[s-cars] Re: Air to Water intercoolers

[Mark Strangways]

Mike I have to disagree on the air to water being LESS efficient than air to
air.
I can get a much closer ratio of water in to air out temperatures than is
possible with air to air exchangers.
Water has a higher moisture content than air does (obviously) and
essentially than is all that is heating up...
There really is very little latent energy in dry air.

I cannot write very good explanations with out many drafts so I hope this
makes sense.

If you had to remove as much heat using air to air methods in your fridge,
the surface area's of the heat exchangers would be huge.
I can get a 100,000 BTU hydronic coil (hydronic is the term for hot water
heating) and put it into a relatively small (sq.ft) air stream. I can get
air temperatures fairly close to the exiting water temp while passing 1000
CFM over it.

Mark S
----- Original Message -----
From: "mlp qwest" <mlped at qwest.net>
To: <Djdawson2 at aol.com>; <strangconst at rogers.com>; <toddekramer at msn.com>;
<s-car-list at audifans.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 7:44 PM
Subject: RE: [s-cars] Re: Air to Water intercoolers


> Dave - I don't hold with perpetual motion or violation of one or more of
the
> laws of thermodynamics.  I think we would be in complete agreement Dave,
if
> the Intracooler / AC concept doesn't include as a part of its design some
> kind of heat reservoir, ... probably a pretty large reservoir.  I've only
> tried to bring up some of the air to water debate in response to ? was it
> Todd's original "Why hasn't anyone thought of this for the UrS4/6's...?"
> post.  OTOH the $5999 IC fan (did I miss a decimal   point or comma in
there
> somewhere?) sounds very, very reasonable to me Dave.
>
> What I do think the air to water crowd can (at least claim) to be able to
do
> that we, poor, misguided, air to air IC folks can't, is STORE or BANK an
> accumulation of low temperature via the A/C unit IF their system includes
a
> large enough reservoir, &/or appropriate reservoir storage medium.  I.e.,
> something like the drag racer groups running their fuel &/or intake air
> through a chest of ice.
>
> I'm not advocating TTM's  "Intracooler" whether it be version I or II,
> particularly for "normal" S-car road course driving.  OTOH, if some one on
> the list were into drag racing kinds of scenarios, and think they will
have
> plenty of time to drive around with the A/C running full bore, long enough
> to cool off a reservoir of ??? (indeterminate size) gallons of heat
transfer
> medium between 1/4tr mile runs, then by all means I hope they'll have at
an
> air to water solution.
>
> On a hot summer day, I would guess you ought to be able to cool the air
> water exchange medium down to something significantly below ambient to
give
> you at least one cool spring day run?  I'm sure however that while the A/C
> chilled air to water system might sound pretty simple at first blush, I
> suspect its actual implementation would prove to be quite a bit more
> complicated, and I have doubts as to its effectiveness.  For example, my
> guess is, and it's only a guess, you would have to isolate the chilled
water
> from the intake air heat exchange process UNTIL you were ready to draw
down
> on the bank of chilled water; otherwise you'd be running with what ever
> ambient temperature the "regular" air to water IC radiator was exposed to.
> Isolating the "super" chilled water from the rest of the system until
called
> for, and then "switching" delivery on at the right time would present some
> considerable plumbing & control problems.
>
> I agree with you.  If the TTM system claims that a car's AC system alone
> could keep up with cooling engine intake air volumes, bringing boosted air
> intake temps down to 33° F, they'd have to be breaking more than one "law"
~
> including a few involving truth in advertising.  OTOH, if what the system
is
> doing is trying to chill a reservoir of water for brief burst of speed,
> perhaps it would work in that limited context.
>
> If some one on the list wants to pursue a better IC solution with an air
to
> water IC, me thinks the simpler, the better.  The best you will be able to
> reliably count on isn't going to be better than ambient air temp as your
> ultimate charge air temperature.  And, don't forget that in an Air to
water
> system, one has to cross 2x heat transfer barriers vs. one in the stock
air
> to air systems.  I think there is some efficiency loss that has to be
> accounted for each time you move the heat from one medium to another.
The
> real advantage to the air to water systems IMO is the flexibility they can
> offer with respect to mounting and configuration layouts.  FWIW, there
are,
> at a minimum, at least 20 to 25 wheel horsepower gains, perhaps more,
> available through intercooler improvements based on real dyno, not blue
Levi
> denim, runs with both the stock K24, as well as the larger RS2 K26
> turbochargers.   And it doesn't even have to be obvious (photo) any more
:-)
>
> Mike "I'm sticking w/air to air, even if it is kind of thin up here below
> Everboost" Pederson
>
> ~-----Original Message-----
> ~From: Djdawson2 at aol.com [mailto:Djdawson2 at aol.com]
>
> ~mlped at qwest.net writes:
> ~
> ~> A new item that is available is the INTRACOOLER II.
>
> snips
>
> Dave responds
>
> ~
> ~Mike,
> ~
> ~Just three concepts for all to consider concerning the INTRACOOLER
> ~II.  Thermodynamics, Entropy, and Perpetual Motion.
> ~Does anyone think you will get more horsepower out of the system
> ~after using the compressor to cool the intake air?  I suggest
> ~using current from the alternator to run a fan that provides more
> ~air over the intercooler.  I would sell this device for only $599.
> ~Any takers?
> ~Dave in CO
> ~
> ~
>
>