Water injection

[Aaron320iSmith 0]

Was reading an artical about water injection in a magazine about 2 years ago when i was first getting into cars and was just wondering if any1 has ever experienced with this? It seems a cost effictive way to gain a little power

[conrod 1]

One important point to note- water does not burn! Only useful in a turbo where the intercooler efficiency/compression ratio/fuel octane is at its limit, so can be useful to prolong the onset of detonation. Better not to need it in the first place.

[rolls_on_19 0]

One important point to note- water does not burn!

You're right there conrod but then again. Neither does nitrous oxide. But that still works like a rocket up your tailpipe. Have you ever poured water on a petrol fire??? Boom.

Just think about what water is. 2 hydrogen, one oxygen,

Edited January 14, 2006 by rolls_on_19

[Guest Andrew]

You're right there conrod but then again. Neither does nitrous oxide. But that still works like a rocket up your tailpipe. Have you ever poured water on a petrol fire??? Boom.

Just think about what water is. 2 hydrogen, one oxygen,

maybe the dumbest thing i've ever heard

Nitrous Oxide doesn't support combustion - yes thats true - when N02 vaporises it significantly cools the intake air therefore increasing air density (i.e then add more fuel = more power also)

Water doesn't magically split into Hydrogen and Oxygen and burn in a combustion chamber - it just changes state - (and still doesn't combust!) As for pouring water on a petrol fire - that only ends in tears because petrol is less dense than water and sits on the surface of the water. So when you pour water on the petrol, the petrol splashes everywhere with the water.

As conrod says water was used to reduce intake air temp - spray a fine mist of water into the air and notice how much cooler the air is there (water is an awesome conductor of heat).

[petone 0]

(water is an awesome conductor of heat).

No, actually quite a poor heat conductor. What it does have is a very high specific heat capacity, which is what makes it awesome at cooling stuff down.

[Guest Andrew]

No, actually quite a poor heat conductor. What it does have is a very high specific heat capacity, which is what makes it awesome at cooling stuff down.

i stand corrected (it is what i meant )

[Damo 23]

As mentioned, water injection IS an awesome part of keeping a turbo engine at peak performance. the RS7 ECU has onboard water injection support, it was one of our immediate goals when designing.

[conrod 1]

I stand by my previous comment that it is better not to need it in the first place. If water injection is the only thing between your expensive turbo engine and a meltdown, then you only need the thing to stop working, or run out of water, then bye bye engine. WRC rally cars only use it because of massive boost (3 bar plus) high static compression ratio, an intercooler that has a maximum size restriction, and a team of engineers to make sure it keeps working! We don't have any of this, so better not to need it! Oh, and Motec is top of the range alongside Autronic, definitely not in Link territory, and priced accordingly, horses for courses really.........

Edited January 29, 2006 by conrod

[westy 614]

Two engines,

1 built properly to handle 20 psi

1 not built properly to handle 20 psi but with water injection to mask the deficientcies.

First engine will always make more power,run better,more reliable and durable.

Water does not burn.Its injected into the mixture to absorb heat.

It does this by using the heat energy in the mixture to vapourize.

[Damo 23]

I stand by my previous comment that it is better not to need it in the first place. If water injection is the only thing between your expensive turbo engine and a meltdown, then you only need the thing to stop working, or run out of water, then bye bye engine. WRC rally cars only use it because of massive boost (3 bar plus) high static compression ratio, an intercooler that has a maximum size restriction, and a team of engineers to make sure it keeps working! We don't have any of this, so better not to need it! Oh, and Motec is top of the range alongside Autronic, definitely not in Link territory, and priced accordingly, horses for courses really.........

Motec is centre market, between the likes of Autronic and Link.

You are completely right that your average turbo puppy wont need it, but then thats not the market I am aiming at as they just dont have enough cash flying around, unlike WRC team types

[CADMAX 0]

i'm trying to find out about this HX2 thing. i keep calling on the 0800 number but i'm all ways out of office hours

HX2 (Pat. Pend.).......

