RE: PH Origins: Water injection

[Dale487]

evilspike said:

The JDM Celica GT4 ST205 WRC (snazzy name!) had the water bag and plumbing installed at the factory for water injection into the intercooler, just needed activating.

I believe the RS Cosworth was the same, just needed connecting and turning on.

So did some Imprezas (I'm guessing JDM models & I think it was plumbed in & working), but the water was to bring down the intercooler temperatures and not injected into the intake like the BMW & New GT2RS - someone more knowledgeable will be able to fill me in, I'm sure.

[aeropilot]

lufbramatt said:

Interesting that they also had to revert back to the water-methanol injection rather than injecting more fuel to cool the charge. Although it was down to a fuel shortage rather than emissions regs...

[FWDRacer]

Nanook said:

FWDRacer said:

So in order to improve brake horse power per litre you have to negatively impact brake horsepower per tonne. Can't fault that Logic

Pardon?

Carrying an extra tank of liquid sloshing around. Brilliant engineering that - then all the incumbent plumbing and lines to deliver it. Engineering Cul-de-Sac.

[Dale487]

Nanook said:

Dale487 said:

evilspike said:

The JDM Celica GT4 ST205 WRC (snazzy name!) had the water bag and plumbing installed at the factory for water injection into the intercooler, just needed activating.

I believe the RS Cosworth was the same, just needed connecting and turning on.

So did some Imprezas (I'm guessing JDM models & I think it was plumbed in & working), but the water was to bring down the intercooler temperatures and not injected into the intake like the BMW & New GT2RS - someone more knowledgeable will be able to fill me in, I'm sure.

On the Impreza, the water was sprayed onto the intercooler. It wasn't injected into the air in the intake in any way.

Thanks for confirming that - weren't the Celica GT4 & Cosworth the same?

[Lewis Kingston]

aeropilot said:

Apart from the Rover V8 bit.......

It was the n/a Buick engine design which became the Rover V8, not the forced induction Olds Jetfire design.

Indeed! Apologies, a bit clunky with my wording there – that was what I was driving at in my mind; much was the same, that said, including the compression ratio in four-barrel Buick form, but there were some differences (head bolt arrangement, no doubt a few other things).

Edited by Lewis Kingston on Monday 29th January 16:30

[liner33]

Dale487 said:

Nanook said:

Dale487 said:

evilspike said:

The JDM Celica GT4 ST205 WRC (snazzy name!) had the water bag and plumbing installed at the factory for water injection into the intercooler, just needed activating.

I believe the RS Cosworth was the same, just needed connecting and turning on.

So did some Imprezas (I'm guessing JDM models & I think it was plumbed in & working), but the water was to bring down the intercooler temperatures and not injected into the intake like the BMW & New GT2RS - someone more knowledgeable will be able to fill me in, I'm sure.

On the Impreza, the water was sprayed onto the intercooler. It wasn't injected into the air in the intake in any way.

Thanks for confirming that - weren't the Celica GT4 & Cosworth the same?

Evo 6 also had a water spray onto the intercooler , I was told this was for homologation purposes allowing them to use proper WI on the WRC

[Midshipracer]

Dale487 said:

Nanook said:

Dale487 said:

evilspike said:

The JDM Celica GT4 ST205 WRC (snazzy name!) had the water bag and plumbing installed at the factory for water injection into the intercooler, just needed activating.

I believe the RS Cosworth was the same, just needed connecting and turning on.

So did some Imprezas (I'm guessing JDM models & I think it was plumbed in & working), but the water was to bring down the intercooler temperatures and not injected into the intake like the BMW & New GT2RS - someone more knowledgeable will be able to fill me in, I'm sure.

On the Impreza, the water was sprayed onto the intercooler. It wasn't injected into the air in the intake in any way.

Thanks for confirming that - weren't the Celica GT4 & Cosworth the same?

Celica and Impreza just sprayed water on the intercooler. With a switch you just turn on

Water injection (well mine does anyway) is controlled by the ECU to come on only when certain conditions are met. For example boost pressure.

