Advanced water/meth injection and nozzle placement
 

Does anyone have any real world data out there with trying various pressures and nozzles placement? Precompressor, pre cac, post cac, direct port etc.

Add methanol into the mix for its evaporative/timing advance/power characteristics.

I have an idea in my mind what would be the most efficient IAT cooler vs CC vs EGT. I wouldn't mind hearing some math and ideas on different areas. Pressure vs volume. Discuss

Maybe all the brains have retired from compd after all.

You waited 7 hours^^ lol

Only experience have with it is a vp truck. Gained 8-10 psi of boost (windshield washer fluid) with the biggest kit snow had to offer. I believe the nozzles were 625 ml per min. I had 2 tapped into the intake horn. Truck was about 400-500 HP at the time. Daily driver.

Mods were adrenaline stacked with smarty, hrvp44, 6x.010 vco, .093 lines and tubes, industrial injection super phat shaft 66, mild cam that required .050 reliefs.

This is geared more toward the big water systems with adequate temp monitoring.

Most of the street truck systems seem to like nozzle placement tapped into the intake manifold or y-bridge.

At least that's what it seemed like when I was looking around for a w/m system. I ended up with one that references boost off the map sensor to pump in a preselected quantity table. Rudimentary but effective

I run a 50/50 of distilled water and VP racing M5, but as soon as that runs out I'm going to M1

Adams setup is a bit more complicated than the ole run of the mill snow kit... its closer to danger removes flesh down to bone than danger will get you wet when raining...

I've wondered the same thing regarding placement, unfortunately my days of big water injection were before my days of nice expensive datalogger. So no real evidence to reveal. I ran 600 psi from essentially a starter motor water pump threw 4 nozzles at the time.

I do know of a local tractor puller that has been experimenting with a high pressure water system and injecting it in the scroll of the turbo. It's a three stage system based upon boost and exh temp. It appears to be working so well he has been backing the water off each run and is down to under 10 oz a pass but temps are still too cool. He is going to move them to the intake piping and see what the difference is.

Something like this:

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...-06-27-348.jpg

Watching as always

The high pressure high volume systems are quite a bit more exciting than using the misting pump from my back patio.

I have seen that comp housing as well. I believe the owner is using a low(ish) pressure system with high methanol content as a primary fuel source.

I believe there is a big advantage in a progressive/multi stage system. And with modern PWM, why not?

10oz seems like a much more logical number than some reports of nearly a gallon within a 1/4 mile pass.


We do know that more pressure = more volume and smaller droplets through the same orifice. Smaller droplets will be more prone to being picked up by the airflow instead of pooling in the intake piping. They also should cool better due to the surface area/volume is much higher. They will also change to a gas much easier than a large droplet. I'm unsure how much difference it actually makes in IAT and egt reduction. Nozzle design will have a big role as well as pressure.

I had an interesting conversation with an engineer in England today. His last words were "I love a good math problem!". I'm glad he does because I'm not much of a math'er.

He recommended an ideal ratio would be around 2:1 water/diesel. Although it will vary per application.

Diesel pump: 860cc/1000strokes
- RPM/4 = stroke/minute

WOT Fuel flow minute:
5000rpm/4 = 1250 strokes/min = 1025cc/min
4000rpm/4 = 1000 strokes/min = 860cc/min
3000rpm/4 = 750 strokes/min = 645cc/min
2000rpm/4 = 500 strokes/min = 430cc/min
1000rpm/4 = 250 strokes/min = 215cc/min
500rpm/4 = 125 strokes/min = 103cc/min

Pressure vs flow (1x 100cc nozzle @100psi nozzle)
1000psi = 316cc/min
800psi = 283cc/min
600psi = 245cc/min
400psi = 200cc/min
200psi = 140cc/min
100psi = 100cc/min

Pressure vs flow (6x 100cc nozzle @100psi nozzle)
1000psi = 1896cc/min
800psi = 1698/min
600psi = 1470/min
400psi = 1200cc/min
200psi = 840cc/min
100psi = 100cc/min
*** Water/fuel ratio 185% This is a good starting point.

Looks like we're on the right track with everything. Can't wait to have some data logs to.review and verify.

You're thinking of adding diesel or methanol at a 1:0.54 ratio?

what is your intake air temp without water?
what would you like it to be ?
What is your Egt without water ?

when i drag race my 800+ hp truck my intake air temps stays in the 105-115 F range.

when i sled pull with the same tune up my intake air temp was up to 210-220 by the end of a pull.

i then added a single 14 GPH nozzle of water to the intake horn and my sled pulling intake air temp has been reduced to a max of 110-120 by the pull end

a single 14 GPH nozzle of water has had a Conservative 80 deg drop in intake air temp for me sled pulling

Referencing pure water for now. I plan on incrementally adding methanol 67-56-1 eventually.


Where is your IAT sensor in relation to your nozzle? What is your injection pressure. What is your actual measured flow?

factory 2006 ram intake air temp sensor data logged with edge CTS2

single injection nozzle in top rear port on a banks monster ram intake horn

dead head pump pressure set at 250-275 psi

iv never flow tested it at simulated pressures

nozzle is rated by banks at 883 cc/min at 100 psi

The operating pressure is going to be much lower. You also are likely seeing a false temp with the nozzle that close. You will see the best IAT reduction by putting the nozzle the furthest from the cylinder. I do believe you are seeing gains though.

curious as to why most pictures iv seen of super stock diesel sled pulling set ups run the water nozzles as close to the cylinder as they can
im guessing they want to get water into the combustion chamber for EGT control

The outlet of the intrecooler would be the farthest away i could go.
might add another 24" of flow path

id like to do some dyno testing to see if more water would help . so far happy with my insitial results

Close to cylinder allows volume to cool the combustion chamber. This should help save pistons and turbine wheels. Also I believe can be used to fine tune each cylinder's individual egt. High atomization far away gives the tiny droplets a chance to transfer some heat. Also a chance to evaporate before it makes it to the valve. By the actual IAT being lower, you could pick up some power potential. Injection precompressor can change the map by simulating a colder atmosphere, helps seal the comp wheel increasing boost efficiency, and helps lower temps before they get out of hand.

Here is an example of a high pressure direct port system.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-omcng2lM0

for every 1 cc of water injected pre intercooler do you not then have 1700 cc of steam you have to try to fit through the intercooler and through the motor ?
the rough math on 500 cc/min of water would turn into 30 cfm of steam

i would think post intercooler would be a better use of the water