 |
924Board.org Discussion Forum of 924.org
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Martijnus

Joined: 29 Dec 2006 Posts: 2019 Location: Netherlands
|
Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 12:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with daniel... the only way you can control a mechanical fan is the way BMW does it...with some sort of 'visco' fan. But since a waterpump has to be driven all the time (not really true..). I can also imagine that an electric waterpump does indeed take more hp. On the other hand...have you ever felt how much power it takes to spin the stock pump by hand? Imagine that with 6000 rpm. That's a lot of power imho! (but the mentioned 5hp is also quite a lot... )
I'm converting to an electric waterpump too... that's why this thread got my interest. The reason I'm doing it (for street/daily use!!) is to reverse flow. It just can't be done with the stock pump... _________________ "Rule: Turbo's make torque, and torque makes fun." (C. Bell)
924 "50-jahre", 1981.
MSII/extra, LPG, ITB's, 5lug.
To be turbo'ed in a while.
Killed her at the Nurburgring, Porscheless at the moment |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
!tom

Joined: 28 Aug 2006 Posts: 1941 Location: Victoria, BC Canada
|
Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 2:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ideola wrote: | | If you have a modern alt cranking out 160A, whether the draw on it is 25A or 120A, it still takes the same amount of parasitic crank loss to turn that alt, and presumably doesn't take any more to turn a 75A alt than it does a 160A alt. Or am I wrong about that? |
Yes, you're wrong about that.
If you have no electrical load on the alternator, the only mechanical load it provides when you spin the armature is due to bearing loss and air friction.
Let's say your alternator is 75% efficient. Let's assume you have a 160A alternator, putting out 13.8 volts. What this means is your alternator is providing an electrical potential difference of 13.8 volts up and until you exceed 160A of current draw. If you are drawing 15A, you're drawing 15A * 13.8V = 207 watts of power out of the alternator. Negating belt losses, bearing losses, etc (as they are insignificant for this exercise), it takes 207 * 1/0.75 = 276 watts of power to generate this 207 watts. That's close to 1/2 hp.
Add in extra electrical stuff and get your electrical load up to 50A. 50A * 13.8V = 690W * 1/0.75 = 920W of input power, or 1 1/4 hp.
The efficiency of an alternator is roughly constant with load. You don't have a constant 4 hp load on the crank driving a 160A alternator regardless of electrical load.
| daniel wrote: | Consider this, if your mech water pump uses 5hp at 6000rpm and you disable it in favour of an electric unit, heres what should happen:
We need 5hp to push the water around the engine, so with a 50% efficient electric water pump we really need 10hp, + another 30% for the alternator say 13hp. So in reality you have droped 8hp! |
I don't believe this is a fair assessment.
It may indeed take 5 hp to spin the pump at 6000rpm. However, this doesn't mean that you would size an electric pump to pump the same volume as the mechanical unit does at 6000rpm. The mechanical pump must be designed so that it pumps sufficient volume at idle speed, as well as perform at an order of magnitude greater shaft speed without cavitation. As an electric pump can be built that does not have to tolerate these wide operating conditions, it may very well take less power than 5 hp (that's 3.7kW, assuming 50% effiency 7.5kW, or 500A @ 13.8V).
An advantage of electric, as stated above, is that the design can likely be made more efficient for the application than mechanical, as the operating speed can be more restrained. This applies to radiator fans as well as coolant pumps. Electric radiator fans typically run at one or two speeds (other than off), and not through the order of magnitude range that the mechanical drive fans must operate at, which must provide adequate flow at idle.
There are two over-riding reasons why radiator fans are electric rather than mechanical.
- Duty cycle. The electric fans only consume power when the coolant in the radiator needs cooling. This means when the car is moving, most of the time there is no power used by the fans. Indeed power is lost by converting from mechanical energy to electrical and back to mechanical, but this arrangement is worthwhile when the duty cycle is correspondingly decreased.
- Efficiency. The fans can be designed to provide sufficient airflow at a single motor speed. Mechanical fans must provide sufficient airflow at engine idle, which typically means much more air flow is provided than necessary (consuming correspondingly more power) at an order of magnitude greater fan speed. It is possible to create mechanical fan designs that do this more efficently than your typical automotive radiator fan (typically flexible blades and viscous drives), but these more sophisticated mechanisms (such as feathering fans similar to constant-speed propellers in aircraft) will still consume some power, and cost substantially more than the designs seen in typical cars.
As I stated previously, I'd expect a major motivation for going to an electric water pump is that the power used is constant throughout the operating range of the engine, rather than excessive at high RPM's with the mechanical counterpart. But, this is just a guess on my part. _________________ 78 924 NA
5-lug |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ideola

