[Overboost]

Originally Posted by kjrulz

Stoichiometric AFR on gasoline is ~14.6, on methanol it is ~6.5.

Thanks I couldn't remember off the top of my head.

[chili36]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Not really. I've made no assumptions. My statements/opinions are based upon data that I've collected. Novel concept eh? Just because I haven't compiled them and presented it in a format that you can understand doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Because I know that isn't going to happen. Given your history, you will never admit to being wrong. Best thing I can do know is get these kits out and let others who have tried both kits do the talking for me. Or better yet, just drive a car with PWM meth control and then make your conclusions.

Yes really. Until you post data that you "have collected" assumptions and claims they will continue to be.
Format that I can understand? LOL! Post a log I think I'm more than capable of figuring it out. No need to format anything. My history? Unlike you I have no problem admitting I'm wrong. Stop beating around the bush show us some LOGS!

[Jake@MOTIV]

Lol - see thats the problem with this forum - I have zero problem admitting when I am wrong. It is often fun to be wrong because it means I will have learned something new. Unfortunately - here you are presenting your "data" as fact when all we are seeing is Shiv giving his opinion. Now thats good and all but really - many people on here unfortunately take your opinion as fact and turn around and spit it out as if they learned something.

I have not used PWM meth kits on an n54 nor do I intend to. My dual nozzle with one very small nozzle for light throttle does plenty good for my purposes. As I mentioned earlier if I was going around a track at high rpm and light throttle / low boost amounts the PWM kit would have slight advantages on it. Like I said earlier (as well) I hope you sell these - it cracks me up that people buy shit blindly.

I am not loyal to anyone company or person. I like to buy what works well for my car and works as I would want it to. In the world of the piggybacks your tuning solution is pretty good. At a point all the addons and gimmicky things become a hinderance from the primary goal of properly tuning the car but none the less it helps sell product. Anyways I am done with this thread - you will never not show your salesman side because thats how business works which is fine. Your products still top this market for piggybacks and you have a following that will always fight for you irregardless of how little they actually understand / know. It is unfortunate though because in some of our convos on the phone it has been really enjoyable to shoot the shit on tech talk and actually get somewhere without the bs nonsense of the salesman hat being on.

Anyways enjoy the shit show. It'll never get anywhere because its the internet and typically facts get squashed and misinformation runs rampant.

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by themyst

Then why dont you simply recommend the aquamist hfs-6 and call it a day if the functionality of a pwm kit has changed your opinion? Being that it is controlled directly by the Procede and the fact it is a high margin product for you, it kills two birds with one stone, reduce churn and sell product.

Because there are advantages of integrating a meth control system with the tune instead of referencing it off of IDC/fuel pressure (which, btw, is still heaps better than the boost-only reference used in PPS systems). Now we can adjust meth DC% as a flow of intake temp, average knock, gear, disable it between shifts, disable/enable it through the dash, trim during traction control intervention, adjust DC to maintain a desired fuel trim under boost. Most already implemented, the rest soon to be.

Shiv

[Mike@N54Tuning.com]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Because there are advantages of integrating a meth control system with the tune instead of referencing it off of IDC/fuel pressure (which, btw, is still heaps better than the boost-only reference used in PPS systems). Now we can adjust meth DC% as a flow of intake temp, average knock, gear, disable it between shifts, disable/enable it through the dash, trim during traction control intervention, adjust DC to maintain a desired fuel trim under boost. Most already implemented, the rest soon to be.

Shiv

The piggyback can do the same thing with the Aquamist controller. It takes an input which you use to tell it how much to inject and an output to tell the piggyback meth flow. Then you could also dump that ridiculous bulky 5psi boost switch so people can use any charge pipe they want.

Also by using the Aquamist controller in addition to users having the option to run the kit without a PROcede (and getting more for the same money) they would also be able to keep their PROcede speed deliminter functional. Win/win/win.

Mike

[Clap135]

I like how the new logs are all over 8psi and show IAT increases during partial throttle. 30 degree drops were claimed....

[chili36]

Lol...maybe he has not compiled them and working on putting those in a format that we can understand.

[Joshboody]

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

The piggyback can do the same thing with the Aquamist controller. It takes an input which you use to tell it how much to inject and an output to tell the piggyback meth flow. Then you could also dump that ridiculous bulky 5psi boost switch so people can use any charge pipe they want.

have to +1 here

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

Also by using the Aquamist controller in addition to users having the option to run the kit without a PROcede (and getting more for the same money) they would also be able to keep their PROcede speed deliminter functional. Win/win/win.
Mike

I like the procede control... easier to customize and many more options. You could just wire in the aquamist controller if needed i'm sure.

[AltecBX]

Originally Posted by Overboost

LOL you both don't understand, The DME can trim air fuel ratios for PETROLEUM not METHANOL. I think the stoichiometric AFR for meth might be something like 9:1 but don't qoute me on that I can't remember but i'll check my chemistry books when i find time.

