REFLECTOR:Why not test NPG+?
Chuck Jensen
reflector@tvbf.org
Tue, 20 Apr 2004 17:03:45 -0400
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C4271A.F7F18680
Content-Type: text/plain
Dennis,
It's always distressing when people want to rely on facts and science
instead of time-test anecdotes and conjecture. It takes all of the fun and
excitement out of watching the resulting blow-ups. But one tiny little note
is worth noting about 1). As John pointed out (at least I think that was is
what he was pointing at), the water antifreeze solution actually boils at
the point of contact with the metal in a conventional system. However, this
is good.
The nucleate boiling is a more efficient heat transfer system than a
non-boiling liquid, such as NPG+, that stays in intimate contact with the
metal surface. Intuitively, that seems like a good thing, but a boundary
layer next to the metal may form and will be slow to conduct its heat away
from the surface. A higher capacity water pump may help create turbulence
to destroy this metal/liquid boundary but at the cost of some lost hp.
Nucleate boiling does a superior job of heat transfer and at no cost.
It'll be interesting to see what the testing shows, but losing the nucleate
boiling may actually result in a hotter engine overall.
Last time, I promise.
Chuck
[Chuck Jensen] -----Original Message-----
From: reflector-admin@tvbf.org [mailto:reflector-admin@tvbf.org]On Behalf Of
Dennis Martin
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 3:11 PM
To: reflector@tvbf.org
Subject: Re: REFLECTOR:Why not test NPG+?
Lots of thoughtful comments on this debate; you all have me thinking.
A few assumptions about NPG+ deserve testing before I throw out my three
bottles of product. I believe in the scientific method, and I've got two
fluid engineers living a block or two away. They have the ability to remain
objective by testing conventional vs. NPG+ . . . and they are rigorous. I
know they'll keep it based on science, not opinion or wishful thinking.
Like Kurt Winker, first I'll test my Chevy aluminum block with conventional
coolant, and then with NPG+. Here are the assumptions that I consider
worth investigating NPG+ technology:
1) If you compare two coolants (conventional 50/50 water antifreeze) and
NPG+, the NPG should result in lower CHTs because when water comes into
contact with hot metal (350+ degrees) it's going to boil away and leave that
part of the metal hotter. That segment of hotter metal temp has to go
somewhere, so it ultimately spreads out to the rest of the block,
hypothetically migrating to the rest of the block, thus resulting in higher
CHTs. If you have a normal functioning cooling system, NPG+ claims their
product will result in lower block (CHT) temps than conventional 50/50 mix.
I'll wait and see what happens inside my engine rather than trust their
data.
2) NPG technology is based on a much higher surface tension compared with
conventional 50/50 antifreeze & water. If this hold true in my tests, NPG+
should remain attached to the hot spots in my engine. It's kind of like
"Water Wetter" products, but Water Wetter is basically a surfactant. If you
use it you'll end up with a "detergent" in your coolant - the poor man's
way of trying to get higher surface tension. Better than nothing to
increase surface tension, but it's still a surfactant which means you have
bubbles, but smaller bubbles.
3) As for the failure of a system, this should be easy to test if I put
20-30 hours of static plus taxi testing on my system. In theory, you could
run at zero pressure, but Evans rcommends a 5 lb. pressure cap. That's an
absolute safety advantage over conventional pressures because it puts 50-75%
less stress on all the hoses and gaskets. In my book, that's definitely
worth testing scientifically.
My plan is to reserve judgment until after run the test, and I'll definitely
let you people know. I'll be the first guy to throw out the NPG+ if it
does not provide the safety margin I'm looking for. No guarantees which
ever way I go, but at least I'll have done my best to work on more fact than
fiction.
All the best,
Dennis
FG Elite, Chevy 4.5 Liter V-6
This is news to me. My only agument to the documented success is that it
seems contrary to principals of engine cooling. The conventional
water/antifreeze mix boils in the cylinder jacket and boiling is the most
efficient means of heat transfer which means it will keep your engine the
coolest. They admit that with NPG+ the engine runs hotter, but claim that
is a good thing for better efficiency. It is true that the hotter the
engine the more thermodynamically efficient it will run, but it won't run
long if the temperature is too high. Us with air cooled engines don't seem
to be looking for ways to increase our engine temps. I suggest you record
your CHT/EGT temps wtih the distilled water and compare with NPG+. If
you're comfortable with the higher temps using NPG+, then I guess it will be
ok. Eliminating boil-over is a detriment rather than an asset IMO. With a
conventional coolant if you lose coolant circulation, it boils over.
