Water Injection Government Studies
 

I found a couple of water injection documents while I was looking for studies and results. These documents surfaced. I found them referenced once in a thread on this forum that was originally posted in 2003, but the link to them was dead...

If someone can host them that would be great. They are about 1.3mb in total and that is too big to attach. Is there any other way I could attach them?

NACA - water injection studies conducted in 1944 on aircraft engines. I thought it was a good read the information is DEFINATELY NOT outdated.

I found them on this site, which is a good read;

http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/waterinjection.html

Thats the website that gave me the idea to turbo my K bike, have you see the price of those " kits"...

e, you can host em (if you want)

Thanks for the link it's got some great info! It's got me buggin' about using nylon hose now though :(

Some interesting quotes from the government studies...

"...it is estimated that for a water-fuel ratio of 0.6 an engine requiring a fuel of a 100 octane number, could satisfactorily be run on a fuel of an 80 octane number...The data indicate the permissible decrease in octane number for moderate quantities of water injected is considerable."

charts are provided to support the results. Another interesting theory proposed is that the water needed to inject could be recovered from the exhaust. This is very interesting.

The kits in the link were around $500 it seemed like most of their prices for individual parts were reasonable. I just listed the link for reference. I really wanted to discuss the documents. They contain a few things I dont understand and I htink people on this board could generate good discussion about it.


I also want to get rid of as much of the nylon line as possible...maybe SS braided TFE hose in the engine bay with hose fittings, and a run of stainless steel line custom bent on the underside of the car next to the fuel lines. I plan on cleaning this up once the major projects are out of the way and the car is back on the road again. The nylon should hold out till then.

Very informative, thanks. I especially liked the 'DIY' section, that pic is worth scrolling to the end for :D

Its $8500 to do their turbo kit w/ water injection, thats NO powertrain work and not installed. Time for me to quit making Rx-7 turbo kits.......

Host the water injection documents that are PDF files... I will email them to you

here are the links I enjoyed the information

http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/downloads/naca_H2O.pdf
http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/downloads/NACA_H2O_2.pdf

great stuff
 

real nice to read proper thermodynamic tests :) :) :) takes me back to my own engine test lab reports ;)

for anyone interested have close look at even the fuelonly tests for fuel air ratio (far=1/afr) to convert it to AFR that you will comprehend and you will see the majickickinpoint I talk about in the 80/20 thread of howards. You will see just how critical itis to run corect levels of richness to allow you the ability to run higher boost pressures (they tested to about 30 psi in those) you can use a great converter like uconeer to translated between the odd units.

My own adoption of Wi uses water fuel ratios closer to 0.25 depending on the point in the map along with rich side far or afr's lol........ great to see these oldies but never decaying facts of engineering being visited by people on this forum :) :) :)

You see they test all the way to 8.3:1 AFR, its nice if you can ignite it and still make the power ;)

Both were great reads, however i do have a q

Did i read correctly that they were injecting water to fuel ratio of 0.6 in some tests? thats considerably higher than anything ive read to date

and when they menation fuel to air ratios? are they just doing lbs of fuel to lbs of air instead of the the more common (atleat to me) air to fuel in lbs?

0.2, 0.6, 1.0, 1.5 Most relevant is 0.2 and yes your right most people dont run the high ratios of water to fuel.

You can clearly see that for maximum performance still appropriate levels of fuel richness along with WI is necessary to extra maxiumum performance and the BMEP threshold is directly proportional to the qty of water injested by the engine, the more water the more pressure you can apply (via turbo or supercharge) and you can keep on uping the power till you reach the physical limits of either the test equipment or the mechanical strength of the block ;)

I explained the fuel to air ratio and the conversion to make it AFR so you can understand the figures.

I personaly have experimented with (and posted on here results for richer end AFR's combined with WtoA ratio's in the higher end) and you can achieve very big gains in the amount of power you can extract on a octane limited fuel like pump gas. You could though go run very high ratio's as they do and make the power on stoichio mixtures, its all been published before you just need enough water and balls to do it lol.... but even that is a bit too radical for me & not relay easy to implement let alone sell to the general public *car enthusiast* :P

Well, you can't cool the intake with steam. You'd have to run the exhaust through some kind of "intercooler" first to condense the water. "Recovery of X" ideas are popular fads, but often impractical/impossible to do. There also seemed to be a lot of hype. Make sure this site isn't just trying to rip people off. I'm sure there are plenty of people who have used various kits out there and can tell you.

I already use water/methanol injection. I agree that you would need to condense the steam. It is just an interesting idea to have a perpetual water injection system that you would never have to refill because the exhuast gas contains enough water. It is just a matter of accessing it without obstructing flow...good luck with that one...