I just bought the snow meth kit and was wondering where to put the nozzle.Another racer said to put it on the intake side of turbo etc.So I have a borg turbo and would just making a short pipe that goes to the intake side of turbo and shooting the meth at the blades work or is it bad to do this..

 

Many will do both pre, and post turbo on non intercooled. Some will say its tough on the compressor wheel, but more say that it's not. Pre is fine non intercooled.

 

I inject into the volute. 80% meth 20% water progressively. #ad

 

Just depends on what you need the kit to do. Pre turbine will have best cooling effect and will make the compressor act bigger. Closer to the intake may provide better detonation suppression via chamber cooling. Like MNLX said, if you don't have an intercooler run pre turbine, if you do have one run both

 

Borg Warner engineer says NEVER inject liquid water/meth to compressor wheel because it shares with the oil supply, some will leak into the oil. The BW engineer that told me this is Dr. Brinehardt.

Therefore this only leaves post compressor regions for injection.

Next, From gen chemistry we learn that,
Methanol & water & nitrogen & oxygen (any gas) as a gas state all take up the same amount of space, 22.4L at Standard temp & pressure (STP)

That is the first reason you never want these liquids to evaporate into a gas state before they can reach combustion chamber, it will displace oxygen and reduce air density. Thus it will cool the air while also reducing its density.

This is why you must inject water/meth as close to the combustion chamber as possible (individual port injection similar to nitrous is ideal, for example).

The next reason for injecting as close as possible to the cylinder is the primary purpose for water injection is to cool the combustion chamber, and this will not happen if the liquid turns to a gas state (evaporates) prior to the combustion chamber.

methanol is useful as an octane booster but it will not cool as well as water (methanol has an inferior heat capacity) therefore it can be used either way, however due to dry-style intake manifolds (no more carb engine intake manifolds) there is some separation and concern over distribution of liquid molecules (it may send more meth to one cylinder than others) therefore the quantity of methanol being injected should be kept minimal to avoid distribution issues in general (as a wet flow concern).

And now that people are beginning to request data I will share my data instead of waiting to be asked to avoid concerns over 'hype' and 'bs'

We should start here, the heat capacity of methanol vs water
#ad


Water is nearly double the heat capacity thus water injection is far superior to methanol for cooling engine parts, such as cast pistons, which is the primary use for water injection in turbo-performance applications.
REF
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19930091835

next be aware there is some drag force associated with the injection nozzle,
#ad



Thus, it is not 'free' to inject any liquid from any nozzle into a moving air stream. The act of injection will disturb the laminar flow (it basically guarantees that the flow will become turbulent) and it will interfere with kinetic energy of moving airflow, which will decrease the power of the engine all else equal. The nozzle *or* high pressure injection will also impart energy to the liquid being injected, breaking up the molecules, ruining their evaporative cooling nature. In other words, for a liquid to cool a surface or a surrounding gas (our goal) it must first be a liquid, and absorb energy from it's surroundings as it transitions to a gas state. If a nozzle is breaking up molecules (turning them to gas immediately 'atomizing' them) and imparting the energy of evaporation and causing the methanol/water to jump into a gas state then there is nothing left to evaporate, the energy was supplied by the water pump instead of the gas you are trying to cool. Thus 'highly atomized spray nozzles' are discouraged for meth/water injection. Instead, the liquid should enter the air stream as a liquid, and become evenly distributed to each cylinder, where once trapped inside by the intake valve closure, it can become a gas state and absorb heat energy from the surroundings and this will yield highest efficiency of the water/meth system. More can be found in WorldWar2 documents where these systems originated as 100% water injection for high altitude airplane performance.

next we should become familiar with the moisture holding capacity of air and the density relationships.

#ad

Hotter air can hold more water, intuitive.
#ad


We should calculate how dense, dry air compared with cool, wet air, to gain some understanding of why you do not want your injected liquid far from the cylinder.
Here is some reasonably dry air, at 102*F ambient temp, notice air density (arrow)
#ad


Now, lets cool the air down with a reasonable mass of injected water to the air stream
#ad


The air has gained a maximum amount of water (100% RH) and lost 20*F of air temperature (IAT). Yet, the air density remains nearly constant. You have gained nothing in terms of mass flow throughput (no power gain is possible in this situation) even though the IAT is reporting cooler temperatures and liquid has fully evaporated to maximal effect.

