|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: away-pitsaway-pits Date: Jan 18, 2007 22:59
One for the engineers and similar.
If water injection gave the power boost (like on the old darts) why did
it fall out of practice
and could it be used to boost power output of say land based power
turbines ?
Any links or data greatly appreciated and also chapter and verse
schemetics etc if you wish to spamlister at g-mail dot com appreciated
cheers
|
| |
|
| | 25 Comments |
|
|
Author: matt webermatt weber Date: Jan 20, 2007 14:41
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 02:37:07 GMT, veritas coldmail.com>
wrote:
>
>
>matt weber wrote:
>
>> Takes a lot of energy to make distilled water. Price de-salinated
>> water sometime, so the economics for most land based applications are
>> pretty suspect.
>
>I agree - GT's...
|
| Show full article (1.18Kb) |
|
| | 1 Comment |
|
|
Author: veritasveritas Date: Jan 20, 2007 15:20
matt weber wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 02:37:07 GMT, veritas coldmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
>> matt weber wrote:
>>
>>> Takes a lot of energy to make distilled water. Price de-salinated
>>> water sometime, so the economics for most land based applications are
>>> pretty suspect.
>> I agree - GT's are too expensive to run land-based. As a general rule, if a thumper can do it
>> (given *all* of the operational factors ) - it is more economical to use it.
> There are few land applications where thumpers aren't big enough or
> practical.
> They are referred to as topping units, and provide peak power output
> on the grid. It's been a long time, but in my Uni days, Wisconsin
> Electric Power Cooperative had one that would turn out 120,000kw (that
> about 160,000 hp). It's main claim to fame is that it could go
> pressing the start button to name plate rated output in about 10
> minutes. operating economy was a secondary consideration, because in a ...
|
| Show full article (1.26Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: veritasveritas Date: Jan 20, 2007 15:41
In the 50's, a well know car-race identity (Frank Klienig) built a device called "Mist Master".
The water-meth injector fitted just under the carby. I have no recollection as to how well it
performed but I can say that I pulled the head off a 48-215 and the combustion chamber was
absolutely spotless - it had never been previously removed. The Taxi had 100,000 miles on the
clock when many cars were stuffed by then. It was usual to have to "de-coke" and engine every
25,000 miles due to the crap engine oil of the day - late, in the 50's, ashless and detergent
oils revolutionised engine longevity.
The bottom line is: W/M injection paid for itself in "de-cokes", if nothing else!
===================
BernieFlyer wrote:
> I have a feeling that Water Injection was used in a number of diesel truck
> engines during WW2.
>
> Bernie
>
> www.acst.com.au
> "away-pits" gmail.com> wrote in message...
|
| Show full article (1.59Kb) |
| 5 Comments |
|
|
Author: away-pitsaway-pits Date: Jan 20, 2007 16:20
veritas wrote:
> In the 50's, a well know car-race identity (Frank Klienig) built a device called "Mist Master".
> The water-meth injector fitted just under the carby. I have no recollection as to how well it
> performed but I can say that I pulled the head off a 48-215 and the combustion chamber was
> absolutely spotless - it had never been previously removed. The Taxi had 100,000 miles on the
> clock when many cars were stuffed by then. It was usual to have to "de-coke" and engine every
> 25,000 miles due to the crap engine oil of the day - late, in the 50's, ashless and detergent
> oils revolutionised engine longevity.
>
> The bottom line is: W/M injection paid for itself in "de-cokes", if nothing else!
>
===================
>
> BernieFlyer wrote:
>> I have a feeling that Water Injection...
|
| Show full article (1.80Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: SunnySunny Date: Jan 20, 2007 19:13
> In the 50's, a well know car-race identity (Frank Klienig) built a device
> called "Mist Master". The water-meth injector fitted just under the carby.
> I have no recollection as to how well it performed but I can say that I
> pulled the head off a 48-215 and the combustion chamber was absolutely
> spotless - it had never been previously removed. The Taxi had 100,000
> miles on the clock when many cars were stuffed by then. It was usual to
> have to "de-coke" and engine every 25,000 miles due to the crap engine oil
> of the day - late, in the 50's, ashless and detergent oils revolutionised
> engine longevity.
cough cough, :-) Just brought back a memory of when I was an apprentice
Fitter/Machinist with the Railways.
