Automotive Decarbonizing an Engine with Water: Myth or Fact?

  • Thread starter Thread starter zoobyshoe
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Engine Water
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the controversial method of using water to decarbonize car engines by introducing it into the intake while the engine is running. Proponents claim that water turns to steam upon contact with hot engine components, helping to dislodge carbon deposits, a theory supported by observations of clean pistons in engines with failed head gaskets. However, skepticism exists regarding the effectiveness of this method, as it primarily addresses carbon buildup in the combustion chamber rather than in the intake system where most deposits accumulate. Historical practices, such as steam injection in the 1970s, are mentioned, but concerns about practicality and potential risks, like hydrolocking, are also raised. Overall, while water may assist in cleaning some engine parts, it is not a comprehensive solution for carbon buildup.
  • #31
Combustion of a gal of gasoline produces 1.5 gal of water as hot, high pressure steam. E85 gasoline yields almost 3 gal of water. Implication is that there's plenty of water present in normal IC engine operation to steam clean combustion chambers, (assuming steam is an effective carbon decontaminant). Strangely, no one takes this abundant source of water into account. Instead, they theorize how squirting a few ounces through the intake system must surely blast carbon deposits away or promote beneficial chemical reactions. They then reveal their confirmation bias by proclaiming in a satisfied manner that the engine sounds better or feels smoother as they rev it aggressively. In the end, all they've shown is how easily wishful thinking fools the mind.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #32
Another use. To clean the oven in your kitchen stove, heat it up to several hundred degrees, then use a a squirt bottle to squirt water on the deposits. (Earned major points when I showed my wife that trick!)
 
  • Like
Likes Derek
  • #33
one more reason this forum is so valuable!
 
  • #34
I have a friend who left Russia in 1980. He told me that it was common practice there to drill a small hole in the side of the carburetor and insert the nozzle from an aerosol can in it and connect it with a tube to a canister of water. The vacuum would suck in the water which mixes with the gas. The purpose was to raise the octane of the gasoline and also to increase gas mileage although the latter claim I'm not so sure of. In winter they would add alcohol or acetone to the water. He said nothing about preventing carbon deposits.
 
  • #35
Tom.G said:
Another use. To clean the oven in your kitchen stove, heat it up to several hundred degrees, then use a a squirt bottle to squirt water on the deposits. (Earned major points when I showed my wife that trick!)

Thanks Tom' I don't know about engines; but, I tried the oven cleaning trick and it definitely works. Quick, odorless and definitely environmentally friendly.
 
  • #36
The cleaning is the result of the mechanical action resulting from water expanding when it becomes steam. The octane increase is the result of water molecules dispursing in the fuel air mixture. The fuel and air have to go around the water molecules and that slows the burn time reducing peak burn temperature.
 
  • #37
Water will clean a piston and combustion chamber quite well. It steam cleans it.
I work in an internal combustion engine research and development lab.
 
  • #38
Some people even used ATF instead of water. This produced clouds of smoke but supposedly worked, I think of the two I would prefer water. There is a product called Sea Foam in the US which I believe is used to clean the interior of engines.
 
  • #39
I was thinking of buying a carbon cleaning machine ? but then saw a chap squirting water from a hand sprayer in the air inlet. He removed the air filter and started squirting water with the engine running, he did say make sure your engine in up to temp first and to use distilled water only. I do wonder in a hand held steamer would have a better effect as it would be finer water partials. I got a Zafira 08 petrol with 170.000 on the clock and wanted to change the engine as its not as good as it should be even after a full service ! I might give this a go over the weekend and keep you posted on my findings i.e if the car runs better or not
 
  • #40
The caveat is you have to actually know how to do it such that you don't ruin your car or get zero carbon removed.

47833081-best-injector-cleaner-gm_cleaner.jpg
 
  • #41
Ad someone pointed out on pg 1, steam does a great job of cleaning as evidenced by a bad head gasket leak.. No, it won't do a whole lot on the backside of the intake valve which is too cold and not under any significant pressure changes to have anything happen.
I think one of the main reasons water/steam cleans the combustion chamber so well is that if the carbon is wetted with liquid water on the compression stroke, the increase in pressure will drive the water into any porous parts of it, as ignition happens, even more so, then it gets really hot and the pressure decreases, so that water turns to steam, since this happens very rapidly and the pores are small, it breaks the carbon apart.. These conditions are not present on the backsides of the valves though.

