fired.

This is exactly where the brand of "Sillyness" so exemplified in this thread comes from, IMO. Steam engines were not steam fired in any sense of the word. The steam acted analogously to the electrical systems on modern locomotives where diesel is burnt, a generator is turned, and power is distributed to electrical engines at each wheel set.

You can't get blood from a turnip, you can't get hydrogen out of water without putting MORE energy in (I reference Law 1 and 2 here; see Chain Reaction), and you cant get more power out of a NA engine by squirting water anywhere into the intake (and I do not mean to bash technicalities like blasting carbon off the internals; that might work. That was one of the alternative uses to which I was refering.)

The ad hominem attack on my spelling is invalid and quite moot. You knew what I was talking about, didn't you?

rotarygod

Water injection into an engine does not help power because of expanding steam. It does not turn into a steam engine. A true steam engine doesn't inject water into the piston and then heat it into steam anyways. It starts with steam and ends with steam. Steam should not even be mentioned with regards to water injection. Water injection is also a waste of time on a naturally aspirated engine. It has it's place with forced induction but only on a drag strip for a few seconds and only after you've maxed out all other power producing/anti detonation options.

carbonRX8

iTrader: (1)

God has spoken. :D

r0tor

iTrader: (1)

well technically, in a NA engine if you add the right amount of water mist into the intake the water will be absorded until the humidity gets to 100% and the intake temperature will lower from the "dry bulb" temperature to the "wet bulb" temperature with evaporative cooling...

... but in real terms we are only talking about maybe a 5 degree cooling effect at most for something at atmosperic pressure - which will maybe get you a horsepower at most. So your point pretty much is correct.

Ole Spiff

I never said steam locomotives were "steam fired" or made any comment at all about how they worked. Oil, wood or coal was used to heat up the boiler which boiled the water into steam which created pressure and was released to drive the mains. It was steam under pressure that drove them. If you've ever had the pleasure of listening to a steam loco go by at full throttle it's a glorious sound.

My comment about injecting vapor anywhere in the intake was an attempt to find out what the original poster was talking about; you'll note in my comment I also wasn't saying it would work either.

Your spelling was your spelling; calling it "ad hominem" now doesn't change the fact that you spelled it that way which I merely pointed out. Since my inquiry as to your motives was due to the appearance that you were "attacking" me as though I were stupid or something, I was merely pointing out your own... "weakness" shall we say, in preparation in case you were going to get into a flaming contest.

One of the things I hate the most about today's current conversational "style" is this penchant for condescending arrogance as a method of demonstrating self-delusional "superiority" as though every conversation is a must-win combat situation. It makes it nearly impossible to just simply "talk" to anyone anymore.

carbonRX8

iTrader: (1)

lol:D That is exactly logical fallacy I was refering to; "attacking the man":D

Sorry. While I was having fun verbally sparring. I dont mean any arrogance, in the least bit. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, (as long as it is mine! ) and I obviously valued yours enough to respond to it. Bad me!

coolingmist

Our kits are already proven. We have dealers and customers getting 80-87 HP from putting our kit on an EVO. The highly modified ones were getting 52 HP, then tuned to 87HP on the dyno. Others were able to run 29 lbs of boost with no hint of detonation. The closer to stock ones were making 27 ish HP gains (leaving boost and everything exactly the same for both tests.)

We have cars that can run alot more timing, cars that were pinging and now have no knock at all. When you sell 1000's of kits in a year and have customers call you almost every day thanking you, you know your kits work.

We were mentioned in this months carcraft magazine. There was a nice article about water injection in it. We know what these kits can do, because we see it every day. While every car is different the average gains from JUST bolting the kit on is 20-25 wheel horsepower.

And yes I am referring to turbo/sc engines. With normally aspirated it allows you to run more timing, lower octain fuel, if you are pinging it will stop it also.


Thanks

bureau13

If you're pinging you have a problem, you don't need a water injection band-aid to fix it. I absolutely believe there are significant benefits to water injection in an FI application, just don't market it as a solution to pinging in a NA car!

jds

coolingmist

Tell that to the people that we have sold these kits for that had pinging and now run more timing.

