Grumpy666

First, let me comment on this:

Wow ..... it's unbelievable how much misinformation is contained in that single article. In fact, some of it is just plain wrong. For example, what they're calling Temperature Efficiency is actually Adiabatic Efficiency. Adiabatic refers to a process that ocurs without the gain or loss of heat. So, if you can generate 12 pounds of boost w/o heating the air, your adiabatic efficiency is 100%. At the same boost level, a Roots S/C heats the air more than a Lysholm S/C, so the Roots is less efficient. What they refer to as Adiabatic Efficiency is actually Mechanical Efficiency. IOW, how much power is consumed for fritional losses (turning gears, etc) and parasitic losses (compressing the air as the screws turn, etc). Whoever wrote that article seems to have a poor understanding of the thermodynamics and physics involved in a supercharger system. I would suggest that you do a little Googling and get some more input on these topics from other sources.


OK, now I understand your reasoning. We are talking about different sources of heat. I'm referring to the heat generated as a result of compressing the inlet charge and you're referring to the heat generated as a result of the combustion process. Not much we can do about combustion heat except increase the engine's cooling system capacity and vent underhood heat better. Water injection will not reduce combustion heat. In fact, by decreasing the inlet charge heat, you will actually increase the combustion heat, since denser air can burn more fuel and cause a bigger bang. Viscious cycle, huh?


Other than a more throaty sound, I doubt that you will see any difference. Maybe a slight bit near redline.
.

vrus

You are wrong about that first statement.

I am *hoping* you are wrong about the second one.. All the tests I have seen with water/meth injection on other vehicles has been VERY promising.. I hope to get the same results. We'll have to wait and see I guess.

I know a *little bit* about adiabatic efficiency... A good friend of mine holds the patent on an adiabatic engine technology that extracts 350bhp/liter. Hmm... 1925hp for the E55... Ok.. Sounds good to me.. I only wish...

You seem to be interested in this type of discussion (as am I.. I am always interested in learning).. Here is some further interesting reading for you..

http://69.17.158.20/vrus/adiabatic_engine/Adiabatic.htm

Please let me know your thoughts when you are done reading.

rflow306

Victor nice dyno graphs, you will definitelly pick-up more power when the ambient temperature goes down. Now go take that rocket ship to a real dyno (Real Dyno= 1/4 mile dragstrip).
P.S missed alot of good post just got my power turned back on. Thank God

vrus

Thanks my friend!

I am working on the 1/4 mile testing.. I am looking to rent Cayuga dragway park for the day.. Its only $1400 so I am going to get 9 or 10 guys together and go have some fun for a day...

Got a Kleemann Stage 3 car that will be joining and hopefully some other nice rides.. I want to line up with the Kleemann car and see how much of a difference the ECU and pulley make..

Stay tuned..

Grumpy666

My comments in the last couple of posts are meant to be applied to WOT conditions. That is the jist of this thread. And this post addresses technology that is readily available and affordable, not what has been created in limited conditions. And since Victor challenged some of my comments, I promise this will be long. So, send your hate mail to him.

Yes, you can reduce combustion temperatures - that's what the EGR system is all about, but not at WOT. To create large amounts of power you need large explosions in the combustion chamber. Big bangs mean big heat. But heat is also needed to ensure good fuel vaporization and a fast burn. That is, up to the point where the flash temperature of the compressed fuel mixture is reached. Can you say ping? Good heat control is essential. That's the job of the cooling system. Therein lies a paradox. You need the heat to maintain a good burn and power - but as the heat goes up, most ECUs pull timing and you lose power. Some do it as low as 180 degrees!

If you want to decrease the burn temperature, you have to dilute the gas mixture (or use a different fuel). You lose power. Cooling the intake charge does not lower the combustion temperature. It allows you to change other parameters to make more power (timing, boost, etc). Guess what happens to heat. If you inject water upstream of the speed density sensor, it might detect the added vapor and command the ECU to increase the injector pulse width. More gas to burn. Bigger bang. More heat. Inject it downstream and it will help to lean the mixture a little (these engines can use a little more lean at WOT). A leaner mixture will burn hotter. More heat. Inject it with methanol and the game changes. Much better cooling effect due to the better latent heat of evaporation of methanol. Plus, it adds fuel. Bigger bang. More heat. OK, maybe the game didn't change.

