EcoModding - Truths and myths about fuel efficiency
70An Introduction To EcoModding
Hypermiling is all about reducing your gas bills by maintaining your car properly, and driving it in a way that reduces your fuel consumption. EcoModding takes things to the next level. Adding bits to your car. Taking things off your car. Modifying parts of your car. All with the aim of reducing fuel consumption and emissions. EcoModders are green gearheads!
Oil is now over $140 a barrel. Gasoline is over $4 a gallon. General Motors share price was around $18 at the start of the month. It was $14 at the start of this week. Yesterday (June 26th) it closed at $11.43. Something needs to be done. It looks like General Motors aren't going to be able to do it. EcoModders are doing it for themselves!
Some people are advertising "Run Your Car on Water!". Others shout "Scam! It's impossible! It Violates The Laws of Physics!". What are the facts behind all the hype?
A Brief History of Modding
An unfortunate fact of life is that the internal combustion engine found in the average family car is not actually terribly good at doing what it was designed to do. There are different ways of looking at the efficiency of an engine, but an average efficiency of around 20% is the figure usually quoted for a gasoline powered engine. Diesels are a bit better. The fuel to wheel efficiency is even worse; somewhere around 15%. For people interested in some of the technical background this overview from the University of Washington is a very interesting read.
Ever since the automobile was invented enthusiasts have modified, tweaked and tuned their engines in an attempt to make them perform better. In the past the aim was usually to provide more power. To make the vehicle the engine powered accelerate better and travel faster. Increasing the efficiency of the engine helps here, and so does boring out the cylinders!
More recently though a new breed of enthusiast has emerged, concerned not so much with increasing power as with reducing fuel consumption and emissions. The EcoModder was born!
Water Injection - The Evidence
Before we get started I'd like to make clear that the following should in no way shape or form be considered as any sort of endorsement of the "Water4Gas scam" eBooks that are currently being rammed down our throats here on HubPages, and most other places on the internet come to that. Despite their misleading sales copy Water4Gas has in fact nothing to do with "Running your car on water" or water injection.
It seems to me that the marketing of Water4Gas and other similar products yet again displays the EcoModding community in a very misleading light to the casual web surfer. In my humble opinion it doesn't reflect very well on the marketers either,
That said there are many people who maintain, I am sure with the best of intentions, that EcoModding violates the laws of physics and must therefore be some sort of scam. I disagree. Here's why.
As you know, I work from home. Free from the grind of the daily commute I sometimes find myself with a few minutes to spare in which I can idly browse the NASA web site. You should try it too. There's a vast cornucopia of interesting things to discover. If you try a search for "water injection" for example you'll see a long list of reports, most of which are to do with squirting water into jet engines.
Before the space race started NASA went by a different name. Way back then it was called the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, or NACA for short. You can find lots of their reports from World War II on that same search. and they are no longer classified. Anyone can download and read them. I found this one particularly interesting.
The conclusion of this report, entitled "Use of Water Injection to Decrease Gasoline Consumption in an Aircraft Engine Cruising at High Power" was that:
"Water injection in aircraft engines would permit temperature-limited cruising powers to be reached at reduced engine speeds and increased brake mean effective pressures with fuel-air mixtures very near that for maximum economy. Such operation would yield significant improvements in fuel consumption, wheras the engine over-all liquid consumption would not be markedly increased".
To the best of my knowledge scientists have a lot of trouble working out what the laws of the multiverse actually are. It is certainly beyond their power to change them. I see no reason to believe that what worked perfectly well in August 1944 should have suddenly stopped working in June 2008, whatever the current version of the laws of physics state.
Hydrogen Enrichment - The Evidence
Now I know I'm repeating myself again, but just to make sure there is no misunderstanding - In my opinion the marketing of Water4Gas sucks! The following is most definitely NOT an endorsement of that product.
As you've no doubt worked out by now I'm a bit of a geek with too much time on his hands who likes nothing better than to idly wander round cyberspace searching for obscure academic reports filled with incomprehensible hieroglyphics. Here's another one I have on my bookshelf, this time from the Journal of Power Engineering rather than NASA. It's catchily entitled "Measurements and predictions of the fuel consumption and emission of a spark ignition engine fuelled with hydrogen-enriched gasoline". You can download it yourself if you want to look at all those Greek squiggles, but it will cost you 30 bucks.
One interesting thing about this study is that gives details of how to do a computer simulation of what's going on inside the engine, and ties that in to the experimental results. However, if all this stuff is just Greek to you here are the conclusions of the boffins:
"Lower temperatures prevail which means lower NOx emission and lower heat transfer to the walls"
and
"It has been shown that a significant reduction in the brake specific fuel consumption, in the order of 20%, is achieved with hydrogen-enriched gasoline for a hydrogen fuel mass ratio of 6% and equivalence ratio of 0.65" (in plain language "pretty damn lean")
Now this paper doesn't go into detail on how to generate the hydrogen, and it doesn't consider the energy consumed in so doing. However it sure as hell does not say that hydrogen enrichment will never work because it violates the laws of physics, and what's more it'll melt your pistons!
