# Crazy IC idea..



## PatScottAKA99XE (Apr 30, 2002)

Heres the deal, I was chatting with a co-worker about IC's and ways to increase thier effectiveness. He brought up the no-so-new idea of a 1 shot ice bathed IC in a place I hadent thought of..replaceing the passenger seat. That got me thinking(and that is dangerous). Take out the passenger seat put the IC there and re-route all of the HVAC ducts to blow only through the IC...of course with the air-conditioning on. Dont flame me for thinking this up.. I would never try it. I am just wondering it the theory is sound. Am I crazy? Nuts?


----------



## psshhgoesmysr20 (May 1, 2002)

With a turbo system you want the piping to be as short, and with as little bends as possible to get the utlimate flow. They already make ICs that do that sort of thing with the ICE, but they are not ideal for daily driven cars. Not unless you want to change out the Ice left and right.


----------



## PatScottAKA99XE (Apr 30, 2002)

I know about the one shot ice systems(I mentioned that in my first post), I know that you want the pipes to be as short as possible, and I also thought I had seen a couple of one shot ice system mounted in the trunk of cars. Anyway, like I said I was just wondering about the theory of an AC/IC cooling system.


----------



## Guest (Aug 18, 2002)

I am not sure I get every thing you are saying because your english and grammer is very garbled. I don't intend to be mean. 
The piping lenght would be a huge problem like pissh says. The pressure drop would be insurmountable. The turbo would have to blow so hard that I really think the increase in intake charge temp would nearly cancel the benifits of the colder IC. Not to mention the increadable amount of time the pipes would take to recharge after a shift. 
As for using the AC....I can't imagine finding space to route ac vents in the engine bay? Plus the load on the motor with AC compressor on. 
Nitrous express came up with the right idea. Have you seen the intercooler no2 spray kit? Its so cool. Instead of spraying the juice into the motor you spray the IC to make it cold. Dynos made some crazy 30hp gains on a turbo civic. I think though it would change your A/F ratio enought that you would have to compinsate in your fuel maps any way so why not just spray right into the motor?


----------



## PatScottAKA99XE (Apr 30, 2002)

Sorry for my english.

Thanks for the info, like I said i was just curious about the theory. 

I never said anything about running HVAC ducting under the hood. In that idea, the IC would be in place of the passenger seat(or in that general area).

Compressor strain - If the theory were valid, the hope is that the cooler temps would make up for the hp loss(due to the compressor) and then some.

Thanks for the input guys


----------



## Guest (Aug 18, 2002)

Werd. I spend most of my free time daydreaming about cars and driving. I have come up with some pretty crazy stuff in my head!


----------



## DOHCslide (Aug 18, 2002)

ive seen a water-to-air intercooler on a g60 that had a seperate cooling system rather than ice. the intercooler piping was normal but he had the coolant running to a seperate radiator mounted under his rear bumper w/ an 8"fan. whole whole kit ran off an independant electric water pump a small resivoir of water which had a quick drain on it. it looked pretty efficent and on race days a quick switch to ice water or alcohol would make a big difference. 
shawn
"buy my sentra"


----------



## bahearn (Jul 15, 2002)

Pressure drop over the long run of tubing won't be much. Turbo lag will, though.

The A/C thing has been done on a turbo RX-7. From a thermodynamics standpoint, it's still a net loss. It takes engine power to run the A/C unit to cool the intercooler. Most people *REMOVE* the drag of the A/C unit.

The air-to-liquid intercooler is nothing magic. It just provides flexibility in locating the first intercooler stage and can use a smaller unit. The total area must remain the same as a single-stage air-to-air intercooler for a given BTU removal by the final stage.

The liquid coolant is best left to pure water as it has the highest heat capacity of common liquids. Alcohol has a significantly lower boiling point than water and would require a much higher system pressure to stay liquid; vapor sucks as a coolant medium. Alcohol has a high latent heat (it absorbs a lot of energy when it changes phase from liquid to vapor) but that's only good if you want alcohol as a vapor.