The point to this diatribe is: cooling the intake charge will not reduce the heat generated by the combustion process. It can and will have the opposite effect. And yes, higher RPMs will generate more heat due to more big bangs per unit of time. But the cooling system should cause the engine to reach thermal equalibrium and stabilize power output. So, for short periods of time (dyno pull, 1/4 mile blast, etc) there should be no power penalty based on RPM.



What this patent describes is yet another variation of what is known as the Hot Vapor engine or the Very Lean Burn engine. The technology was developed well over a decade earlier and showed promise of doubling fuel economy and power. The A/F ratios used were over 20:1. But it's not in production today. Know why? Because our ever-helpful government outlawed all engines that used non-standard air-to-fuel ratios. No matter how much gas they saved. Gee, I wonder which Lobby caused that to happen . . . My guess is the vagueness of the description and the confusing jargon in the document got it past the not-very-technically-savvy patent clerks. One of my early automotive heros (Smokey Yunick) holds the original patents on the Hot Vapor engine. If you're not familiar with him, do some research - I promise you a good read. He was the bane of NASCAR officials.
.

vrus

Unfortunately, I am not well versed enough in thermodynamics or engine dynamics to debate this with you. I only know based on my experiences and what little I have learned over the years tinkering with my own cars...

I do know with certainty that the meth/water injection does provide a higher power output on F.I. engines and somehow the engine seems to run within the same heat range. I have personally seen EGT, IAT, oil and coolant temps being monitored and based on what you were saying I would expect that EGT and coolant and oil temperatures would skyrocket.

Like I said.. I am "hoping" that I will see great things out of this.. I might be wrong... But, I am confident enough that I have invested quite a few thousand dollars to find out... We'll all know soon enough because like I said I will share whatever I find.


That all might be true but the reality is that his company (CET: Combustion Engine Technology) which is now setup and running in Jacksonville, Florida is putting this out to market. He is closing deals on it and I have seen the development car myself in running form... 3.2L, 1350hp, no cooling system or fan of any kind. Block is ICE COLD while running.

Here is one article he sent to me from last year: http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonvi...12/story7.html

Dont want to take this thread off topic so if you are interested in this we can discuss in a new thread...

Evolution Marine

Grumpy666 - I agree the intake temperature does not affect the combustion heat generated, however, if the intake temp is at, lets say 300 degrees F, and lets say the combustion process generates 1200 degrees F of heat then the combined total heat of the intake temp and the combustion process temp would put the combustion chamber temp at 1500 degrees F. (this is a very simplistic explanation). Now, add some intercooler cooling and/or some methanol/water injection and lower the intake temp to 100 degrees F and the combined intake and combustion process temps would bring the combustion chamber temp down to 1300 degrees F.

I think this is the point that "vrus" is trying to make, that if the intake air temp is higher, that the combustion process temp is starting with a higher base temp and results in higher combustion CHAMBER temps. Again the combustion PROCESS heat generated is constant as you have pointed out.

As far as power loss relating to RPM,s I think "vrus" was referring to the inability of the 55 motor to maintain optimal thermal equilibrium for a reasonably longer period, than it currently can, before heat soak occurs, and that heat soak occurs sooner as the RPM,s are maintained at the higher levels with larger throttle valve opening positions for reasons you have pointed out.

So I think you are both correct, just needed a little clarification on semantics.

"vrus" Methanol's flash point is 3.2 times higher than gasoline so from a flammability stand point Methanol is far safer than the gasoline we use every day. Safety all comes down to managing the fuel correctly, however if an accident does occur (leak or rupture) methanol is 3.2 times less likely to flash than gasoline under the same circumstances. The colorless flame of methanol is a problem, however if the methanol tank is placed securely, towards the center of the car, the chance of rupture would be minimal, especially if a bladder style fuel tank were used. Just a thought, because a 100% methanol (130+ octane) admixture does work wonders. Oh, BTW, Methanol will also help clean the combustion chamber of carbon deposits.

One more thing, as you pass your opponent he will swear he just raced an "Indy Car", smelling your exhaust.

Great discussion!! - Bob

vrus

Since I dont want to make trips to the store every week to refill a canister of Methanol, I will be buying in large quantities and storing in the garage. I was told that storing pure methanol is dangerous and would be better to store in a 51/49 methanol/water mixture. At that point, I would just pour into my car's meth/water tank and away I go..

Is this not true? Is methanol 100% SAFE to store in my garage all year round?

