G-pantonization of citroen c15 D

[Flytox]

Hello Ak

The circuit includes a tank, a filter, a wiper pump (which runs slowly), a non-return and on the output, there is a debubber and a "Y". One branch of the "Y" goes to the GVd passing through a nozzle of 65 and the other branch returns to the tank. To adjust the pressure on the nozzle in the circuit, there is a needle valve on the return to the tank.

With a diagram it's easier:



On the float flowmeter (on the dashboard), there is a needle valve that allows you to set exactly the water flow I want. When I drive in town / slowly I decrease the flow to around 0.4 liter / hour and otherwise I set it to 0.88 liter / hour. (these are arbitrary values ​​but which allow me to have a "good" stability "in the temperature of the vapor.)

I did a mounting with a speed variator to change the speed of the pump and therefore the pressure and all controlled by a potentiometer on the throttle. It never worked properly on the car. The drive and the pump do not want to work together (roughly 3 different speeds instead of a continuous variation) ...
A+

[jonule]

Hello,
the constant level tank of a carburetor does not work?

[ak]

Hello !

Good news !!!

But first thanks to André and Flytox for their explanations and nice diagram of their alternative finds to the tank at constant level. For now we continue with the trap but we keep these explanations under the elbow for the rest.

Well, today the car had an appointment at the garage for maintenance. It was the nice little car mechanic who had given a hand for the end of the installation of the system, while cracking the pear about the virtues of doping with water.
It happens that it has enough to test the exhaust level pollution, so they did the test: once without water and thus doping circuit out and a second time with water in the system.
It gives these two measurements side by side respectively for the first test then for the second:



Detail :


Well, the mechanic made eyes like two rounds of custard!

Well, for conso we do not know yet, have to wait, but already for the pollution is bingo.

Thank you all!

[jime]

Hello

I am your realization from the beginning, the results like the manufacturing of the reactor and the GVI are impressive
strongly GO consumption results

Good luck for the future

[Chatham]

Well, the mechanic made eyes like two rounds of custard!

Well, for conso we do not know yet, have to wait, but already for the pollution is bingo.

Thank you all!

What annoys me is that there is an operating error that can significantly influence the result: the engine t ° in the second case is significantly higher than in the first ...
In order to have correct measurements, it is necessary to make them run at normal operating temperature (water and oil) either 85 -90 ° C with water and 90-100 ° C with oil and not 52 ° C in one case so bad combustion, and 65 ° C in the other also not optimal ...

[ak]

Hello again,

Thanks for the encouragement Jime. Now Alain is thinking of starting again but in the original muffler, not to exceed under the sill.

What annoys me is that there is an operating error that can significantly influence the result: the engine t ° in the second case is significantly higher than in the first ...
In order to have correct measurements, it is necessary to make them run at normal operating temperature (water and oil) either 85 -90 ° C with water and 90-100 ° C with oil and not 52 ° C in one case so bad combustion, and 65 ° C in the other also not optimal ...

Yes, you're right Chatam, and it will start again by making an appointment at home and ensuring that the temperatures are correct, but there since it was part of the normal maintenance and that he did not believe it was not really advisable to insist too much. Now that he has seen I think he will be ripe for a new test within a month or two, when the system and we will be running in
Nevertheless, that even in bad conditions of measurement the difference is too important to be fortuitous, and that it gives fishing.

[Flytox]

Hello Ak

Glad to see results ...... as pointed out by Chatam, this time the measurement is not rigorous, but the next move exactly follows the protocol, it should illustrate that we do not work for nothing, continues you are on the right track.

A+

[Other]

Hello

Thanks for the encouragement Jime. Now Alain is thinking of starting again but in the original muffler, not to exceed under the sill.

Little advice do not put a reactor in a muffler
a reactor must be in the duct escapes as close as possible to the cylinder head and it is avoided to relax the exhaust gas (Even install the receiver in the original duct, the restriction passed by the reactor concentrates the temperature on the reactor)
I know all the mechanics and theorist will say it's not good for the engine and it's true, but in our case we want to run a doping water with the usual regime on the road and especially the intermediate regime.

For the antipolution test, do not put too much candy with it
if the consumption drops by 30% you will measure the pollution after
(I have never measured it?) and you will still see an improvement

Anyway we know that the reactor does not run cold exhaust (it does not change catalysts that they still have to walk higher)
In our case it is not the temperature of the engine but the exhaust that we must consider

For the consumption test
two important things

Take a test without a reactor at 120kmh or 130kmh
repeat the same test with water doping 120kmh or 130kmh

Not take the lowest consomation of the manufacturer at 90kmh
and compare it with water doping at 90kmh

At low cost if it is well designed thermally you have a gain, but less than a motorway driving in charge.

Andre