----------



## OPIUM (Aug 18, 2002)

All i did was re-route my windshield squirter lines to my fmic with a misting head and replace the window washing fluid with cheap ass isopropyl alcohol (70% alcohol 30% water), and Zip tie the line down. Of course the fluid resevoir was thoroughly cleaned. I then removed my winshield wipers. Now when i feel like it needs cooler air, i just spray my intercooler. I took the wipers off because when you want to spray your windshield wipers go on and off with it. Its not like i need them in AZ either. There ya go. Free cheap mod


----------



## bahearn (Jul 15, 2002)

> misting head and replace the window washing fluid with cheap ass isopropyl alcohol (70% alcohol 30% water)


You don't like your car? Trying to burn it for an insurance settlement? I applaud your implemetation of the mister, and your choice of coolant is excellent as far as heat absorption, but, *Cripes A'Mighty*, your safety conscienceness needs a lift. That 30% water does nothing to inhibit isopropanol's flammability, and you're passing those vapors near the engine compartment and the *HOT* turbine and exhaust plumbing.


----------



## PatScottAKA99XE (Apr 30, 2002)

Now I dont feel so bad.


----------



## OPIUM (Aug 18, 2002)

Its not that bad... its mixed in with a ton of water. About 3 parts of water to 1 part of the alcohol. 

Plus the other fact is that it would have a hard time reaching the engine bay by the way its mounted. My grill is cut only enough for my intercooler, and then my new radiator takes up the rest of the room blocking off the engine bay like a 900lb goalie in front of the net. Never had a problem in the months that i've been spraying...


----------



## PatScottAKA99XE (Apr 30, 2002)

quote:

misting head and replace the window washing fluid with cheap ass isopropyl alcohol (70% alcohol 30% water)

quote:

About 3 parts of water to 1 part of the alcohol. 




Is my math off???


----------



## OPIUM (Aug 18, 2002)

What i meant was that i add tap water to the alcohol to water it down more than it already is. I wasn't talking about the alcohol itself. 3 parts of tap water to 1 part of the 70% alcohol and 30% water solution.


----------



## PatScottAKA99XE (Apr 30, 2002)

Ok, thanks for the clarifacation(sp?)

Guys answer me this..
Why do people use the washer nozzels off their car, loseing the ability to wash their winshield like OPIUM3 here. If it were me I would get another set of nozzels, a pump, a res, the hoses and make my own spray system leaving the stock nozzels intact.


Not trying to single you out OPIUM3, you gave your reason why. I am talking about others that I have seen(in parts of the country where they would need it for the winshield).


----------



## OPIUM (Aug 18, 2002)

For me its all about location location location. In AZ, especially the area where i live, we never get rain. And if we get rain, its hardly any at all. Its not like i need them at all. We're almost at the end of our monsoon season, and i've only needed them once. The other times it rained here i was inside anyways. So thats my reason. And for the water nozzle i stole one from home depot. I put it on the end of the hose i was running so it would give more of a mist, rather than a stream, so i can cover the entire intercooler.


----------



## bahearn (Jul 15, 2002)

> About 3 parts of water to 1 part of the alcohol.


You've gone from 70% isopropanol to roughly 18% isopropanol. Why bother? You'll find straight water to be a lot cheaper and almost as effective *AND* you remove a potential fire hazard.


----------



## morepower2 (Apr 19, 2002)

PatScottAKA99XE said:


> *Heres the deal, I was chatting with a co-worker about IC's and ways to increase thier effectiveness. He brought up the no-so-new idea of a 1 shot ice bathed IC in a place I hadent thought of..replaceing the passenger seat. That got me thinking(and that is dangerous). Take out the passenger seat put the IC there and re-route all of the HVAC ducts to blow only through the IC...of course with the air-conditioning on. Dont flame me for thinking this up.. I would never try it. I am just wondering it the theory is sound. Am I crazy? Nuts? *


Using the AC to cool the IC wont work, it violates the second law of thermodynamics. The energy that the AC takes to remove heat from the air is greater than the power increase you could get from chilling the IC with it.