Another thing to keep in mind is the starting RH of airflow. In climates such as Florida where RH is already high to begin with, the air will not be able to hold much water/meth that is being injected because it is already nearly saturated. This is a good thing for water injection because you want the water to reach the combustion chamber. It is bad for dry-flow intake manifolds due to distribution concerns. 'Use these systems at own risk' if you do not consider distribution it may leave a cylinder out in the dry.

Finally, there is some misconception as to the cooling ability of 100% methanol injection, even with understanding heat capacity and 'latent heat of vaporization' some people still will insist that methanol is superior or that they can effectively cool air using methanol injection. While it is possible to cool the air, as we have seen, there is the drop in density due to evaporation to consider, firstly. This will take the majority of your density gains away. However, there is also some disregard for the mathematics behind the evaporative cooling effect/ability of methanol injection 100% meth as well. And that is what I will cover now.

Here is a typical example of a low flow rate (low power, 400hp~) To show how little effect methanol has on IAT cooling.
In other words, if we double the power (800hp) we would also double the airflow mass rate, and cut our 'gains' in half. So I am giving the methanol a double advantage: this engine has a minimum of airflow (400hp). And we are going to inject some reasonable quantity, I choose as follows: 400hp forced induction.
#ad


Hand calculations for the win
#ad


back it up with an online calculator:
#ad


Number match up, magnitude is sanity checked.

Keep in mind the reported drop in temperature is shared with the plumbing, intake manifold, valves, etc... anything in contact with the air will transfer some heat energy during this exchange. therefore it is not a 100% IAT derived equation, only partially IAT effective.


Even without the GAS LAW (22.4L/mol) density based drop of displaced O2, the IAT drop for typical methanol mass injection quantities even at 100% meth injection rates, is negligible with respect to temperature.


couple refs for curious
water is evaporated within the cylinder:
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19930091835

https://rbracing-rsr.com/waterinjection.html

 

ok I have never had a answer to a question with so much science.I really appreciate you coming on and explaining this.So im running a carb and your saying to put the injection close to where the turbo pipe goes into the carb hat.

 

As close as possible to the intake valves is ideal. Because you have a wet flow manifold (for carb application) it will reduce the risk of distribution issues as well, so you can be free to inject more methanol and/or water than most people would usually recommend.

 

Rodney from ProMeth says to inject as far from the throttle body as you can. He seems to have a bit of experience on the subject.

Power loss from injecting into the air stream? Pretty small compared to the loss of having to run less boost without the WM. JFC.

 

so closer to where the pipe comes out of the turbo and before the carb hat.This question had been all over the place I guess.There are quite a few theories with meth injection placement..really appreciate your response

 

Amen to this. What do you need the kit to do? add fake octane, or cool things down, or both?

 

when you say run preturbine how are you plumbing this.Are you shooting the meth at the intake blades of turbine.When I first started looking at this I was going to put a 5 inch tube on my turbo inlet to screw the meth nozzle into.I was going to inject it right at the blades.IM wanting to cool the charge alittle and maybe alittle octane boost...Would love to hear opinions

 

I ran 2 nozzles pre and post turbo/intercooler for a while. Noticed I was getting some puddling in the pipe before the IC,a low point in the piping. Removed it and just went with the single after the IC. That one was about 2 feet from the TB. Was using a Sniper nozzle mount from ProMeth:
#ad


Combo was a 351w on 20psi and 93 pump.

Maybe you should post some info on your combo a what you're looking to do with it.

 

#ad


This shouldn't be a critical decision, find the nozzle size(s) you need, plumb where convenient (preferably where it won't spray down the bay every time the bov pops off). If you have a specific goal post it up.

 

The system was originally developed for WW2 aircraft, please read the supporting document from its creation where it specifies that the liquid needs to make its way into the combustion chamber before moving to a gas phase.

The reason people will say to inject far from the engine is because they think it will increase the air density, which as we have seen is un-true for many reasons, and entirely unscientific.

lets use science, please
1. As liquid evaporates it displaces oxygen and reduces air density. Oxygen takes up the same exact space as evaporated water in classical physics, this is called the IDEAL GAS LAW a general chemistry (high school) concept. The more liquid that evaporates, the less your air density.
#ad

"DRY AIR IS MORE DENSE THAN HUMID AIR"


2. At some point air will hit a maximum absorbancy per temperature, "wet bulb" concept
#ad

This is another reason why you need to inject close to the engine's valves.
When this threshold is reached the water will begin to pool/puddle in the intake pipes. It is your job to keep this from happening by placing the nozzle in a location where water can NEVER puddle, thus, is as close to the intake manifold as possible.
Also note that 3.4K is less than 10*F change in air temperature possible for cold air, cold water (27*C = 80*F)


