Why can't a water to air chargecooler be integrated with a an air conditioning system? Sounds like it would/should work?
Why can't a water to air chargecooler be integrated with a an air conditioning system? Sounds like it would/should work?
Even though it may work fairly well
It's easier to do an ice tank, and you wouldn't have a/c in the cabin,or you would need to keep the dead weight a/c system that blocks the radiator...
And you would need to make a special tank that housed the cold sink and make it water tight.
Didn't the Ford Lightning use the AC to pre-chill the IC?
Oh, let's hear it for the sort of mind that remembers 15-year-old engineering trivia. Now, where are my keys...
light reading for you from the last time we talked about this.
I didn't re-read the thread, but I think I remember there being solid reasons why it's not super popular.
New Hellcat uses the AC as well. They had video on engineering explained on youtube.
I talked to a guy at the strip one night with the Killer Chiller on his terminator. Said he was able to get sub 50°F IATs
The one thing is if you cool it past the dew point, you will get water in your intake.
RossD wrote: The one thing is if you cool it past the dew point, you will get water in your intake.
So what? It's not going to be anywhere nearly enough water to hurt anything.
former520 wrote: New Hellcat uses the AC as well. They had video on engineering explained on youtube.
Also the Dodge Demon. They had to use Freon as a refrigerant in that system.
rslifkin wrote:RossD wrote: The one thing is if you cool it past the dew point, you will get water in your intake.So what? It's not going to be anywhere nearly enough water to hurt anything.
Actually it does- when the engine ingests large enough drops, it causes slow burns and misfires. And if the blob of water gets large enough, it will be a dead misfire.
Lots of modern cars struggle with this problem.
Missed the other thread- but it would be interesting to see how long before the energy it takes to run the compressor system is more than the power gained by decreased air charge temp.
And then balance that with the weight of the system.
In reply to alfadriver:
Interesting. How large a blob of water are we talking for that to be an issue? I could see it happening at low rpm / light load pretty easily, but those times of low air flow are also when it would be easiest to trap / drain the water. At high rpm / heavy load, I'd think the water would get broken up enough for that to not present a problem.
rslifkin wrote: In reply to alfadriver: Interesting. How large a blob of water are we talking for that to be an issue? I could see it happening at low rpm / light load pretty easily, but those times of low air flow are also when it would be easiest to trap / drain the water. At high rpm / heavy load, I'd think the water would get broken up enough for that to not present a problem.
You would think that, but oddly enough, it doesn't. The IC's act as really crappy carbs- just letting water get through in pretty large drops.
I saw a video of a system where it looked like light rain- and it was causing misfires. The worst part was that the design put most of the water onto one cylinder.
In theory, if the IC is far enough away, there would be time to evaporate the drop- but even with front mounted air-air intercoolers, there's an issue of condensation for production vehicles.
In reply to alfadriver:
I'd heard about the issue with the ecoboost pickups. Wasn't that one an issue of water collecting in the bottom of the IC under light load in cold, damp weather and then the engine getting a slug of water when you got on the throttle?
In reply to rslifkin:
Yup.
Which is an illustration that condensation needs to be dealt with when designing an IC system. Somehow.
alfadriver wrote: Missed the other thread- but it would be interesting to see how long before the energy it takes to run the compressor system is more than the power gained by decreased air charge temp. And then balance that with the weight of the system.
I think it's more like a hybrid battery - you don't expect the AC to keep up, it gives you low intake temps for a short period. Like a quarter mile or so 
Keith Tanner wrote:alfadriver wrote: Missed the other thread- but it would be interesting to see how long before the energy it takes to run the compressor system is more than the power gained by decreased air charge temp. And then balance that with the weight of the system.I think it's more like a hybrid battery - you don't expect the AC to keep up, it gives you low intake temps for a short period. Like a quarter mile or so
At the height of our challenge days, we had 1 gal tanks that we put ice into for the intercooler. When we started, the throttle was so small that the restriction would make so much boost that it would melt the ice in one 1/4 mi run. By the end of the '04 challenge, I could do a ~50 sec autocross and still have some ice left.
Given what those systems can do, I'm betting that the ice water system was 1) as efficient, 2) cheaper (by a ton), and 3) lighter (in spite of a gallon of water).
I just needed a drain and a new bag of ice each run.
I was gonna say why even circulate the water? Just spray the outside of the air to air IC with something like a windshield washer tank and pump.
It's more of a marketing party trick than anything truly useful, agreed. At least you can always make more "ice" with the AC.
Now if you had a way to modulate the DX cooling down to a safe level just above the dew point you'd be golden. Or slow the air down below 500 fpm to keep from blowing condensate off of the coil.
You'll need to log in to post.