----------



## PatScottAKA99XE (Apr 30, 2002)

*Re: Re: Crazy IC idea..*



morepower2 said:


> *
> 
> Using the AC to cool the IC wont work, it violates the second law of thermodynamics. The energy that the AC takes to remove heat from the air is greater than the power increase you could get from chilling the IC with it. *


Thank you Mike, thats is exactly the type of answer I was looking for.


----------



## James (Apr 29, 2002)

*Re: Re: Crazy IC idea..*



morepower2 said:


> *
> 
> Using the AC to cool the IC wont work, it violates the second law of thermodynamics. The energy that the AC takes to remove heat from the air is greater than the power increase you could get from chilling the IC with it. *


But aren't we talking about two different systems? Not to argue with you... I just find something funny about that comment. The drain on the power from the AC is the same no matter how much the power of the motor is isn't it? So if you increase the power of the motor the AC will just be working to chill the IC instead of Pat's nuts. I see the only problem as the length of pipe you have to use to route everything as well as where would you put the IC...


----------



## bahearn (Jul 15, 2002)

Water will remove 2-1/2 times as much heat as isopropanol for a given weight of liquid. Humidity does slightly affect the advantage but it's still twice as good. Straight water is more effective, cheaper and isn't a fire hazard.


----------



## bahearn (Jul 15, 2002)

Water absorbs 2-1/2 times as much heat as isopropanol when it vaporizes. Relative humidity affects the vaporization rate, but even still, water is twice as effective as isopropanol, it's cheaper and is no fire hazard.


----------



## James (Apr 29, 2002)

Stage ENGINE AC DRAIN HP Loss HP Gained HP TOTAL
Stock 100HP 25% 25 N/A 75
Turbo 200HP 25% 50 100 150
w/IC 240HP 25% 60 40 180
Chill IC 280HP 25% 70 40 210

ok that's what I'm saying the overall gain is still there by chilling the IC (don't make fun of my numbers I'm just proving a point)... is there a flaw in this?

(it's suppose to be a chart but I cant get the columns to line up when I paste it in so you'll just have to follow along)


----------



## javierb14 (Jul 9, 2002)

yes, u can c gains from chilling the IC...if its air to water system a properly designed air/h2o IC can drop charge temps below ambient.


----------



## bahearn (Jul 15, 2002)

The issue here is using the car's air conditioner to chill the intercooler. As both Mike and I wrote in different posts, it is thermodynamically impossible to gain more power with the chilled intake charge than was consumed by the air conditioner.


----------



## morepower2 (Apr 19, 2002)

James said:


> *Stage ENGINE AC DRAIN HP Loss HP Gained HP TOTAL
> Stock 100HP 25% 25 N/A 75
> Turbo 200HP 25% 50 100 150
> w/IC 240HP 25% 60 40 180
> ...


Yes but you are increasing mass flow while the cooling capacity of the A/C remains the same so the charge will be cooled less than at lower mass flows.

It is very fultile to argue this point as anyone who has taken the first semester of thermodynamics knows that this is true. Its common science!


----------



## javierb14 (Jul 9, 2002)

> it is thermodynamically impossible to gain more power with the chilled intake charge than was consumed by the air conditioner.


this is true...so use an air/h2o its already been proven to work, not to mention running fittings and lines for the heat exhchanger is easier than fabbing up AC lines.


----------



## morepower2 (Apr 19, 2002)

javierb14 said:


> *
> this is true...so use an air/h2o its already been proven to work, not to mention running fittings and lines for the heat exhchanger is easier than fabbing up AC lines. *


In my opinion air to air is better for everything but drag racing where you can have an ice tank to pull the air temp really down. For roadracing and street air to air is the way to go.

Water to air has to have two heat exchangers with efficency losses for both, plus a pump water tank and other extra parts.


----------



## javierb14 (Jul 9, 2002)

ya, u do have to compromise....
air/air=lighter but lengthy charge pipes, and usually less $
air/h20=heavier but short charge pipes, and usually more $
what ever works for u.....