3. We can easily see the relationship of air holding water in one of these handy charts#ad

We can see for the majority of well intercooled vehicles using perfectly DRY air (zero humidity - good luck) around 30*C or 40*C, the max change to specific heat is less than or near 10% from perfectly dry to 100% saturated air.

here is a similar chart with more information
#ad


4. Finally the myth about methanol being able to cool air sufficiently is destroyed when we calculate directly using scientific method as I have done already. For typical injection rates (175CC per 400hp) there is less than 20*F of cooling capability on the table for 100% methanol, and that EXCLUDES the density losses due to evaporation of a liquid to gas inside the plumbing prior to the engine's intake manifold.


I've seen all the hype over these systems. I know people claim incredible temperature drops and that you can easily send a liquid into a gas state by injecting into a turbulent air stream far from the engine in hopes of achieving those temperature adjustments.
Nevertheless,
Real world calculations and scientific method does not back those theories up. Furthermore, real world experience also shows us that injecting water/meth into any engine with all else being equal will reduce the power output regardless of the temperature drop reported by the IAT sensors.

For example, real world results showing us the truth:
https://ls1tech.com/forums/dynamome...s/1661317-na-meth-injection-dyno-results.html
-------
There are some companies which will tell the truth, who have designed the system to suit a vehicle:

https://rbracing-rsr.com/waterinjection.html


I'm going to explain the purpose now for the various fuels so it is very clear:

Methanol: In small amounts, I am an octane booster. if you sprinkle me into your engine, I can take pump fuel 93 octane and raise the quality of this fuel near race gas quality, making it safe for you to raise the boost and produce more power (boost supplies the power) or simply as an preventative measure for those hot days while you keep using 93 octane, allowing you to avoid a flex fuel system and avoid running high concentration (20%+) alcohol in the main fuel supply.
I am NOT going to provide any density increase for your airflow because when I evaporate, I take up the same amount of space as oxygen does. While a 20*F~ drop in temperature is possible when using me at typical aux injection rates (175cc/400hp) the act of me evaporating will remove density gains associated with temperature drop not to mention the heat exchange which occurs constantly with nearby components. Thus, the closer to the engine you can get me before I turn to a gas state, the better and the colder the engine intake will become.

Water: I have a very high heat capacity, much higher than methanol which means I am far more effective at reducing the temperature of nearby matter. In small amounts, I am able to absorb heat energy from hot engine parts that I am able to get near, such as pistons, cylinder walls, valves, head/deck/exhaust parts. You had better make sure I do not evaporate inside your intake tract, however, because then this advantage is completely lost (I will not able to cool any engine parts- so what was the point?) And furthermore I take up the same amount of space as oxygen does, so I will reduce the density of your air when I evaporate.
=> Best to trap me inside the combustion chamber before I jump to a gas state to preserve your air density.

93 Octane gasoline: I am a poor fuel, a cheap fuel for daily drivers. If you have a race car, or racing engine, you should not use me.
My long carbon chains and high energy content make it difficult to use me in performance applications. My weakness is high temperature: When I get too hot I explode too quickly to provide useful force to a piston , which creates a pressure spike that will damage the engine or put a hole somewhere, hopefully a head gasket and not a piston.
I burn dirty and create fragments of hydrocarbons that gradually become sticky tar-like or diamond-like substances which deposit all over an engine, so when using me you should have a fully functional PCV system to help keep the engine clean.
The concept of using methanol to improve me is for people who cannot afford to install Flex-Fuel systems or have alcohol delivery in large drums.

Ethanol: People drink me to get drunk. I am a very powerful racing fuel, the ideal fuel for turbo performance engines. My octane rating is very high because of my chemical structure and low energy content so I can be used with very high compression and boost without creating a pressure spike which will damage the engine. People inject me in much larger concentrations than gasoline and I carry alot of heat away when I evaporate near the engine's intake manifold (as intended, right at the valve or as it enters the valve). I can cause ice to form on intake manifolds because of this effect. Because my chemical structure is very short, only 2 carbons long, I will not form carbon conglomerate byproduct like gasoline does, and because of my hydroxyl group I will act as a solvent and clean your engine as I go in. The only reason not to use me, is cost. I can be delivered anywhere in the world for a price so there is no excuse not to use me besides cost.