Evolution Marine

vrus - Because it's flash point is 3.2 times higher than gasoline, it is safer than the gas in your car's gas tank. It all comes down to fuel management. Be sensible about where you put it in your garage, just as you would with gasoline, and you will be fine. Keep it in an airtight and sturdy container because it is hydroscopic and will absorb the moisture in the air. It, also will not deteriorate over time if properly sealed. Another suggestion would be to store the Methanol and any Race Gas you have outside your garage in the side yard in an enclosure to keep the weather off the containers and out of reach of children. Keep up the good work. - Bob

Grumpy666

Yes, no arguement to the first sentence. In earlier posts you stated, in essence, that if we can control the heat generated by the S/C with water injection, then that would help control the engine heat that is more prevalent in the upper RPMs. That's why I listed why water injection would actually cause the engine to produce more heat. As you stated above, meth/water injection does provide a higher power output. Higher output means more heat. But, as you also stated, the cooling system is up to the task of dissipating the additional heat. That's why you don't see the temperatures of the parameters you listed above skyrocketing.

The content of the above paragraph is why I originally said that water injection should give you a power bump across the entire RPM range, but won't raise the upper portion to near the midrange level. As long as the engine's temperature remains stable, the shape of the torque curve shouldn't change. But, as you said, you need to do it and re-test.

Do you know, is the ECU upgrade programmed to match your car? Or is it developed on a test mule and then everyone gets the one-size-fits-all version?


I believe the engine ban applied to mass-produced, passenger vehicles. Your friend should be OK in his niche business. I wish him the best in his endeavor.
.

vrus

I really do enjoy the discussion.. I just feel that I am lacking in the knowledge to be able to properly debate it with you.. You sound very knowledgeable and I take your comments to heart.

In the end, no matter what anyone says to me, I just have to do it and see for myself in order to believe it.

The water/meth injection system will have a MAP sensor which is configurable. You can configure it to "crack open" at a preset pressure and it will release the water/meth into the system.

The system will also be pulsed to an injector.. It will release water according to fuel injector pulse so you will be guaranteed that throughout the entire RPM band, you will get a perfect Water to Fuel ratio. The setup is all in choosing the correct jet quantities and size so that a 15% water to fuel ratio is attained. I will be testing with 3 different nozzle sizes (7mm, 8mm, 9mm) and will be testing in single or paired configurations.

Alot of money will be spent on dyno testing because that is where the proof will come from.

Again, if anyone has anything to contribute or any input/guidance I welcome and appreciate it.

Thanks!

Grumpy666

Actually, I said it does affect the combustion heat generated - a lower intake temperature results in a denser charge which can burn more fuel and hence a bigger bang. More heat. The point I was trying to get across is even though this is happening, the cooling system seems to keep it under control. And you can call me Grumpy.


It's not really an additive effect. When you bring two objects with different temperatures together, heat will flow from the warmer object to the colder object, but the resulting temperature would depend on the mass of both objects. Depending on the temperature difference, the big boy usually wins. Let's take a look at our own little slice of reality. In the case of the combustion chamber, there's the mass of the piston, cylinder wall (block), and head, all absorbing and re-radiating combustion temperatures. In comes the cooler intake charge, a very small amount of a gasseous, extremely low-mass mixture. How much cooling do you think will occur? Think of it this way, you have a tea kettle on the stove whistling away. You can stick your hand in the steam coming out of its spout for several seconds without an adverse effect. Would you stick your hand in the boiling water? The water and steam are the same temperature. OK, back to the engine: also note that the 'coolness' of the intake mixture is only in the cylinder during the intake stroke. During the compression stroke, it's compressed to about 1/10 its normal size, which heats it up. Then it go bang.

Not really - see above. Essentially, the intake temperature affects power output. Higher temp = lower power. Agree? Lower power = smaller bang. Smaller bang = less heat.

Time out. I just re-read a few posts and I think there might be some confusion on what I'm trying to say about temperature and heat. A bigger bang will generate more heat that the cooling system has to deal with. However, at the same A/F ratio, a big bang and a small bang will occur at the same temperature. OK?

If the car is not moving fast enough for the cooling system to do its job for your given RPM level, then yes, heat soak will rear its ugly head. But if its minor heat soak, the ECU will pull timing and the entire RPM range will be affected. It it's major heat soak, the ECU will disengage the compressor. I think I'm missing your point.

Grumpy666

As EM pointed out, the flash point of methanol is higher than gasoline. I would like to add that 51/49 mixture has no flash point. Let your paranoia be your guide . . .