----------



## James (Apr 29, 2002)

morepower2 said:


> *
> 
> Yes but you are increasing mass flow while the cooling capacity of the A/C remains the same so the charge will be cooled less than at lower mass flows.
> 
> It is very fultile to argue this point as anyone who has taken the first semester of thermodynamics knows that this is true. Its common science! *


Yeah I understand thermodynamics... just doesn't seem to apply (or at least I can't see it). I don't see it as creating more energy than you're putting in but making more the IC more efficient... 



> The SVT Lightning concept was a surprise during Ford’s unveiling of the all-new 2004 F-150. Launching a 'Whole New Era of Built Ford Tough,' the new F-150 is an all-new full-size pickup architecture designed for more power, refinement and unprecedented driving dynamics capability. It is the star of Ford Motor Company’s biggest-ever wave of new-product introductions at the dawn of its Centennial year. The SVT F-150 Lightning concept features a six-speed manual transmission, independent rear suspension and a 500-horsepower supercharged V-8. It is a powerful combination aimed at extending SVT Lightning’s supremacy into the future.
> 
> Designer John Coletti’s team fit the SVT Lightning concept with an all-aluminum, 5.4-liter DOHC supercharged and intercooled V-8 engine conservatively rated at 500 horsepower and 500 foot pounds of torque. And while they were at it, they invented and patented a speed secret for those times when even that much power just isn’t enough. Ford’s patented SuperCooler technology cleverly provides a special burst of power for the SVT Lightning concept. Traditional intercoolers dissipate heat from the supercharged air by circulating coolant through a front-mounted, air-cooled radiator. With the SuperCooler system, the vehicle’s air conditioning system is used to chill a small storage tank of coolant to about 30 degrees Fahrenheit. On demand, the SuperCooler system switches the intercooler flow from its normal circulation and dumps the chilled coolant into the engine’s intercooler. In turn, the intercooler dissipates up to 20 percent more heat from the charge air – resulting in a denser air charge.
> 
> The SVT F-150 Lightning concept features an independent rear suspension and SVT’s famous attention to every detail of the suspension, steering and braking systems for driving dynamic capabilities that match the sport truck’s awesome power. SVT engineers chose to fit an independent rear suspension (IRS) system to the Lightning concept in lieu of F-150’s standard Hotchkiss type solid rear axle with leaf springs and outboard shock absorbers. The IRS unit was adapted from the Ford Expedition.


----------



## OPIUM (Aug 18, 2002)

bahearn said:


> *Water absorbs 2-1/2 times as much heat as isopropanol when it vaporizes. Relative humidity affects the vaporization rate, but even still, water is twice as effective as isopropanol, it's cheaper and is no fire hazard. *












Screw it, I'm going to just start pumping *NESTEA* onto my IC.


----------



## javierb14 (Jul 9, 2002)

lol


----------



## bahearn (Jul 15, 2002)

After discussing this with a couple of chemical engineers, it was determined that relative humidity plays a larger role in water evaporation rate than I led on. Here in Houston, where relative humidity is often over 95%, water would not do very well in removing heat since the air is near saturation point and can't take much more water vapor. In Arizona, ("but it's a DRY heat") you can get great evap rates for water.

And, water is already burned!


----------



## OPIUM (Aug 18, 2002)

Don't forget the fact that we can cook eggs on the sidewalks. It gets that hot sometimes. Sometimes it raises your core body heat temp so high it feels like your breathing hot sand. Yeah, water works great on the intercooler.


----------



## bahearn (Jul 15, 2002)

"It's not the heat, it's the humidity."

If air is saturated, regardless of temperature, it won't absorb more and that water will sit as big hot droplets on the IC. That aside, as you increase air temperature, relative humidity falls, that is, warmer air can hold more dissolved water than cooler air. Heat the air, it can hold more water. So, even at 100% relative humidity, when you boost and increase the IC temperature, the surrounding air heats up from conduction and radiation, and its relative humidity falls below 100%, allowing SOME water to evaporate.

Isopropanol does have the advantage that normally the relative "humidity" is zero.


----------



## OPIUM (Aug 18, 2002)

"Alcohol... The cause of, and the solution to, all of lifes problems."

~~ Homer _Jay_ Simpson ~~


----------

