Mythbuster video: acetone, magnets, hydrogen

[Other]

Hello
*

Acetone 1/500: overconsumption! André, what do you think?

what i think is that they haven't tried much 1/500 this is what we put to catalyze the polyster resin, i guess these people have a lawn mower, while it put 1% in the fuel and compare what it cut before and after. it is not very scientific, but if we cut 30% to 40% more with a small container it is visible, we come used every week we use it ..
*

magnets no savings but may be in the manner of André there would have been something

For the magnets I will prepare a reduced air gap assembly in an insulating duct, following the tests, others which have more measurable results, I need a vehicle which has nothing but that, because mine are starting to have too much things, and there I don't know what who does what?

And for the HVB: 10% savings on the Mercedes compared to diesel and they say in conclusion that the advantage is that they did not have to make any changes. They drove with the sole fuel 1L. of HVB. So they conclude at the end that you can roll with pure fried oil without modifying ... where is the serious there?

The lack of seriousness, To walk 100% on a regular basis, (not just pass 10 liters for a show,) it takes some modifications of oil reheating and pre-wash pump, and a good advice to have a filter has new diesel in the suitcase (trunk) with tools to change it, by the road in case!
or then I do it wrong when I walk 100% potato oil I consume 0,5 liters more per 100km than with diesel. It is true that I did not tare my injectors higher nor increase the advance, I do not modify the whole vehicle if I decide to stay on diesel, Again, maybe my recovery oil is not quality super fuel, I take what the cook puts in the barrel I decant and filter that's it, it's peanut and Canola and in both cases it consumes more than diesel.
I don't know if it's the same show but in Quebec I saw this show and it's been a bit (kêtaine).


Andre

[Capt_Maloche]

Very nice the two guys on the video thanks Toff for the video.

For the magnets, I agree with them, I put 4 neodymium magnets on the arrival of my oil burner for 15 days, no difference in flame, nor in yield, nor in smoke temperature, nor in opacity. .

For acetone, we come back to injecting a fuel at high ignition speed, where we have to calculate the% as a function of the amount of energy necessary for the total ignition of the air mass + fuel in the cylinders, just like hydrogen.
I'm sure it can be interesting.

For the hydrogen cell, it is absolutely the cat on the video without additive, it comes back to the ionization of water by electric fields, Crispus, are you there?

They did not test WITH, for my part, version 3 on twingo with widened fins is a disaster, + 10% consumption compared to version 2 which did not save me anything (only my wife thinks that the car hold less easily ...) my two models are made of aluminum.
would steel have other virtues?

To determine the amount of energy required to ignite the air + fuel mixture
I would take the gasoline model because of the compression ratio which does not allow to exceed the point of auto-ignition of gaseous fuels like H2.

I would use empirical values:

Flash point in ° C and Auto-ignition temperature ° C
Super fuel
-40 ° C
+ 400 ° C

diesel
+ 70 ° C
+ 260 ° C

For full load operation
C = air C at 20 ° C 50% Hygrometry = 0.34 KW / m3. ° C
T = Compression ratio of 10
A = energy absorption coefficient by the walls of the cylinders 30% in top dead center.
Cyl (m3) = Engine displacement considered 2000cm3 or 2l or 0.002m3 (4 stroke / 2)
Reg_mot = engine speed of 1000 rpm = 16.67 rpm
Nbr_Cyl = No. of cylinders
Cp_carbu = Specific heat of fuel vaporization 335 KJ / kg

we will have
hot engine air inlet temperature 30 ° C
Theoretical air temperature at the end of compression approx. 30 ° Cx10 = 300 ° C
the temperature of the mixture should be increased to 400 ° C
Fuel injection in this case at constant speed is around 0.002 l / s at 2000 rpm, 0.001 l / s at 1000 rpm


Cyl / 2 x Reg_mot = Air flow m3 / s
0.002 / 2 x 16.67 = 0.01667 m3 / s or 16.67 l / s

we will have to heat it all to 400 ° C without using fossil fuel

for air
0.01667 x 0.34 x (400-300) = 0.566 KW (KJ / s)
for fuel
approx 0.001 x 335 = 0.335 KJ / s

or around (0.566 + 0.335) x 1.3 = 1.17 KJ / s to ignite the whole mess.

This corresponds to a flow rate of H2 of how many L / s?
Calorific value H2 = 10 KJ / m800 3 KJ / l
or 1.17 / 10.8 = 0,11 l / s (390 l / h) of H2 to improve combustion at 1000 rpm at full load, around 1 liter of water / h whatever.

you might as well remove the fuel!
It is far from the possible flows with the current drawn on a battery (10A x 0.625 x 6 cells = 37,5 l / h), on the other hand, with a Stirling alternator on the exhaust ...

