evolutionm.net - Home of the Lancer Evolution
Home Features Community Marketplace Registry Garage

Go Back   evolutionm.net > Lancer Evolution 1-9 Forums > Evo Engine Management / Tuning Forums > Water/Alcohol Injection & NOS
New! Use your Facebook, Google, AIM & Yahoo accounts to securely log into this site, click logo to login  

Welcome to EvolutionM.net!
Welcome to EvolutionM.net.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old Feb 24, 2006, 08:48 PM   #16
Silver Sponsor +1
Personal Sales Rating: (445)
 
TTP Engineering's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Central FL
Posts: 8,314

Drives: 2008 Evolution GSR SSS, 2005 Evolution MR, 2003 Evo GSR, 1995 TsiAWD, 1995 GST, 1995 Tsi 2wd, 1991 GVR4 WW, 1991 GVR4 NBM, 1993 TsiAWD, 1991 Tsi, 1995 RS N20

Send a message via AIM to TTP Engineering
No one said anything about vehicle travel speed. We are talking about spoolup and boost. Yes I can hit 26psi from a mid to upper rpm in under a second while cruising. Zero to 20psi in less than that. Spoolup is almost too fast to tune on an Evo stock turbo and too fast for the flow sensor lag. The only time spoolup takes more than a second is during a low rpm start dyno pull in a long gear.

This is what is possible from our kit, out of the box without additional sensors that may be too slow reacting. This is on an Evo stock turbo.

__________________
2005 Evolution VIII MR
763whp/595tq HTA86
10.19 & 143.3mph stock ECU
Factory ECU Expert

2008 Evolution X GSR
12.0@113mph Full Wt+


In House Mustang Dyno AWD-500!
www.ttp-engineering.com


(407) 475-0010
AIM=TTPEngineering

MODIFYING THE 4G63 SINCE 1995, YES 14 YEARS!

TUNING EVO V - EVO X & 2009 RALLIART!

TTP's Myspace page!

Last edited by TTP Engineering; Feb 24, 2006 at 08:54 PM.
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 25, 2006, 12:14 AM   #17
Silver Sponsor
Personal Sales Rating: (5)
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: England
Posts: 1,736

Drives: Citreon Xsara

Quote:
Originally Posted by EngineRunup
This is a nice set up. Some most recent WRC car runs port injection. Port injection will help even cylinder distribution a great deal.

Richard
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 25, 2006, 09:27 AM   #18
Evolved Member
Personal Sales Rating: (4)
 
SlowCar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Posts: 3,458

Drives: a drunken IX

Quote:
Originally Posted by C6C6CH3vo
If one of the four nozzles gets clogged the psi sensor wont notice.

The only way to have a system like that totally failsafe would be four separate flow sensors.

Nonetheless, very clean setup you have.
a flow detection failsafe system with a "settable" operating window will solve this 4 nozzle setup. Say each nozzle sprays 90cc/min, 4*90 = 360cc/min. Set the lower limits of the failsafe to 360cc/min - if the system does not see this minumum flow rate, you will not be able build boost or switch to an aggressive map on a on/off system.
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 25, 2006, 03:42 PM   #19
Silver Sponsor
Personal Sales Rating: (5)
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: England
Posts: 1,736

Drives: Citreon Xsara

TTP Engineering,

Would it be possible for you to log a "all-gear run" just to help me confirming that the "on/off" system could be a better bet than a progressive system under dynamic conditions. I may be wrong on that assumption. I read from previous posts from you that you considered on/off system was just as good.

I looked at your published logged data above and am impressived with the flatness of the a/f line. No hurry.

Many thanks,

Richard
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 9, 2006, 05:53 PM   #20
Evolved Member
Personal Sales Rating: (33)
 
EVO8LTW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 3,307

Drives: 04 RS and 08 GSR

This may be a dumb idea, but another failsafe would be to have redundancy in the system. You could even have a second kit with a second pump, second nozzle, second controller, etc. I've actually given some serious consideration to this as a true failsafe.
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 9, 2006, 06:11 PM   #21
Newbie
Personal Sales Rating: (1)
 
moto17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 87

Drives: 2003 Mitsu Evo

Quote:
Originally Posted by EVO8LTW
This may be a dumb idea, but another failsafe would be to have redundancy in the system. You could even have a second kit with a second pump, second nozzle, second controller, etc. I've actually given some serious consideration to this as a true failsafe.
What will you use to switch over from #1 to #2 incase system #1 fails.....knock...egt....afr sensor?

Seems that a flow monitoring system like aquamist dds3 will sove the problem of a redundancy system..........no flow = no boost above ~12psi on stock wastegate
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 9, 2006, 06:18 PM   #22
Evolved Member
Personal Sales Rating: (33)
 
EVO8LTW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 3,307

Drives: 04 RS and 08 GSR

Quote:
Originally Posted by moto17
What will you use to switch over from #1 to #2 incase system #1 fails.....knock...egt....afr sensor?

