Water injection

[AndysR]

Can I sway the discussion in another direction and just ask those that have run ethanol in their cars albeit either mixed with the fuel or as an additional intorduction though a WI kit if there has been any side effects on the car? I had heard that ethanol can be quite corrosive that's all. Just curious not wanting to start another arguement

[hamish]

Bromberg, L., D. R. Cohn, and J. B. Heywood, comps. Calculations of Knock Suppression in Highly Turbocharged Gasoline/Ethanol Engines Using Direct Ethanol Injection. 23 Feb. 2006. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

http://lfee.mit.edu/public/LFEE%202006-01%20RP.pdf

Georgallides, Tryphon. "How a Water Injection System Works." Rallycars.Com. 1996.

http://www.rallycars.com/Cars/WaterInjection.html

"Water Injection Wizardry." Mother Earth News Sept.-Oct. 1979.

http://www.motherearthnews.com/libra...ction_Wizardry

"Water Injection Basics." Alcohol-Injection. 11 Oct. 2005.

http://www.alcohol-injection.com/for...read.php?t=217

Cohn, D. R., L. Bromberg, and J. B. Heywood, comps. Direct Injection Ethanol Boosted Gasoline Engines: Biofuel Leveraging for Cost Effective Reduction of Oil Dependence and CO2 Emissions. 20 Apr. 2005. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

http://lfee.mit.edu/public/LFEE_2005-001_RP.pdf

McCutcheon, Kimble D. "Frank Walker-"What Can I Do About This Problem?""

http://enginehistory.org/Frank%20WalkerWeb1.pdf

"Subaru World Rally Car Engine." Race Engine Technology.
Hendricks, R. C., D. T. Shouse, and W. M. Roquemore, comps. Water Injected Turbomachinery. Mar. 2005. NASA.

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/ca...2005173637.pdf

Lanzafame, R., comp. Water Injection Effects in a Single-Cylinder CFR Engine. Mar. 1999. Society of Automotice Engineers.

http://forums.evolutionm.net/water-a...rch-paper.html

Huw,

Fantastic the mountain of evidence is yet another cut and paste of Aquamists Web site, some kids rally car web site, a couple of links that do not work and a Mitsubishi Evo Forum. Hardly even a Mole Hill.

H

[hamish]

Can I sway the discussion in another direction and just ask those that have run ethanol in their cars albeit either mixed with the fuel or as an additional intorduction though a WI kit if there has been any side effects on the car? I had heard that ethanol can be quite corrosive that's all. Just curious not wanting to start another arguement

Yep you heard right. It Ethanol and Methanol are very corrosive to your fuel system.

[jardon]

Huw,

If you were injecting pure Methanol you will need 3 times more Methanol than Petrol to gain any power. That is roughly 9000cc/min at WOT in your car. If you go and buy another 29 pumps from BigCC you might get there !

Interesting reading on T5Turd I see that Don is still a bitter and twisted and Ashook is still a retard. (my turn for childish insults)

H

Right Hamish, let's calm down now. We both know you have just made those numbers up - I don't know why but please try to be rational. There is plenty of evidence (yes, some of it on aquamists user group) for wai and the best results are obtained by trial and error. On that basis tuners use say between 10 and 40% wa to fuel - generally higher volumes with methanol rich mixtures.

[jardon]

I'm going to bed - please let's keep this sane and unlocked until tomorrow!

Edit: I neither started nor contributed to any thread on T5D5 that relates to this issue. I have a genuine reason for posting here so let me get on with it. If it had worked out that wai made my car slower you can be sure I would have posted that too - just as I sought advice on the Aquamist forum when I had teething troubles.

[The Flying Moose]

I'm going to bed - please let's keep this sane and unlocked until tomorrow!

Edit: I neither started nor contributed to any thread on T5D5 that relates to this issue. I have a genuine reason for posting here so let me get on with it. If it had worked out that wai made my car slower you can be sure I would have posted that too - just as I sought advice on the Aquamist forum when I had teething troubles.

Dont worry... the ban stick is out instead (waits for Pedro to come running along!)

[GazT4R]

Huw,

If you were injecting pure Methanol you will need 3 times more Methanol than Petrol to gain any power. That is roughly 9000cc/min at WOT in your car. If you go and buy another 29 pumps from BigCC you might get there !

Interesting reading on T5Turd I see that Don is still a bitter and twisted and Ashook is still a retard. (my turn for childish insults)

H

Whether Don is bitter and twisted or Ashok is a retard is beside the point quite frankly.

Again you've got lost in and hung up on one point which is the calorific value of Methanol although lord knows why.

Huw isn't using pure Methanol as a fuel though is he, the fact it burns is a byproduct which is useful to us however not essential so the calorific value of Methanol is unimportant. Lets just stick to water to keep things simple.

