Author Topic: Misting vs. Icing Radiator  (Read 19987 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Interested Observer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 433
Re: Misting vs. Icing Radiator
« Reply #15 on: June 26, 2015, 07:12:10 PM »
bd:
Problems with dry ice:
1) Obtaining, maintaining, handling in a probable 100F environment (Speedweek).
2) “putting the heat exchanger in dry ice” would result in a gaseous boundary around the exchanger which has very poor heat conductivity--nil heat transfer into the gas.  And the gas has only 1/5 the specific heat capacity of water.     Advisable to further analyze and/or test this in the lab before committing to it.
3)  Possible condensation issues inside the (electrical equipment-dense) vehicle.

Questions:
If the motors are happy at 65C/149F, where does the “320F” temperature cited come from?
Traction control for the “instant torque” motors?

Suggestion:
Do an evaluation of the energy expended (heat generated) for a realistic run down the course.  Full power likely cannot be utilized in the initial stages of acceleration, and heavy power consumption only in the last.  Less time to generate heat.

Comment - I would question the 28 gallons.  I know of 1100 hp full bodied cars running with less than that amount, starting at ambient temperatures--not iced, as you would be able to do (although that might raise the condensation problem unless insulated).

Offline bdwilson24

  • New folks
  • Posts: 13
    • Eagle Works Advanced Vehicle Lab
Re: Misting vs. Icing Radiator
« Reply #16 on: June 26, 2015, 08:56:07 PM »
bd:
Problems with dry ice:
1) Obtaining, maintaining, handling in a probable 100F environment (Speedweek).
2) “putting the heat exchanger in dry ice” would result in a gaseous boundary around the exchanger which has very poor heat conductivity--nil heat transfer into the gas.  And the gas has only 1/5 the specific heat capacity of water.     Advisable to further analyze and/or test this in the lab before committing to it.
3)  Possible condensation issues inside the (electrical equipment-dense) vehicle.

Questions:
If the motors are happy at 65C/149F, where does the “320F” temperature cited come from?
Traction control for the “instant torque” motors?

Suggestion:
Do an evaluation of the energy expended (heat generated) for a realistic run down the course.  Full power likely cannot be utilized in the initial stages of acceleration, and heavy power consumption only in the last.  Less time to generate heat.

Comment - I would question the 28 gallons.  I know of 1100 hp full bodied cars running with less than that amount, starting at ambient temperatures--not iced, as you would be able to do (although that might raise the condensation problem unless insulated).


Those were the 3 main concerns I had with dry ice as well.

1) We have a local shipping company that provides both dry ice and liquid nitrogen, so obtaining it wouldn't be difficult. I've talked to people that use dry ice for camping and things that though, and they said they've kept dry ice wrapped in newspaper for 3-4 days at the bottom of a coleman ice chest, and since it is used a lot in shipping, I feel fairly comfortable with it maintaining for a few days for Speedweek.

2) For the sublimation/gas layer issue, I was considering placing the radiator/heat exchanger at the bottom of the box with the dry ice on top of it, so as it sublimates, it is basically gravity-fed onto the heat exchanger. There would obviously be some loss in contact area, but it will be minimized. I was thinking of boring holes through the dry ice to allow the gas to vent out the top.

3) The box would need to be sealed, except for a vent hose that would route to the tail of the car.

Just for reference, the heat exchanger/ radiator will be at the back of the car while the batteries will be in front of the driver's compartment. We have one pancake motor in the hub of each wheel.

Sorry, for being unclear; the INLET temperature of the dielectric oil is specified to be 65C. After the oil passes through all four motors, it has been heated to 160C.
The cooling system for the motor controllers and batteries will be a separate circuit since the controllers require antifreeze. The heat loads for that circuit are much less though.

When we were figuring out the power and torque needed, we had done some analysis to figure how far we will be to reach top speeds and everything, but by no means is it perfect, and we hadn't applied it to our cooling system. Do you have a general timeline or list of "events" at each mile marker you go by? I've attached some excerpts from my report that shows my calculations for the heat load, temperatures, ice water volume, and ice water weight. The 3.74 cu. ft. in my report is where the 28 gallons came from.

If anybody would like more details of my application and how I've come to certain conclusions, I can email the initial report as a pdf, but the file is too large to upload to the forum.

Again, thanks to everyone for the feedback. It helps a lot to have to get other perspectives and to have to check over my own thoughts.

Offline manta22

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4146
  • What, me worry?
Re: Misting vs. Icing Radiator
« Reply #17 on: June 26, 2015, 09:03:15 PM »
BD;

Re #2- The thermal resistance will be horrible. Instead, use a slurry of dry ice and alcohol. The heat transfer will be orders of magnitude higher.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ

Offline bdwilson24

  • New folks
  • Posts: 13
    • Eagle Works Advanced Vehicle Lab
Re: Misting vs. Icing Radiator
« Reply #18 on: June 26, 2015, 09:17:24 PM »
manta22,

For the slurry, would that just be methanol?

Offline Peter Jack

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3776
Re: Misting vs. Icing Radiator
« Reply #19 on: June 26, 2015, 09:59:42 PM »
Check on your use of anti-freeze. It's use has been ruled illegal for internal combustion engines so there may be some issues with it's use. There have been some issues with flamability.

Pete

Offline bdwilson24

  • New folks
  • Posts: 13
    • Eagle Works Advanced Vehicle Lab
Re: Misting vs. Icing Radiator
« Reply #20 on: June 26, 2015, 10:00:36 PM »
Check on your use of anti-freeze. It's use has been ruled illegal for internal combustion engines so there may be some issues with it's use. There have been some issues with flamability.

Pete

Thanks. I will check into that.

Offline Peter Jack

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3776
Re: Misting vs. Icing Radiator
« Reply #21 on: June 26, 2015, 10:08:06 PM »
manta22,

For the slurry, would that just be methanol?

If you use methanol and your system uses aluminum components you'll have to flush the system on a regular basis. Methanol is corrosive with aluminum. We find that a problem that we solve with regular flushing in methanol fuel systems.

Pete

Offline manta22

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4146
  • What, me worry?
Re: Misting vs. Icing Radiator
« Reply #22 on: June 26, 2015, 10:09:28 PM »
manta22,

For the slurry, would that just be methanol?

BD;

Any alcohol that has a freezing point below dry ice. Yes, it will be flammable so it should be treated like a fuel tank.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ

Offline JimL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 802
Re: Misting vs. Icing Radiator
« Reply #23 on: June 26, 2015, 11:36:16 PM »
Bd...sent you a totally unrelated Personal Message.  Fun project and thanks for putting it on this forum!

Offline maj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 743
Re: Misting vs. Icing Radiator
« Reply #24 on: June 27, 2015, 03:25:09 AM »
The methanol problem is why you use silicone fluid, its used in computers for dry ice cooling and i am pretty sure you would not need extra heat exchangers , but would need pump and hoses rated for the extremely low temp

i went through the motions of looking at it as an option to my ice water slurry for intercooler ,found the suppliers for both products, and figured out the logistics of storing  but never had time to setup and tune for the new temp range , maybe another yr i will

Offline bdwilson24

  • New folks
  • Posts: 13
    • Eagle Works Advanced Vehicle Lab
Re: Misting vs. Icing Radiator
« Reply #25 on: June 27, 2015, 03:36:09 AM »
The methanol problem is why you use silicone fluid, its used in computers for dry ice cooling and i am pretty sure you would not need extra heat exchangers , but would need pump and hoses rated for the extremely low temp

i went through the motions of looking at it as an option to my ice water slurry for intercooler ,found the suppliers for both products, and figured out the logistics of storing  but never had time to setup and tune for the new temp range , maybe another yr i will

Ah, I didn't understand what you meant by your first post. The silicone oil is another idea I will look into. I probably wouldn't try to pump the slurry though; maybe use a finned-tube heat exchanger to pass the hot oil through the bath.

Thanks!

Offline dw230

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3168
Re: Misting vs. Icing Radiator
« Reply #26 on: June 27, 2015, 12:08:58 PM »
RE: record certification

I am the impound guy. My staff and I required that classes based on weight be certified by taking the vehicle to the Pilot truck stop in West Wendover following the record run. There the vehicle is weighed on the scale, weight cert paid for by the competitor(approx. $6.00). Only then are we assured that the vehicle is in the proper weight class.

DW
White Goose Bar - Where LSR is a lifestyle
Alcohol - because no good story starts with a salad.

Don't be Karen, be Beth

Offline JimL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 802
Re: Misting vs. Icing Radiator
« Reply #27 on: June 27, 2015, 01:42:43 PM »
Dan, thanks for adding that.  Do you happen to know if the scales have to do a "weight off load" method there?

I ran into that issue some years back on a different project, where the newer scales will not print a ticket below 1500 lbs.  We had to weigh the vehicle on a weighted trailer, then remove the vehicle and then they weighed the trailer (with its original added weight) to give us a differential weight for the under 1500 lb car.

After all that, it was still a hassle at the DMV!  They would not accept anything but printed weight tickets, and both tickets were obviously well over 1500 lbs.  It took a manager to agree that subtraction is an actual working mathematical method  (at the DMV they only know how to add, and add, and add.....) :roll:




Offline Interested Observer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 433
Re: Misting vs. Icing Radiator
« Reply #28 on: June 27, 2015, 02:44:01 PM »
BD,
Somewhat misled by your 1100 lb limit, I more or less assumed this was what we would think of as a “small-bore” streamliner.  However, given the 85kW/wheel power output mentioned in your calcs, this would be on the order of 450 hp.  With something like 5 sq ft frontal area and a Cd=0.15, you are talking about a 400 mph machine.  Is this in line with what you folks are thinking?  Leads me to wonder if you have a (SCTA?) rule book and are taking into account structural/safety/stability requirements for a vehicle of this class.  The 1100 lb limit begins to look hard to achieve.