How much water is too much? Well.. I'll take a Cummins 5.9L diesel since I know the exact dimensions.. and because every cylinder has pretty much a 1L swept volume.. I know from when I built my engine that the piston dish is 45cc, and there's about another 10cc of volume between the piston and head.. so 55cc of total minimum volume. Any introduction of liquid water will evidently increase the compression ratio, however, true hydrolock will only happen at about 54.9cc. That doesn't mean that you don't get excessively high pressures before then.
Knowing that this engine can handle boost pressures of 45psi (4x atmospheric), I think I'd be safe to say I could reduce volume at TDC by 50% assuming it's NOT at boost and have a decent safety margin yet (I'd have to do the adiabatic compression math to find the exact amount). Anyhow, I would say that an engine can actually ingest a considerable amount of water when it's running before you get excessive pressure.. However, POURING it in is far too unmetered.. a little bump of your elbow would make for a bad day, however, using a nozzle and needle valve would give you a steady, metered flow that you could hear how the engine responds and modify the delivery accordingly..
So at 2000 RPM, that's 1000 intakes strokes and if I allow 50% of minimum volume to be water, that's 1000x ~25cc = 2.5 liters per minute.

Here's a another company that does water/alcohol injection, and they have a calculator on their website to choose the right nozzle sizes.. I've been very tempted but haven't bought it yet
http://www.alcohol-injection.com/en/
 
  • #42
Water might work to some extent, but as howlermonkey pointed out there are formulations that are much more effective,
 
  • Like
Likes jerromyjon
  • #43
I don't put much faith in fuel additives.. not because I don't think it's not possible for them to work, but rather it's too easy to sell snake oil (maybe that would work!) for a nice profit.. Seriously, look at the "additives" section of the local auto parts store.. from the same supplier, there's a decarbonizing formula, an injector cleaner, a carburator cleaner, an emissions system cleaner, an injector lubricant... Do you really think they're all (significantly) different formulations?
 
  • Like
Likes HRubss and jerromyjon
  • #44
It's not an additive that I showed above.

It's a very specific process we use at lexus on direct injected cars.
 
  • Like
Likes jerromyjon
  • #45
I thought that excess carbon in an engine was a thing of the past, now that we use unleaded gas/petrol and synthetic oil. In any case, there's a lot less carbon build-up in today's engines. Plugs are significantly cleaner and last much longer. I don't think that there's enough carbon accumulation to cause any problems, even in higher mileage engines.

Water injection was also touted to improve fuel economy. I added a simple suction system to an old Volvo (Bosch CI fuel injection) and saw no difference in mileage and could feel no difference in performance.

It sounds like yesterday's solution for yesterday's problem.
 
  • Like
Likes jerromyjon
  • #46
  • #47
Spinnor said:
"Water injection was used historically to increase the power output of military aviation engines for short durations,

Jets too. early Boeing 707's were so equipped.
 
  • Like
Likes jerromyjon
  • #48
jim hardy said:
Jets too. early Boeing 707's were so equipped.

When you want to cool something down, water. Heat of vaporization of water 40.65 kJ/mol
 
  • Like
Likes jerromyjon
  • #49
Rx7man said:
Do you really think they're all (significantly) different formulations?
Regardless, they are all profitable and logical treatments for problems when they occur. Carbon build up is bad in ports, I'm on the fence about combustion chamber carbon, though. Is the compression increase worth the flow loss? I doubt it.
 
  • #50
Spinnor said:
When you want to cool something down, water. Heat of vaporization of water 40.65 kJ/mol
Is there additional thrust from the change in volume hence velocity past the turbine blades and out the exhaust ? Asking not asserting.
 
  • #51
jim hardy said:
Asking not asserting.

The coffee has not kicked and Google has a lot to tell me.

https://www.google.com/search?q=why...ome..69i57.18951j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_injection_(engine)

The coffee is still trying to kick in. I think I get the effect with a piston engine, the water (actually a water alcohol mixture) cools the fuel air mixture when it enters the cylinder and thus allows a more dense charge of fuel and air into the cylinder, therefore more power. With a jet engine the water reduces peak temperatures which allows more fuel to be used helping to increase thrust. Apparently the water can be injected at various places in the jet engine.

I must be missing something.
 
  • #52
I had a 1964 Turbocharged Corvair. I wrote to GM and received a technical document explaining their research and final design. A lot had to do with the rate of burn of the mixture. Small charge burned slow. Hence Vacuum advance. Big charge burned faster thus the mechanical pressure timing retard in the distributor. They tossed around water injection or a reduction in compression. The compression reduction won as they thought most people would not fill the tank and engine damage could result. Also interesting was no waste gate but a specific amount of restriction by the muffler. Downside was a hole in the muffler could achieve a run away situation and a blown engine. Connection rods were double the strength, crank was forged, exhaust valves were sodium filled.