Joined: 01 Oct 2004 Posts: 15550 Location: Spring Lake MI
|
Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 3:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Tom, that's an excellent crash course, thanks for helping me get my head around this.
But as you noted, the motivation (for me) is primarily to precisely control the pump using the ECU, and more importantly, to provide reverse flow through the head for improved cooling.
As for the HP gains, I suspect where I got off the rails on this was looking at the typical drag racing applications, the idea being, you operate the pump while at idle, but turn it off while doing your quarter mile run to avoid the parasitic loss that would otherwise occur if you had a belt driven pump. So the HP gain (or rather, avoidance of parasitic HP loss) is only during very specific circumstances, not 100% of the time. _________________ erstwhile owner of just about every 924 variant ever made |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
daniel
Joined: 18 Jun 2009 Posts: 686 Location: Sydney, Australia
|
Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 7:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi All
The examples I used are purley arbitrary, for specifics do you own research ect. Also I do not wish to discourage electric water pump use, if you read my thread I have used one myself! Only saying that you wont see HP gains with one installed in a car that relies on an alternator for replenishing of charge.
It all comes down to energy can not be created or destroyed, only converted from one form to the other. But as we all know, if you convert energy from one form to the other (eg mechanical to electric and back again) you incur losses as no machine is 100% efficent. _________________ Over the top of skyline, total brake failure.... hit the wall at over 200 kp/h at the dipper, so anyone who has to brake for the esses is a pussy.
1977.5 Race Car, CAMS Group S Spec
1989 944 Cabriolet |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rocco R16V

Joined: 03 May 2009 Posts: 497 Location: PNW
|
Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 11:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Another benefit of the electric water pump is the motor can change revs quicker. The mechanical water pump has to speed up/slow down the water with every rev change. This additional resistance is eliminated with the electric pump. The alt was there before, the battery smoothes the current load, and the electric’s pump speed can be dictated by heat rejection needs, not rpm. _________________ "Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves. "
Ronald Reagan |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
924OZY
Joined: 24 Jan 2010 Posts: 71 Location: Gold Coast Australia
|
Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 3:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think its pretty clear that the electric motors used to power these pumps are not big enough to be 5hp, or anywhere near that.
I'm sure if someone has a look,
they will be able to say exactly how many hp it is even capable of draining.
Could also be worked out by the amps and volts required/ or used. _________________ 924 N/A snailshell, superpro linkage bushes, 2.5"exhaust
4.0L ef Fairmont, 3000rpm stall, shift-kit, J3 chip, 3" exhaust, self tuned using tunerpro, soon to be boosted,
expecting 350Kw at wheels at 10psi. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Martijnus

Joined: 29 Dec 2006 Posts: 2019 Location: Netherlands
|
Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 5:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Rocco R16V wrote: | | Another benefit of the electric water pump is the motor can change revs quicker. The mechanical water pump has to speed up/slow down the water with every rev change. This additional resistance is eliminated with the electric pump. The alt was there before, the battery smoothes the current load, and the electric’s pump speed can be dictated by heat rejection needs, not rpm. |
yes, but the alternator has more load because it has to power the pump. That means that under the exact same conditions, the alternator will run with more drag... and that uses the energy you think makes your engine rev quicker
I do agree a bit though... but I don't think you'll notice it irl.
Tom, I love your calculations in your reply I've been thinking about watts a lot lately because I realized how inefficient a generator is (petrol to electric) and people told me Watts from a petrol engine aren't the same as electrical Watts So that's why I like your calculated power drain in your reply. If you think about it... every Watt from a bulb has to be generated at some point by the alternator, so it takes more than that from your crank.
Again...i'm not doing it for real efficiency, just like Dan I want to reverse flow. I'll be starting a thread about it soon. _________________ "Rule: Turbo's make torque, and torque makes fun." (C. Bell)
924 "50-jahre", 1981.
MSII/extra, LPG, ITB's, 5lug.
To be turbo'ed in a while.
Killed her at the Nurburgring, Porscheless at the moment |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rocco R16V

Joined: 03 May 2009 Posts: 497 Location: PNW
|
Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 8:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Martijnus wrote: | | Rocco R16V wrote: | | Another benefit of the electric water pump is the motor can change revs quicker. The mechanical water pump has to speed up/slow down the water with every rev change. This additional resistance is eliminated with the electric pump. The alt was there before, the battery smoothes the current load, and the electric’s pump speed can be dictated by heat rejection needs, not rpm. |
yes, but the alternator has more load because it has to power the pump. That means that under the exact same conditions, the alternator will run with more drag... and that uses the energy you think makes your engine rev quicker
I do agree a bit though... but I don't think you'll notice it irl.
|
yes the alt will have some additional drag to power the pump.
the pump running a constant flow doesnt have the additional drag of having to change the speed of flow.
Think of how much gas it takes to go from 5 to 50 mph over and over again vs just cruising at 40 mph. _________________ "Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves. "
Ronald Reagan |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|