HX2 from the "HX2 Corporation".....This technology achieves significant fuel savings (petrol or diesel) of up to 60% and an almost total erradication of harmful exhaust emissions.

This system produces very smooth, powerful and responsive engine performance particularly in the mid power band range. Engines run cleaner and cooler, and cylinder wear is practically non-existent. Both normally aspirated and turbo charged engines can be equipped with HX2.

PERFORMANCE EXAMPLE:

HX2 Final Road Test Series 5/12/01

Vehicle 1985 500 SEL Mercedes Benz 5.0 litre V8, Mileage 130,000+ mls

Test 1

City / suburban running:

Distance covered : 348 miles x 1.61 = 560.28 Km

Litres used : 81.13 Ltrs

560.28 / 81.13 = 6.91 Km/Ltr

Manufacturers specified consumption for city/suburban running is:

20 Ltrs per 100 Km = 5 Km/Ltr Test Consumption 61.8%

Test 2

Open road running

Average driving on relatively flat terrain

Distance covered 97 miles x 1.61 = 156.17 Km

Litres used 15.87 Ltrs

156.17 / 15.87 = 9.84 Km/Ltr

Manufacturers specified consumption for open road running is:

15 Ltrs per 100 Km = 6.67 Km/Ltr Test Consumption 52.474%

Test 3

Open road running

Hard high speed driving on steep terrain

Distance covered 29 miles x 1.61 = 46.69 Km

Litres used 5.66 Ltrs

46.69 / 5.66 = 8.25 Km/Ltr

Manufacturers specified consumption for open road running is:

15 Ltrs per 100 Km = 6.67 Km/Ltr Test Consumption 76.312%

Test 4

Open road running

Hard high speed driving on gentle terrain

Distance covered 122 miles x 1.61 = 196.42 Km

Litres used 20.31 Ltrs

196.42 / 20.31 = 9.67 Km/Ltr

Manufacturers specified consumption for open road running is:

15 Ltrs per 100 Km = 6.67 Km/Ltr Test Consumption 55.023%

NB: Test Consumption figures are percentages of the manufacturers stated consumption rate

linkage http://cki.co.nz/technologies.htm

i would love to know if it's sh!t or if it's any good or even if this is BS.

[Damo 23]

i'm trying to find out about this HX2 thing. i keep calling on the 0800 number but i'm all ways out of office hours

HX2 (Pat. Pend.).......

HX2 from the "HX2 Corporation".....This technology achieves significant fuel savings (petrol or diesel) of up to 60% and an almost total erradication of harmful exhaust emissions.

This system produces very smooth, powerful and responsive engine performance particularly in the mid power band range. Engines run cleaner and cooler, and cylinder wear is practically non-existent. Both normally aspirated and turbo charged engines can be equipped with HX2.

PERFORMANCE EXAMPLE:

HX2 Final Road Test Series 5/12/01

Vehicle 1985 500 SEL Mercedes Benz 5.0 litre V8, Mileage 130,000+ mls

Test 1

City / suburban running:

Distance covered : 348 miles x 1.61 = 560.28 Km

Litres used : 81.13 Ltrs

560.28 / 81.13 = 6.91 Km/Ltr

Manufacturers specified consumption for city/suburban running is:

20 Ltrs per 100 Km = 5 Km/Ltr Test Consumption 61.8%

Test 2

Open road running

Average driving on relatively flat terrain

Distance covered 97 miles x 1.61 = 156.17 Km

Litres used 15.87 Ltrs

156.17 / 15.87 = 9.84 Km/Ltr

Manufacturers specified consumption for open road running is:

15 Ltrs per 100 Km = 6.67 Km/Ltr Test Consumption 52.474%

Test 3

Open road running

Hard high speed driving on steep terrain

Distance covered 29 miles x 1.61 = 46.69 Km

Litres used 5.66 Ltrs

46.69 / 5.66 = 8.25 Km/Ltr

Manufacturers specified consumption for open road running is:

