Water/Methanol Injection--Liquid Intercooling

[CobraMarty]

I started a previous thread about turbo/superchargers, Heat, detonation and intercooling, CLICK HERE, and here is my follow up.

Water/Methanol Injection--It Definitely Works!

Using just the 'blue' windshield washer fluid and the smallest water/meth nozzle, at a constant 3 pounds boost on a slight uphill grade, the manifold intake air temp was 118* which was 20* above the pre s/c temp, actually it was like 125-128* just before boost and with the boost and water, the temp was going down to the 118*! At WOT 6pounds boost, the Manifold intake air temp was 140* which was 34* above the temp sensor before the s/c located a couple inches below the tb.

6 pounds boost should raise the discharge charge temp 130+* above the starting temp. Stock intake air temps thru the stock air box, even a 'CAI', or an air filter over behind the distributor area- are seeing IAT's of 150-170+*! So any form of forced induction without any type of intercooling, I am sure, under boost, are seeing charge manifold air temps of 250+*!!

This is why the 7th injector works. It itself acts as a 'chemical/liquid' intercooling. My temps before water inj. were 150-165*, now with very small amount of water/meth the temps are 118-140*. My goal was to be somewhere between 20-40 degrees above ambient without an 'intercooler'.

Next to try and get the starting IAT at the throttle body cooler.

 

[CobraMarty]

Here's some pics-
The resevoir is a stock cherokee windshield washer tank from an early XY. $5 at the pick-a-part. Fits and works perfect. Holds 1 gallon of fluid and has low level switch which I will wire up to the stock windshield washer level switch, so that if either tank is low the 'low washer fluid light' will come on.

Here is a shot of the nozzle. It is just below the 7th injector on the backside/inlet housing of the supercharger(just to the right of the 'bright white spots' in the pic). Yes gas and water/meth run thru the supercharger.

 

[CobraMarty]

1% HP gain for every 10* decrease in charge intake air temp. 100*decrease=10% more power at the same boost level.
Plus less chance for detonation. Could run lower octane fuel or tolerate a load of poor quality gas.
Plus can add in a little bit of timing for more power gain.

WIN, WIN, WIN.

 

[streetxj]

Cool.

 

[CobraMarty]

Added a Methanol controller today.
It is a PWM which is adjustable for minimum boost start and maximum for 100%DC.
At lower boost- less meth is needed than at higher boost.

 

[CobraMarty]

Even works for N/A engines.

In the latest issue of Engine Masters Magazine, They used a Snow Stage 3 MPG Max Boost Cooler. On the dyno, the engine's intake air temp was 107* dropping to 90* at the end of the pull and with the Snow MPG, the start temp was 61* and climbed to 67* at the end of the pull. This drop in IAT was worth 21HP and 16TQ.

That was a 2.95% increase in HP and 2.6% increase in TQ. No additional tuning was done. Just the cooler IAT. There was a drop of 23* at the end of the pull and 46* at the start of the pull.

This shows how a 10* decrease in IAT is worth 1% more power.

WHAT IS YOUR IAT ??

 

[bjoehandley]

Even works for N/A engines.

In the latest issue of Engine Masters Magazine, They used a Snow Stage 3 MPG Max Boost Cooler. On the dyno, the engine's intake air temp was 107* dropping to 90* at the end of the pull and with the Snow MPG, the start temp was 61* and climbed to 67* at the end of the pull. This drop in IAT was worth 21HP and 16TQ.

That was a 2.95% increase in HP and 2.6% increase in TQ. No additional tuning was done. Just the cooler IAT. There was a drop of 23* at the end of the pull and 46* at the start of the pull.

This shows how a 10* decrease in IAT is worth 1% more power.

WHAT IS YOUR IAT ??

I've noticed that while running E-85 in my Chrysler 200, the difference in overall driveability with E-85 vs 87 Octane pump gas was astounding. Not sure what the intake temps were and are, but but I'd be willing to bet the vaporized alchohal. drops the air temps going intp the combustion chamber prior to ignition.

 

[CobraMarty]

Have been adjusting the digital PWM controller.
Using a 250cc/min nozzle, at 1 pound starts at 25% and scales up to 100% at 5.5 pounds.
Now it uses about 1/2 to 3/4 of the 1 gallon reservoir tank per tank of gas.
IATemps are in the 120-140* and even cooler now that the weather is cooler.

 

[CobraMarty]

Others are catching on to the benifits of chemical/liquid intercooling.

 

[CobraMarty]

Intercooling by any form is of great benifit to FI applications. Cooler charge intake temperatures has so many advantages. Any FI system with charge intake temperatures over 200 degrees need to seriousoy look at intercooling the charge air temp.

 

[CobraMarty]

I've mentioned this site/link before, Here is some of the best reading about Methanol/ CHemical Intercooling. Read the 5 Stickys.

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=145

 

[O-Gauge Steamer]

Just an FYI here. The Lockheed L-1049 Super Constellation Aircraft used water injection. Aircraft was designed in 1937. At that time, water injection was old hat.

