Understanding Intercooling, Charge-Coolers, Heat Exchangers and Circulation Pumps
I'm busy upgrading the charge cooling system for my S4 and read this thread with much interest. I received the proper datasheets from MS Motor Services for the CWA pumps, describing the control of the pump duty cycle. I attach two pages here for interest. This also shows that while it is possible to run he pump with +12V on he PWM input the pump isn't designed tomoperate like that and instead of running at 100% duty cycle, it will run at about 97% as indicated by one of the other forum members.
It is probably academic as 97% would be ample I think.
Thanks to Nick's efforts I was able to order a tinyCWA controller from Tecomotive with custom firmware for manual control of my pump speed. The OE pump on this car - a CWA50 - runs at 50% duty cycle normally and reprogramming the algorithm in the ECU is possible but I haven't been able to source the necessary security access code for that.
I'm fabricating a custom heat exchanger locally which has about 2.5 times the surface area of the stock unit, and with the help of the controller I will optimise the pump speed for acceptable control of IAT for our conditions.
I'm currently recording progress here: Audi Club SA - B8 S4 Development.
I got some solid ideas reading this thread - including keeping the stock Pierburg pump as opposed to what was initially suggested by others...great work Nick!
I bought a "BMW" pump and I would like to know if it is a CWA50 or CWA100 ? Certainly, it looks like a Pierburg pump.
Can you tell just by looking at the pictures?
The PN# is 11517568594-03 on the pump and the seller told me that the cross-ref number is 1157588885.
Thanks for your valuable input.
Last edited by MrDangerUS; May 25, 2015 at 05:45 PM.




Nick
Last edited by Welwynnick; May 27, 2015 at 05:29 PM.
Pictures are always welcome.
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
OK, lets see who's paying attention....
So how can you best use a high-flow pump in a charge cooler system? I had a crazy idea last night, thinking about how to make the most of my BMW coolant pump. This is a Pierburg CWA-200, which generates about 0.5 bar pressure over a wide range of flow rates. Indeed, the optimum operating point is around 120 lpm/32 gpm @ 0.5 bar, which is much more flow than I'm using (see post 108) So I thought about better ways to take advantage of the Pierburg's capability. Even if it was flowing much faster, it would still generate much the same pressure (more even), and that's what's necessary to keep water flowing through the IC's. Regardless of what's happening elsewhere in the system (double pumps, double HE's, whatever) the IC simply needs to "see" the right pressure and flow.

So I thought about running a by-pass pipe directly from the pump outlet to the HE inlet, by-passing the IC altogether. Doesn't make much sense, huh? Surely you want all the water to go through the IC? My thinking was it would increase the flow through the pump and get it working closer to its preferred pressure/flow point. It would increase flow through the HE, but because the CWA-200 has such a flat output curve, it would maintain output pressure at the higher flow rate. Therefore the IC flow wouldn't be affected, but the flow through the HE would be increased, which is a real benefit.

The increased HE flow interested me, but the by-pass to the HE inlet didn't make so much sense, as it would tend to increase the dynamic pressure at the inlet, and reduce the pressure differential across the IC. It was getting late and I wasn't thinking clearly, but I put my head down and things instantly became clearer.
IC systems have high resistance, and its been difficult to cope with that all along. Maybe because of the IC, maybe the HE, maybe the inadequate 3/4" piping. But the thing is they're all in series, with resistance adding up. Why not simply connect them in parallel instead of in series? The two IC's are effectively in parallel with eachother already, so what will putting the HE in parallel do? The ICs will see all the pressure generated by the pump, but the flow through the HE will be higher. My HE is a BMW X3 radiator, which should take the full flow of the CWA-200 - which should be several times higher than the flow through the IC. On average, that means the coolant will pass through the HE several times, for every pass through the IC. It should reduce the temperature of the water going through the IC, due to the repeated HE passes. And as long as the pump is big enough, it should actually increase the flow through the IC, as the pump's output pressure isn't split across both the IC & HE - they both see the full pressure of the pump.