Calculation = ((Cyl (m3) / 2 x Reg_mot x 0.34 x (400-300)) + (0.001 x Cyl (m3) /0.002 x Reg_mot (rpm) / 1000 x 335) x 1.3) / 10.8 = Liters H2 / s

references http://www.enseeiht.fr/hmf/travaux/CD03 ... thermo.htm

http://www.educauto.org/Documents/Tech/ ... _gplc.html

[PITMIX]

Well, in any case, they deserved their title of myth-taker.

They may not be very serious but we must admit that they put more resources than most of us to test the consumption.

I'm going to have a lot of trouble doing better to convince otherwise with my little videos.
The 30% saving with the reactor becomes compulsory for Pantonizers. Otherwise it is the same verdict as in the program that awaits us (can).
The luck that we have is that they did not test the reactor, because if they did it as for the fuel cell ... gloups
It still leaves us time to prove the opposite of what they say (Kevin you're or ???).

[Woodcutter]

I make my modest contribution by combining two of the tests: I drive in oil (around 30%) and in acetone (around 3 ‰ on the volume of oil).
Coincidental happy or not, I consume less (6,33 l / 100 on average over 5000 km) since I ironed in oil compared to the 10 km preceding made in Diesel (000 l / 6,87). .

[nlc]

I think I should never have watched this video! It is bullshit !

We really have the impression that the aim of the game was to show that it is impossible to lower the consumption of a car.
Anyway, we have the impression from the start that the dice are loaded !!

Was this issue financed by oil companies or what?

But then the pinnacle of anything is the hydrogen cell. How bad was their cell out? 0.1L / hour ??
I think there is more gas flow when you open a bottle of badoit !!

In short, the test procedures were serious, but the tests were absolutely not
They knew in advance what to conclude.

[Other]

Hello

Coincidental happy or not, I consume less (6,33 l / 100 on average over 5000 km) since I ironed in oil compared to the 10 km preceding made in Diesel (000 l / 6,87). .

Just try high diesel and acetone and you will see a difference.
but when you fill up and you open the cap it looks like it reacts over time, the pump attendant runs away when he opens the cap!
I did all these tests to get an idea, but I stopped putting it. it's just to say that the dosage curve, I don't know how they did it, on which critics? but with experiments it does not stick at all, according to the curve if we put too much acetone, it consumes more! for me a little mug in an 80 liter tank is like putting nothing.
A 100% oil is something else, a mixture of oil and diesel gives almost the same consumption as gasiol.
Another test with new diesel filters, have run as much as possible and we compare gasiol, then oil just to see if we can reach the same top speed, it's not very scientific, because with oil it goes less well in the filter ...

Andre

[Capt_Maloche]

But then the pinnacle of anything is the hydrogen cell. How bad was their cell out? 0.1L / hour ??
I think there is more gas flow when you open a bottle of badoit !!

Less than that, it's true that I laughed when I saw the 2 and a half bubbles , and their heads amazed
I think they played the game without adding any additive + too much chopped current

let's be handsome and demonstrate the opposite, if possible

What do you think of my reasoning 3 messages above?

[PITMIX]

It is clear that if they had tried the nlc cell would have been much more interesting.
nlc I think that on the laguna it would be necessary to reduce the flow of gasoline to see if the engine turns like that with the surplus of hydrogen.

[Christophe]

No, I believe that the Time factor remains a scientific fact that should not be overlooked if we want a credible result.
As well as the repetitivity of the experience.

This is what I meant with that (but it had to be unclear):

"in their case it is the protocol of the experiment that should be reviewed"

[MichelM]

Hi everybody
I have tested for over a year with the motorcycle (BMW K75, 750cc) and about 5 km the Neodymium magnets (flattened stainless steel tube, low air gap) and I must say that in the long run it looks like improves: at the beginning almost no difference I made with my regular journey 000L / 5,5km at 100L, and now I arrive very regularly at 5,2L and even recently at 5L ?! I do not understand why it slowly drops the fuel comes from the same station, the air filter is the same, the spark plugs, the identical settings ... Is it a progressive cleaning of the circuit and the engine (4,9 65 km) who do that? For driving I could be more economical, it seems to me that in recent months it has been worse than before.
So for the test seen in this video with probably ferrite magnets placed on the hose and with a single measurement I think it's normal that it does not work. Now with my editing, I will have to take it off one day to see the difference, but what if there isn't after that? If it's a cleaning it's normal that once removed nothing happens ... Otherwise it was just the effect on my driving? You might as well put a hold on the accelerator that will have as much and even more effect!
Michel