Here is why I am looking at cleaning carbon out of the combustion area. Ford 5.4 liter 3 valve motor has a extended nose on its spark plugs that resides in a very tight clearance hole. The nose is to reach the hemispherical combustion chamber. Carbon builds up around this nose and it breaks off when you try and replace the plugs. The truck I just bought for work has 102,000 miles on it. Recommended spark plug change interval is 100,000 miles. Videos of all the snake oil etc being poured into the gas tank and down the intake are very disappointing. I will try the water and let you know.

George Wroclawski
 
  • #54
Have a diesel generator twin turbo with 700 hours on it and 25 years old. Normally it has not been run under a load with the exception of annual load test. Problem is the thing was ran weekly for 30 minutes and is so carboned up that I'm sure the rings are no longer seated. We will blow by 2.5 gallons of oil in a 2 hour load test at 80% load, at 100 % you can't be in the area it blow so much smoke out of crank case. Any ideas short of a $15k overhaul to fix this problem?
 
  • #55
Vern Baker said:
Have a diesel generator twin turbo with 700 hours on it and 25 years old. Normally it has not been run under a load with the exception of annual load test. Problem is the thing was ran weekly for 30 minutes and is so carboned up that I'm sure the rings are no longer seated. We will blow by 2.5 gallons of oil in a 2 hour load test at 80% load, at 100 % you can't be in the area it blow so much smoke out of crank case. Any ideas short of a $15k overhaul to fix this problem?

DieselTalk
DieselEngineTrader's FREE Diesel Engine Forums • 22439 registered forum users

https://www.dieselenginetrader.com/diesel_talk/

From, https://www.google.com/search?q=die.....69i57j0l4.5962j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

If the experts here can't help you out.

Just a thought, oil is cheap.
 
  • #56
Spinnor said:
...

Just a thought, oil is cheap.

Maybe a vent fan for the crankcase smoke?
 
  • #57
I learned this from my grandfather. He would always use an empty spray bottle, like an old Windex bottle, to prevent getting too much water in the cylinders and breaking stuff. He and my dad would clean engines using this method before disassembling them to work on them. I've done the same. On two occasions I used the method to stop knocking in older carbureted engines.
 
  • #58
Isnt there a risk bits of carbon coukd break off and scoring the bore? I lost a strimmer engine recently because of this. Wasn't much carbon in it that I could see.
 
  • #59
Carbon deposits in engines are not hard carbon stuff like diamonds.
Just sooty oily half baked hydrocarbon gunge/
 
  • #60
ryanza said:
Here is a very mildly educated guess at what might happen re water cleaning carbon in an engine.

Steam reacts with carbon to form synthesis gas, this is part of the process to produce feedstock for a Fischer–Tropsch plant. It might be that the fine mist of water turns to steam on contact with the hot internal parts of the engine and that steam then reacts with the available carbon.

Pouring water, out of a cup, jug or hose into an engine is probably not the best way to try test this process.
Here's the simple analysis,compare expansion coefficient of carbon to the metal whether it's aluminum or carbon alloy. Carbon doesn't have an expansion factor relative to metals. Where the smallest amount of contraction can cause the carbon to simply break loose. This has been used in other processes.

There might be other dynamics as well, but induce a sudden temperature drop is very powerful. Then there's probably the expansion factor that might be induced by cold water turning to steam and under compression has an effect. What I do knows is, I sunk an Oldsmobile 455 and after removing water from crankcase and cylinders and putting new oil in, etc., the engine purred like a kitten. Inducing a thermal shock is so obvious.

An engine is regulated to run around 200 degrees in general. Some will block off coolant flow, then pour cold water in the intake. Which it can also cause cast iron to say "break". Cylinder gaskets, valves have to be considered too.

Just like dropping the exhaust pipe from the manifold removed so much back pressure that the Old 98, 73 model laid two rubber streaks about 10'ling, then a single streak much longer. Which without the pipe, letting off the gas can allow atmospheric temperature back up into the ports and warp valves, though it didn't happen. There's always what can happen.

Again one has to compare what's relative. If cylinder temperatures drop suddenly, the metal can contract where carbon doesn't . Say like aluminum, with a 200 degree change in temperature, shrinkage or expansion can be 2 or three thousandths. Again there's the skin or surface temperature that suddenly changed that doesn't translate into complete temperature affect of an entire body.

Lol, it's just like if you want to test and see if you have any spirits around you, yo, never mind, I won't tell you this. Someone might try then get concerned.
 
Last edited by a moderator: