It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Mixing water in your gasoline?!?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 02:56 PM
link   
First of all, I did a search and came up with nothing regarding this (I hate booleon searches... 200 subjects that have nothing to do with what I'm looking for...)

Anyways, I saw this on TV a few minutes ago...

gasadvance.com...

In past researches, I've found that alot of these TV-sold technologies can also be found for free... so, I'm curious if anyone knows anything about this system, the principle it works on, or has spent the money on the DVD, or systems they sell? I've seen alot of systems that use water to augment the expansion of gasses in the combustion chamber (systems built for reciprocating engines, adapted from jet engine water injection).

Seems to me that this may just be another system taht uses the heat from the burning gasoline to cause water to expand, thus not only adding to cylinder pressure, but also helping to cool the combustion chamber... some desert buggies use water injection to assist in cooling this way.


So, thoughts, experiences, or comments regarding this particular system? Seems, historically, that when a system like this gets to TV, it turns out to be pretty hokey... sometimes we get a decent idea like the "Tornado", which is just a new "universal" item adapted from an old hotrodder carburator trick (making a slot in a baseplate that is about 7 degrees off of vertical, to create a smooth swirl, which helps atomization of the air/fuel mixture, as well as keep the mixture moving and avoiding condensation along the intake ports). This system is claiming to use an 80/20 mix of Water/Fuel.

Another question is, is this a system that could be adapted for use with alcohol? Water injection typically doesn't work with alcohol because they readily mix together.

I'll keep my eye out, but it's always nice to get help and others' thoughts and ideas when sifting through the seemingly infinite number of web-grains along the stretch of internet beach.




posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 03:15 PM
link   
Just checked out the link. Seems like a scam to me just as any of the too good to be true things are.
From my understanding of the internal combustion engine it only works one way and it can not be modified to run on water or anything else but a combstible fuel. I would think if you could change it over to burn water the major car manufactors would be the ones to introduce it not some "as seen on tv" company. I know there are lots of crazy ideas on improving your engine most of them are costly and ony do damage to it.

Just my two cents worth



posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 03:50 PM
link   
well, water injection IS used quite frequently. In a jet engine, a mist is sprayed into the combustion chamber. When the fuel is ignited, it obviously expands and creates the thrust. The water intruduced into the combustion process expands as well from the intense heat, further adding to the overall thrust. In a reciprocating engine, water injection systems are used for the same purpose... in essence, the water isexpanding inside the cylinder, and basically using it like a steam engine, but combining the "boiler" process into the cylinder, and using the burning gasoline to create the steam.

Water injection works... but 80/20 water/gas?!? I just can't quite fathom how the gas can burn with that much water.



posted on Aug, 14 2006 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Earthscum
In a reciprocating engine, water injection systems are used for the same purpose... in essence, the water isexpanding inside the cylinder, and basically using it like a steam engine, but combining the "boiler" process into the cylinder, and using the burning gasoline to create the steam.


thats not correct. water injection is actually used to lower combustion temperatures to avoid detonation or pre-ignition mostly on turbo or supercharged enigines. since the pressure is much higher from cramming all that air in there it causes higher combustion temperatures which isnt good. the water acts sort of like octane. you also need to have it misted in with the air and fuel. i wouldnt pour water into my gas tank.

actually heres a better explanation.

www.rallycars.com...

[edit on 14-8-2006 by homeskillet]


MBF

posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 12:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by homeskillet

thats not correct. water injection is actually used to lower combustion temperatures to avoid detonation or pre-ignition mostly on turbo or supercharged enigines. since the pressure is much higher from cramming all that air in there it causes higher combustion temperatures which isnt good. the water acts sort of like octane. you also need to have it misted in with the air and fuel. i wouldnt pour water into my gas tank.
[edit on 14-8-2006 by homeskillet]


This is what water injection is used for and how it is used. Also the water injection is used to cool the incoming air so that more air can be packed into the combustion chamber. Good explanation homeskillet.


apc

posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 07:30 AM
link   
Just dont run injection an iron block. Or an iron sleeved aluminum block (which most high boost engines should be...).