Water cools the intake charge, here I think we can agree, given that most inject post intercooler using high pressure atomisation, upon entering the cylinder it also cools and upon ignition of the fuel air mixture slows the burn of the fuel as even you yourself has pointed out.
Rather than use extra fuel to cool and prevent Det we can use water instead if we wish to do so, therefore in high performance applications raising the knock threshold moving away from detonation per given AFR and given boost and timing etc. (Methanol is slower burning than petrol and cools the charge, crown, walls as Alan pointed out so same applies there in principle on the cooling side).
Now given that the charge is cooler and therefore more dense, cold mornings with cool air, then we have a denser fuel/air mixture entering the cylinder. Couple that with a slower burn per set boost/ignition value therefore further back from Det then we already have a higher threshold to work with when mapping the engine. If we then adjust the boost/timing, in most cases timing is used to advance the burn and therefore make more use of the slower/more complete burn then we have two thing which together will undoubted give us more power.
A cooler more dense charge giving us more fuel and air into the cylinder per given cycle and using more advance to compensate for a slower burn enables a complete, cleaner burn as it would with higher octane fuel hence the comments that water in effect raises the octane rating of the fuel. In the case of Methanol injecting @ 10-15%, it having a higher octane rating but lower calorific value (ME7's cope better with this due to the wideband and can adjust (obviously only so far without a set threshold so mapping with it running is better) but 850's will lean out somewhat so would need map adjustments to the AFR as well as the timing whereas with the ME7 you could just add more timing) it would slightly raise the overall octane rating of the fuel in the cylinder.

Refer to the cited links above should you need more evidence however we still await any concrete cited references from yourself be they wikipedia, published works, thesis or even fag packet references.

[GazT4R]

Can I sway the discussion in another direction and just ask those that have run ethanol in their cars albeit either mixed with the fuel or as an additional intorduction though a WI kit if there has been any side effects on the car? I had heard that ethanol can be quite corrosive that's all. Just curious not wanting to start another arguement

It's advised not to use ethanol due precisely because of it's corrosive nature Andy.

Isopropol alcohol or Methanol are the two main ones although the latter being 'biodiesel additive' is far cheaper than the former so is used more widely.

Methanol is corrosive, in a sense to aluminium, in that it will if sat on aluminium make it form and oxide layer but then will also corrode the oxide later however we are not using it as a fuel but suspended as a atomised vapour in the intake charge which is fast moving over hot surfaces so does not have time to form oxides and corrode.

[hamish]

Right Hamish, let's calm down now. We both know you have just made those numbers up - I don't know why but please try to be rational. There is plenty of evidence (yes, some of it on aquamists user group) for wai and the best results are obtained by trial and error. On that basis tuners use say between 10 and 40% wa to fuel - generally higher volumes with methanol rich mixtures.

No not made up.

If you are running an engine on 100% Methanol it will need twice as much Methanol as it will Petrol.
If you are running a mix of Methanol and Petrol you will need a 3:1 mix for similar power to 100% petrol.
To give you an idea if you were tuning a forced induction engine on petrol with a target AFR of 12:1 that would be 8:1 with Methanol.
Another indicator can be seen with injected engines that have been converted to Methanol they will normally have an extra set of injectors fitted.

Not increasing the quantity of Methanol sufficiently will result in a loss of power.

[t5_monkey]

I have to say as an impartial observer.

Jardon is staying calm, quoting reams of evidence both researched by himself and available online, and his detractors are just getting personal, which to me says, he's winning the debate. (I've never met anyone involved BTW!)

I think if someone is a fully qualified engineer, of any kind, they should be able to debate the pros and cons of this issue without getting personal.

So lets be mature, and let non-engineer folk like me enjoy reading rational and non-stupid expert opinions?

PS..I heard WI good for avoiding melted Pistons...

personally... I always like wiki for this kinda stuff http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_injection_(engines)

[hamish]

Whether Don is bitter and twisted or Ashok is a retard is beside the point quite frankly.

Again you've got lost in and hung up on one point which is the calorific value of Methanol although lord knows why.

Huw isn't using pure Methanol as a fuel though is he, the fact it burns is a byproduct which is useful to us however not essential so the calorific value of Methanol is unimportant. Lets just stick to water to keep things simple.

