waterinjection.info

waterinjection.info (http://www.aquamist.co.uk/forum2/vbulletin/index.php)
-   Avoiding Disaster (http://www.aquamist.co.uk/forum2/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   Running Pure Meth - Use UEGO as failsafe? (http://www.aquamist.co.uk/forum2/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=1952)

ricekikr 12-03-2011 08:32 AM

Running Pure Meth - Use UEGO as failsafe?
 
AEM sells a gauge, which shows flow. They say its useful because blockage occurs over time, ie. the gauge will gradually show lower and lower flow over time if blockage is occurring. (basically not a failsafe, but good for monitoring)

Question is, if running pure meth or even 50/50, will the UEGO be enough to show if the Meth system is failing, ie. it will run leaner and leaner over time. Or is flow monitoring system really necessary (which costs as much or even double the basic meth kit)?

Problem is I don't have an AFR failsafe (I just have the gauge). ie if it goes lean too quickly it goes boom. But I'm hoping to catch the lean AFR if blockage occurs over time, and just use a meth low level switch to cut boost if I run out of meth(which I read is the reason most engines go boom).

RICE RACING 12-03-2011 10:12 AM

Re: Running Pure Meth - Use UEGO as failsafe?
 
Been reading a few of your posts lately.

A few words of advise.

* Pure meth is inferior to water injection, in every way shape and form except for one thing only (its easier on ghetto spark systems to get it to fire).
* Water mixed in a ratio along with methanol @ 50% is the best mixture to use as a fluid to avoid detonation while maximizing power potential of your engine. Any more meth than this is inferior for anti det and many other parameters.


ANY good system is as reliable as your main fuel injection system, in fact far more reliable and dependable. Fail safes are not really a way to think about this subject, if you start thinking like this then you may as well apply it to all other systems or aspects of your car from the spark plug ceramic tip to the chromed tail pipe falling off and hitting a pedestrian.

ricekikr 12-03-2011 11:17 PM

Re: Running Pure Meth - Use UEGO as failsafe?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by RICE RACING (Post 14467)

ANY good system is as reliable as your main fuel injection system, in fact far more reliable and dependable. Fail safes are not really a way to think about this subject, if you start thinking like this then you may as well apply it to all other systems or aspects of your car from the spark plug ceramic tip to the chromed tail pipe falling off and hitting a pedestrian.

I'm still not sure what mixture to use. Most probably 50/50 or pure meth.

Do you mean that any failsafe/monitoring device isn't needed? So all this talk about blocked nozzles or lower than normal flow is just marketing?

RICE RACING 13-03-2011 12:19 AM

Re: Running Pure Meth - Use UEGO as failsafe?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ricekikr (Post 14469)
I'm still not sure what mixture to use. Most probably 50/50 or pure meth.

Do you mean that any failsafe/monitoring device isn't needed? So all this talk about blocked nozzles or lower than normal flow is just marketing?

I cant speak for others systems, but in my own I have NEVER in 20 years and hundreds of kits ever had anyone complain of a blocked jet. My system is different to the rest though so you need to keep that in mind (read my members thread if you are interested).

Making WI over complicated is doing it a dis service at the end of the day. I guess if people insist on using coffee machine and boat bilge pimps in their kits and microscopic water injectors then maybe its a path to failure.

Water Injection when done right is just like it was back in the 30's and during WW2, it made things reliable and dependable and as Charlie Sheen would say WINNING!

Why would you be confused as to the fluid to use??????? Its only been researched to death 100 years ago! by people far smarter than us and backed up by many generations of people there after.

I can help you if you want it, you just need to read what I have posted here and many times over and over. It's not that difficult though peoples nature is to reinvent the wheel even though its thousands of years old.

:)

ricekikr 13-03-2011 08:05 AM

Re: Running Pure Meth - Use UEGO as failsafe?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by RICE RACING (Post 14470)
Making WI over complicated is doing it a dis service at the end of the day. I guess if people insist on using coffee machine and boat bilge pimps in their kits and microscopic water injectors then maybe its a path to failure.

:)


This. I was actually thinking about this the other day. Are the newer jets really better, is progressive better than on/off or is the newer load based really that much better than either, 250 vs 150psi pump. I just keep reminding myself, people made much more power than I'm planning to make with the old system. BUT I believe that the newer systems help, by how much I don't know.

Re mixture, at first I was thinking bout running pure H2o, mainly because Richard L (who to me, seems to be one of the more knowledgeable people re w/m) preaches it. But like he also said 50/50 is easiest, pure h2o could possibly make the most power but requires high ignition power, which my engine lacks. Pure meth is also still a viable option, people make good power with pure meth and you don't have to mix it anymore (I know easy, but still an additional step).

End of the day, I'll use whatever give me the most power with the least problems, if any.

Anyways, back to topic.

Do you use any failsafe/monitoring system? Or is the basic low-level switch enough?

And thanks for tip regarding the new style jets, I was actually thinking of getting one. :)

Richard L 13-03-2011 10:59 AM

Re: Running Pure Meth - Use UEGO as failsafe?
 