And DEFINITELY never pour it straight in the tank! It will just seperate and make bad things happen when the pump starts to draw it.



posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 10:27 AM
link   


posted by Earthscum

“ . . water injection IS used quite frequently. In a jet engine, a mist is sprayed into the combustion chamber. When the fuel is ignited, it obviously expands and creates the thrust. The water introduced into the combustion process expands as well from the intense heat, further adding to the overall thrust . . “



Not exactly, Mr E. Water injection was used on some older jet engines but I’ve been away from the UsAF since the 1960s, so I’m not on real solid ground in 2006 jet engine technology.

There are 3 parameters that can be measured which will give you the thrust of a jet engine. All relate to the exhaust. 1) volume, 2) velocity and 3) temperature. Anything you can do to alter one or more of those parameters will alter the thrust of the jet engine. Power or thrust gages were actually based on the rotational speed of the turbine. If the engine was rated at say, 8,000 rpm, then a reading of 90% power meant the turbine was spinning at 7,200 rpm. And etc.

Water injection was used on J65s and J57s. And maybe on others. You could see the effects of water injection in the dark exhaust “smoke” on take off of B36s, B47s and B52s when using 100% power plus water injection. The water was injected after the hot gases passed though the turbine, and raised the density or volume of the exhaust, thereby adding to the thrust.

Called running “wet” when the afterburner is used, that system injects raw JP4 (or whatever jet fuel is being used) very near to the end of the outlet pipe of the engine, raising all three parameters, the exhaust volume, its velocity and its temperature. The thrust was thus increased over running "dry." Whereas water injection might raise thrust 5 or 10%, afterburner fuel infection can raise thrust 50%.

The now almost universal adaption of fan jet technology uses a second turbine to power the very large set of blades in front of the basic engine. That air is coinfined in a shroud and bypasses the engine. This has the effect of adding to the volume of the engine's exhaust. Because almost no additional fuel is required to power the bypass fan over the standard jet engine, the extra thrust is considered a bonus.

In the case of War2 internal combustion engines, the gem of them all was the P&W R2800, air cooled, 14 cylinders in two rows of 7 each. Making upwards of 2,200 hp towards the end of the war, among its many applications it powered America's fastest fighter, the F4U. The R2800 was fitted with water injection. That was called the “War Emergency” power and had a separate throttle setting to engage. There was enough water supplied for about 5 minutes of running. The engine was mandatory for a major overhaul after 1 use of ‘WE’ power because of the extra stresses put on the cylinders and crankshaft. ("P&W" is for Pratt & Whitney. "R" is for radial. The P-51 was powered by the Packard built Rolls Royce V-1650, water cooled and rated at 1,500 hp.)




[edit on 8/15/2006 by donwhite]



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 12:39 AM
link   
I read your linked article, homeskillet... and yes, water injection is used to cool combustion temps... I mentioned that already... but that article is geared more towards being able to keep correct timing, which will produce more efficient power than retarding the timing.

Think of it this way... what does that water do when it is heated by the gasses? Simple answer, it expands. It actually adds to the overall pressure inside the cylinder. (I know this because I have been racing and playing with turbo cars for some years now. I'm kinda partial to autocross/rally myself). The water injection has a dual purpose. (off topic, a neat way I've seen intercoolers chilled is by smaller A/C units. The coils are mounted in front of the intercooler. If you can find an efficient A/C unit, the power gain is supposed to be subsstantially more than the power needed to drive the A/C unit. From what I understand, it works extremely well in really hot climates, such as Nevada)

What I'm asking though, is if anybody knows how this 'new' system works. From my own experience, you can't feesably ignite fuel/air mixture that contains 80% water to 20% fuel. I've dug around and can't figure out if they are somehow breaking the water molecules and recombining the H and o's, or what.