Water in itself kills power that's why there are 50/50 mix with meth to add ocatane, allowing formore aggressive timing and thereby more power

I run Aquamist in mine

[Lewis Kingston]

lufbramatt said:

yup

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_801#801D-2_and_8...

Interesting that they also had to revert back to the water-methanol injection rather than injecting more fuel to cool the charge. Although it was down to a fuel shortage rather than emissions regs...

I've not researched it but I wonder if that was entirely due to fuel shortages. In Ricardo's tests in the '30s he states: "By enriching the mixture to the limit of usefulness, the bmep could be stepped up to 237 psi. By the introduction of water, it could be further stepped up to 290 psi and probably more; at the same time the fuel/air ratio could be reduced once again."

The conclusion eventually reached is that detonation could be prevented by enriching the mixture but only up to a certain point, after which some kind of detonation surpression would have to be used. After all, I can't imagine they were burning through that much extra fuel using C-3 – and the above may be why it output using the system wasn't as high as MW50.

[soad]

liner33 said:

Dale487 said:

Nanook said:

Dale487 said:

evilspike said:

The JDM Celica GT4 ST205 WRC (snazzy name!) had the water bag and plumbing installed at the factory for water injection into the intercooler, just needed activating.

I believe the RS Cosworth was the same, just needed connecting and turning on.

So did some Imprezas (I'm guessing JDM models & I think it was plumbed in & working), but the water was to bring down the intercooler temperatures and not injected into the intake like the BMW & New GT2RS - someone more knowledgeable will be able to fill me in, I'm sure.

On the Impreza, the water was sprayed onto the intercooler. It wasn't injected into the air in the intake in any way.

Thanks for confirming that - weren't the Celica GT4 & Cosworth the same?

Evo 6 also had a water spray onto the intercooler , I was told this was for homologation purposes allowing them to use proper WI on the WRC

RB320 springs to mind. Water spray for turbo intercooler.

[Steven_RW]

The evo system and other such systems fitted to spray the intercooler on standard cars did nothing to reduce the intake temps. They were a token system that allowed the rally teams to then fit the real deal which sprayed a much finer mist that could actually evoporate and help.

They were designed for when a rally car was in a desert, sideways with no airflow on the radiator at 30mph asking for max boost. IE extreme circumstances.

Water injection doesn't make more bhp (as stated).

It can be used to stop the temps running away which can remove the need to cut the boost levels.

The reality is better intercooling gives the benefit all year round in every scenario and always, unlike water which just runs out.

BMW F1 team decided that "water doesn't burn" and gave up on it during the turbo era.

I think the M4 is trying to have the shortest and neatest inlet manifold setup so sacrifices the total intercooling capacity with that small water intercooler. If they had longer pipe work and a fat front mount intercooler they wouldn't even be discussing water injection.

RW

[SuperchargedVR6]

Yipper said:

Water injection can get you 1-20% extra power when used with a remap, but it can be a pain to fit and maintain and refill. Costs at least £500-1000 to buy and install professionally. It's never really taken off, for those reasons.

Indeed. £1000 would be better spent on a more efficient intercooler imo.

I've had a couple of Aquamist systems over the years. The main benefit was summer turbo torque felt just as strong as winter turbo torque - but I doubt it showed up as extra shetlands on the Dyno.

Horribly unreliable pumps and controllers at the time though. I would hope they've improved by now.

[Searider]

FWDRacer said:

So in order to improve brake horse power per litre you have to negatively impact brake horsepower per tonne. Can't fault that Logic

The tanks are normally quite small - only 5 litres or so.
Some systems use the screenwash tank.
Ironically VW -70C screenwash is a mix of water and methanol and is ideal.
The injection will be mapped to only be active at high boost levels so not a great deal is required.

[Lewis Kingston]

SuperchargedVR6 said:

Horribly unreliable pumps and controllers at the time though. I would hope they've improved by now.

Thanks for the heads-up – I've been nosing around a few, so I'll keep an eye out for any recent reports.

