water injection = Higher Efficiency?

[ProDarwin]

Originally Posted by ecomodded

How will new inventions be brought to use when the Experimenters get reprimanded for daring to trying.

You are missing the point. Any good inventor or engineer will have data - even a simple ideal scenario calculation - to back up his experiment before proceeding to the prototype stage. They would also do some background research on their concept.

In this particular scenario this concept:

A) Has been tried before. Twice.
and
B) Is unsupported by thermodynamics.

Inventors don't get reprimanded for thinking outside the box. They do when they can't provide any data showing their idea will work. I'm an engineer, and would be reprimanded (likely fired) if I spent $50K to prototype a 6-stroke steam engine and then a co-worker proved it wouldn't work in 5 minutes using basic thermo. I'm sure this is what would happen to vago as well.

Originally Posted by ecomodded

Your still up to it vago, crapping on people attempts. horrible attitude you have developed, Horrible, Nasty words of discouragement..

Yes, what an awful attitude. How dare he use math or science!

[ProDarwin]

Originally Posted by ecomodded

Math is one thing bad attitude is another.

Well, I hate to break it to you, but no amount of positive attitude will overcome the laws of physics

[Frank Lee]

Originally Posted by ecomodded

Math is one thing bad attitude is another.
Frank your a lost cause, your ecomodding and driving abilities have gained you a very SAD average mpg. Fail !!
Both Feank Lee and vago's vehicle choices are pathetic for economy and should be brought to their attentions, so i have brought it. Sad choices indeed how can one even attempt to take advice from the likes of you too.

It appears he has me on that one; he only needs to fill up once every 8 months.

[ecomodded]

Frank lee you are a serious pest.
Math is one thing trying to detour people from their attempts at saving fuel is not. lets keep things in perspective, it was vago's bad attitude not his math that is the problem, unfriendly discouragement is the problem..

[Frank Lee]

You won't find me discouraging people from anything that has a shot at working (like Volt, anyone?) and you won't find me promoting things that don't have a shot at working. You'll find me poking holes in nonsense posts and you'll find me adding to sensible ones when I think I can. If that makes you think I'm a pest... good!

[drmiller100]

Originally Posted by ecomodded

Frank lee you are a serious pest.
Math is one thing trying to detour people from their attempts at saving fuel is not. lets keep things in perspective, it was vago's bad attitude not his math that is the problem, unfriendly discouragement is the problem..

this site has a LOT of tailgunners. Tailgunners are bar stool racers who discourage others from doing things - if someone were to do something, or TRY something, their lives would be less complete.

My education was more theory then practice, for which I am better suited. I'm trying to get one of the engineer types to help me with the practical side of things, but so far we haven't had a good engineer come along and run some numbers for us which reflects the reality of the experiment.

FWIW, I continue to try experiments, and build things. I just got tired of posting my progress to this site.

[drmiller100]

Originally Posted by t vago

You have a Bachelor of Science in Mathematics. You minored in Physics and Computer Science. You figure this out, genius.

at what point do the moderators step in and slow down the personal attacks?

Crap like this detracts from the site.

Do the mods want us to start doing IP Traces on all posters so we can post personal info?

Credit cards anyone?

[t vago]

Originally Posted by drmiller100

at what point do the moderators step in and slow down the personal attacks?

Crap like this detracts from the site.

Do the mods want us to start doing IP Traces on all posters so we can post personal info?

Credit cards anyone?

Fixed it for ya.

[IamIan]

Originally Posted by t vago

What exactly is this expansion ratio for water at 212 F? 1700:1?

It isn't a fixed number.
It varies with context... temperature alone is insufficient data to determine the final expansion ratio.

Originally Posted by t vago

That's right! 1603.35:1, not 1700:1! You're willing to continue this discussion on the basis of a rule-of-thumb figure that was not even meant for any sort of engineering at all.

You've misunderstood me.

I'll try again.

I'm saying if you agree with either the ideal gas law or the principles it is based on ... than by confining the expansion of the steam in a limited volume container , as we have in this example ... than it follows from the ideal gas law and it's principles that the partial pressure of the steam must be higher than it would be if it's expansion were not restrained by the limited volume of the container ... to claim otherwise violates the ideal gas law and the principles it is based on.

Originally Posted by t vago

Yah, you did miss something. I just addressed part of it, but here's the other part.

Unless there's work done on that gas after the steam is added to it, the system presented in this example will only have saturated steam. How can it possibly be otherwise? 99.9% of the water in the final system is still a liquid! And if the liquid water and the steam are at the same temperature, which must happen due to conservation of energy because no outside heat was added apart from injection of water at 100 C, and due to the fact that no compression work was performed on the system from the outside, how could there possibly be more steam added?

This response of yours does not address the point I make in the quote you referenced from me.

Who said their is more steam added?

And as you already wrote previously ... we did compression work on the system from the outside when we added the liquid water.

The steam we have is the result of the energy that will be transferred from the initial gasses to the liquid water we put in ... Who's adding more than that?

In this part you quote from me ... I'm claiming the amount of partial pressure from phase changing a given amount of liquid water to steam will be effected by how the limits of the volume it can expand into ... which is what the ideal gas law requires.

0.96g of liquid water + 0.04 grams of steam confined to a 600cc container will not have the same pressure if the same 0.96grams of liquid water + 0.04 grams of steam is confined to a 100cc container ... the pressure will also be different if the same 0.96grams of liquid water + 0.04 grams of stream is confined to a 10cc container.

Although the ideal gas law shows this and requires this ... the mechanism for why this happens is easier to see in the kinetic theory of gasses ... although I don't see a need to go that far into the principles the ideal gas law is based on ... I think the ideal gas law should be adequate on it's own.

And honestly ... I don't understand why you seem to be arguing against the ideal gas law here???

[user removed]

I used to use a Binks #7 spray gun to feed well atomized water into the intake manifold of a 81-81 280 ZX to remove carbon deposits from the piston and cylinder head. About 1/3rd of the head was only 1 millimeter from the top of the piston and carbon buildup would cause a knock that made most people think the engine was coming apart.

We would use a pair of vise grips to lock the throttle at about 2500 RPM (air cleaner removed) then set the paint gun to a certain amount of atomized water and let her run for 15-20 minutes. It always worked, you could see the clean tops of the pistons through the plug holes and the knock was gone, and you had one tickled to death customer who had his engine knock fixed for less than 1 hours labor and no parts.

I guess I should have tried adjusting the paint gun to a minimal amount of water to see if it actually increased the power, but I never saw any increase in RPM with a small amount of water delivered from the gun, and it was very well atomized by that old #7 gun.

I simply can not see how additional humidity in in coming air would increase power. In the B17 at War Emergency Power ratings you were basically destroying the engine in a matter of minutes with 2 atmospheres of boost in an air cooled radial aircraft engine. You had separate controls for mixture, boost, and timing, I believe and those controls could be maladjusted and destroy an engine. Not really a possibility with any modern computer controlled engine that is running in its designed parameters.

As far as the steam pressure created by using combustion temperature to superheat the steam, I just don't see that as taking place in the milliseconds when combustion temperatures are at their peak, probably for less than 45 degrees of crankshaft rotation, possibly much less than that as the pressure of combustion drops precipitously after ignition at TDC.

regards
Mech