Page 2 of 3
Re: GEN V or ported GEN III w/SSIC?
Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 12:06 pm
by dirtracr95
2000Silverbullet wrote:How much lower specifically? I've been wondering this for a while.
The minimum amount of heat added by compressing air to 8 psi at 100% efficiency according to Boyles Gas Law is 71*F.
The compressor's efficiency will add additional heat. For instance if it is 75% efficient, it will add another 24*F of heat.
I have noticed about a 10*-20*F drop in temps after converting to the Gen5.
Engine heat soak will add additional heat. My engine heat soaks to 160*F.
The normal running temp of my SC outlet air is 120*F with IAT of 50*F, so the heat gain is 70*F
At 8 psi the SC outlet temp spikes almost immediately to 190*F, so that seems to correspond to the 70*F rise due to compression.
That means the other 70*F is due to compressor efficiency and heat transfer from the 160* engine.
The
water injection will knock the temp down to 140*F at WOT so it cools about 50*F. Not as much cooling as the SSIC that claims 80*F.
You honestly think a meth injection system with a solenoid that can stick pumping water/meth into your intake is any safer than an intercooler?
Ah, yes actually!
I was referring to the risk of heat exchanger failure and dumping coolant into the engine in a very high quantity.
The meth injection is a very low volume system. It is very fail safe also. The solenoid failed closed so the engine just bogged from running rich. Still ran a 13.5 with no injection.
You just mentioned water injection. Do you have any other info on METH injection? The rates at which they cool are different. I was following a Thread on one of the turbo regal/GN sites about the differences between water injection and meth injection. I have to try to find the post.
And what percentage of Water to Air intercoolers fail? I havnt really heard of any cases. Sure the possibility is there, but so the possibility of the methanol catching fire underneath the hood.
Re: GEN V or ported GEN III w/SSIC?
Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 1:09 pm
by 2000Silverbullet
When I said water injection I meant the mixture of 50% water and 50% methanol. LOL you can try to ignite it but good luck, it won't burn by itself! It's about the same concentration as wiper fluid.
With it turned off, when I go WOT the SC outlet air temp spikes between 200 - 250 F.
With it turned on, when I go WOT the SC outlet air temp spikes between 150 - 200 F depending on IAT.
50F is enough to kill any heat related KR and I am producing 12 - 14 psi
Put that in your pipes and chill it!
Re: GEN V or ported GEN III w/SSIC?
Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 1:41 pm
by Dirthead Racing
2000Silverbullet wrote:
With it turned off, when I go WOT the SC outlet air temp spikes between 200 - 250 F.
With it turned on, when I go WOT the SC outlet air temp spikes between 150 - 200 F depending on IAT.
50F is enough to kill any heat related KR and I am producing 12 - 14 psi
So what is your A/F ratio doing when you are running the injection vs not and how are you tuning to keep from going rich/lean?
Re: GEN V or ported GEN III w/SSIC?
Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 1:55 pm
by 2000Silverbullet
A/F ratio at WOT normally is 11.0
A/F ratio at WOT with Boost Cooler on is about 12.5
Complete combustion (stoich) for gas is about 14.7 A/F. For methanol it is about 6.3. Methanol has less fuel energy than gas, but adds considerable quantities of oxygen. Adding, 10% methanol, to gas creates a new unknown stoich value somewhere in between, maybe closer to about 13.8
I tune by varying the rate and timing of injection.
Re: GEN V or ported GEN III w/SSIC?
Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 2:10 pm
by Dirthead Racing
2000Silverbullet wrote:A/F ratio at WOT normally is 11.0
A/F ratio at WOT with Boost Cooler on is about 12.5
Complete combustion (stoich) for gas is about 14.7 A/F. For methanol it is about 6.3. Methanol has less fuel energy than gas, but adds considerable quantities of oxygen. Adding, 10% methanol, to gas creates a new unknown stoich value somewhere in between, maybe closer to about 13.8
I tune by varying the rate and timing of injection.
So you add oxygen? Isn't that cheating?
On a serious note though, The general consensus in the 3800 community is that WI/MI/AI is not as consistent as an intercooler for daily driven vehicles. That is one of the reasons there are significantly(probably greater than 50 to 1) more IC's on vehicles than WI/MI/MI. A full size intercooler is advertised at 110deg temp drop, even at 50% eff from the advertisement(heat soak), it's still doing a better job of cooling incoming air than WI/MI/AI according to your stated results. Based on the well respected performance parts builders for our engine, the people using WI/MI/AI are the minority for a reason.
Re: GEN V or ported GEN III w/SSIC?
Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 3:58 pm
by willwren
I've played with both on the Series 1, including 3 different WI systems, and a custom intercooler. The WI is inconsistent in the results it delivers, with or without methanol. I've seen this at times on the Bullet as well.
My IC gave me far more consistent results with my first prototype.
Re: GEN V or ported GEN III w/SSIC?
Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 5:09 pm
by dirtracr95
2000Silverbullet wrote:When I said water injection I meant the mixture of 50% water and 50% methanol. LOL you can try to ignite it but good luck, it won't burn by itself! It's about the same concentration as wiper fluid.
You can light it on fire trust me. I had a wiper fluid line disconnect under the hood and it caught fire when it hit the exhaust manifold it burned through half of the wiring harness.
Re: GEN V or ported GEN III w/SSIC?
Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 7:41 pm
by willwren
You cannot light a 50/50 water methanol mixture. We're not running washer fluid.
Re: GEN V or ported GEN III w/SSIC?
Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 8:01 pm
by 2000Silverbullet
The general consensus in the 3800 community is that WI/MI/AI is not as consistent as an intercooler for daily driven vehicles. That is one of the reasons there are significantly(probably greater than 50 to 1) more IC's on vehicles than WI/MI/MI. A full size intercooler is advertised at 110deg temp drop, even at 50% eff from the advertisement(heat soak), it's still doing a better job of cooling incoming air than WI/MI/AI according to your stated results. Based on the well respected performance parts builders for our engine, the people using WI/MI/AI are the minority for a reason.
Oh it's consistent when it's injecting. The failed solenoid was my fault for not draining and purging the system (like I was supposed to do) so the Meth corroded it closed.
The biggest problem with the set up is reservoir volume which limits the time to about three times what you would get from a nitrous bottle. After about 15 minutes of aggressive driving, it runs out and you have to stop and refill it. That can be embarrassing in a cross town race.
I ran into a trucker at the sled pull that Shadd hosted who ran the same system on his turbo diesel Ford truck. He had a huge 10 gallon reservoir in his bed.
The biggest problem with IC is heat soak. It doesn't take too long for the IC coolant to reach 160 F, then it would be very difficult to achieve even a 50 F drop.
Yes of course it can be regarded as a power adder........just a lot less than with nitrous with less dramatic results.
Re: GEN V or ported GEN III w/SSIC?
Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 8:40 pm
by Matts75
2000Silverbullet wrote:The biggest problem with IC is heat soak. It doesn't take too long for the IC coolant to reach 160 F, then it would be very difficult to achieve even a 50 F drop.
You due know that folks put a pump on that IC right?
Re: GEN V or ported GEN III w/SSIC?
Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 9:33 pm
by willwren
Matts75 wrote:2000Silverbullet wrote:The biggest problem with IC is heat soak. It doesn't take too long for the IC coolant to reach 160 F, then it would be very difficult to achieve even a 50 F drop.
You due know that folks put a pump on that IC right?
Yes, we
DO know that, some of us run intercoolers. The point Paul is trying to make is that on a hot day, eventually your front core cannot dump enough heat picked up in the intercooler core. And it can never get cooler than the ambient air.
I still contend that even in these conditions, an intercooler is better at what it does than water injection, and I used to be a fan of WI.
Re: GEN V or ported GEN III w/SSIC?
Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2009 1:03 am
by dirtracr95
you can get it colder than ambient air temp for race purposes if you spray the intercooler with CryO2. Not sure if you can use it on Water to Air intercoolers but definatly good for Turbo guys with Air to Air intercoolers
http://www.designengineering.com/produc ... m=sp&pid=5
Some of Design Engineering's CryO2 products can be used with N/A cars or before the supercharger.
http://www.designengineering.com/produc ... m=sp&pid=4
You could adapt this to an L67
http://www.designengineering.com/images ... prayer.pdf
Re: GEN V or ported GEN III w/SSIC?
Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2009 8:54 am
by willwren
It's far simpler at the track, as well as far cheaper, to simply use a slushbox.
Re: GEN V or ported GEN III w/SSIC?
Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2009 9:45 am
by dirtracr95
True but fast isnt simple or cheap
Re: GEN V or ported GEN III w/SSIC?
Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2009 10:56 am
by willwren
Fast can be inexpensive, and it can be simple depending on your skill level. A slushbox is far more economical than what you propose, and far easier to build and install.
Re: GEN V or ported GEN III w/SSIC?
Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2009 2:35 pm
by Greyhare
Using CO2 also requires very careful placement of the intake.
I have seen car loose power with CO2 foggers on the inter-cooler; the CO2 was drawn in by the intake. CO2 displaces O2.
The real problem with WI on the 3800 (and others) is the short intake. The ideal place would be after the MAF, after the supercharger, ~12 to 18 inches before the intake runners. Not going to happen on the 3800.
As to heat soak on an air/water IC; if your heat soaking to more than 5-10 deg above ambient, you need a larger front heat exchanger.
This is why Bill's has shown so much promise; he is using a heat exchanger that can keep a 250hp engine cool.
Re: GEN V or ported GEN III w/SSIC?
Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2009 6:21 pm
by willwren
Greyhare wrote:
This is why Bill's has shown so much promise; he is using a heat exchanger that can keep a 250hp engine cool.
And block a bunch of airflow to the OEM radiator.
(fix in the works for that)
Re: GEN V or ported GEN III w/SSIC?
Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2009 9:07 pm
by 2000Silverbullet
The real problem with WI on the 3800 (and others) is the short intake. The ideal place would be after the MAF, after the supercharger, ~12 to 18 inches before the intake runners. Not going to happen on the 3800.
Yes Mike, I agree. A couple of years ago I experimented injecting after the SC into the LIM.
Not successful.
Now I inject after the MAF just before the SC. Much better cooling with the added benefit of keeping the SC rotors licketty clean and promoting a better liquid ring seal.
Re: GEN V or ported GEN III w/SSIC?
Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 5:38 am
by radomirthegreat
Greyhare wrote:The real problem with WI on the 3800 (and others) is the short intake. The ideal place would be after the MAF, after the supercharger, ~12 to 18 inches before the intake runners. Not going to happen on the 3800.
Series 2 3800 turbocharged people can use agrazela's suggested L36 LIM with L67 heads for two injector bosses per cylinder for W/A/N injection right into the cylinder. That would help with the distribution of whichever concoction one wants to mix with air and fuel.
Greyhare wrote:This is why Bill's has shown so much promise; he is using a heat exchanger that can keep a 250hp engine cool.
He stated a while back that he was making over 300 HP based on 1/4 mile time calculation. Does the heat exchanger heatsoak because of his higher horsepower?
Re: GEN V or ported GEN III w/SSIC?
Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 11:11 am
by willwren
Radomir, way off base.
IF I was using it as a real RADIATOR it would support that much cooling as far as engine coolant is concerned.
I'm using it SOLELY for the purposes of the intercooler.