Im not talking about a bone stock car that is pinging but when you have a car that is modified to the point that the engine is overloaded the water injection can solve the problem. Its a great solution, it works. If you have another way to prevent the pinging, i say go for it, but most of the time our customers have tried everything and the only way to stop it is to retard the timing. The water injection solves this delima.

jwbond

coolingmist, i am not doubting your kit on a fi application. i was just stating that i am curious as to what it can do for an 8 w/ a turbo or sc. it seems that this has not been done yet (as far as i know).

if you can produce a dyno for an rx8 with fi and your kit then i think you will find everyone in these forums would be very interested in seeing what can be acheived with your kit.

carbonRX8

iTrader: (1)

What does this mean? (Are we still talking about rotories here?) The needle on my BS meter is starting to wiggle.
Increasing your "octane" by spraying water in your intake does not sound like the best solution. Perhaps they should be running race fuel.

Richard Paul

iTrader: (5)

I don't want to be the one to keep this topic alive but I reread some of my Ricardo last night and he does use the word "steam".
In supercharged engines he said it effected the detonation like richining up the mixture. It of course was pulling heat out of the charge. The thing to remember is that his testing was done with "high octane" fuel of 87. This was a long time ago. They also used a lab engine with no real performance porting and chamber design.
"Sir Harry" did not change timing. Remember more timing is not what you want, it is best to be able to run with less. You only need the extra timing if you can't burn all the mixture in time to use the pressure. If you light it off before TDC then you have to compress an expanding gas. This takes mechanical power away.

Possable that the expanding gas helps turbulance and speeds combustion. It also works better with the alcohol because it boils faster and gets started sooner in the process. Also he says 50/50 is the max ratio you should use.

rotarygod

Here's a nice result from a water injection test on a nonturbo vehicle.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/auto...tml?page=4&c=y

Water injection is still only useful on forced induction a quarter mile at a time but possibly even at Bonneville. Like nitrous, it has no place on the street. If someone absolutely NEEDS water injection in order not to ping, they shouldn't be working on cars at all. They don't know what they are doing. It is not a solution you market to people who drive street cars or even road course/track cars. I don't care how many EVO, WRX, etc people use it and like it. I also know alot of those kids that drive around that do many other dumb things to their cars because marketing and hearsay convinced them to. Nitrous on an essentially stock street driven Civic is a prime example. There's a better way.

coolingmist

UPDATE:

We found a dyno Shop out west that wants to become a distributor of ours. They have an Rx-8 as the project car with a turbo.

We are shipping them our Deluxe Single Stage kit today. They will install the kit and get dyno #s.

I will update this thread once I get the dyno sheet.

David

globi

Water injection on naturally aspirated engines does work, if the engines are built for it.
http://not2fast.wryday.com/thermo/wa...99-01-0568.pdf

If you think of it, it's actually surprising that it's not commonly used.
The energy required to vaporize water is enormous.
If you compress 1.3l with a compression ratio of 10 you need 0.516kJ and reach a temperature of 463C. This is about the same energy that is required to evaporate 0.2 ml of water at 21C.

If water completly vaporizes during the compression cycle, you could easily increase the compression ratio from 10 to 15 (and higher) on a gasoline engine without causing detonation, because the compression energy is required to evaporate water vs. heating the intake air. A higher compression ratio does increase power and efficiency. Also since you use water to cool the air vs. fuel you don't need to richen the air fuel ratio anymore.

With an electronic throttle you could even protect the engine. So if the water reservoir is empty the throttle wouldn't completly open anymore.

Consumer however might not interested in this because even if the engine needs 20% less fuel, who would be willing to fill a water reservoir frequently?
Maybe if the consumer had to pay $6 a gallon?

Why don't we see this on naturally aspirated Formula 1 engines? Water slows down the burning rate somewhat which means that it might not work on fast spinning engines.

Btw regarding FI: cooling the intake air during the compression cycle can't be accomplished by an intercooler. So there are definitely some merits of water injection in addition to an intercooler.

globi

Even more merits:
http://not2fast.wryday.com/thermo/wa..._chemistry.txt

capnkirk52

exactly, you need to add methanol to the mix if you want help for detonation. windshield washer fluid is usually 10-20% meth and works pretty good..

globi

Water definitely increases knock resistance.

The purpose of adding extra fuel (AFR less than 12.5) is to cool the intake charge during the compression cycle. While fuel evaporates it takes heat off the intake charge.
Water does the same. However the latent heat of water is over 6 times higher than of gasoline. So the same amount of water will cool the intake charge 6 times as much as gasoline during the compression cycle. (Well if the water droplets are small enough such that they will evaporate.)

Also if the air is dry water will cool the intake air below ambient even if the water is at ambient temperature. (Again it requires energy for the phase change - liquid to gas.)

If you don't believe in the laws of physics. Here's an SAE paper which proofs that water increases knock resistance:
http://not2fast.wryday.com/thermo/wa...99-01-0568.pdf