View Single Post
Old 04-28-2012, 12:54 PM   #184 (permalink)
mort
EcoModding Lurcher
 
mort's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 333
Thanks: 149
Thanked 109 Times in 80 Posts
Hi drmiller100,
So traveling back in time...
Quote:
Originally Posted by drmiller100 View Post
Lets say we inject enough "steam" into the intake stream to eliminate vacuum pumping losses, which I think we all agree are measurable and significant????
OK, for some numbers, imagine a 2.5 liter Otto cycle at 1500 rpm cruise, the air consumed is about 625 l/m and the volume swept by the pistons is 1875 l/m. To eliminate pumping across the throttle requires 1250 l/m of steam. The saturated steam table says that at 100 C. we can just get to 1.7 l/g. That gives us 735 g/m. The mass of air, 625 l/m is about 590 g/m. The fuel consumption is about 40 g/m. Without testing I can tell that adding 18 times more water than fuel will prevent ignition. If you deliver only as much water as fuel ignition will be difficult, and at that point you only reduce pumping by about 5% Water injection systems used to cool high boost engines often start misfiring at about 20% of fuel flow.
Anybody with a big water tank can try it, but I'm not hopeful that reducing pumping is achievable.

Also on this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by drmiller100 View Post
Lower absolute instantaneous temperatures means less losses to the cylinder head/piston.
Lower peak temperature reduces thermodynamic efficiency faster than it reduces heat loses through the cylinder walls. Higher compression ratios are more efficient, even though heat through the cylinder increases.
-mort
  Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to mort For This Useful Post:
jdchmiel (02-23-2014), serialk11r (04-28-2012), t vago (04-28-2012)