Water injection in the 6.2?

[Cletus09]

Well thank you all for your input! Your discussion definitely topped my education and understanding! maybe this is something I should experiment with and get an answer for everyone. Obviously I don't wan to blow up my motor, nor do I want to dump more money Into the vehicle than it is worth. Unfortunately I don't not have a ton of time to fiddle right now as I am swamped with school and work. However, if I am ever to get into this project, I will most definitely post my findings now I just need to find a dyno

 

[Tanner]

For the record: Water/alcohol injection can show marginal/minimal gains on gasoline engines, and some benefits on turbo/supercharged diesels.

BUT - the benefit to naturally-aspirated diesels in negligible.

It's basic physics, folks - in the limited combustion chamber space of a N/A diesel, you can only cram in a finite amount of air & fuel at a time. NOW you want to take up part of that N/A space with water or water/alcohol mix? The major gains are made to the wallets of the people selling you a water injection system for an N/A diesel.

Ask Gale Banks or Heath Diesel for their take on adding water injection to a N/A 6.2.... I see no kits on either website.

'Tanner'

 

[Tanner]

look up snow preformance they are leaders in the water/meth injection market.

And a quick review of Snow goes to show that they market Water/meth injection kits for ....

TAA-DAAAAHHH!!!! Turbo-diesel engines. Not naturally-aspirated diesels...

My basic point is thus: if you DON'T understand the operating principles of a N/A diesel, then please - to keep you from breaking your engine - don't go messing with it by trying to gain more power based on hearsay.

And yes - 'HHO' is a joke; it's simply another way of writing 'water' (H2O) - yet the sellers of 'Brown's Gas injection kits' are happy to take 'your stupid money'.

'Tanner'

 

[patracy]

Ask Gale Banks....

I'm sorry, I can't even keep a straight face with that comment. (Anyone who's been around the block in diesel performance will get that)

Water/Meth is a potent additive in a diesel build. However in a 6.2 NA scenario, it's not going to gain anything alone.

Water/Meth helps a ton when you're running a serious power plant like a Cummins, Duramax, or Powerstroke that often is being overfueled. But again, it's just one piece of the puzzle for a massive gain picture.

 

[MarcusOReallyus]

Actually, many on SS are old enough to recall the days before push-button phones, bank drive-up teller windows & ATM's, when Coke was made with sugar, and when TV dinners originated. Plus a bunch of other old stuff.

It ain't always about age. Not everyone knows all about everything, even us old buggers.


TV dinners. Swanson! Blech.

 

[MarcusOReallyus]

And yes - 'HHO' is a joke; it's simply another way of writing 'water' (H2O) - yet the sellers of 'Brown's Gas injection kits' are happy to take 'your stupid money'.

'Tanner'

I have an uncle who has sunk a lot of money into that Brown's Gas scam.


I'm not sure I'd call "HHO" a joke, though, except when used that way deliberately (as has been done in this thread).


I think it's more like, "deliberately lying about something in order to extract money from people who didn't pay attention in 7th grade science".

 

[MarcusOReallyus]

M/W injection in the B52's was in front of the turbine wheel rather than after as in an afterburner. The injection of the water caused the exhaust to be to cool enough for the smoke to turn black....I remember watching the B52's taking off on huge thick trails of thick black smoke.

Interesting. IIRC, the 747s injected AFTER the turbine, and the exhaust was white. I watched a few take off from LAX.

But then, the military usually gets to play with things that are not kosher for civilian vehicles....

 

[BiffJ]

Interesting. IIRC, the 747s injected AFTER the turbine, and the exhaust was white. I watched a few take off from LAX.

But then, the military usually gets to play with things that are not kosher for civilian vehicles....

I'll have to chat with my buddy who is an aircraft mechanic on heavies. I'm an A&P but work on little stuff like my cessna 175 and little recips. I know in the old days they used water injection on 727's, 707's and DC8's because they needed the help for takeoff. The old turbojets had pretty low static thrust and that was also the reason the 52's needed the help. As far as I know the new fanjet 52's aren't using water injection anymore. They have more power than they can use in most instances. I was watching the B52's back in the late 60's and early 70's when my pop was stationed on SAC bases. Things have changed a bit haven't they....?

Frank

 

[MarcusOReallyus]

I'd be interested in hearing his feedback. I learned about it from TWA mechanics at LAX, lo, these many years ago.


(So long ago that TWA was still a dominant airline!)

 

[BiffJ]

I sent him an email. Not sure what he'll know as hes a bit younger then we are. He works on a lot of 757's, 737's and MD80's though he used to work on L1011 and 747 some. I'll let you know what he says.

as for other sources there are some via google. Wiki has a good article. Look at the section titled aircraft
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_injection_(engines)

After looking at a number of sources it appears that the most common use of water was prior to the compressor in the intake. Cooling the intake air created a higher density charge which allowed more fuel to be burned. Note also the comment on the black smoke which did not make the surrounding populous happy.

Frank

 

[BiffJ]

Here is what he sent on the 747 with the JT9D engines....