Now, homework: I want you to consider a few things:
1. The location of injected ethanol fuel, and the ice effect it has on intake manifolds at high alcohol content.
2. The mass of ethanol injected from flex fuel systems VS the mass of methanol injected by typical aux systems. What is the difference in potential evaporative cooling between those two mass injections?
3. The rate of heat transfer through plumbing such as intercoolers and intake pipes that lead up to an engine. What governs the rate of heat transfer? How fast does it occur? Hint: If you cool air below ambient temperature, and then send the air through an ambient temp intercooler, the intercooler acts as a interheater.

Bonus Question
A turbocharger is moving 1000CFM of 80*F ambient temperature airflow, raising the temperature to 250*F And the pressure to 28psi at the outlet.
The air flows through an intercooler at ambient temp which will reduce the temperature of air to 100*F and the pressure to 24psi.

Now, the owner decides to install an air-water-ice intercooler to further reduce the temperature of the air.
The new intercooler is 30*F and the outlet air temperature is now 50*F and the new pressure is 20psi.

Find the total power gained from the new intercooler, all else being equal.

Assume the intercoolers are nearly 100% efficient (negligible pressure drop due to resistance/friction).

 

People - this is wrong! Please ignore.
Evaporating water or methanol expands and displaces some of the air volume but . . . . . . the cooling effect of this evaporation causes the air to shrink by a GREATER amount. The overall result is an INCREASE in charge density.

You can easily confirm this by looking at the psychrometric chart. Start at say 120*F, 0% RH (bottom right corner). Specific volume (inverse of density) is about 14.6 ft3/lb. Then evaporate water adiabatically until you reach 100% RH. (To do this follow the line of constant enthalpy up and left at about 30%). The new conditions are 64*F, specific volume about 13.5 ft3/lb. Specific volume has reduced from 14.6 to 13.5 - about 9%. In other words density has increased by 9%.

#ad

 

New power = Old power x Pn/P0 x To/Tn = Old power x (20+14.7)/(24+14.7) x (100+460)/(50+460)
= Old power x 0.985 = 1.5% power decrease.

 

This is incorrect. The energy supplied to the water is easily calculated and far far less than the energy required to vaporise. There is no short-cut to vaporising water. Energy equal to the latent heat of vaporisation must be added and even a high pressure pump only adds enough energy to vaporise a minute fraction of the water. "Atomisation" to create very small droplets should not be confused with vaporisation.

 

90% of what F4k posts in incorrect copy and paste babble.

Pre turbo gives you benefits that can't be found anywhere else, period. No other method shifts the actual plots on the compressor map, basically making your turbo act slightly larger. I've done it for MANY years with zero draw backs and spoken in detail to an individual spraying over 50% of their total fueling at 1000hp+ levels.

It is possible to reduce charge temps down to near the boiling point of meth (around 150*) if you are willing to spray large volumes. The amount needed to do that is proportional to the amount of air you flow. He found and backed up with dyno/MAF/power change calculations that at 100lbs a min (or basically 1000hp) For each 8gph he injected it would knock 15* of charge temp off. This held true until he reached around 150*. At this point, more volume did not change the charge temp much. At half the airflow, each 8gph knocked off 30*. Sounds like an easy experiment, but you can't use a temp probe to calculate these numbers as they saturate with fluid and spit out useless data. You have to do back to back dynos with a MAF and calculate teh temp drop VS power gained and MAF flow increase with and without pre turbo injection.

If you want the most out of your kit, straight meth is the most practical method. But it requires fail safes, safety measures (burst panel), and much more time/effort.

If you want a basic/easy cost effective kit. The 50/50 and small volume kits similar to what is sold online is the best route IMO. basically install it and forget its there.

 

He is the resident troll. Just add him to your ignore list, life will be better.

 

I appreciate your response and mathematics , you are saying that adding an intercooler is going to reduce the power output.

That is correct. And what I was hoping somebody would point out.

This is also correct and another idea I was hoping somebody would point out.
If you spread the water out properly it can vaporize more easily-
However the word "atomization" is my target here. Atomization literally means to turn it into atoms which is vaporization.
So working backwards from my example- we choose to 'spread the water out' so it can vaporize more easily but if you atomized it completely there would be nothing left to vaporize.

It isn't for me to be right or wrong with any of this, these are teaching and observations with ideas to form for future success. Not a question of wrong or right.
i.e. A Pump supplies energy and some of that energy breaks up water into smaller components which vaporize more easily but not atomize it completely or there would be no vaporization.