What is the stiochiometric air-fuel ratio?
Internal combustion engines burn fuel to create kinetic energy. The burning of fuel is basically the reaction of the fuel with the oxygen in the air. The amount of oxygen present in the cylinder is the limiting factor for the amount of fuel can be burnt. If there’s too much fuel present, not all fuel will be burnt and un-burnt fuel will be pushed out through the exhaust valve.

When building an engine, it’s very important to know the air-fuel ratio at which exactly all the available oxygen is used to burn the fuel and all the fuel is burnt completely. This ratio is called the stoichiometric air-fuel ratio.

Calculation
As already stated, the stoichiometric air-fuel ratio is the ratio at which all oxygen is used up and all fuel is completely burnt. This ratio is a basic property of a fuel and is the result of its chemical composition. Let’s for example look at natural gas (methane). When burning any carbon-based fuel, carbon dioxide and hydrogen are formed. Going back to the methane example, the following reaction equation describes the oxidation of the fuel:

CH4 + 2O2 -> CO2 + 2H20

Following from the equation, we need 2 molecules of oxygen for every octane molecule.

If we look up the atomic weights of the atoms that make up octane and oxygen, we get the following numbers:

Carbon (C): 12,01

Oxygen (O): 16

Hydrogen (H): 1,008

So 1 molecule of methane has a molecular weight of: 1 * 12,01 + 4 * 1,008 = 16,042
One oxygen molecule weighs: 2 * 16 = 32.
The oxygen-fuel mass ratio is then: 2 * 32 / 1 * 16,042 = 64 / 16,042 = .
So we need 3,99 kg of oxygen for every 1 kg of fuel.
Since 23,2 mass-percent of air is actually oxygen, we need : 3,99 * 100/23,2 = 17,2 kg air for every 1 kg of methane.
So the stoichiometric air-fuel ratio of methane is 17.2.

Common fuels
When the composition of a fuel is known, this method can be used to derive the stoichiometric air-fuel ratio. For the most common fuels, this, however, is not necessary because the ratios are known:

Gasoline: 14.7

Natural gas: 17.2

Propane: 15.5

Ethanol: 9

Methanol: 6.4

Hydrogen: 34

Diesel: 14,6

You may find it interesting that methanol and ethanol both have a very low air-fuel ratio, while the carbon chain length is comparable to methane and ethane. The reason for that is alcohols like methanol and ethanol already carry oxygen themselves, which reduces the need for oxygen from the air.

Conclusion
In order to be able to judge if an air-fuel mixture has the correct ratio of air to fuel, the stoichiometric air fuel ratio has to be known. If the composition of a fuel is known, this ratio can be calculated rather easily.

[biz77]

Originally Posted by AltecBX

What is the stiochiometric air-fuel ratio?
Internal combustion engines burn fuel to create kinetic energy. The burning of fuel is basically the reaction of the fuel with the oxygen in the air. The amount of oxygen present in the cylinder is the limiting factor for the amount of fuel can be burnt. If there’s too much fuel present, not all fuel will be burnt and un-burnt fuel will be pushed out through the exhaust valve.

When building an engine, it’s very important to know the air-fuel ratio at which exactly all the available oxygen is used to burn the fuel and all the fuel is burnt completely. This ratio is called the stoichiometric air-fuel ratio.

Calculation
As already stated, the stoichiometric air-fuel ratio is the ratio at which all oxygen is used up and all fuel is completely burnt. This ratio is a basic property of a fuel and is the result of its chemical composition. Let’s for example look at natural gas (methane). When burning any carbon-based fuel, carbon dioxide and hydrogen are formed. Going back to the methane example, the following reaction equation describes the oxidation of the fuel:

CH4 + 2O2 -> CO2 + 2H20

Following from the equation, we need 2 molecules of oxygen for every octane molecule.

If we look up the atomic weights of the atoms that make up octane and oxygen, we get the following numbers:

Carbon (C): 12,01

Oxygen (O): 16

Hydrogen (H): 1,008

So 1 molecule of methane has a molecular weight of: 1 * 12,01 + 4 * 1,008 = 16,042
One oxygen molecule weighs: 2 * 16 = 32.
The oxygen-fuel mass ratio is then: 2 * 32 / 1 * 16,042 = 64 / 16,042 = .
So we need 3,99 kg of oxygen for every 1 kg of fuel.
Since 23,2 mass-percent of air is actually oxygen, we need : 3,99 * 100/23,2 = 17,2 kg air for every 1 kg of methane.
So the stoichiometric air-fuel ratio of methane is 17.2.

Common fuels
When the composition of a fuel is known, this method can be used to derive the stoichiometric air-fuel ratio. For the most common fuels, this, however, is not necessary because the ratios are known:

Gasoline: 14.7

Natural gas: 17.2

Propane: 15.5

Ethanol: 9

Methanol: 6.4

Hydrogen: 34

Diesel: 14,6

You may find it interesting that methanol and ethanol both have a very low air-fuel ratio, while the carbon chain length is comparable to methane and ethane. The reason for that is alcohols like methanol and ethanol already carry oxygen themselves, which reduces the need for oxygen from the air.

