Miatapower List Archive

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Bob Circle <(email redacted)>

I have heard that people have installed water injection system kit on
there cars. And would like to learn about the good bad and ugly of the
kit. I know some of bad like running out of water, but I would like to
learn about the results. Has anyone done any measurements like before
and after intake temps? Has anyone done a before and after dyno run with
the water injection system. Has anyone run the system with an FM ECU or
without an intercooler. Has anyone run them on the track? I am really
interested in people that are currently running the system. Where did
you install the nozzles? What are you using for a water tank? Was there
any change in the fueling of car?

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Mike Marzalek <(email redacted)>

Bob,

I built my own water injection system a while back. I ended up buying an
intercooler. I used a fogging emitter from a drip watering system, an RV
water pump, the window washer tank was used as the tank, and designed my own
proportional controller. I injected before the turbo for ease of
installation.

IIRC the intake temps dropped from a peak of 190 degrees to maybe 150
degrees (with IC they go to ~10 degrees above ambient). My rolling dyno
showed no power change (at the time I didn't have a J&S which might have
advanced timing and increased power). The tank had to be filled every 50
miles or so of spirited driving - a major pain. YMMV

Mike Marzalek
(email redacted)
'96 red aerodyne
Sonoma County, Ca.

-----Original Message-----
From: (email redacted)
[mailto:(email redacted)]On Behalf Of Bob Circle
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 1999 6:13 AM
To: (email redacted)
Subject: Water injections system the good bad and the ugly



I have heard that people have installed water injection system kit on
there cars. And would like to learn about the good bad and ugly of the
kit. I know some of bad like running out of water, but I would like to
learn about the results. Has anyone done any measurements like before
and after intake temps? Has anyone done a before and after dyno run with
the water injection system. Has anyone run the system with an FM ECU or
without an intercooler. Has anyone run them on the track? I am really
interested in people that are currently running the system. Where did
you install the nozzles? What are you using for a water tank? Was there
any change in the fueling of car?

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: "Tom Graham" <(email redacted)>

Bob,
There was a thread about water injection and methanol on the SSCOR list
about the middle of Dec. You could check the archives.
Water or water/alcohol injection should be used as artificial octane.
There is not a large boost in power to be found except in w/a injections
ability to limit detonation which is great. Many people are using it on
Sebring cars in hot climates and are running 12 degree timing without
retarding controls. (I believe this to be true, memory may be failing)
Also a positive displacement supercharger may gain efficiency from a
rotor sealing effect if the water is injected through the blower.
1. An intercooler will give a fine power increase and should be used if
all possible.
2. If water injection is used it should be injected as close to the port
as possible so the cooling is in the cylinder. This could potentially
'suck' in more air.
3. Never inject into a turbo. I have seen warnings about impeller
erosion and it may slow the impeller.
4. Use the smallest nozzle possible.
Tom


Tom Graham
4CED AIR 90
Columbus, Ohio


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at hotmail.com

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted)

In a message dated 99-02-11 22:27:52 EST, (email redacted) writes:

<< Never inject into a turbo. I have seen warnings about impeller
erosion and it may slow the impeller.
4. Use the smallest nozzle possible. >>

I can't quite agree with this. I've never seen compressor wheel erosion from
a water injector. Changing the water to vapor (latent heat of vaporization)
is how the temperature is reduced and the spinning wheel sure helps do just
that.

Nozzle size should be adjusted for the job size. Keep in mind that water
vapor takes up space where air ought to be.
corky

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: "Tom Graham" <(email redacted)>

----Original Message Follows----
From: (email redacted)
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 08:19:33 EST
To: (email redacted), (email redacted), (email redacted)
Cc: (email redacted)
Subject: Re: Water injections system the good bad and the ugly

In a message dated 99-02-11 22:27:52 EST, (email redacted)
writes:

<< Never inject into a turbo. I have seen warnings about impeller
erosion and it may slow the impeller.
4. Use the smallest nozzle possible. >>

I can't quite agree with this. I've never seen compressor wheel erosion
from
a water injector. Changing the water to vapor (latent heat of
vaporization)
is how the temperature is reduced and the spinning wheel sure helps do
just
that.