I understand about the jet engines... but again, it's been explained to me by ex engineers to have a dual purpose... again, since the water is introduced into the combustion process as a liquid or near liquid state, it gets heated and expands, adding to the overall thrust.

I may have unintentionally misled some to assume that I'm talking about large power gains... I'm not (although, any small gain in racing application is considered significant as long as the system used to make the gain doesn't take away from the overall speed or accelleration). This system I linked in the original post makes me think that they are claiming to be actually using the water as either a fuel, itself, or using the water to somehow cause a more efficient combustion of the fuel.

Has anyone ever used any of the older "power increasing" water systems? I haven't found anything about how those actually work... seems to be either it doesn't work (no explanation), works just like normal water injection systems, or "never heard of it" (kicked under the carpet by who knows... and still no explanation).



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 02:23 AM
link   
there was a system that mixed water and diesel i believe to improve the fuel econemy, water was also used in 500cc gp bikes although it wasn't injected into the engine, it was injected into the exhaust pipes this somehow increased and improved the torque that the engine produced i believe.



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 08:56 AM
link   
Water Injection.

I am not convinced adding water to gasoline, ethanol or diesel fuel will do anything but contaminate the fuel. Two scientific facts remain, oil and water does not mix, and water does not burn. If you accept that, then you are confronted with trying to understand how the addition of water to an engine - either internal combustion or gas turbine - will be beneficial and somehow add to the power output of the engine.

Water can be introduced into an engine either by adding to the fuel reservoir, injecting into the fuel air charge or into the combustion directly or into the exhaust as it exits the engine

Backyard mechanics do a lot of things to engines hoping to raise its power output, but so far, mainstream engineering has avoided following their lead. For example, it was posted that in 500 cc grand prix motorcycles, water is added to the exhaust system and I suppose, that makes the bikes go faster. It was not stated if power was increased or if it was, then how. Q. How much "power" is in the exhaust pipe anyway?

I have read and I believe that a “turned” exhaust will bring about better evacuation of the cylinders at a given speed or rpm, but due to the relatively narrow rpm range this works, it is not used in mass produced engines. The same is true of a “tuned” intake manifold. Anyone here recall the long Chrysler manifolds that extended across the engine with a 4 bbl carburetor mounted on top of each branch? Many high end cars today use a two track intake manifold system. Long track for low speed torque, short track for high speed power.

Intercooling. The creme de la creme of engine technology. Most frequently used in the case of a positive displacement supercharger. The compressing of gases raises the temperature and lowers the density of the intake charge. Since charge density is directly proportional to power out, it is reasonable to try to gain back some of the lost density so that you can pack more fuel air mixture into the combustion chamber. Very useful at the race track or on the dynamometer but hardly worth the price on a “street” car.

So where am I? Water injection (WI) looks to me to be esoteric, as in nitrogen and nitroglycerin injection. I went to the SAE website and searched for water injection and found quite a list of papers. 21,218 to be exact. Just reading titles of the first 25 shows WI is frequently related to NOX - nitroous oxides emissions - and to Egr - exhaust gas recirculation, both of interest to EPA-types. None of the 25 listed papers titles indicated the use of WI would rise power output.

Conclusion. If WI was useful in mass produced engines, it would have been adopted years ago. Whether it makes one engine more powerful than another in a particular setting, is in my mind entirely problematical. Water does not burn and an internal combustion engine is not a steam engine.

For reference see www.sae.org...



[edit on 8/18/2006 by donwhite]



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 10:33 AM
link   
earthscum, if you read through the link i posted it states (in bold) The sole function of water injection is avoiding detonation. there is nothing more to it.

i know they say its is "new" technology but there has to be more than just addding water to your gas. that weblink you posted looks more like some kind of infomercial. reminds of the electronic supercharger or the "tornado" intake which both do nothing but lighten the wallet.

don white posted lots of good points. "tuned" intake and exhausts are nothing new and are great in helping an engine run at a more peak effeciency. it helps with the pulses of air coming in and out of a multi-cylinder motor so they arent "banging" against each other thus reducing flow. but as for the air to air intercooler, it has been used in many production turbo/supercharged street cars effectively. i read a lot about turbocharging and any reduction in intake charge heat is a good thing. like i mentioned in my first post, the high pressure intake air is hot and thats not good for effeciency. thats why people use things like water injection as well.