Grumpy666

Wow, very trick, Victor. I was thinking of doing a multi-stage system using Hobbs switches set to different boost levels. Yours is much more scientific and precise. I like it. Where do you plan on tapping into the injector circuit? BTW - with the nozzle sizes listed above, you're going to literally flood the engine. Don't you mean 0.7 - 0.9 mm?

vrus

For the injector pulse, it will be tapped into one of the Injector's harnesses...

Slip of the finger.. Yes. They should read 0.7, 0.8, 0.9mm.. Thanks for correcting that.

Evolution Marine

Grumpy - Concerning the combustion process temp and the intake temp, I agree that the intake temp affects the net combustion process temp that eventually affects the combustion chamber temp. What I thought you were referring to was the fact that the combustion process can not produce any more heat than the fuel available (BTU's) at the time of combustion.

Grumpy - vrus is not adding more fuel he is just cooling the intake temp. which will lower the combustion CHAMBER temp. which will allow the ECU to leave more timing in the motor which will maintain HP and if the combustion CHAMBER temp lowers far enough the ECU will put even more timing in and HP will go up. So no more fuel will be added just timing which also raises combustion CHAMBER temp. Given enough cooling effect by the cooler intake temp. the HEAT vs HP battle will equalize at a higher HP number.

Also the cooling system on the 55 motor does not keep the motor temp under control for extended high output, thus the ECU dials back the timing and/or disengages the blower, to varying degrees, depending on how high the operating temp has risen. This is the major challenge with this motor and to which vrus has directed all his efforts to date.

Grumpy - You are correct here, the mass of the combustion gas is very small compared to the the mass of the motor parts you mentioned. However, the combustion gases have one important advantage over the motor parts, they reproduce themselves, @ 6000 RPMs, at the rate of 100 times a second. These small incremental shots of lower temp intake temp, at this rate, will cool the Combustion CHAMBER down, just as the incremental shots of heat at each firing of the combustion PROCESS heated up these motor parts to begin with.

Grumpy what happens to the energy? I think you do agree with me here also as evidenced by this quote.

Grumpy you are correct - absorbing and re-radiating. The heating and cooling process in the combustion CHAMBER is an incremental process (at 6000 RPMs - 100 times a sec.) and at the point of equalization it is a very delicate balance and this balance can be incrementally changed (at 6000 RPMs - 100 times a sec.).

Grumpy - Sorry about the poor explanation here. What I was trying to explain was that the 55K motor does not have enough cooling capacity to maintain peak HP (ECU sees this and dials back timing and/or disengages the blower) for an extended high out put period. vrus is attempting to solve this issue in part by the projects he has proceeded with on his car, all being, at this point, related to heat reduction in the motor. The end result of all his hard work and $$$$$ will hopefully be a motor that the ECU deems is running below its normal operating temp and can take more timing and produce more HP during extended high output. I was also assuming that the final testing will be on the road where high out put is directly related to high speed, so there will be the necessary air circulation for the cooling system to operate at its highest level.

Great discussion. - Bob

Grumpy666

EM - Normally, I wouldn't respond to your post, since I see it as a thinly veiled attempt to defend the errors in your original post. But I think there are others on this forum who truly want to learn, and I don't want them to be confused by all the misinformation, errors, and confusing statements that it contains.

Please stop mis-quoting me. I said that the intake charge temperature affects the amount of combustion heat generated, not the temperature. Combustion temperature is modulated by the A/F ratio. Please re-read the Time Out from my last post.


Yes, Victor is not adding more fuel - the fuel is already there. Take a look at an A/F ratio chart at WOT. The ratio from 2500 RPM to redline is well below the stoichiometric 14.7 ratio of air/gas. This means that there is not enough air available to burn all the fuel present. When the intake valve opens, a given volume of air will enter. Cooler air is denser than warmer air. Denser air contains more oxygen molecules for that same given volume. So, more oxygen will enter the combustion chamber to react with the already-too-much fuel. Bigger bang. More heat. And yes, the ECU will not add more fuel - it can't - at WOT, the car is in open loop mode - the amount of fuel injected is predetermined by a lookup table in software. The ECU can only limit spark advance, which does not raise the combustion chamber temperature - it raises the pressure. That's where the increased power comes from and that's why detonation becomes more of a concern - the higher pressure puts the mixture closer to its flash point prior to spark ignition.


Wow - don't you wish you could go back in time and erase this statement? Think about it - every time that extremely-low-mass charge enters the chamber, it's immediately followed by an exploding fireball. When does the cooling occur? What you're suggesting is the engine will run cooler at higher RPMs. Yeah. right. Also, at 6000 RPM, the intake valve opens 50 times per second, not 100. This is a 4-cycle engine.


Please re-read my original post regarding this topic. The answer doesn't change, no matter how nonsensically you ask the question. I gave up trying to understand that last sentence.


Either you haven't learned from my posts or you are unwilling to do so. Every performance mod that Victor has done to his car will cause the engine to generate more heat at WOT. That is one of the prices you pay for higher power output. Cooling the intake charge does not cool the engine. It heats it due to the increased power it generates. I don't know any clearer way to state this.

One possible exception to Victor's mods is the Evans coolant, which contains a surfactant to lower the surface tension of the fluid. Theoretically, this should help heat transfer, but I doubt if it's measurable in the real world.

Please don't respond with more bogus theories on how you think it should work. That will not promote any more meaningful discussion, and I will not respond.

eclou

Enough of the thermodynamics masturbation.

Vrus, you need to add fuel. Plain and simple. Your AFR of 14:1 all the way up to 4200rpm is way too lean. FI cars are not the same as N/A cars and should not be run anywhere near lambda. The fact that your car is running that lean at 100F means that once the intake charge temp drops you will very possibly lean out even more and blow a headgasket/burn the valves/catastrophic detonation. The way the AFR shows the dip at redline indicates that the injector/pump/fpr combo will flow enough fuel, so adding an adjustable FPR may help fatten the AFR under the torque peak/midrange. The computer should be able to keep the AFR from becoming too rich towards redline. I would also suggest strongly that you install an EGT and monitor (you can get these for less than $400) to aid in your tuning. I would guess your EGT's are close to 1600 right now.

vrus

I know the AFR is lean at the bottom, but with the stock programming there isn't much I can do about it. To be honest I never thought about purchasing a FPR to put in.... That is a great idea and will allow me to make changes without affecting the programming.. The concern is what will the dealer think of it if they see an adjustable FPR sitting on the rail??

Because the mixture is a bit lean now, all I have to do is spray a higher concentration of methanol and that should help.

Thanks for the idea.. I will do a little more research on which FPR to purchase.

eclou

If you are concerned about the appearance of the adjustable FPR, you might consider looking up an OEM unit from another model which may have a higher bar rating. I am guessing the SL65 unit may be the ticket but you need a spec sheet to check. I would try .5 bar more initially. Too rich should not be a problem. The computer should be able to pull back on the injectors after some adaptation period.

Also, increasing the intake charge density using a fogger may lower the intake charge temps and exhaust gas temps some, but it make you lean out even more unless you get the computer to add fuel first. Just to be safe, I would run plugs 1-2 stages colder than stock, narrow the plug gap, and physically check the plugs often.

vrus

See.. Now this is why a community board is so great.. You have so many minds and eyes looking into something..

Sometimes the answer is so simple that you can't see it..

ECLOU: Much thanks for the idea. I will get my parts guy on it right away.. If my dyno improves, I definitely owe you a beer!!

rflow306

Victor another thing to consider before making changes is that the a/f meter or tail pipe sniffer from the dyno is not 100% accurate, especially when you first hit it on the dyno. I am going to weld a bung on the down pipe and run another meter when I dyno again. With another meter you can check it on the the street under real conditions ie 100% load. I personally am not a big fan of the dynojet tailpipe sniffer its readings can be misleading at times.

eclou

Werd. Post cat O2 readings are not nearly as accurate as a pre cat sample. Nowadays with cars running pre-cat/resonators right at the manifold it is increasingly difficult to get a wideband sample. However sometimes you can use the factory 3 wire sensor information or plug in a 5 wire in the factory pre-cat location.

vrus

Yup. I agree.. That's why I have been looking into a wideband to have installed in the car. It is a must when you are tuning with things like water/meth injection. I will install one soon.

As for the FPR idea.. I spoke with 3 parts guys and they all say they cant find an FPR on the W211... I guess it is controlled by the ECU or pump or something?????

rflow306

Victor our e55 like many modern cars don't have a return system. You can install any high pressure regulator you want by installing a return line back to the tank. This would involve adapting a fitting somewhere on the fuel rails. The only problem with this is that you will add fuel all the way across the board which I believe you don't need. I think the key to all this is ECU tuning we need to be able to tune our map on the spot. Ignition timing and a/f is the way to go not boost.

One last thing does any one know at what rpm our cars build full boost on average?