So, it works. The addition of the methanol is primarily to prevent it from freezing. The methanol is not actually required to get the effect. Just water works just fine. And dandy as well. I have even heard that methanol is a detriment to the process.

In a nut shell, the water converts to steam in the combustion chamber which greatly adds to the power being generated.

There is a downside to this as along with increased power is, paradoxically, wasted fuel. If you have ever seen old films of prop driven aircraft taking off and the engines appeared to be belching black exhaust, that was the water injection in action. The "over rich" condition is due to the flame front being partially quenched during the burn cycle. The combustion temperature is lowered as a result and a bit of unburnt fuel exits out the exhaust.

As it was, every piston engine aircraft (OK, that's pretty much all of them except for two...) used water injection. The Fighters used it so as to be able to utilize shorter runways, The Bombers/Cargo Aircraft used it to be able to take off in an "over loaded" state.

A system has been utilized by many OEM car manufacturers over the years. I believe that Oldsmobile used one in '62 but I could have the year wrong. I think it was in the Jet Fire engine series but could be wrong about that as well. I think the car had a turbocharger on it.

I spend a few quality years with the L-1049 whilst in the Air Force. Stationed in California and TDY'd to Thailand, Florida and Iceland.

 

[Bryan C.]

I cleaned this thread up. Any further drama will result in infractions and your posts will be deleted.

 

[GSequoia]

I spend a few quality years with the L-1049 whilst in the Air Force. Stationed in California and TDY'd to Thailand, Florida and Iceland.

Now that's showing your age. :kissyou:

 

[O-Gauge Steamer]

Old, No Doubt About It.

Pre AWACS. We were the 552nd AEW&C Wing with detachments in the three places I listed. From Thailand, we flew Combat Air Control over Vietnam. Funny thing is, the radar on the AWACS does not have the range of the old stuff we flew. But then, the aircraft is nearly twice as fast...

Iceland was the base for the DEW extension. The Florida unit extended the Southern Tier radar barrier.

So, yes. Old Guy. How else could I have taken part in installing a Supercharger on a Ford flat head V-8 in 1959? Not done these days as the engine are just too valuable...

But back on the point of water injection. The primary benefit is not a reduction of IAT but is the generation of steam. Water will typically expand into steam by a factor of 1,603:1. So that translates into a one milliliter injection of water/methanol (at a 50% mix) expanding to 801.5 mLs of steam. From references I have found, a 400hp engine would take a 100ml single point injection. Extending that, the steam generated would be 8+ liters.

Will you get an IAT reduction, yes. Does it matter all that much? Debatable... You can reduce your IATs by the addition of a header blanket and insulation under the intake manifold.

Note that I do not recommend header wrap here. Most, if not all, header manufacturers will void their warranty if you wrap the header as it creates a phenomenal hot point where the wrap stops. Blankets just shunt the heat away preserving the header. And, yes, there is a blanket installed in my rig... I always install one on any inline non cross flow head engine I own. On a cross flow, not important except to reduce under hood temperatures.

Link to Snow Performance Installation Instructions:

http://www.snowperformance.net/product_images/product_variation-installation_pdf-108.pdf

In the instructions, Snow recommends and AFR of 12.0 to 12.5 to prevent quenching of the flame front. IMO, if that is the way you go, make sure that either you have two fuel maps in your controller (with/without water) or that you never run the system out of juice. A fail safe in other words.

Not touting Snow as the best, just a very good system. Aquamist and Devils Own make good stuff as well.

 

[CobraMarty]

Will you get an IAT reduction, yes. Does it matter all that much? Debatable...

Not quite sure about that one. Reducing IATs is just what air-air and air-water intercoolers as well as chemical intercoolers do, which allow you to run more timing(less timing retard), less fuel, more boost, lower octane fuel, reducing risk of detonation, longevity and more power.

 

[CobraMarty]

'Reducing IATs' I am really meaning 'reducing charged intake air temperature and increasing the charged intake air's density- 'more air molecules/space'. I don't have an "intake air Molecule" gauge but I do have an IAT gauge and they are proportionally related.
More molecules + more fuel = more bang/more power.

 

[Keithmania]

Not quite sure about that one. Reducing IATs is just what air-air and air-water intercoolers as well as chemical intercoolers do, which allow you to run more timing(less timing retard), less fuel, more boost, lower octane fuel, reducing risk of detonation, longevity and more power.

you have to be one of the most contrarian people I have seen post in this forum. You have lots of internet knowledge, but when given real world, hands on experience, from O-Gauge no less, you revert back to your talking points. How about this, instead of dogmatically adhering to what you know, why not run a bit of an experiment. Use straight up de-ionized water to your rig, then preheat it to see if it is truly a low-only-IAT phenomenon, or possibly, just possibly, the creation of steam as O-Gauge stated.

all to often you come off as one whose knowledge is with out refute and most people I know can only stand to be around know-it-all's for only do long. so if you want to be well received anywhere you go, lose the "my knowledge is superior to everyone else's knowledge" bit.

$5 says he argues with this too

 

[CobraMarty]

OK. I'll take the $5.

 

[scottmcneal]

$5 says he argues with this too

I'll take some of this action. I got 5 to say he does too