I would like to add on what is already discussed in good details by Rice Racing (Pete of RR).

As the concept of water injection was made popular over the years, many companies has jumped on the bandwagon but lost some of the original focus of what is the order of priorty, this is where marketing has taken the industry in a wrong direction.

Like Pete (RR) said, the job of a water/methanol injection system is to inject water reliably and predictably.

This is exactly your point of mentioning AEM's new flow monitoring system for water injection. Why make the effort of monitoring every CC in a delivery system which is fundamentally flawed. Looking at their flow curve against duty cycle, does it in any form shown any linearity? In some areas, there is non-linearity error of +120%!

Imagine someone trying to sell you a car with an engine temperature gauge that is accurate within a few tenth of a degree rather a car with a properly designed engine coolant recirculating system with a simple temperature gauge.

You do realise the momentum of the bandwagon, no other wmi makers other than RR and aquamist have taken the effect to address the basics of a wmi delivery system. They all opted for controlling flow by vary pump speed (PPS system) and uses slick marketing to cover-up the non-linearity and limited dynamic delivery range.

A typical PPS can only vary its flow from 100cc to 200cc/min with a pressure change between 60psi to 240psi with linearity of over 120%. You are one of the few people that raise doubt and start questioning behind the smoking mrrors.

ricekikr 13-03-2011 11:38 AM

Re: Running Pure Meth - Use UEGO as failsafe?
 
Wait. I got lost somewhere.

1. I never stated that AEM flow sensor was accurate, in fact I was implying it was a simple gauge that gradually shows less and less flow.

2. I never argued that h2o injection is inferior in any way. But that doesn't mean I will use pure h2o. I will use whichever gives the greatest power, whether it be pure meth / pure h2o / 5050. If they all give equal HP I will choose which is cheaper or easier to use regularly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard L (Post 14473)
You are one of the few people that raise doubt and start questioning behind the smoking mrrors.

3. What does this mean exactly? I never questioned anything. Raised doubt? I in fact even mentioned that I was thinking of using pure h2o because of what you said - Which means I believe you, how would that be equal to doubt?

4. This topic was simply opened to see if people use their UEGO gauges to see if the flow of pure meth or 50/50 will be caught in time before total failure. - My thinking was less meth flow mean leaner AFR. -

I was just looking for confirmation that it was indeed enough.

The reason I used "pure meth" in the title was because, I think, pure meth would have a greater effect on AFR vs 50/50 (I'm not sure if loss of pure h2o would change AFR)

I guess I should've put "will low 50/50 flow show changes in the UEGO" in the title instead. :confused:

ricekikr 13-03-2011 11:57 AM

Re: Running Pure Meth - Use UEGO as failsafe?
 
I reread your post, were talking bout different AEM failsafe. I was talking specifically about the Flow Gauge (the gauge that mounts in a gauge pod that shows real time flow). Not their more high tech fail safe system that can be hooked up to the pc.

I used that as an example, because in a discussion between Coolingmist and AEM, AEM said that the gauge is useful because it will show gradual loss of flow over time.

Thus my theory that AFRs will gradually get leaner as flow gradually reduces because of buildup of some sort that impedes flow. Which in my case eliminates the need to purchase any other failsafe system (other than the low level switch), in other words the AEM gauge is redundant and was simply used as an example.

But if blockage occurs instantly then the UEGO as a failsafe is useless. Thus why I made this thread.

Richard L 13-03-2011 03:16 PM

Re: Running Pure Meth - Use UEGO as failsafe?
 
I am not too concern about the function of the flow gauge but the effectiveness of it. If the system cannot deliver accurately base on boost or any other form of signal, monitoring the afr with UEGO is a waste of time.

Water/meth flow based on boost without RPM is a non-starter, you will get different rate being injected under different gears. Coupling with the non-linearity of the piump speed based system, the afr will be all over the place.

Hence using UEGO as a failsafe is a pointless excercise. I can give you a real world example if you want.

As regarding monitoring a gradual loss over time, this method of monitoring is only effective on an all-on/all-off system. You can only base your previous maximum reading to the current one. For a progressive system where injection rate is not maxed out at all time, how do you compare your previous flow reading at 1/2, 3/4 throttle or different boost level?

keithmac 13-03-2011 03:20 PM

Re: Running Pure Meth - Use UEGO as failsafe?
 
I used a Wideband AFR failsafe for my Methanol setup, it would cut boost if AFR leaned out over 12:1 afr while the system was injecting.

Because I was using mainly Methanol as the injectant it needed a failsafe, wether that was fast enough is debatable.

What Richard and Pete are trying to get across is a system based on a PWM valve is infinitely superior to one based on pump speed, I had an on-off system and it was a nightmare to map and get smooth transition into the injection phase.

With the PWM valve systems the ability of the system to accurately deliver/meter the flow makes the system easier to set up and tune for.

I`ve been using water, water meth and meth injection for probably 10 years on my own cars and never ever had a blocked jet..

Worth mentioning in winter if you go with staight water it would be benificial to add some methanol to prevent freezing, it also prevents any build up of bacteria/ algae that can cause sludge/ slime in the tank.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:06 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.