Seems that a flow monitoring system like aquamist dds3 will sove the problem of a redundancy system..........no flow = no boost above ~12psi on stock wastegate
You would run them both simultaneously and tune so that the motor will live (barely) on only 1 system. The problem with the regular failsafes is that they may not react fast enough, particularly with a fast spooling stockish turbo, and they may not address all potential issues. Plus, if you're running a high pressure actuator, wastegate pressure can still be 20+, which may not be low enough with aggressive timing.
__________________
RichJ
2004 RS - FP Red, stock ECU w/SD, 464 whp on 93 oct (BR dyno)
Redline TA Summit Point track record - Street Class

Many thanks to Buschur Racing, tephra, jcsbanks, mrfred, l2r99gst and my wife!
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 9, 2006, 06:29 PM   #23
Evolved Member
Personal Sales Rating: (1)
 
4G63>OOOO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,222

Drives: 2003 Evo MR wannabe (now with 6 speed!)

Send a message via AIM to 4G63>OOOO
In this case, the best failsafe, in my opinion, is running race gas.

Unless you're going to go through the trouble of rigging up an entire fuel system with surge tanks, -10 teflon coated lines for methanol, twin SureFlo pumps, all of the above failsafes and a prayer, it's never going to be as safe as just pumping some lead in the gas tank.

I've run every kit out there, from a custom Aquamist to the SMC to the Sureflo based and I even went so far as to buy an ATL cell to put in the trunk, but ultimately, the money you spend isn't enough to ensure that something won't go wrong. All you need is one electrical contact to short, one pump to die, one solenoid to stick, one filter to clog, etc.

My opinion is that you should get a safe tune on pump gas and just add water injection on top for a margin of safety. To tune for alcohol when it's not a sure thing is an exercise in frustration, having been there and done that.
__________________
Joe

"Driving fast is all about maintaining the highest possible level of acceleration in the appropriate direction" - Ayrton Senna
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 9, 2006, 07:09 PM   #24
Silver Sponsor
Personal Sales Rating: (5)
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: England
Posts: 1,736

Drives: Citreon Xsara

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4G63>OOOO
In this case, the best failsafe, in my opinion, is running race gas.

Unless you're going to go through the trouble of rigging up an entire fuel system with surge tanks, -10 teflon coated lines for methanol, twin SureFlo pumps, all of the above failsafes and a prayer, it's never going to be as safe as just pumping some lead in the gas tank.

I've run every kit out there, from a custom Aquamist to the SMC to the Sureflo based and I even went so far as to buy an ATL cell to put in the trunk, but ultimately, the money you spend isn't enough to ensure that something won't go wrong. All you need is one electrical contact to short, one pump to die, one solenoid to stick, one filter to clog, etc.

My opinion is that you should get a safe tune on pump gas and just add water injection on top for a margin of safety. To tune for alcohol when it's not a sure thing is an exercise in frustration, having been there and done that.
I agree with you entirely, putting two separate fueling systems (gasoline and alcohol) is not an easy task. I suggested before having a single "dual fuel engine management system" may iron out some afr and timing matching problems.

You will probably found when using using the aquamist (2d system) to mirror the fuel map and deliver the mixture via a high speed valve almost like having a "duel fuel engine management system.

One other possibility is having two tanks, one with regular fuel and the other race fuel. The engine management will change fuel line at certain engine load. If the change over solenoid or fuel pump is faulty, the engine just dies without damage. The overall cost is small compare to have an second system that injects alcohol/ water only.

Using water as a safety measure is a lot simplier to manage. With the availability of the DDS3 flow sensing system, its 0-5V output can be used to trim fuel to gain a few horses with the benifit of some economy under WOT region. Most high end engine management system has a fuel/ignition trim map normally intended for road speed correction - if this can be coupled to the sensor's flow output...
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 9, 2006, 07:52 PM   #25
Evolved Member
Personal Sales Rating: (1)
 
4G63>OOOO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,222

Drives: 2003 Evo MR wannabe (now with 6 speed!)

Send a message via AIM to 4G63>OOOO
Yes, getting the 2D running right was only a pain once I got hooked on the methanol. The ability to make more power with that system was fun for a time...until I killed that pump. Then I got the SureFlo with and that was really good...until I killed that one, too. Then I got a SureFlo with Viton seals and that was good...until the relay took a vacation and so did a couple pistons.

I'm currently of the opinion that by the time you get a dual fuel car set up right, you've added so much wiring and sheer WEIGHT in fuel cells, fuel lines, harnesses, etc, and you're STILL taking a chance compared to the guy running next to you that just put some lead in his tank.