PrintShare it! — Rate it: up down flag this hub
Comments
Okay, I just realized you have a second Hub discussing "tips and tricks." Let me read that one, then I'll get back with you.
Hi Cheryl,
Thanks a lot for your comments. Both my hubs need a lot more work still I'm afraid. I've actually spent most of my time since I arrived here on hubpages stuck in the middle of the hype from both sides of the "argument". More useful info will follow, I promise.
I remember you said on the automotive forum that you had "anecdotal" evidence that this stuff can work. Could you possibly share any more about that?
When I have a spare hour or two I'll be adding some "hard" evidence here. Scientific papers and such like.
Cheers,
Jim
For the aficionados out there the picture is not of the P-51H. I couldn't find a nice colour photo of the real thing. If anyone knows of one please let me know.
Thanks,
Jim
Try the Mustang (fighter) Mustangs (car) website at
http://www.mustangsmustangs.com/p-51/p51variants/P
They have some GREAT photos and info. Yes, I'm a WW2 buff, as well.
Unfortunately, the info I gave in the forum is about all I have. My husband, the test engineer and "mad scientist," actually purchased the Water4Gas ebook some years ago (before it became so well known) and installed one (maybe two) of its three separate systems on our old Mercedes. (Beautiful car. I hated selling it but it had become a financial black hole. We're both self-employed and could no longer afford it.)
I can only remember that it was a sealed glass jar with a metal coil and what looked like water inside it. There was a noticeable increase in gas mileage although I have no figures and cannot substantiate this claim.
I'm sorry I can't help further. I can perform routine maintenance and some repairs on a car but am neither a mechanic nor an engineer. I've emailed your profile page to my husband (who is both) and perhaps you two can chat further on that topic.
Thanks again Cheryl,
You possess an amazing array of talents!
Having read the small print it seems Curtis allows the use of his photos on other websites, so I've updated the picture to show a pukka P-51H Mustang. If anyone's even vaguely interested in these matters do follow the link. More photos and lots of info too:.
"The Rolls Royce Merlin V-1650-9 was chosen. Take-off horsepower was actually down from the -7 series to 1,380. But, the new -9 Merlin used water/alcohol injection and was able to up the war emergency power to 2,200 at 10,200 feet. This was the fastest production P-51 clocking 487 mph at 25,000 feet."
Thanks for bringing your husband into the loop. It sounds like he might possess an amazing variety of talents too.
Interesting article and links, especially the one under "this one". It doesn't change my view on the 'Water4Gas' promotion which is filled with non-science, wild claims and false stats. Water injection as an internal coolant is a totally different concept from water dissociation (to hydrogen and oxygen). The WW2 experiments were entirely based on the former, and are fascinating. The specific heat of water is much higher than that of hydrocarbon fuels, so it does make sense to use it in this way. It is not being used as a fuel (because that is impossible) but as a dispensible coolant to increase fuel efficiency. In your researches, have you discovered if the recommendations were ever employed commercially (or militarily?)
On your final comment about the laws of, well, lets stick to this universe for now, I don't really agree with you. Yes, in extremis, there is much to learn, but in the field of motor mechanics here on earth, such fields as relativity and string theory just don't apply. Automotive theory is entirely derivable from Newton's laws of motion, Thermodynamics and Chemistry, which apply as much now as they did when Mr Bentley was in short pants.
Hi Paraglider,
Glad you liked it. As you know, I'm a big fan of your hubs too. As I alluded to above, I agree with you wholeheartedly regarding the Water4Gas sales copy.
The technology was used militarily in the North American P-51H Mustang shown in the photo above. This was powered by the magically named Merlin engine, courtesy of Messrs. Rolls & Royce in long trousers. Water injection was added for the P-51H with the aim of allowing the aircraft to get to Japan and back during a planned invasion. As we now know, the results of some rather different research was ultimately used for that purpose instead. Similar technology has also been used commercially. More on this soon.
I didn't mean to imply that it was necessary to invoke some arcane law of quantum physics in order to explain how EcoModding works. In such matters I do in fact have more faith in the engineers who make things work, rather than the scientists who endeavour to explain how and why things work. I certainly take note when the engineers and scientists agree that something works and I see the resulting contraption flying through the air with my own eyes.
Last, but not necessarily least, I have no faith whatsoever in the growing army of marketers who flog so many things to death, particularly when they do so by misappropriating the work of others.
The thing is, Scientists lose interest once they have put forward a theory. Or at least, their interest moves to the next theory. Faraday had no interest in making a better alternator, having made the basic discovery, he moves on. Occasionally, you'll get a Marconi or a Leonardo who is both scientist and technologist, but the mindsets are very different and most are happy in one or other camp (like me & my hypothetical mate Jim the car builder!)
Yeah, well, yes and no :)
As Paraglider mentioned in his latest hub, car is a compromise between performance, safety, and economy. I would add ecology, too - and this is what makes water injection not acceptable. Or rather not water injection, but what it was used for.
The idea was to run engine on extremly lean mixtures. If I remember correctly, peak efficiency comes around 1.4-1.6 lambda. However, combustion temperatures on such lambdas are so high they can easily melt combustion chamber. Here water comes to resque :)
However, lean mixtures generate enormous amounts of NOx (with almost non-existent CO and HC), and not compatible with current catalytic converters. This is the reason water injection is not used on modern cars...