However as long as it is boiling over, you still have cooling and time to
prepare to shutdown before your engine overheats. With the NPG+, I think
overheating would happen immediately upon loss of coolant circulation.
John
----- Original Message -----
From: NMFlyer1@aol.com <mailto:NMFlyer1@aol.com>
To: reflector@tvbf.org <mailto:reflector@tvbf.org>
Cc: dmartin@cougar.netutah.net <mailto:dmartin@cougar.netutah.net> ;
ALVentures@cox.net <mailto:ALVentures@cox.net>
Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 7:06 PM
Subject: Re: REFLECTOR:Velocity Manuals, Methods & Views
Greetings,
I wanted to get the information on a product I plan on using to all the
liquid cooled engine experimentors. Specifically the NPG+ is of interest.
I know that it seems to work well in race applications and should add the
little extra benefit that our hard run engines may need.
I plan on firing up my Chevy V-6 in about 4-6 weeks and will use distilled
water to ensure I have no leaks. Then I will flush the system and put in the
NPG+.
Evans <http://www.evanscooling.com/index2.html> Cooling Systems, Inc. High
Performance Engine Cooling and Power Production.
Let me know what you think, and I hope it helps.
Kurt Winker
------_=_NextPart_001_01C4271A.F7F18680
Content-Type: text/html
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<TITLE>Re: REFLECTOR:Why not test NPG+?</TITLE>
<STYLE type=text/css>BLOCKQUOTE {
PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
DL {
PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
UL {
PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
OL {
PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
LI {
PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
</STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=813403920-20042004><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Dennis,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=813403920-20042004><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=813403920-20042004><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>It's
always distressing when people want to rely on facts and science instead of
time-test anecdotes and conjecture. It takes all of the fun and excitement
out of watching the resulting blow-ups. But one tiny little note is worth noting
about 1). As John pointed out (at least I think that was is what he was
pointing at), the water antifreeze solution actually boils at the point of
contact with the metal in a conventional system. However, this is
good. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=813403920-20042004><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=813403920-20042004><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>The
nucleate boiling is a more efficient heat transfer system than a non-boiling
liquid, such as NPG+, that stays in intimate contact with the metal
surface. Intuitively, that seems like a good thing, but a boundary layer
next to the metal may form and will be slow to conduct its heat away from the
surface. A higher capacity water pump may help create turbulence to
destroy this metal/liquid boundary but at the cost of some lost hp.
Nucleate boiling does a superior job of heat transfer and at no
cost.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=813403920-20042004><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=813403920-20042004><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>It'll
be interesting to see what the testing shows, but losing the nucleate boiling
may actually result in a hotter engine overall.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=813403920-20042004><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=813403920-20042004><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Last
time, I promise.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=813403920-20042004></SPAN><FONT face=Tahoma><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2></FONT><FONT
face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Tahoma><SPAN class=813403920-20042004><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Chuck</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><BR><FONT size=2><SPAN class=813403920-20042004><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff>[Chuck Jensen] </FONT></SPAN>-----Original
Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> reflector-admin@tvbf.org
[mailto:reflector-admin@tvbf.org]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Dennis
Martin<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, April 20, 2004 3:11 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
reflector@tvbf.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: REFLECTOR:Why not test
NPG+?<BR><BR></DIV></FONT></FONT>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>Lots of thoughtful comments on this debate; you all have me
thinking.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>A few assumptions about NPG+ deserve testing before I throw out my three
bottles of product. I believe in the scientific method, and I've
got two fluid engineers living a block or two away. They have the
ability to remain objective by testing conventional vs. NPG+ . . . and they
are rigorous. I know they'll keep it based on science, not opinion or
wishful thinking. Like Kurt Winker, first I'll test my Chevy aluminum
block with conventional coolant, and then with NPG+. Here are
the assumptions that I consider worth investigating NPG+
technology:</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>1) If you compare two coolants (conventional 50/50 water antifreeze) and
NPG+, the NPG should result in lower CHTs because when water comes into
contact with hot metal (350+ degrees) it's going to boil away and leave that
part of the metal hotter. That segment of hotter metal temp has to go
somewhere, so it ultimately spreads out to the rest of the block,
hypothetically migrating to the rest of the block, thus resulting in higher
CHTs. If you have a normal functioning cooling system, NPG+ claims their
product will result in lower block (CHT) temps than conventional 50/50
mix. I'll wait and see what happens inside <U> my engine</U> rather
than trust their data.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>2) NPG technology is based on a much higher surface tension compared with
conventional 50/50 antifreeze & water. If this hold true in my
tests, NPG+ should remain attached to the hot spots in my engine. It's
kind of like "Water Wetter" products, but Water Wetter is basically a
surfactant. If you use it you'll end up with a "detergent" in your
coolant - the poor man's way of trying to get higher surface tension.
Better than nothing to increase surface tension, but it's still a surfactant
which means you have bubbles, but smaller bubbles.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>3) As for the failure of a system, this should be easy to test if I put
20-30 hours of static plus taxi testing on my system. In theory, you
could run at zero pressure, but Evans rcommends a 5 lb. pressure cap.
That's an absolute safety advantage over conventional pressures because it
puts 50-75% less stress on all the hoses and gaskets. In my book, that's
definitely worth testing scientifically.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>My plan is to reserve judgment until after run the test, and I'll
definitely let you people know. I'll be the first guy to throw out
the NPG+ if it does not provide the safety margin I'm looking for. No
guarantees which ever way I go, but at least I'll have done my best to work on
more fact than fiction.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>All the best,</DIV>
<DIV>Dennis</DIV>
<DIV>FG Elite, Chevy 4.5 Liter V-6</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite="" type="cite">This is news to me. My only agument to
the documented success is that it seems contrary to principals of engine
cooling. The conventional water/antifreeze mix boils in the cylinder
jacket and boiling is the most efficient means of heat transfer which means
it will keep your engine the coolest. They admit that with NPG+ the
engine runs hotter, but claim that is a good thing for better
efficiency. It is true that the hotter the engine the more
thermodynamically efficient it will run, but it won't run long if the
temperature is too high. Us with air cooled engines don't seem to be
looking for ways to increase our engine temps. I suggest you record
your CHT/EGT temps wtih the distilled water and compare with NPG+. If
you're comfortable with the higher temps using NPG+, then I guess it
will be ok. Eliminating boil-over is a detriment rather than an asset
IMO. With a conventional coolant if you lose coolant circulation, it
boils over. However as long as it is boiling over, you still have
cooling and time to prepare to shutdown before your engine overheats.
With the NPG+, I think overheating would happen immediately upon loss of
coolant circulation.</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite="" type="cite"> </BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite="" type="cite">John<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE>----- Original Message -----</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><B>From:</B> <A
href="mailto:NMFlyer1@aol.com">NMFlyer1@aol.com</A></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><B>To:</B> <A
href="mailto:reflector@tvbf.org">reflector@tvbf.org</A></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><B>Cc:</B> <A
href="mailto:dmartin@cougar.netutah.net">dmartin@cougar.netutah.net</A> ;
<A href="mailto:ALVentures@cox.net">ALVentures@cox.net</A></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, April 17, 2004 7:06 PM</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><B>Subject:</B> Re: REFLECTOR:Velocity Manuals, Methods &
Views</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>Greetings,</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE> </BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE> I wanted to get the information on a product I plan on
using to all the liquid cooled engine experimentors. Specifically
the NPG+ is of interest. I know that it seems to work well in race
applications and should add the little extra benefit that our hard run
engines may need.</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>I plan on firing up my Chevy V-6 in about 4-6 weeks and will
use distilled water to ensure I have no leaks. Then I will flush the
system and put in the NPG+.</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE> </BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE> </BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><A href="http://www.evanscooling.com/index2.html">Evans
Cooling Systems, Inc. High Performance Engine Cooling and Power
Production.</A></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE> </BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>Let me know what you think, and I hope it helps.</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE> </BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>Kurt Winker</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE> </BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE> </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C4271A.F7F18680--