For just messing around on the street, I'd say a small shot of water is great for engine longevity...but don't go near that VP Racing M1 Methanol. The slope is slippery and the guy behind you is on his way down the bottom as well.

I do appreciate what you're doing, but before someone gets in it too deep, they should know how fragile such a system can be.
__________________
Joe

"Driving fast is all about maintaining the highest possible level of acceleration in the appropriate direction" - Ayrton Senna
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 10, 2006, 08:46 AM   #26
Silver Sponsor +1
Personal Sales Rating: (445)
 
TTP Engineering's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Central FL
Posts: 8,314

Drives: 2008 Evolution GSR SSS, 2005 Evolution MR, 2003 Evo GSR, 1995 TsiAWD, 1995 GST, 1995 Tsi 2wd, 1991 GVR4 WW, 1991 GVR4 NBM, 1993 TsiAWD, 1991 Tsi, 1995 RS N20

Send a message via AIM to TTP Engineering
IMO there are always ways to circumvent any failsafes. I say, get a good reliable wideband with EGT reading and LCD display such as the zeitronix and keep an eye on the health of your system that way.

Widebands are almost an imperative component of any meth injection system.
__________________
2005 Evolution VIII MR
763whp/595tq HTA86
10.19 & 143.3mph stock ECU
Factory ECU Expert

2008 Evolution X GSR
12.0@113mph Full Wt+


In House Mustang Dyno AWD-500!
www.ttp-engineering.com


(407) 475-0010
AIM=TTPEngineering

MODIFYING THE 4G63 SINCE 1995, YES 14 YEARS!

TUNING EVO V - EVO X & 2009 RALLIART!

TTP's Myspace page!
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 10, 2006, 11:21 AM   #27
Silver Sponsor
Personal Sales Rating: (5)
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: England
Posts: 1,736

Drives: Citreon Xsara

Quote:
Originally Posted by TTP Engineering
IMO there are always ways to circumvent any failsafes. I say, get a good reliable wideband with EGT reading and LCD display such as the zeitronix and keep an eye on the health of your system that way.

Widebands are almost an imperative component of any meth injection system.
I agree. and like to add: Wideband is essential to any tuning system including air filter change.
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 10, 2006, 10:39 PM   #28
Evolved Member
Personal Sales Rating: (8)
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: SC
Posts: 3,867

Drives: goggles and a speedo

Does anyone know if the benifit of diluting the anhydrous methanol to 90, 85, or 80% in order to make it softer on kit parts/materials outweighs it's loss of net HP when compared to 100% MeOH.


I'm guessing that 80% and 95% methanol, respectfully, is equal to denatured for power and for destructive properties, but I don't know - I got C's throughout O-chem.

I'm thinking a little water in alcohol goes a long way for the systems reliability without much loss of bang.

Last edited by C6C6CH3vo; Mar 11, 2006 at 06:58 PM.
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 13, 2006, 12:45 PM   #29
Silver Sponsor
Personal Sales Rating: (5)
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: England
Posts: 1,736

Drives: Citreon Xsara

Quote:
Originally Posted by C6C6CH3vo
Does anyone know if the benifit of diluting the anhydrous methanol to 90, 85, or 80% in order to make it softer on kit parts/materials outweighs it's loss of net HP when compared to 100% MeOH.


I'm guessing that 80% and 95% methanol, respectfully, is equal to denatured for power and for destructive properties, but I don't know - I got C's throughout O-chem.

I'm thinking a little water in alcohol goes a long way for the systems reliability without much loss of bang.

I don't think it will make that much of difference between 80% anf 100% methanol unless your engine need that extra fuel. Putting 10% of water in methanol will bump up the cooling latent heat by en extra of 10%. In fact every % of water you add will increase the latent heat value by the same % level.

Richard
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 14, 2006, 08:23 PM   #30
SMC
Newbie
Personal Sales Rating: (0)
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 4

SMC Failsafe

Hey Guys-
Sorry for the wait on the safeguard.......it's been a freakin zoo here. It looks like it will be a swap to the new v3.0 controller with safeguard built in. This makes for a much neater look than adding another box to graft into the old controller.
The 3.0 controller will have an extra dial to set the safeguard point. (for example 20 psi) If you reach 20 psi and the controller does not sense an alky pressure signal from the pump the safeguard will close a solenoid valve that will mount inline between the wastegate and boost controller. (factory or otherwise) When the valve closes the boost will drop to wastegate spring level. Sound good? Any input from you is appreciated. Will put it up on the website as soon as it is available....and after my main vendors have tested it. Thanks for your patience!
Hope to have prototype pictures up soon.......
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
activate, alcohol, aquamist, boost, comp, connect, coolingmist, ebc, fail, injection, install, labonte, safe, smart, trimmer, water, zeitronix

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

 



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0