Water cools the intake charge, here I think we can agree, given that most inject post intercooler using high pressure atomisation, upon entering the cylinder it also cools and upon ignition of the fuel air mixture slows the burn of the fuel as even you yourself has pointed out.
Rather than use extra fuel to cool and prevent Det we can use water instead if we wish to do so, therefore in high performance applications raising the knock threshold moving away from detonation per given AFR and given boost and timing etc. (Methanol is slower burning than petrol and cools the charge, crown, walls as Alan pointed out so same applies there in principle on the cooling side).
Now given that the charge is cooler and therefore more dense, cold mornings with cool air, then we have a denser fuel/air mixture entering the cylinder. Couple that with a slower burn per set boost/ignition value therefore further back from Det then we already have a higher threshold to work with when mapping the engine. If we then adjust the boost/timing, in most cases timing is used to advance the burn and therefore make more use of the slower/more complete burn then we have two thing which together will undoubted give us more power.
A cooler more dense charge giving us more fuel and air into the cylinder per given cycle and using more advance to compensate for a slower burn enables a complete, cleaner burn as it would with higher octane fuel hence the comments that water in effect raises the octane rating of the fuel. In the case of Methanol injecting @ 10-15%, it having a higher octane rating but lower calorific value (ME7's cope better with this due to the wideband and can adjust (obviously only so far without a set threshold so mapping with it running is better) but 850's will lean out somewhat so would need map adjustments to the AFR as well as the timing whereas with the ME7 you could just add more timing) it would slightly raise the overall octane rating of the fuel in the cylinder.

Refer to the cited links above should you need more evidence however we still await any concrete cited references from yourself be they wikipedia, published works, thesis or even fag packet references.

Having mapped similar engines on both petrol and methanol I can tell you that you will need more than 15% methanol to make gains. Injecting these small amounts you are is pointless.
Have any of you ever considered what your ME7 map might do if the IAT became "too" cold ? It will go to a fuel enrichment map. I see this often when live mapping bikes on the dyno we have to turn the fans off until the engine temp has got back into its sweet spot. Otherwise we could end up mapping a cold start map. Engines are not happy running cold as well as hot.

[GazT4R]

No not made up.

If you are running an engine on 100% Methanol it will need twice as much Methanol as it will Petrol.
If you are running a mix of Methanol and Petrol you will need a 3:1 mix for similar power to 100% petrol.
To give you an idea if you were tuning a forced induction engine on petrol with a target AFR of 12:1 that would be 8:1 with Methanol.
Another indicator can be seen with injected engines that have been converted to Methanol they will normally have an extra set of injectors fitted.

Not increasing the quantity of Methanol sufficiently will result in a loss of power.

You are correct Hamish in that if we were running the engine on Methanol due to its lower calorific value we would need to inject far more Methanol to compensate however we are not injecting the Methanol as a fuel it is simply a byproduct of the use in this case.

Since the Stoichiometric value of Methanol is 6.4:1 and that of petrol is 14.7:1 then to run a target AFR of 12:1 on petrol would require an AFR of around 5.4:1 on Methanol not 8:1.

On an ME 4.3/4.4 which is invariably running a fixed AFR at WOT, unless you have significantly increased the MAF size and scaled the MAF tables to suite, will continue to fuel subject to part throttle compensation (inapplicable here since Meth/Water Injection is set to inject at a predetermined boost pressure usually associated with WOT or near WOT when MAF saturation occurs anyway) via the petrol injectors at 12:1 or whatever you set it to in the fuel tables. Now knowing that we have Methanol or water injected, slowing the burn, we then adjust the map accordingly. In the case of both additional timing is usually added to take advantage of the increased knock threshold created by the slower but more complete burn thus creating more power. As stated in the articles referenced one could run a leaner AFR nearly 12.5:1 instead of 12:1 since we no longer have to use the addtional fuel for cooling to move back the knock threshold. Either way more power is created.

In the case of the ME7 engines running the wideband a similar case emerges although whilst the ME7 wideband senses the additional fuel in the case of methanol but compensates at the injectors for it maintaining it's target AFR, in a sensible case 12:1, in terms of calorific value @ 10% Methanol Injection per volume of fuel it leans the mixture out nearer the 12.5:1 again without adjustment due to the calorific value decrease but again with the additional cooling of the charge and slowing of the burn, whether water which would not lean the mix in calorific terms or Methanol which would, then we can add addtional timing to compensate the slower flame front and thus create more power.

[jardon]

No not made up.

If you are running an engine on 100% Methanol it will need twice as much Methanol as it will Petrol.
If you are running a mix of Methanol and Petrol you will need a 3:1 mix for similar power to 100% petrol.
To give you an idea if you were tuning a forced induction engine on petrol with a target AFR of 12:1 that would be 8:1 with Methanol.
Another indicator can be seen with injected engines that have been converted to Methanol they will normally have an extra set of injectors fitted.

Not increasing the quantity of Methanol sufficiently will result in a loss of power.

No.

