Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Indeed, i wish i could read that wack schematic they posted? What are those two different sized rings about? A multi nozzle array?...

Without trying to be a critic, i await to see what closed loop system they implement for when the espresso machine water pump, even mounted in a metal box, dies from having to pump a constantly varying water pressure loads for a few years.

On a second look at the schematic, it looks like its a setup from a jet turbine, hence the "engine water pump" at the bottom left, and the duel staggered ring shaped nozzle array.

Those pressure regulators and the surge chamber sounds pretty trick. As for triggering, i would think the regulators would take care of that. Awaiting part 2 !

AutoSpeed Water Injection System Part 2

Interesting. I do like their seemingly comprehensive testing procedures and logic.

Though it looks like they are going to position the nozzle before the air filter, claiming it'll will provide "proportional amounts of water : air"

I'm not so sure about this. The key IMO, is being able to tell the existing ECU (in AS.com's example, an OEM ECU) that the detonation suppressing system is working and to take advantage of this with more ignition, less fuel etc.

For the system to be really worth it, it should allow such aggressive fuel/ign that if the system ever failed to turn on, the motor would suffer serious det damage... this is all means, the control of water : air must be EXTREMELY tightly controlled, not "roughly proportional"

my 2 cents

Not entirely, would be pretty impressive if they run that coffee machine pump for a good few years without issue.

Also, the IC intercool spray pulled like 25% more heat from the intake charge, then WI! lol.

Proper WI in the US is pretty big. Its essentially another whole fuel system, rail, injectors, reg etc. They add a water soluble oil to the water to allow Petroleum hardware to work and not rust. They run real 40% water : fuel ratios, not the 65 ml/minute AS.com are trying.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...