Of course, a proportion of the heated water from the IC will go through the pump and go straight back to the IC without going through the HE. But as long as the HE flow is much higher than the IC flow, most of the water going to the IC's will be extra-cold: colder than it would have been from a single HE pass.
So there's a thought - running the IC and HE in parallel instead of in series. Can that make any sense at all!?!?
The reason it might be a good idea is to make the most of what you've got. The charge coolers are an integrated part of the engine - upgrade them and you have no room for large air filters and cold air inlets, which undermines the benefit of the bigger IC's. The pump and HE are easier to upgrade, and can achieve similar improvements. An IC system is simply a very big heat sink for the charge air, and you want to minimise the thermal resistance between the intake air and the ambient air, so that you maximise heat flow outwards.
An air-to-air system is actually quite good at this, as there's very little between the two air streams - just a thin sheet of finned ally with a reasonable thermal resistance. A water cooled system is rather different, as you have to add to this an interface with the water in the IC, plus an interface with the water in the HE, plus the circulation system. All of that can only add to the thermal resistance of the whole system, so you need to minimise the resistance at both the IC and the HE.
Increasing the flow through the IC helps, but its difficult to make big improvements. Having a large heat exchanger and lots of flow WILL make a big difference to the HE however, and provide lots of cold water for the IC's. So the thermal resistance of the HE cannot be too low - even if the water was circulating at a million mph, it will still be worse than air-to-air, as it can only add to what's already there. Radiators normally run at a temperature delta between inlet and outlet of around 10 degC / 20 degF. So that's one delta for the HE, and one delta for the IC. Ideally, both will be zero, but the idea of a big HE and a big pump is to get that 10 degC delta as close to zero as possible.
Of course the V12TT uses charge cooling for packaging and piping reasons, but there are other advantages. The water passages in the HE are narrower than air passages, allowing MORE rows for a given frontal area. My X3 rad has fifty rows - more than any air-air cooler - and there's less obstruction to ambient air passing through, so other things being equal there will be more through-flow. Similar arguements apply to the IC's as well.
Nick
What did you end up doing - parallel or left the system HE and IC in series?
Thanks,
-Pete




I'm still using a series configuration, but I'm thinking about changing that. I use a CWA-100 pump, which is quite high pressure / low flow, but I'd like to go back to the CWA-200, and make the most of the engine radiator HE.
Before I do that though, I'd like to get some better instrumentation in, and at least have an in-line flow meter in series with the IC's. I do like the idea of having a really high flow through the HE (literally off the chart), and getting the thermal resistance down low, but I'd want to be sure that I wasn't reducing the flow to the IC's.
With charge cooling, you really want both elements of the equation to be low - ie: low thermal resistance for both the HE and IC. However, they don't have to be similar, they both simply need to be as low as possible.
The only slight problem with asymmetric shunt cooling is keeping the HE loop as short as possible. Most radiators are cross-flow, but a double pass rad like the E-class 6-cylinder cars might be a good idea. That would keep the feed and return hoses short. However, that radiator flow resistance would be higher, which undermines some of the advantage. The alternative is to stick with the cross-flow rad, and have the feed pipe running across the rad. Problem is there's not much room down there.....
Nick
Last edited by Welwynnick; Nov 9, 2015 at 05:23 PM.




I learned a lot about pumps and cooling systems in the last year or so.
Cooling systems have been developed over a hunderd years, its a problem that's been solved.
However, Mercedes seem to have forgotten all about it with the V12TT, and treated it as a special case, which is very unfortunate.
There are some long-established golden rules for installing (centrifugal) pumps, including:
- The pump inlet pressure should be as high as possible.
- Therefore the pump should be located at the lowest point in the system.
- Locate the pump after the radiator, to keep it as cool as possible.
- Mount the pump horizontally, to minimise bearing end loads.
- To avoid air locks, the outlet should be at the top of the pump, and must not point down.
- The pump's pressure/flow characteristics should be matched to the system resistance curve to achieve best performance.
- Don't run a pump into an excessively high or low resistance, or it will fail quickly.
- Keep air and contaminants out of the system.
- Finally - feed the pump from the BOTTOM of the radiator, to minimise air ingestion.
But yes, people often see an improvement in the performance of their IC system simply because its been bled properly, rather than because of the modifications they've done. I can't think of any other reason for the popularity of marine circulation pumps and engine cooling pumps.
Regards, Nick




- Standard production radiator with aluminium matrix, and plastic tanks (so its cheap)
- RHS Oil cooler for auto transmission (so I can run ABC oil through it)
- Drain plug for bleeding
- RHS High inlet
- LHS Low outlet
- Width: 600mm
- Height: 500mm
- Thick: 40mm
The Range Rover Sport 2.7 radiator seems to fit the bill, so this might be my next project. That's 12 litres of HE matrix volume, exactly the same as the engine radiator, and twice the engine capacity, it meets every criterion for me. The frontal area is also very large - even larger than the BMW X3 radiator that I currently use - so it should maximise airflow.
I think I might use the CWA-200 and SFR controller this time round.
Fingers crossed.




Last edited by Welwynnick; Feb 17, 2016 at 03:47 PM.
or is that for something else. The bosch 010 pump is there but there is also another pump part number A0001405385. Also "Nick" I have removed the 010 pump and am in the process of reinstalling it, whats the best method you found to feed it with least air pockets sir?




easy way to be sure of getting all the air out. I would use a cooling system refill kit, and drive it with a rotary vane vacuum pump (as used on AC systems). They're not expensive. Alternatively, you could use the method given in the other M275 thread
https://mbworld.org/forums/m275-v12-...-included.html
or is that for something else. The bosch 010 pump is there but there is also another pump part number A0001405385. Also "Nick" I have removed the 010 pump and am in the process of reinstalling it, whats the best method you found to feed it with least air pockets sir?



Nick
Nick
All good Nick, thanks once again




do you know if the 010 pump is a standard on the Sl65?