Methanol is stoich at approx 6:1. At petrol AFR 12:1 (lambda 0.8) the equivalent methanol mixture would be very rich indeed - approx 5:1. This is irrelevant though. Listen again. We are injecting a cooling mist of wa into the intake charge. The cooling is significant as is the huge octane increase induced by the wa mix - this is NOT main fuel. Jyst an 'additive' if you like. We are discussing different issues here. Talking about methanol as main fuel is irrelevant to wai.

[GazT4R]

I have to say as an impartial observer.

Jardon is staying calm, quoting reams of evidence both researched by himself and available online, and his detractors are just getting personal, which to me says, he's winning the debate. (I've never met anyone involved BTW!)

I think if someone is a fully qualified engineer, of any kind, they should be able to debate the pros and cons of this issue without getting personal.

So lets be mature, and let non-engineer folk like me enjoy reading rational and non-stupid expert opinions?

PS..I heard WI good for avoiding melted Pistons...

personally... I always like wiki for this kinda stuff http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_injection_(engines)

I quoted that earlier but got rubbished by Hamish and then further quoted other sources which were sound in nature citing published works however these seemed to be immaterial too.

[jardon]

On IATs being too low - worthy of consideration but not borne out by datalogging, which I did through the winter. Ignoring that evidence a warmed up car in winter with sub zero iats doesn't stay in fuel enrichment (unless it's faulty).

[jardon]

http://www.aquamist.co.uk/vbulletin/

Don't know why I haven't posted that before. If you want to learn how it works and see the mild to wild results then check it out. An excellent resource.

[hamish]

You are correct Hamish in that if we were running the engine on Methanol due to its lower calorific value we would need to inject far more Methanol to compensate however we are not injecting the Methanol as a fuel it is simply a byproduct of the use in this case.

Since the Stoichiometric value of Methanol is 6.4:1 and that of petrol is 14.7:1 then to run a target AFR of 12:1 on petrol would require an AFR of around 5.4:1 on Methanol not 8:1.

On an ME 4.3/4.4 which is invariably running a fixed AFR at WOT, unless you have significantly increased the MAF size and scaled the MAF tables to suite, will continue to fuel subject to part throttle compensation (inapplicable here since Meth/Water Injection is set to inject at a predetermined boost pressure usually associated with WOT or near WOT when MAF saturation occurs anyway) via the petrol injectors at 12:1 or whatever you set it to in the fuel tables. Now knowing that we have Methanol or water injected, slowing the burn, we then adjust the map accordingly. In the case of both additional timing is usually added to take advantage of the increased knock threshold created by the slower but more complete burn thus creating more power. As stated in the articles referenced one could run a leaner AFR nearly 12.5:1 instead of 12:1 since we no longer have to use the addtional fuel for cooling to move back the knock threshold. Either way more power is created.

In the case of the ME7 engines running the wideband a similar case emerges although whilst the ME7 wideband senses the additional fuel in the case of methanol but compensates at the injectors for it maintaining it's target AFR, in a sensible case 12:1, in terms of calorific value @ 10% Methanol Injection per volume of fuel it leans the mixture out nearer the 12.5:1 again without adjustment due to the calorific value decrease but again with the additional cooling of the charge and slowing of the burn, whether water which would not lean the mix in calorific terms or Methanol which would, then we can add addtional timing to compensate the slower flame front and thus create more power.

Gaz,

This isn't your writing. You seem to have "gained" a lot of knowledge in the last 24 hours.

[jardon]

Gaz,

This isn't your writing. You seem to have "gained" a lot of knowledge in the last 24 hours.

Give it a rest Hamish - desperation isn't pretty. No disrespect toi Gaz but that lovely post would need some work to grace a text book. Gaz and Ashoks cars ran wai before me and they experience the same results - wai on releases more power than wai off. They mapped the R 2.4 without and then with wai on they sat with Marco and progressively advanced the ignition curve. This is old news to some.

[GazT4R]

Gaz,

This isn't your writing. You seem to have "gained" a lot of knowledge in the last 24 hours.

It is my writing thank-you Hamish but I will take it as a compliment that it is of a standard that you think it was someone elses, in fact I find it quite amusing that you think that.
If you would like I can dig my dissertation out for my degree and post all ten thousand plus words of that to prove my level of writing and my ability to write a coherent arguement based upon cited references however in this case my knowledge has also been gained through personal experience and discussion with people who know what they are talking about not just written word.

[GazT4R]

Give it a rest Hamish - desperation isn't pretty. No disrespect toi Gaz but that lovely post would need some work to grace a text book. Gaz and Ashoks cars ran wai before me and they experience the same results - wai on releases more power than wai off. They mapped the R 2.4 without and then with wai on they sat with Marco and progressively advanced the ignition curve. This is old news to some.

None taken Huw.