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 11:38 AM
link   
I do know that when you drive your car when it is wet, it runs a hell of a lot better.

Basically the air is cooler, more dense etc so a water "mister" of sorts (to mimick a rainy night) would definitely make your car run better.

I'm not talking one car either - I'm talking old cars, EFI and the latest cars as well.

Power is definitely increased, however I haven't done economy tests so who knows.

Cheers

JS



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 12:18 PM
link   

posted by homeskillet
" . . the air to air intercooler has been used in many production turbo/supercharged street cars effectively. I read a lot about turbo charging and any reduction in intake charge heat is a good thing. like I mentioned in my first post, the high pressure intake air is hot and that’s not good for efficience. that’s why people use things like water injection as well.”


H/S, I failed to clarify that my only objection to intercoolers engineering-wise, is the cost is hard for the ordinary Volvo driver to recoup. You are entirely correct in the improvement it offers over natural aspiration.






[edit on 8/18/2006 by donwhite]



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 12:40 PM
link   
Is this for real? are you crazy put water in your tank and your going to want to beat your self to death, it will probably run instead of having a V8 you will have a V1 AND IF IT EVER got below freezing you will be looking for a new car. just plane stupid IMO.



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 01:38 PM
link   


posted by skitzo

Earth Scum are you crazy put water in your tank and you’re going to want to beat your self to death, it will probably run instead of having a V8 you will have a V1 AND IF IT EVER goes below freezing you will be looking for a new car. IMO. [Edited by Don W]


Look, the price has risen about $1 in the past 12 months. Has Congress held any hearings? Has the president gone on the tube to explain what he is doing to lower gas prices? Are we alone and helpless while the movers and shakers of our great nation hole up in Aspen or Mystic? Or Crawford, more suited for the nuevo riche?



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by solidshot
there was a system that mixed water and diesel i believe to improve the fuel econemy, water was also used in 500cc gp bikes although it wasn't injected into the engine, it was injected into the exhaust pipes this somehow increased and improved the torque that the engine produced i believe.


But I do know about diesels... You never mix diesel and water simply because you will grow algae in the fuel, and clog your fuel filter (leaving you stranded), or damage your injectors (if you ever want to go broke fast, start replacing diesel injectors). There have been some attempts to use water injection in diesels, but it's purpose is to lower EGT's (Exhaust Gas Temperatures) and also for environmental reasons. As far as EGT's go, there are easier and cheaper ways to accomplish this, the jury remains out on potential environmental uses.

www.greencarcongress.com...

Water/Methanol injection is another story:

www.snowperformance.net...

Once again though, an injection process, not mixing. That may be snake oil as well.


With what we have at our disposal today, bio diesel is the way to go.


[edit on 18/8/2006 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 02:05 PM
link   
emulsified diesel diesel+water to reduce emitions i believe



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by solidshot
emulsified diesel diesel+water to reduce emitions i believe


But that's a process that occurs at refineries or large distribution points (like a truck stop), and availability is next to zero (makes bio diesel look like it's on every street corner). The subject was on board mixing of fuels and water (at least I think it was)... That won't work.

There's also the issue of substantial reduction of power and economy with emulsified fuels... They just don't have the BTU per gallon of conventional fuels. Bio diesel doesn't suffer from this shortcoming. B100 is within 2% of of the BTU's that standard #2 diesel has, and with a much higher Cetane rating. I run B100 and make close to 400 RWHP (not BHP which is a worthless measurement) while getting 22 MPG highway... 7500 lb vehicle to boot.


Bio Diesel Monkeys, not just for vegetarian trucks anymore...