Hi Misha,
Thanks very much for your expert input. Very useful. I hope you can agree though, that the P-51H does not in fact violate any of the laws of physics?
As I alluded to above, the modern family car is indeed a compromise, possibly even a kludge. If you mess with the system without knowing what you are doing you risk screwing your lambda sensor, screwing your catalytic converter, screwing your emissions and screwing the planet.
Jim
LOL I don't think the limited number of enthusiasts will screw the planet :)
But you are right of course, screwing there own wallets is easily achievable :D
Hi Misha,
Thanks for that. It's pleasing to know that someone out there appreciates my understated British humour :)
However, as you yourself have pointed out there is a hell of a lot of hype surrounding this area at the moment. If enough people melted their cats maybe the effect would eventually be measurable?
Not sure what you'd have to do to melt a cat. Mine would sit in front of the fire till he was too hot to touch but never showed signs of melting. (It's ok - I know ;)
Hi Paraglider,
I know you know ;)
However maybe some other readers do not know that I know that you know?
Everyone please be assured that no animals were harmed in any way during these experiments!
Are you two tying yourself in knots?
Hi Soulsurfer.
I had my car (old frontera) converted to LPG 4 years ago and now that
fuel is rising its great at 59.9p per litre , it doesn't seem to have caught on though i
mean it is half the price of normal fuel but people aren't converting as much?
As for water vapour injecting, i have driven a car that was designed for a Bond
film by SAAB in the 80,s it was a 900 Turbo and had a vapour injection system
and boy did it go, it was used as a marketing promotion for Dealerships.
Diesels can run on all sorts of different fuel hybrids , but cooking oil is going up now , in fact anything oily has gone up almost automatically.
Hydrogen fuel cells are bad news for the fuel companies because water falls from the sky , its free and its easy to get , they dont want to know about alternatives.
Ive looked at the idea in principle and it seems to have good potential , the fact is unless you can disprove it doesn't work , then you cant knock it , i am quite
interested in trying to make my own fuel cell since my car with LPG is slightly less
powerful than using petrol, both systems run on a separate basis and i can switch
from gas to petrol while driving. My normal fuel injection system is fooled ,an
electronic control unit takes that out when the car is on gas so the petrol isnt used and just circulates back to the tank. The water vapour idea creates a denser charge to the cylinder and has a cooling effect on the air taken in which in its usual state is expanded and thin , it therefore gives a better charge than normal
and more power is the result of that. I think a car running on neat Hydrogen is
quite a different situation to a car that uses it as a boost through the intake manifold along with petrol and i am not sure about what the ratio is because the fuel cells vary in output, so how do you control delivery unless you have a valve
regulating it via the throttle pedal ? Perhaps fuel consumption also depends on
who is driving? Because there are a load of fuel wasters who cannot even drive
a car economically to save their lives , they just want to race and overtake "WHAT FUEL CRISIS"! obviously they don't care about the price of fuel . The good thing at the moment is people are beginning to try new ideas and take alternatives more
seriously and that cant be bad unless you have shares in SHELL or BP.
Of course i haven't mentioned MOONSHINE as an alternative to petrol but you would need a big still for that , however it can be mixed with water (cool).
Hi Paul,
Thanks very much for your comments. I knew Saab made a water injection version of the 99 Turbo (more on this soon) but I didn't realise there was a James Bond connection. A quick Google turned up this on an MI6 web site! http://www.mi6.co.uk/sections/articles/literature_
Liquified Petroleum Gas is very cost effective in the UK at the moment because of the tax breaks, as long as you can find a pump nearby. In the UK the tax on gas and diesel is currently around $5 per imperial gallon.
I'm assuming when you talk about "trying to make my own fuel cell" you mean a "hydrogen booster" device of some sort? Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles and the necessary infrastructure are starting to become available ( http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25413866/ ), but they're not really suitable for a DIY project just yet! Please let us know what you discover when you get your system working.
As you say, a combination of alcohol and water injection is often used in performance engines, and was used in the P-51H Mustang also. I believe methanol is preferable to ethanol though, and even moonshine costs more than water!
Finally I'd like to echo your remarks that "people are beginning to try new ideas and take alternatives more seriously and that can't be bad". Pity about the marketing though.
Cheers!
Jim
On the subject of efficiency in internal combustion engines, please not e that marine two-stroke Diesels have reached 54% in some cases...
CherylTheWriter says:
17 months ago
soulsurfer, you are so right about the infernal combustion engine, and no, that's not a typo. Although not a mechanic by any means, I'm reasonably proficient at tinkering beneath the hood and I'd love to read some details about this. Exactly what sort of modifications are we discussing here?
Consumers can't support the U.S. dollar to lower commodities prices, including that of crude oil. We can't convince OPEC to increase production to lower prices by reducing global demand. Only with our pocketbooks--by purchasing less gasoline/petrol, and by purchasing only fuel-efficient vehicles--can we influence such worldwide economic situations.