[jeremy996]

I had a Courtney Turbo Nova GTE with water injection. I was told that the water was an alternative to an intercooler, which they could not package under the bonnet. It went well but I lost touch after I sold it in 1991. A quick check on the DVLA looks like it died in 2006.

Edited by jeremy996 on Monday 29th January 17:01

[Midshipracer]

Dale487 said:

Nanook said:

Dale487 said:

evilspike said:

The JDM Celica GT4 ST205 WRC (snazzy name!) had the water bag and plumbing installed at the factory for water injection into the intercooler, just needed activating.

I believe the RS Cosworth was the same, just needed connecting and turning on.

So did some Imprezas (I'm guessing JDM models & I think it was plumbed in & working), but the water was to bring down the intercooler temperatures and not injected into the intake like the BMW & New GT2RS - someone more knowledgeable will be able to fill me in, I'm sure.

On the Impreza, the water was sprayed onto the intercooler. It wasn't injected into the air in the intake in any way.

Thanks for confirming that - weren't the Celica GT4 & Cosworth the same?

Celica and Impreza just sprayed water on the intercooler. With a switch you just turn on

Water injection (well mine does anyway) is controlled by the ECU to come on only when certain conditions are met. For example boost pressure.

Water in itself kills power that's why there are 50/50 mix with meth to add ocatane, allowing formore aggressive timing and thereby more power

I run Aquamist in mine

[givablondabone]

Immediately thought Saab when I saw this.

Seem to remember the water bottle needed refilling more often than a rabbit's sack mind.............................................................

[Gilhooligan]

ogrodz said:

Do you think the Ford Focus RS is using a similar technology? Direct injection of water through the cylinder head gasket?

[cossey]

NickGibbs said:

cossey said:

The real reason for the renewed interest in water injection is the new emissions/fuel economy rules.

The new WLTC and RDE tests are testing the engines at much higher loads than before. The previous strategy was to go rich at high load to reduce the turbo inlet temperature, now this is not allowed a new method to cool the exhaust is needed. Hence water injection is likely to be quite common on engines >90kW/L.

The alternative is higher materials specs for the turbo which will be very expensive.
The effect on detonation is fairly minor as the engines are already using direct injection an having less issues because of it.

This sounds highly plausible. Silly question probably, but is this a solution just for petrol engines?
(Good article btw)

it was the reason given by multiple OEMs as part of their search to find suppliers so hopefully it is the real reason

It does reduce exhaust temps on diesels too but the naturally lower temps from a diesel are usually less of an issue on materials limits. There is also a combustion efficiency boost to both fuels (free radical OH from the water improves CO to CO2 conversion whilst reducing NOx production) but these are more minor.
This is also why variable turbo technologies that are very common on diesels are very rare on gasoline.

[Boosted LS1]

20 odd years ago I fitted copper charge coolers to my TT Rv8 engine. They worked but were costly and bulky. I also fitted an Edlebrock Varajection WI kit along with a home made water tank and pump. It probably cost me a few hundred quid in total and I'll definately use it again. It was a really good mod and the way the engine note became muffled when the WI switched on was quite noticeable. I used to spray the water into the compressors using a pair of welding tips for nozzles. Back then I don't think atomisers were readily available.

[FWDRacer]

Nanook said:

Carrying that tank of fuel, sloshing around, brilliant engineering that...

Seriously though, have a think about it. A one tonne car with 140bhp.

Now the same car with an extra 50kg of mass on board, which allows it to make a whopping extra 20bhp. The power to weight ratio of the heavier car is 12bhp/tonne higher.

Do you really think they would bother making the effort if it actually made the car slower?

In your highly enlightened handpicked scenario . 12bhp/tonne - imperceptible. Impact of a (liquid) 50kg mass in a 1-tonne car raising the CoG? Go and try it - stick a 50L drum in the passenger seat.

Adding mass isn't going to assist a car's ability to change direction. Especially if that mass can't be located low down inside the wheelbase.

Edited by FWDRacer on Tuesday 30th January 09:34