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 05:45 PM
link   
if your really that concerned about gas prices sell the gasser, buy a diesel, get creative and find some friendly restaraunts. or you could buy a kit.


and don white, i gotcha. automakers decide a lot on cost and it's not always whats best for our wallet or world for that matter. but if you want you could also get creative at the junkyard and find a starion intercooler and buy some steel piping and some silicon tubing and you're in business. i've seen people do junkyard turbo set-ups (on non turbo cars mind you) for much less than $1000



posted on Aug, 20 2006 @ 12:57 AM
link   
When these systems add water, they do it as close to the combustion chamber as possible... donwhite is completely correct about contamination. If you introduce water into your fuel tank, the water just sits at the bottom and gets sucked up first... and an engine designed to run on petro fuels obviously won't run by igniting water, lol.

I remember another system discussed in previous threads about water injection... it was used as a power booster. The systems previous to the afore mentioned system only introduced a tiny amount of water, though.

Homeskillet... I'm going to reluctantly agree with you... I learned the water injection trick from seasoned racers who have been doing it for years, so I'm going to just say that every one of them were lying, or misleading me. HOWEVER, I am going to say, on the same hand, that you ARE wrong... if you are cooling combustion temps in order to keep correct timing without detonation, you ARE using the water as a power booster. without it, you retard your timing (I've seen, in person, up to 23 degrees retard just for a high-boost application... 19lbs on a turbo), thus getting back the power lost previously to avoid blowing holes through the top of pistons. I already covered that in part, but I guess I didn't make it clear enough. I really don't think the racers I've known were lying to me... they've been building high HP engines for a long time... some of them since the early/mid 70's. Again, the side effect is expanding water vapors, which add to the pressures in the combustion process.

As far as the diesel app's, I've heard in passing about them, but nothing more. I know if there is a catalytic converter involved, it won't help out on emmissions, but most diesels don't use cats... at least not until more recent years (became more common about mid-90's to use cats in diesels). A catalytic converter relies on the substrate to reach a certain temparature before it starts actually doing it's job, somewhat how a diesel uses a glow plug because the fuel won't ignite until the chamber reaches a certain temp.

So, you think this is a scam, or what? I'm starting to think there's something to it, but I think SO has me looking at things a bit more... well, skeptically, lol... such as this:


Q. Why is there no information of the actual modification process on the website?

A. We are providing this information on the DVD due to the amount of information and the customization processes for your particular engine, which depends on number of cylinders, etc. as well as complete instructions and how you can purchase the modification kit.
(emphasis added by Earthscum)


So, if I can make the modifications, why isn't it feesable that I could make the modification kit myself? Someone has to dig for cash, I guess...

But, I did find some clues... read the full FAQ...


Q. Does it really work?

A. The Gas Advance System simply vaporizes the fuel using the exhaust itself. With a patented system, a magnetic reactor rod ionizes the fuel during vaporization. Internal combustion engines utilize oxygen through air intake and hydrocarbons through gasoline. Your gasoline engine already uses hydrogen, oxygen, and carbons to burn. We simply use catalyst ionization with the reactor rod separator strategically placed in the fuel line, this vaporization process serrate oxygen, hydrogen, and carbons to burn as elements and do it more efficiently. Hydro-carbons, oxygen, and hydrogen burn more efficient through this patented process.


Hmm... still a helluva lot of water, IMHO.

Another thing that makes me scratch my head is that it says it won't harm the internal components of the engine, but avoids speaking of any other part of the COMPLETE engine. MOST cars have steel exhaust systems that are prone to rust. If you are breaking the water down and recombining it in the combustion process, you will run water through your exhaust system. It is proven. If you have lots of any kind of water exited through the exhaust, it will rust out! Cast steel intake manifolds will also rust of water is run through the system. When you shut your car off, any water still left in the system will sit on the bottom and rust steel components. I know I'm being picky, but that is definitly an issue that isn't covered.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join