Some of us got together and reproduced the "mistmaster" (as a foreign order)
and flogged off few to our mates.
(The water tank had metho added to the mix)
(worked well, even with twin SU Carbys)
|
| |
| 3 Comments |
|
|
Author: veritasveritas Date: Jan 20, 2007 21:23
Sunny wrote:
>> In the 50's, a well know car-race identity (Frank Klienig) built a device
>> called "Mist Master". The water-meth injector fitted just under the carby.
>> I have no recollection as to how well it performed but I can say that I
>> pulled the head off a 48-215 and the combustion chamber was absolutely
>> spotless - it had never been previously removed. The Taxi had 100,000
>> miles on the clock when many cars were stuffed by then. It was usual to
>> have to "de-coke" and engine every 25,000 miles due to the crap engine oil
>> of the day - late, in the 50's, ashless and detergent oils revolutionised
>> engine longevity.
>
> cough cough, :-) Just brought back...
|
| Show full article (1.36Kb) |
| 2 Comments |
|
|
Author: SunnySunny Date: Jan 20, 2007 22:36
>
>
> Sunny wrote:
>>> In the 50's, a well know car-race identity (Frank Klienig) built a
>>> device called "Mist Master". The water-meth injector fitted just under
>>> the carby. I have no recollection as to how well it performed but I can
>>> say that I pulled the head off a 48-215 and the combustion chamber was
>>> absolutely spotless - it had never been previously removed. The Taxi
>>> had 100,000 miles on the clock when many cars were stuffed by then. It
>>> was usual to have to "de-coke" and engine every 25,000 miles due to the
>>> crap engine oil of the day - late, in the 50's, ashless and detergent
>>> oils revolutionised engine longevity.
>>
>> cough cough, :-) Just brought back a memory of when I was an apprentice
>> Fitter/Machinist with the Railways.
>> Some of us got together and reproduced the "mistmaster" (as a foreign ...
|
| Show full article (1.78Kb) |
| 1 Comment |
|
|
Author: veritasveritas Date: Jan 20, 2007 23:52
Thanks for getting back to me - Barry was in Sydney (with NSWGR) and VicRail took him on during
the games lead up (and the games) when he was training. I know it is a long time ago - just
thought that with an Olympic profile, you may have remembered him. :)
Sunny wrote:
>>
>> OT: Ever run into an apprentice fitter, 'Barry' (can't remember his last
>> name at the moment) who would have been there about the same time as that.
>> He represented Australia (diving) at the '56 Melbourne Olympics... He
>> would have been 17 then.
>
> I was with NSW Railways. In early 56 I was doing National Service, only
> "Games" bloke I met was named "Brown" ( A Golden Glove boxing champ) who
> wiped the ring with me during the Inter Bn Competitions.
Could have been the same guy that I did a tour with. Gymnastics demonstration troupe for me
(Barry was my coach) and your guy (of course) a boxer. They couldn't get a match for him (only
exhibition bouts). I was no real boxer but dabbled as an occasional welterweight.
> They didn't tell me he was going to the Olympics until after the bout :-)
Obviously you didn't ask to be deferred because of your apprenticeship. I did (and got it) -
but I went 'regular' (RAEME) about 6 months later. Bloody Kapooka though!!!!
|
| Show full article (1.29Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: yajnyajyajnyaj Date: Jan 18, 2007 23:58
Water injection was used in some high-performance turbocharged wartime
aero engines. As a general rule, up to 10%% of the fuel can be replaced
by water, with savings in fuel consumption &/or improved power output.
Water tends to freeze so alcohol has to be added.
Advantages were in cooler running of cylinder heads, valves etc.
Disadvantages were in complexity - two sets of injectors, water tank/
weight. Intercooling is a more efficient way to go.
CmiJ.
On 18 Jan 2007 22:59:10 -0800, "away-pits" gmail.com>
wrote:
|
| Show full article (0.90Kb) |
| no comments |
|
RELATED THREADS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