Back to the Btu’s--
I only questioned your arrival at 28 gallons on the basis that you aren’t going to be able to expend the 85x4 = 340kW (456 hp) over the entire course of the run due to traction limitations.  Given real good salt and 0.6 friction coefficient, the available power likely wouldn’t be able to be fully used until about 260 mph.  Consequently, the heat generated would also be reduced.  Hence, the suggestion to produce a realistic acceleration/power consumption analysis.  Covering the last 3 miles at around/above 300 mph would only take about half a minute.  So again, less than 2 minutes, less heat problem.

Your calcs also mention two pumps, presumably one for the dielectric oil and one for the cooling fluid.  A question then arises as to how the oil flow from one pump is evenly divided to the four motors, two of which are considerably further than the others from the pump.  I would also wonder if it would not be better to up the circulation rate and bring down the oil temperature.  I’m not sure I would want to be in close quarters with 320F oil.  In line with Peter Jack’s caution about the antifreeze, there may be tech requirements concerning this oil.  In the IC world, all this hot stuff has isolation requirements.

And finally, while the alcohol slurry deal may help the conduction from the hot side, I fail to see that it would significantly improve the sublimation gas barrier around the dry ice.

Offline bdwilson24

  • New folks
  • Posts: 13
    • Eagle Works Advanced Vehicle Lab
Re: Misting vs. Icing Radiator
« Reply #29 on: June 27, 2015, 04:23:56 PM »
BD,
Somewhat misled by your 1100 lb limit, I more or less assumed this was what we would think of as a “small-bore” streamliner.  However, given the 85kW/wheel power output mentioned in your calcs, this would be on the order of 450 hp.  With something like 5 sq ft frontal area and a Cd=0.15, you are talking about a 400 mph machine.  Is this in line with what you folks are thinking?  Leads me to wonder if you have a (SCTA?) rule book and are taking into account structural/safety/stability requirements for a vehicle of this class.  The 1100 lb limit begins to look hard to achieve.

Back to the Btu’s--
I only questioned your arrival at 28 gallons on the basis that you aren’t going to be able to expend the 85x4 = 340kW (456 hp) over the entire course of the run due to traction limitations.  Given real good salt and 0.6 friction coefficient, the available power likely wouldn’t be able to be fully used until about 260 mph.  Consequently, the heat generated would also be reduced.  Hence, the suggestion to produce a realistic acceleration/power consumption analysis.  Covering the last 3 miles at around/above 300 mph would only take about half a minute.  So again, less than 2 minutes, less heat problem.

Your calcs also mention two pumps, presumably one for the dielectric oil and one for the cooling fluid.  A question then arises as to how the oil flow from one pump is evenly divided to the four motors, two of which are considerably further than the others from the pump.  I would also wonder if it would not be better to up the circulation rate and bring down the oil temperature.  I’m not sure I would want to be in close quarters with 320F oil.  In line with Peter Jack’s caution about the antifreeze, there may be tech requirements concerning this oil.  In the IC world, all this hot stuff has isolation requirements.

And finally, while the alcohol slurry deal may help the conduction from the hot side, I fail to see that it would significantly improve the sublimation gas barrier around the dry ice.


I'm strictly part of the mechanical group, but according to our aero guys, we are looking at about 9 sq ft of frontal area and they gave us a rough CFD drag number of about 400 lbs at 250 mph; that correlates to Cd=0.28 which is pretty high I'd think for a streamliner, so I'll double check that with them. For rolling resistance and other losses, we were somewhat in the dark, but I ran my calculations using an average rolling resistance coefficient of about 0.06 and static friction coefficient of about 0.4 from the ranges of values I found across the internet. The rolling resistance added about 95 lbs of force in the opposite direction of travel. We are using 23" tires.

I've actually mentioned a few times that we could get by with 3 motors instead of 4 because, even when I ran my calculations using the numbers above, I get a maximum speed of about 259 mph with just the 3 motors, and 345 mph with 4 motors; our tires, let alone many other parts of our car, obviously won't work as they should at that speed. The exact requirements I calculated were 647 Nm of total torque and 246 kW of total power, but with the 4 motors, our continuous power output is way more than we need- quite a bit more expensive too.

The 28 gal of water is definitely an overestimate; we were shooting for the worst case scenario, but the more I read the comments left in here, the more I'm thinking about how much I could save in weight, space, and cost by overestimating a lot less. If we do cut out one of the motors, the dielectric oil temperature would be reduce down to about 240F, which is obviously still high, but that would help a lot with meeting all of our requirements. I will look into more on the rules about antifreeze.

As for the alcohol slurry, I will also be looking into the suggestion made earlier about silicone oil. Doing some digging, I've found that it is mixed with dry ice for cryogenics and such, so it's a possibility.

All of the advice given on here has been very helpful and appreciated, and I will be discussing it with our team when we get back to work on Monday.