Nozzle size should be adjusted for the job size. Keep in mind that
water
vapor takes up space where air ought to be.
corky

That's good news, Corky. I made a water injection system in the 60s. I
used a Mason jar with 2 hoses out of it. One hose was plugged into the
manifold the other went to the carb opening. As the car boosted the
water would flow out of a nozzle made from a piece of small dia. copper
tubing. The nozzle size was determined by smashing the end with a hammer
and blowing water through it until the proper size and pattern was found
(scientific, huh). Did it work? Results were inconclusive as Mom freaked
out and made me put her car back together again. I have read that the
impellor could be eroded and have always felt kinda sad and guilty that
my system would be damaging to Mom's car. Now I feel better. :)
You are right about the nozzle size. I said it wrong, that's what I
ment. As small as possible that works.


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at hotmail.com

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted)


CorkyBell3 wrote concerning H2O injection causing erosion to compressor
wheels:
>I can't quite agree with this. I've never seen compressor wheel erosion from
>a water injector.
I have posted about compressor wheel erosion to the list based upon a phone
conversation with Bill Cardell back in '95. At that time, Bill told told me to
not use water injection prior to the compressor because, based upon his
personal experience, it caused compressor erosion. Bill, if I have been
mis-interpreting what you said, please correct me. If not, could you please
expand upon your statement?

Regards,
Barry

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Mike Inman)

At 08:19 2/12/99 -0500, you wrote:
>
>In a message dated 99-02-11 22:27:52 EST, (email redacted) writes:
>
><<=A0 Never inject into a turbo. I have seen warnings about impeller=20
> erosion and it may slow the impeller.
> 4. Use the smallest nozzle possible. >>
>
>I can't quite agree with this.=A0 I've never seen compressor wheel erosion=
from
>a water injector.=A0 Changing the water to vapor (latent heat of=
vaporization)
>is how the temperature is reduced and the spinning wheel sure helps do just
>that.=A0=20
>
>Nozzle size should be adjusted for the job size.=A0 Keep in mind that water
>vapor takes up space where air ought to be.=A0=20

Wouldn't it be best, then, if the water got into the cylinder and the intake
valve closed before it changed from liquid to vapor? This way, the latent
heat
of vaporization is "absorbed" before detonation tempratures are achieved,=
plus
the expansion of the water from liquid to vapor has a steam engine=
effect.....

M

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: bill cardell <(email redacted)>

Yup, used to use a really crude water injection system on my '90 before it was
intercooled. It sprayed into the compressor and we did see some erosion on the
compressor. Never seemed to hurt anything, but sure didn't look pretty. Reasons we
sprayed into compressor at the time was: cheapo water injection with windshield
washer pump, so would have had to pressurize the reservoir with boost to keep
water flowing if injected after the turbo.
With the aquamist's 100psi or more of water pressure, can put it after the turbo
with no worries.

(email redacted) wrote:

> CorkyBell3 wrote concerning H2O injection causing erosion to compressor
> wheels:
> >I can't quite agree with this. I've never seen compressor wheel erosion from
> >a water injector.
> I have posted about compressor wheel erosion to the list based upon a phone
> conversation with Bill Cardell back in '95. At that time, Bill told told me to
> not use water injection prior to the compressor because, based upon his
> personal experience, it caused compressor erosion. Bill, if I have been
> mis-interpreting what you said, please correct me. If not, could you please
> expand upon your statement?
>
> Regards,
> Barry

--
Bill Cardell
The Dealer Alternative, Inc.
Palisade, CO
dlralt.com
970-464-0878 tech inquiries
1-800-FLY-MX5S orders only

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: "Tom Graham" <(email redacted)>

Mike,
I thought about the steam engine effect some time ago. I even came up
with a sixth cycle for internal cooling of large slow turning stationary
engines. The problem with 4 stroke is the same as advancing the timing
too far, it starts to expand on the compression stroke. But I feel you
are correct in wanting to get the mist not the vapor into the combustion
chamber. I have no data to back that up though.
Tom



Tom Graham
4CED AIR 90
Columbus, Ohio


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at hotmail.com

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: "Werner Cassel" <(email redacted)>

On 12 Feb 99, Mike Inman said:
>
> Wouldn't it be best, then, if the water got into the cylinder and the
> intake valve closed before it changed from liquid to vapor? This way, the
> latent heat of vaporization is "absorbed" before detonation tempratures
> are achieved, plus the expansion of the water from liquid to vapor has a
> steam engine effect.....
>
> M
........
Mike, IIRC 1 liter water = 1700 liters steam. I think this might be a bit too much
for the combustion chamber ....

Werner

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted)

A few more thoughts on water injectors.

It is generally considered that the h20 is used in leiu of an IC, but doesn't
have to be so. W/o IC, the most practical place to put the nozzle is in front
of the turbo.

If one has an IC, then the water must go in after the intercooler. Suppose
enough water were vaporized before the IC such that the charge temp dropped to
ambient, then there would be nothing for the IC to do, as the temp inside
would be the same as outside. Let the IC do its job, then put the water in
and the temp drop due to water will add to what was already removed by the IC.

Mike brings up the interesting idea of putting water in at the chamber so the
expansion takes place where useful work can be done. Neat idea.
corky

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Mike Inman)


Just for kicks:

At 200C, saturated steam values are:

1.5 ATM pressure (7psi boost...)

0.001 m3/kg liquid volume

0.127 m3/kg vapor volume

1745 kJ/kg vaporization energy

So, if you're running 7psi of boost, your intake temp will have to exceed
200C to get water to steam. At which time, the water will expand 127 times
in volume and suck up a whole lot of energy, keeping the temp around 200C.

If you inject enough water to get 1cc into the cylinder, that's not too
much extra pressure....

M

At 12:57 PM 2/13/99 +0100, you wrote:
>
>On 12 Feb 99, Mike Inman said:
>>
>> Wouldn't it be best, then, if the water got into the cylinder and the
>> intake valve closed before it changed from liquid to vapor? This way, the
>> latent heat of vaporization is "absorbed" before detonation tempratures
>> are achieved, plus the expansion of the water from liquid to vapor has a
>> steam engine effect.....
>>
>> M
>........
>Mike, IIRC 1 liter water = 1700 liters steam. I think this might be a bit
too much
>for the combustion chamber ....
>
>Werner
>

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Ray Ayala <(email redacted)>

Mike Inman wrote:
>
>... So, if you're running 7psi of boost, your intake temp will have to exceed
> 200C to get water to steam. At which time, the water will expand 127 times
> in volume and suck up a whole lot of energy, keeping the temp around 200C.
>
> If you inject enough water to get 1cc into the cylinder, that's not too
> much extra pressure....


But that's about 120 liters per minute at 6K RPM. Would require a
pretty big water tank. - Ray

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Mike Inman)


Anyone not interested in Thermodynamics, just skip this.

O.K., the other was a quickie before breakfast, this has been bugging me
for months, I pulled out my Thermodynamics book to "think on it" in
December, so here's a more complete version:

Assume a 1.6 liter engine running 7psi boost at 5000RPM:

Inject a stream of water at 1.0 liters per minute, that's the same as
having 4 250cc/min fuel injectors wide open. There are 10,000 intakes per
minute, so 0.1ml (cc) of water is drawn into each cylinder per cycle.

Again, at 7psi of boost, saturated steam lives somewhere around 200C, and
has a 127 to 1 expansion ratio with 1745 kJ/kg vaporization energy. We've
got 0.1 grams of water which will absorb 175 joules of energy at 200C.
Obviously, it is beneficial to get the water into the 400cc chamber as
liquid, so it doesn't expand to 12.7cc of vapor (displacing the air) - but
not too critical. If you were injecting 10 liters per minute water, it
would be much more important (and far easier) to get it in as liquid.

Our intake air is basically superheated Nitrogen which has a volume of:

Well, damn, my Nitrogen table doesn't go above 300K and we're at 475K.
Hmmm... extrapolating up, it's at 1.050 m3/kg. A m3 has 100x100x100 cc in
it, so 400cc is 0.0004 m3, so we've got about 0.42g of N2 at 7psi boost and
200C.

This N2 has an entropy factor somewhere around 7 kJ/kg K, so, our 0.42g of
N2 will rise 1 degree K (or C) for every 2.94 J given to it. This means
that the 0.1 grams of water will suck up 175 Joules, lowering the energy of
the 0.42g of N2 enough to impact the temprature about 60C - before
compression.

-----------

Now, two cases of interest:


1. You're running a non-intercooled 'charger with nominal intake temps of
260C or higher the water injection drops your intake temps by 60C, and
sucks up 3% of your intake volume - effectively dropping your displacement
from 1600cc to 1550cc. Now, you have dropped intake temp from 535K to 475K
(best case), so this is a 12% increase in O2 content over what you had
before - bringing you back to 1745cc effective....

My flip analysis: not bad, but you're still at godawful intake temps, at
7psi boost, you'll never get below 200C anyway, because that's the sat
steam temp. There's a real problem here with reduced O2 content in the
intake charge.

2. You're running an intercooled 'charger system with nominal intake temps
lower than 200C (typical is 50C or less). The water all goes into the
chamber as liquid, does not impact O2 intake, and converts to vapor during
the compression cycle - requiring a bit more analysis:

Even though it's after breakfast, I'm not sure my thermo-chops are up to
completely dealing with this one....

Looking at the fully compressed picture (about 1.5MPa, ~600K):

Air (Superheated N2)
Entropy (s) about 6 (kJ/kg K)
Volume (v) about 0.132 (m3/kg)
v/s ~= 0.022 (m3 / kJ K)

Water vapor
Entropy about 7.85
Volume about 0.27
v/s ~= 0.034

So, water vapor makes a better working media that air when heated at this
pressure, it expands roughly 50% more. This really applies to the first
case too, although there, the water didn't sneak in before it expanded.

I'm not sure if even I believe any of the following, but the result isn't
too wild, so it might be right:

In this case, instead of having 400cc of air, you now have 400cc of air
plus 13cc of water vapor. The water vapor sucked out 175J of energy doing
its phase transition trick. 400cc of air at 50C 1.5bar holds about 950J of
energy, so this is like you're starting with 326cc of colder air (but the
same amount of O2) and 13cc of water vapor (translate this to 20cc of air
since it's 50% more effective). So, the working volume is down to 346cc,
but intake temp has dropped from 325K to an effective 265K (it will never
drop to 265K, but when compression is complete and the water vaporizes, it
will be as if the original air was at 265K.... I think), so heat added to
this chamber (by burning fuel) will have more expansion effect....
Throwing a really WAG at the net effect, 346 x 325 / 265 = 424 cc of
effective displacement....

So, turn your intercooled 'charged 1.6 into a 1.7 just by injecting 1.0l/m
of water (at 7psi boost, 5000RPM)..... Plus, the added benefits of higher
potential boost due to lower tempratures...

I'm not sure about corrosion, and I'm fairly sure the catalytic converter
would never get up to operating temp, but the idea of putting a "water
rail" alongside the fuel rail on the intake manifold and running a parallel
set of injectors (like those stock 220s that came off the car....) that
fire in sync with the fuel injectors does sound like a "cool" project.

Now, I can finally put that Thermodynamics book back on the shelf.

M

At 12:57 PM 2/13/99 +0100, you wrote:
>
>On 12 Feb 99, Mike Inman said:
>>
>> Wouldn't it be best, then, if the water got into the cylinder and the
>> intake valve closed before it changed from liquid to vapor? This way, the
>> latent heat of vaporization is "absorbed" before detonation tempratures
>> are achieved, plus the expansion of the water from liquid to vapor has a
>> steam engine effect.....
>>
>> M
>........
>Mike, IIRC 1 liter water = 1700 liters steam. I think this might be a bit
too much
>for the combustion chamber ....
>
>Werner

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Mike Marzalek <(email redacted)>

IIRC the plots on the aquamist web page confirm what Mike says. The peak
cylinder pressure & temperature is reduced because of the h2o (less
detonation and also less power), but you get a broadening of the pressure
wave as the h2o vaporizes into steam which makes up for the power lost by
cooling the charge after ignition. Remember the whole point is to heat the
intake charge. The hotter the charge, the more it pushes down on the
piston. The total torque from one cylinder firing is the integral of the
instantaneous pressure combined with the sine of the crank angle. So having
lower pressure longer may produce more power.

Mike Marzalek
(email redacted)
'96 red aerodyne
Sonoma County, Ca.

-----Original Message-----
From: (email redacted)
[mailto:(email redacted)]On Behalf Of Mike Inman
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 1999 6:48 AM
To: Werner Cassel
Cc: (email redacted)
Subject: Re: Water injections system the good bad and the ugly




Just for kicks:

At 200C, saturated steam values are:

1.5 ATM pressure (7psi boost...)

0.001 m3/kg liquid volume

0.127 m3/kg vapor volume

1745 kJ/kg vaporization energy

So, if you're running 7psi of boost, your intake temp will have to exceed
200C to get water to steam. At which time, the water will expand 127 times
in volume and suck up a whole lot of energy, keeping the temp around 200C.

If you inject enough water to get 1cc into the cylinder, that's not too
much extra pressure....

M

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: "Tom Graham" <(email redacted)>

Mike,
Use homogenized fuel and water, larger injectors.



Tom Graham
4CED AIR 90
Columbus, Ohio


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at hotmail.com

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Mike Inman)


Just hope the water doesn't find it's way back to the fuel tank....

At 04:23 PM 2/13/99 -0800, you wrote:
>Mike,
>Use homogenized fuel and water, larger injectors.
>
>
>
>Tom Graham
>4CED AIR 90
>Columbus, Ohio
>
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at hotmail.com
>

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted)

In a message dated 99-02-13 09:51:09 EST, (email redacted) writes:

<<
At 200C, saturated steam values are:

1.5 ATM pressure (7psi boost...)

0.001 m3/kg liquid volume

0.127 m3/kg vapor volume

1745 kJ/kg vaporization energy
>>

I've always admired you heat transfer guys.
corky

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: "Werner Cassel" <(email redacted)>

On 15 Feb 99, at 7:58, (email redacted) wrote:

>
> In a message dated 99-02-13 09:51:09 EST, (email redacted) writes:
>
> <<
> At 200C, saturated steam values are:
>
> 1.5 ATM pressure (7psi boost...)
>
> 0.001 m3/kg liquid volume
>
> 0.127 m3/kg vapor volume
>
> 1745 kJ/kg vaporization energy
> >>
>
> I've always admired you heat transfer guys.
> corky
.......
A somewhat more down-to-earth discussion of water injection and intercooling
can be found at

autospeed.com/A_0115/P_1/article.html

Werner

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Mike Inman)

>A somewhat more down-to-earth discussion of water injection and intercooling
>can be found at
>
><autospeed.com/A_0115/P_1/article.html>autospeed.com
/A_0115/P_1/article.html
>
>Werner

Good article, and they point out that for optimal detonation reduction, you
only need 20-30% of the total fuel mass to be water (the analysis I did of the
"steam engine effect" at 1 liter per minute was roughly 50% water by mass....)

Tom mentioned homoginized water/gas - the article mentions using acetone to do
this, they also mention that as far as they know, it's never been actually
tried...

It also has something that reads alot like the BEGI marketing material:

A water injection system should:

Distribute the water
equally to
each cylinder;

automatically start the water
flow prior to it
being required;

have positive shut-off (eg via
a solenoid valve)
when water injection is not
required;

either warn the driver or
decrease engine
power (eg by dropping boost)
should the
water supply be exhausted;

be very reliable.


I still think that the idea of taking your old stock injectors and plumbing
them in on a separate "water rail", with the water injectors controlled by the
same signals as the fuel injectors would make one hell of a water injection
system, and if you consider the injectors to be "free," then it's cheap too.
It meets all of the above requirements (well, you'll need a "water tank"
gauge), plus, it keeps the water in exact proportion to fuel throughout the
powerband. You could tune the % water by varying pressure on the water rail,
but if fuel and water pressure are even, then 220 stock vs 440? (whatever Bill
ships now...) injectors have the water/fuel ratio just about right to begin
with.

M

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: "Tom Graham" <(email redacted)>

I forgot a bad/ugly side of water injection. If water is injected into
the throttle opening it can freeze sticking the throttle open until it
melts. Use methanol/water mix and you should be ok.
Tom



Tom Graham
4CED AIR 90
Columbus, Ohio


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at hotmail.com

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Ray Ayala <(email redacted)>

I wonder if distilled (or otherwise treated) water would be required to
avoid corrosion in the injectors? My home water faucets corrode from
our tap water. - Ray

Mike Inman wrote:
>...I still think that the idea of taking your old stock injectors and plumbing
> them in on a separate "water rail", with the water injectors controlled by the
> same signals as the fuel injectors would make one hell of a water injection
> system, and if you consider the injectors to be "free," then it's cheap too.
> It meets all of the above requirements (well, you'll need a "water tank"
> gauge), plus, it keeps the water in exact proportion to fuel throughout the
> powerband. You could tune the % water by varying pressure on the water rail,
> but if fuel and water pressure are even, then 220 stock vs 440? (whatever Bill
> ships now...) injectors have the water/fuel ratio just about right to begin
> with.
>
> M

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Mike Inman)


I'd also be worried about green fuzzy stuff growing in the lines... makes a
methanol mix look much more attractive (except that methanol burns, so has=
to
be transported and stored like fuel for safety reasons.... and that other
thing
about invisible flames....)

M

At 11:07 2/15/99 -0800, you wrote:
>
>I wonder if distilled (or otherwise treated) water would be required to
>avoid corrosion in the injectors?=A0 My home water faucets corrode from
>our tap water. - Ray
>
>Mike Inman wrote:
>>...I still think that the idea of taking your old stock injectors and
plumbing
>> them in on a separate "water rail", with the water injectors controlled=
by
the
>> same signals as the fuel injectors would make one hell of a water=
injection
>> system, and if you consider the injectors to be "free," then it's cheap
too.
>> It meets all of the above requirements (well, you'll need a "water tank"
>> gauge), plus, it keeps the water in exact proportion to fuel throughout=
the
>> powerband.=A0 You could tune the % water by varying pressure on the water
rail,
>> but if fuel and water pressure are even, then 220 stock vs 440? (whatever
Bill
>> ships now...) injectors have the water/fuel ratio just about right to=
begin
>> with.
>>=20
>> M
>=20

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted)




As someone mentioned earlier - this is really intriguing. Has anyone
actually run water/something injection with a Link ECU ? What size water
tank do you need so it lasts at least a tankful? Any idea on what kind of
timing you could put back in - or better yet performance gains? What
safety's would be in place so if you run out of water prematurely or a
solenoid leaks ... Is it easier to just have race gas delivered to your
house at 4xcost the cost of 92 octane stuff .... : )






(email redacted) (Mike Inman) on 02/15/99 04:58:02 PM

Please respond to (email redacted) (Mike Inman)

To: Ray Ayala <(email redacted)>
cc: (email redacted) (bcc: Dan W Thorpe/WLGORE)
Subject: Re: Water injections system the good bad and the ugly