15 Ltrs per 100 Km = 6.67 Km/Ltr Test Consumption 76.312%

Test 4

Open road running

Hard high speed driving on gentle terrain

Distance covered 122 miles x 1.61 = 196.42 Km

Litres used 20.31 Ltrs

196.42 / 20.31 = 9.67 Km/Ltr

Manufacturers specified consumption for open road running is:

15 Ltrs per 100 Km = 6.67 Km/Ltr Test Consumption 55.023%

NB: Test Consumption figures are percentages of the manufacturers stated consumption rate

linkage http://cki.co.nz/technologies.htm

i would love to know if it's sh!t or if it's any good or even if this is BS.

In my experience, if they need to quote tests like that (and put pat. pending after their design name) tehy are trying to make you think what they are offering is better than it really is.

All about perception.

[ducatiss 1]

Water injection was also used in some of the old WWII aircraft - I think the supermarine spitfire with its supercharged engine had some variant of water injection. A good system will be tied to the inlet temp and say only spray at a given temp when detonation becomes more likely. I would have to agree with previous posters that for normal street/track use, it is best avoided.

[briteyes 0]

A couple of things to note here.

Water injection even in an N/A enging will boost the output.

The reason for this is that when water converts to steam it expands.

If you are getting a full burn and as the A/F ratio is controlled the aditional expansion of the water will increase the output.

To gain the best effect from water injection. The water needs to be introduced as a very fine mist.

Given the 1680 to 1 ratio between the volume steam and water a small amount ,and that is all one can introduce with out putting the fire out can give a significant increase in output.

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

This is a good place to start if you want to learn more about water injection.

[conrod 1]

Motec is centre market, between the likes of Autronic and Link.

You are completely right that your average turbo puppy wont need it, but then thats not the market I am aiming at as they just dont have enough cash flying around, unlike WRC team types

Okay, maybe I was oversimplifying things a bit here,Motec M48 is centre market, but the M800 is towards the top end, along with the Autronic SM4.Incidentally, both offer advantages over the other, but Motec is still more user friendly, and installation friendly, but CAN be more susceptible to electrical interference. A large part of what I do for a living is fitting these systems, and I have seen the advantages and pitfalls of all of these systems. The REAL top end of the market is the likes of a Pectel T10S, which will give you complete engine control, and will also control a semi-automatic gearbox, and active diffs as well, will cost you more than your car though!

I am curious though, exactly what market are you aiming at? With both ends ends covered in NZ (and around the world) you will have to be offering a competitive advantage to try to knock off some of the established players.And a WRC team or professional race team cannot afford to be a "guinea pig" for a new system, which is where I gather you will be pitching your product price and specification wise. :confused:

Edited February 7, 2006 by conrod

[Guest Andrew]

A couple of things to note here.

Water injection even in an N/A enging will boost the output.

The reason for this is that when water converts to steam it expands.

If you are getting a full burn and as the A/F ratio is controlled the aditional expansion of the water will increase the output.

To gain the best effect from water injection. The water needs to be introduced as a very fine mist.

Given the 1680 to 1 ratio between the volume steam and water a small amount ,and that is all one can introduce with out putting the fire out can give a significant increase in output.

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

This is a good place to start if you want to learn more about water injection.

still pretty much wrong -

from your aquamist website:

aquamist is ERL's latest generation
of water-injection equipment.
The main function of these systems
is to suppress detonation caused by
high temperature and pressure developed
within the combustion chamber when
the effective compression ratio has
been taken beyond the auto-ignition point
by either a turbo or a supercharger.
Water, with its high latent heat content,
is extremely effective for controlling
not only the onset of detonation but also the
production of oxides of nitrogen in
the modern leanburn engines.
ERL's latest products are designed with
great care to ensure each system meets the
highest standards of both electronic and
mechanical reliability.

The reason for this is that  when water converts to steam it expands.

So?? It still doesn't support combustion.

[westy 614]

Ha!

We used to dribble water down our carbs to clean carbon buildup off the insides