Conclusion
In order to be able to judge if an air-fuel mixture has the correct ratio of air to fuel, the stoichiometric air fuel ratio has to be known. If the composition of a fuel is known, this ratio can be calculated rather easily.

Don't get too hung up on it. The only thing the o2 sensor cares about is the amount of oxygen left over after combustion. Doesn't matter if you are burning gasoline, methanol or ethanol. The car obviously only has control over the primary injection system and thus deals with overall fueling by trimming that. In this scenario, since the methanol is being used for supplemental injection to aid in cooling and adding octane and not as the primary fuel, it is really moot to worry about the stoich AFR of it.

[Overboost]

Originally Posted by biz77

Don't get too hung up on it. The only thing the o2 sensor cares about is the amount of oxygen left over after combustion. Doesn't matter if you are burning gasoline, methanol or ethanol. The car obviously only has control over the primary injection system and thus deals with overall fueling by trimming that. In this scenario, since the methanol is being used for supplemental injection to aid in cooling and adding octane and not as the primary fuel, it is really moot to worry about the stoich AFR of it.

Maybe i'm mis reading this but are you stating that adding octane is somewhat independent of adding fuel? If what you were saying was true then if we had an openloop fueling system then adding meth would have no adverse affect on it. But that is not the case. Meth is fuel regardless of if you refer to it as primary or secondary. I know why you chose to say its not primary but in this case it is the first fuel being added to the charged air coming into the combustion chamber so I would say its stoichiometric AFR is quite important.

About your comment on O2 sensors. I'm not sure exactly how they work but If they only read the content of oxygen that was left over meaning pure O2 then at any values at 14.6 or richer the O2 sensor would not read anything because at these values all the pure oxygen is used up.

[Overboost]

Biz77 in your case we would have to create an environment where only gasoline reacts with oxygen during the combustion process and the methanol becomes somewhat of transport molecule for all the heat generated in the process and nothing more. This by the way is impossible to do as methanol does react with oxygen and probably at a faster rate since it requires less oxygen molecules for the reaction to occur with methanol than petroleum.

[kjrulz]

not that anyone cares, but I'm still 50/50 on this whole mess - hopefully the facts will get ironed out soon.

[biz77]

No, I'm saying on this car it is simply seen as extra fuel and the DME deals with the additional fueling by trimming the primary fuel source, which is the gasoline being directly injected into each cylinder. This car, being continuously closed-loop, will do whatever it can to hit the predetermined AFR targets based on load, RPM, etc.

[Forcefed3]

Originally Posted by Overboost

Maybe i'm mis reading this but are you stating that adding octane is somewhat independent of adding fuel? If what you were saying was true then if we had an openloop fueling system then adding meth would have no adverse affect on it. But that is not the case. Meth is fuel regardless of if you refer to it as primary or secondary. I know why you chose to say its not primary but in this case it is the first fuel being added to the charged air coming into the combustion chamber so I would say its stoichiometric AFR is quite important.

About your comment on O2 sensors. I'm not sure exactly how they work but If they only read the content of oxygen that was left over meaning pure O2 then at any values at 14.6 or richer the O2 sensor would not read anything because at these values all the pure oxygen is used up.

Wide band O2 senors, which we have, can read AFR's from 7:1 all the way to 20:1.

[Overboost]

Originally Posted by biz77

No, I'm saying on this car it is simply seen as extra fuel and the DME deals with the additional fueling by trimming the primary fuel source, which is the gasoline being directly injected into each cylinder. This car, being continuously closed-loop, will do whatever it can to hit the predetermined AFR targets based on load, RPM, etc.

Ok. But what i explained before was that since both fuels are in the combustion process having lets say 12:1 AFR overall doesn't tell us anything about what the independent AFR of petroleum and methanol are. It just tells us the combined AFR. The AFR of either fuel independently could be way off optimum.

[Overboost]

Originally Posted by gbreeE90

Wide band O2 senors, which we have, can read AFR's from 7:1 all the way to 20:1.

I know that, I was just saying if they worked only by reading oxygen that didnt take part in the combustion reaction then we could not have value 14.6 or lower.

[Mike@N54Tuning.com]

Originally Posted by Joshboody

have to +1 here


I like the procede control... easier to customize and many more options. You could just wire in the aquamist controller if needed i'm sure.

The way the JB4 controls the Aquamist controller is using a 5v input and a 5v output. The PROcede has these same channels open from the old o2 simulator everyone removed. The JB4 sends a 0-5v signal representing how much meth to inject, and receives a 0-5v signal representing how much meth is actually flowing through the flow sensor. This same setup has been used with CM controllers for some time. Although BMS doesn't promote it, because the basic 8/12 progressive strategy has proven just as effective.

Mike