[FONT=Verdana,Helvetica,Arial][SIZE=-1][FONT=ARIAL,]This very complicated water injection system could be used with the following JT9D engines on the 747 :

JT9D-3A, Dry T/O rating 43.500 lbs. Wet rating 45.000 lbs.
JT9D-7 and -7H, Dry T/O rating 45.500 lbs. Wet rating 47.000 lbs.
JT9D-7A and 7AH, Dry T/O rating 46.150 lbs. Wet rating 47.670 lbs.
JT9D-7F, Dry T/O rating 46.750 lbs. Wet rating 48.650 lbs.

On the DC10-40 :
JT9D-20, Dry T/O rating 44.500 lbs. Wet rating 47.500 lbs.


Water alone is specified and should contain no more than 10 (ppm) parts per million impurities. Use of water is limited to takeoff operation up to an altitude of 8,000 feet for D-3A, and 10,000 feet for D-7, -7H, -7A, -7AH, -7F and -20, at the minimum ambient temperatures of 32oF. Take off using both water injection and dry takeoff power is
limited to a maximum period of 5 minutes including operation with water injection for not more than 2 1/2 minutes
(JT9D-3A, -7, -7H, -7A, -7AH, -7F) and 5 minutes (JT9D-20).


On the 747-100/200 two water tanks were each built in the wing roots (left and right) and extra piping was installed for transportation of the water to the four engines (one tank for 2 engines at the same wing.) Also piping for waterfilling and draining of residual water after T/O was installed. Four high capacity water pumps were feeding the engines with water.
Each engine had an adapted fuelcontrol to cater for extra fuel when the system was activated.

System operation (747) :

- When a wet rating was needed min. 2300 kgs of water was uplifted. (standpipe level was 2450 kgs)

- During Taxi-out, just before entering the runway, the system was switched on (F/E panel), the four water pumps were momentarily giving a flow indication (four green lights), check all water low press lights out. Most frequent failure at this moment : water pumps start to operate but the water shut off vlv is still (partly) open. This is called a "steam out" or "piss out" . The relevant engine (still at idle) gets the full water flow and stops operating and has to be restarted, after switching off the waterinjection system.

When entering the runway the system is now armed.

After advancing the powerlevers at approx. 1.25 EPR the system comes in, four green water flow lights illum (pilots annunciator panel), the watershut off valves are open. Carefull monitoring of the EGT indication is crucial (one engine can suddenly revert to no water (pump failure), but still with the high (wet) fuelsetting.
After 2.30 minutesa or just before water run out (indicators on F/E panel), the system is switched off, 2.30 minutes dry rating is still available when needed.
Switching off was the most tricky part of the operation, because of the low usage of the system frequently failures occured.
The most dangerous was that the waterpumps stopped and shut off vlv's closed but one engine fuelcontrol stayed at the wet fuel rating. Before you could blinck an eye the EGT exceeded the T/O limits and an expensive boroscope check or even an engine change was required.[/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT]

Thats all I got from him on that subject. He did note that liability issues limit what the commercial carriers will do and that their flight envelopes are more limited than those of the military. None of the current carriers are using water injection to his knowledge. Looking at the figures of thrust posted for the JT9D I can see why they wouldn't want to use it. The complexity and extra weight isn't offset by the meager added thrust. In the case of turbofan engines it doesn't make as much sense.

Frank

 

[MarcusOReallyus]

Very cool. Thanks very much! Clearly not as much gain as I remembered (or was told), but still, a significant gain.

But yes, the complexity and more importantly, the possible failure modes makes it not worth the trouble and risk.

Hmmm. Maybe that's true of piston engines, too?

 

[BiffJ]

With some of the piston engines it made a much bigger difference. I think the Junkers Jumo used in the FW190D9 went from about 1500HP to about 1850 with the high boost and M/W injection. The water kept the engine from blowing up by cooling the incoming air and preventing detonation, methanol kept the water from freezing as well as adding to the cooling of the intake charge and the high boost allowed more fuel to be poured through the engine. It all added up to significantly more power... on the order of 30% or so.

I don't think you'll get that with the diesel though....

Glad the other info helped

Frank

 

[usmcpatriot]

I agree with dstang97. A 6.2 is a 6.2. They were made to pull in configuration with the drivetrain. Nothing fancy. Check into Acetone, works great in my jap hooptie work car, A to B work car that is.

Acetone in diesel fuel

 

[Tanner]

Note also the comment on the black smoke which did not make the surrounding populous happy.

Frank

So - the best way to benefit both the plane & the populous is to add a water/bug killer mix to the injection tank... boosts plane's performance & fogs for mosquitoes at the same time!

'Tanner' - the always thinking 'idea man'...

 

[MarcusOReallyus]

Oh, I can see it now! California has a looong history of aerial spraying for the Mediterranean Fruit Fly, with the predictable outrage from people who are science-challenged.

Just add it to the jet exhaust. Problem sovled!

 

[BiffJ]

Yes, I believe you guys have it....now the question is this: do you inject in the intake so that the engine is protected from fruit flys as well? Or do you inject after the turbine to make sure the toxins are coated with a carboniferous layer of oily hydrocarbon for waterproofing?

Frank