water injection = Higher Efficiency?

[t vago]

Originally Posted by IamIan

Which is what I see that graph of yours showing ... to me , it is showing that if you only looked at the ideal gas law and ignored the other behaviors of the substances involved , you would at some temperatures and pressures get very different results than what just the ideal gas law alone would predict... and to me ... that is completely expected to me ... and in no way invalidates the principles of the ideal gas law itself ... it is not a theory of everything ... and I don't expect it to be.

No, but you are willing to discard over a century of collected real-world data about how water behaves, all because it doesn't jibe with your religious fascination with the ideal gas law.

[jamiec]

I have done a crude water injection before did not notice any gaines in economy tho it kept the motor clean inside. I may try a better setup someday with a high compression engine.

[radioranger]

heres one other question , kind of related, since the gas is already 10% alcohol , could you add water right into the fuel or inject it into the fuel line, since alchol absorbs water there must be some number of grams of water the fuel could tolerate,

[drmiller100]

temperature describes the pressure of the steam, unless you get over 700c or something, which vago keeps ignoring.

and the combustion is for SURE over 700c.

the other thing vago keeps ignoring is the steam makes a variable compression ratio, leading to "perfect" compression, by definition.

And the whole "quench" thing is just malarkey. pretty hard to kill an internal combustion engine with water until it hydraulics.

and vargo continues to puzzle on what happens to combustion temps in the presence of water.

and, temperature might set the steam tables below 600c, but over it, we are back to ideal gasses, and at the transition "weird" things happen, which really points to the idea the whole issue is more of an issue of btus.

[t vago]

Originally Posted by drmiller100

temperature describes the pressure of the steam, unless you get over 700c or something, which vago keeps ignoring.

Originally Posted by t vago

Well, water is a strange animal. Above 373 C and 22064 kPa, it's not really purely a gas nor purely a liquid.

And if you'd have bothered to do some basic research, you'd find that peak combustion temperatures are well above 700 C. In fact, at peak combustion temperature, water actually disassociates. Why not impress us with your superior knowledge and tell us what peak combustion temperatures are? Draw on your extensive Honda engine knowledge.

Originally Posted by drmiller100

and the combustion is for SURE over 700c.

Fer shure. Totally. Like, gag me with a spoon. Ohmahgawd!

Originally Posted by drmiller100

the other thing vago keeps ignoring is the steam makes a variable compression ratio, leading to "perfect" compression, by definition.

How so? Do you mean that I keep shooting down your magical 1700:1 expansion ratio? Let's bring that up again.

Originally Posted by drmiller100

And the whole "quench" thing is just malarkey. pretty hard to kill an internal combustion engine with water until it hydraulics.

I refer you to this paper that your friend tjts1 posted.

Originally Posted by tjts1

You should read this.
http://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/9...ieldOp=0&Docs=

Hm... Even the EPA would agree that elevated water mass causes misfiring.

Originally Posted by drmiller100

and vargo continues to puzzle on what happens to combustion temps in the presence of water.

Originally Posted by t vago

...the obvious benefit of moving the conditions of the combustion chamber away from detonation and pre-ignition...

Originally Posted by drmiller100

and, temperature might set the steam tables below 600c, but over it, we are back to ideal gasses, and at the transition "weird" things happen, which really points to the idea the whole issue is more of an issue of btus.

Then, by all means, enlighten us, drmiller100. Tell us what peak combustion temperatures are. You know oh-so-much about how Honda engines work. Educate us.

Tell us how steam magically makes things all better. Ignore that it takes heat energy to make steam. Ignore that your combustion chamber has to itself push down a piston, and incorrectly assume that all of the heat energy from burning fuel is available to make steam. Go ahead.

[drmiller100]

with saturated steam in the intake pumping losses due to vacuum work over time head towards zero. 4 stroke gasoline pumping losses are in the order of 15 percent.

2/3 of the energy of combustion is lost to heat. fully 1/3 of the energy is lost to the water jacket.

heat transfer is partly due to temperature differentials, materials, thicknesses, and insulating factors.

we are trying to compare two cases. One case is traditional 4 stroke, very part throttle, minor horsepower.
the other case is the same air, fuel, with saturated steam on intake stroke, compression stroke, power stroke, and exhaust storke.

intake stroke should be easier, as less absolute pressure making it easier to suck.
compression stroke should be about the same as steam turns to water with increasing pressure.

combustion occurs, and as it occurs, btus turn liquid to steam, meaining less absolute temperature, but really wondering if the pressure is actually less.

as power stroke occurs, will liquid to turn to steam maintaining pressure beyond the ideal gas theories?
W
as you stated, if you have the temp, the volume is insignifcant as to pressure. so maybe we have more pressure longer down the power stroke?

as someone else stated, should be pretty easy to test, but what EXACTLY do you measure? do you measure bsfc? is that a fair way to do it?

[t vago]

Originally Posted by drmiller100

as someone else stated, should be pretty easy to test, but what EXACTLY do you measure? do you measure bsfc? is that a fair way to do it?

Do an A-B-A test. Rig up something that will inject steam into the intake manifold. Keep all over variables as close to the same as possible. Pick a test course that is short enough to not eat up too much time, yet long enough to show definitive results (say, around 20 miles total distance traveled). Perform a test run without introducing steam into the intake manifold. Perform another test with steam. Perform a third test, again without steam. Measure fuel consumption in all three cases.

It's not rocket science.

This will be my last response to you for now. I will not respond any more to you, until you (or somebody else here) actually builds something, involving water or steam injection into a gasoline engine, that is proven to improve fuel economy.

[oil pan 4]

I know some one that claims they "have had nightmares where ideal gas law gets used for steam".
On a thermo test if you even try to solve a steam problem ideal gas law its wrong, doesn't matter if it is correct.
Water is the most studied chemical in history, why bother to reinvent the wheel?

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by t vago

build something, involving water or steam injection into a gasoline engine, that is proven to improve fuel economy.

Good luck
I think the only gasoline engine that will benifet from water injection is to build it from the ground up. So no ABA testing because water will be required for operation.

[maxc]

Thermal decomposition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia