Talk:Internal combustion engine cooling

Early comments
193.113.48.9 (talk) 13:27, 4 January 2008 (UTC)Shocking bad English on this page.

Shockingly bad English!

In pursuit of improving that situation, I suggest first renaming the article to "Cooling internal combusion engines" because "engines" is so broad that it requires definition inside the artilce after a user has possibly picked the wrong subject. Comments please.Jobst 23:10, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I feel there should be mention in this article of the pressurisation of automotive water cooling systems as a way of overcoming boil-up's. By increasing the pressure inside the cooling circuit the water is able to get much hotter than at normal atmospheric pressure. Of course, the description of boiling engines when vehicles are driven up mountains is part of the same discussion; as atmospheric pressure reduces water boils at a lower temperature. Neil Ives.

explanation for decline in air cooled engines
The article states that;

"Today practically no air-cooled automotive engines are built, air cooling being fraught with manufacturing expense and maintenance problems."

I feel that there needs to be a brief explanation of why this is, what are these costs? Don't worry, I'm not a VW fan boy, I'd just like to see some more information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.111.8.137 (talk) 17:13, 5 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Neither explanation is right, it's mostly to do with air-cooled heads having higher peak combustion temperatures and thus higher (and no longer acceptable) NOx emissions. This is why Porsche have even used water-cooled heads on the air-cooled 911 flat 6. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:37, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Also, the explanation of water-cooling being "fixed" in the 1940s does not explain that fact (numerous first hand experience) of 1960s water cooled vehicles constantly boiling over. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.166.166.75 (talk) 21:20, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

150 d celsius pressure 70 lbs/inch^2 not in a car
150 d celsius  pressure 70 lbs/inch^2

not in a car

Wdl1961 (talk) 14:17, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Consensus before page moves?
Do we still believe in this? Andy Dingley (talk) 17:24, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

the note on the first of the 3 ship water cooling diagrams
"A fully closed IC engine cooling system" - someone's put a 'dubious' there but in fact this system does exist and is called keel cooling.

Here are two company selling external hull-mounted heat exchangers: http://www.fernstrum.com/ http://www.waltergear.com/kc.htm but there are other ways such as welding half-pipes along the keel and hull. Here is an example of a very basic system, 2 pipes: http://www.ronlloyd.com/oddstuff/sling.jpg some designs on metal boats essentially use the entire keel and the hull as a heatsink.

It has some advantages:
 * good for use in muddy/gritty water where ingesting raw water for an on-board heat exchanger could cause problems (eg dredgers)
 * good for use in areas with floating seaweed or trash as there is no strainer to block
 * Raw water pump is eliminated.
 * Quiet since there is no continious coolant stream splashing out of the vessel
 * engine coolant is kept separate to raw water
 * especially effective in colder waters

it has some disadvantages:
 * requires holes in the hull
 * can't be used on the hard (when the boat is out of the water) - a conventional water intake can be connected to a hose.
 * not very efficient if the boat is stationary or slow
 * not very efficient when covered in barnicles and growth
 * some designs can increase drag
 * potential to be holed - can be difficult to fix in the water and contaminates the coolant
 * another possible source of galvanic corrosion

I will remove the note.

--HighlyErratic 18:37, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Hot climates
There is repeated IP edit-warring (4R overall, 3R today), to add the sentence, "Cooling is even more important in regions where the climate is very hot."

The trouble is that this claim is inaccurate to the point of being seriously misleading. It is either trivially simplistic, thus unencyclopedic, or else it is such an over-simplification to become wrong.

Climate is either 20ºC (standard temperature and pressure) or an exceptional shift of 20ºC either way to 40ºC (hot desert) or 0ºC (frozen). In engineering terms, a 20ºC shift just isn't much. It's only 293–253K. Engine cooling is there to remove excess heat from the cylinder head, via the cooling medium (usually water) and reject it to the air. The combustion temperature inside the head is very high, but that's not important (it's mostly cooled by doing work in expanding against the piston). The cylinder head combustion chamber surface can sit at a couple of hundred ºC and the coolant is 100ºC, or maybe 130ºC for a high performance pressurised system. Transfer out of the cylinder block is then by mechanically-pumped convection. This temperature is also controlled by thermostats etc. Note that this is not changed between a hoot or cold climate! Whether the engine is running in a Siberian winter or in a Dubai summer, the coolant stays at much the same temperature. If it fails, it will overheat the engine in the Winter too. Overheated Winter engines are not uncommon, as frozen-pipe failures are just as bad as any other burst.

Only when we look at the radiator does climate make any difference. This has to transfer heat based on a difference of either 100-20 = 80 or 100 or 60 ºC. From Newton's law of cooling (and given that this transfer is convective, not radiative) we're looking at the radiator becoming 25% less effective between Dagenham and Dubai. 25% is not a deal-breaker change in engineering terms. Note that this is also only affecting the radiator, not the engine block, coolant pump or coolant systems. Modern vehicles will also have oversized radiators and thermostatic fan cooling of them. So in practical terms, the car in Dubai is running its radiator fan for longer, not even requiring a bigger radiator.

The trouble is that this claim is inaccurate to the point of being seriously misleading. It is either trivially simplistic, thus unencyclopedic, or else it is such an over-simplification to become wrong. Certainly (and per WP:BURDEN too), such an over-simplified statement should not be re-added here. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:01, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I disagree. Of course the cooling system is more critical in hot climates, and the long explanation above omits many things. Accusing someone else of "seriously misleading statements" is actually ridiculous. Using Kelvin degrees is just obfuscation: what really matters is the difference between cooling medium and ambient air. That difference is a LOT smaller in Dubai (45* air temp is nothing extra-ordinary, and the entire car + engine gets directly heated by the sun) and the effect is not linear! Also add the Air Conditioning system working full power at all times, and cabin heating never helping with cooling... Car cooling systems are actually designed to handle the hot climates and are tested there vigorously. If it works ok there, then no need to worry about other places. Clearly the cooling system is more critical in hot climates so I suggest to leave the comment in the article.

Richard — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.163.242.182 (talk) 23:55, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

External combustion Engine cooling
For some reason there is no article for external combustion engines, or even Engine cooling in general. Is there any particular reason for that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.26.123.208 (talk) 07:01, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
 * It's unusual to cool external combustion engines. Most are deliberately heated, not cooled.
 * As to scope of this article, it's already too broad. A convenient title was cooked up and content just dumped in to fit. A better article would define a topic that was more focussed and of more relevant scope to readers, then write around that. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:32, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Actually, external combustion engines work on temperature differences, so removing heat from one part is essential. The cooling of the medium can be in a different place altogether though... (for steam for example). But, I dont feel this needs to be in this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.163.242.182 (talk) 23:22, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Medium.. air / water section dubious
" air needs 2000 times the flow velocity and thus a recirculating air fan needs ten times the power of a recirculating water pump."

This needs much more explanation, if it is at all correct.. Going from 2000 times flow velocity to 10 times power... how exactly? Where is the calculation / approximation? Flow velocity by itself tells us nothing..

Furthermore: that whole section is sketchy and seems (what they call here) original research: Many claims but no proof or references. It says something about "water boils around the desired engine temperature" ... thats a funny statement. Water boils at 100* C, and thats surely not a desired / optimal engine temperature. (You want as high as possible without breaking things, good for efficiency and power)...

I really think this article needs a rewrite, or at least removal of dubious, incorrect or unreferenced parts..

Richard — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.163.242.182 (talk) 23:28, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Internal combustion engine cooling. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090925224614/http://www.boatpartsinfo.com/cooling-systems.html to http://www.boatpartsinfo.com/cooling-systems.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:12, 14 November 2017 (UTC)