BJM

iTrader: (1)

I had originally ignored the silly stuff like recompressing the exhaust and assumed it was just written wrong in the article. After doing a full and normal exhaust stroke, the steam stroke would occur by allowing some quantity of water to flash into steam, providing some additional work and dropping the engine temperature at the same time. Its no more complicated than that. It seems like a really good way to get the cooling system to help in the running of the engine rather than just be a necessary evil.

Water injection as part of combustion is a very different thing, I believe that is what Ricardo had studied.

LS_RX-7

Yes, it does work, but far less is achieved this way than what is easily possible/attainable.

By completing a full exhaust stroke and retaining only a small quantity of the combustion gases/heat, you severely limit how much water-steam you can successfully inject. This relationship is clear.

It may not be more 'complicated' than that, but it certainly involves more detail to be of true value.

Ricardo studied and devised systems for many forms of water injection, as well as methanol injection, nitrous oxide systems, cold air injection, exhaust recirculation systems, and many combustion chamber profiles, fuel systems, and other engine parts to include sealing rings, piston profiles, and other items. Ricardo was a genius who's study was not confined to water injection into the induction system.

Water as part of combustion is not so different to water-steam reaction as you might think. While water-steam injection doesn't make use of the water as a combustion catalyst/excitor, it does still utilize water's heat transport abilities in the same manner, as well as it's radiation absorption spectrum, albeit for a different purpose than combustor water injection.

On a different note, I realize my posts are long, but there is no need for this discussion to die out now. There are other things that can still be debated and discussed relating to the Crower Engine. I've noticed the post frequency has all but disappeared since I wrote my mini-essays. To all the previous partakers, "Come back!" Lol.

BigMikeGXP

Im still here!!! Just waiting for someone with the money to build one.

chuntington101

im still here to! i think it is amazing and i am really glad you are infoming us on the clearly vbast amounts of knowlage you have LS_RX-7! thank you!

i think this system does have uses, if onlt in comercal plant machenary were water is avaialbe on top (haha)! you could use the hot enhaust to distil the "tap water" and then inject it onto the engine! as it apears the engines run cooler thank to the heat being transfered/used to convert the water to steam you coulfd the run the engine leaner (ie more efficently), run higher comp ratio or more boost and make more spesific power! also you would have to advantage of the "steam stroke".

do you guys think that for the same displacment power would be increased???

Chris.

LS_RX-7

Absolutely. An engine designed to take advantage of the water-steam injection for the purpose of increased power output could theoretically make well more than twice the power than a similar engine without it, using identical fuel composition and quantity.

I would think for an industrial setting, a filter would be more appropriate due to the ease/simpleness/compactness of the system, as well as the reduced concern for desposits and peak power output. BSFC is far more important in a stationary generator that spends over 95% of it's time in a very narrow operational speed range.

chuntington101

i thought so LS_RX-7! also due to the cooler running temp of the engine you could run more boost/timing/compression which would further increase power/effiency!

and if you could get rid of the water jacks think how much stronger the block could be!!

i agree about the industrial setting! filtters would be much easier!

Chris.

CamTom12

iTrader: (1)

OverTq isn't a big deal on helicopter engines, it's big deal on the tranny's, though

Back to the discussion

LastBlack02SS

iTrader: (21)

I love reading about this, anyone still have input?

Torquemonster TT

Madbill was right when talking about normal water injection - but your post here makes perfect sense. I feel that too many gave up on water injection because they found they got a slightly better result from race fuel... HOWEVER - the water injection they were comparing it to was nothing like the volume used in WW2.

While it has been shown that water likes to be atomized at over 100psi - there are no water injection kits out there right now that can supply 30% by volume - water as fuel - to a decent horsepower engine. So what we get is simply a cooling spray... it works - but it does not go far enough.

I firmly believe that whatever results were achieved on race gas - you could go further by increasing boost and/or compression and adding in water to around 30% voume between the torque peak and hp peak. Corrosion is the least of anyones problems - good leakdown build quality, lube and coatings etc - it should not be an issue. Oil system may need a water removal system like diesels is all for very high water use.

BTW - under the right conditions - water DOES crack in the chamber. We are hoping to map that soon - as funds allow... we're hardly going to get government let alone oil industry funding for that bit of reasearch.... lol

Torquemonster TT

LS_rx7 - great posts there - at least what i could follow of it - I'm not in your league.

To make it simpler for me to understand what you are saying - is the reason you suggest direct water injection rather than a much simpler direct port injection because when you want to inject the water the intake valve will be closed?

Otherwise - would not a simply direct port injection setup get close to the efficiency gains of direct injection? I have often wondered about using direct port nitrous plumbing and injecting water instead - running multiple pumps to get the required volume at 140psi.

On another note: I think a water injector into a turbo could work provided it was close enough so it did not turn into steam before the turbine... you'd want that expansion going on in the turbine I'd have thought. I'd aim it right up into the exhaust turbo inlet from a non flow restricting boss in pipe to the turbo. Thoughts?

chuntington101

first off TT you can get some great results from running only 10% water to fuel! this is the max volume of most "Kits" out there i think. but they till work a treat! and they dont just cool the intake they slow the burn down to below dept levels!

if you want to see water injection taken to the exstreames then you should look at WRC cars! i know the Subby run indavidual water injectors per cyclinder and they actually map the water injections per cyclder to get the aboslute most out the engine under full boost (over 40psi in the mid range). and they are using race fuel of some discription to!

as for this water engine in question you have to directly inject the water! you need to get the water into the chamber AFTER the BANG stroke! then when you inject it the water turns to steam and prvides another power stroke! but the main advantage is the cooling effect it has on the cylinder! an engine like this would let you run massive boost because it runs soo cool!

thanks Chris.

chuntington101

oh and why dont you want to get steam before the turbo???? anti lag systems presures the manifold not just the turbo (hence all the cracked headers!!!)! i know what your saying but it makes it much harder to set up!

thanks Chris.

Torquemonster TT

Thanks Chris - yes I'm well aware of the kits. I ran aqaumist on a Subaru and spent $20k on that car. We ran 18psi on 91 octane with 24 degrees timing at a true 9:1 and WRX cams. The car was an RS wagon AWD and despite being a 4 door family wagon with only 2 liter engine - ran 13.6 @ 103mph and 250kph, then got 33mpg at cruise when stock ones could get no better than 25.

Water works great! I was just saying I felt we could take it much further.

Re steam in the exhaust headers/manifold - would this not also cause reversion during overlap? The old anti-revesion header cones might be a good idea.

dogger

iTrader: (1)

My head hurt's now.anyone else want to stuff anthing else in there? still kind of a empty space.

good info by the way

Trojan man

iTrader: (1)

LS_Rx-7, would water injection in the Ricardo-style combustion cycle you described be subject to a theoretical max RPM limit by a physical/chemical property that has a lower bound on the amount of time that is required for the phase change into steam? Similar to a diesel engine, where diesel oil has an unavoidable time "lag" between compression and ignition which limits it's high rpm ability. I'm assuming water would have a much lower "lag" time, and thus a higher operational rpm range - but when Crower said his design would be more useful on a diesel than a gas motor that idea sprang to mind.

I too saw the Crower design as lacking in the way it was described (which is meant in absolutely no disrepect to Crower as an engineer). It seems a more efficient method to the BMW procedure linked earlier in this thread would be ideal. As an incomplete sketch, I envisioned a system where the heat energy fully exits an exhaust port (maximizing the power stroke), and is then transferred into the water fluid external of the chamber - creating steam. Yadda Yadda, it's late, and i don't want to think anymore.