Results study Echo Moteur² project

Edits and changes to engines, experiences, findings and ideas.
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79120
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973




by Christophe » 06/05/08, 21:09

A) I read:

1 publication of our results in the upcoming Sciences & Avenir magazine
1 article in Science & Vie to come


Can you tell us more? 8)

If the journalists do not take into account my remark in red above + my different questions it risks making another 2 articles which will bury the system ...

Please let them know ... And other relevant remarks will no doubt come later ...

B) I quote a passage from your conclusion:

Finally, concerning the technical conclusions that we were able to draw on the Gillier-Pantone system, we were able to note that, despite the large number of people, always growing, convinced of the benefits obtained by the process, no significant gain, in terms of consumption. , was never found during our testing period. However, this is not enough to consider the principle of water doping as a myth, drawn from the fabrications of its supporters, as some say.
think. The number of parameters likely to act on engine performance being considerable, it was not possible, for reasons of time or budget, to study them all. Furthermore, the influence on pollution could not be
quantified.


For me 5% is more than significant ... except obviously if the margin of error of the measurements is of this order ...

I therefore reiterate my hope that a "power 3" Echo Motor project will remove the last "doubts" (in one direction or the other). Never 2 without 3 no? : Cheesy:
0 x
User avatar
echo-moteur²
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 23
Registration: 06/11/07, 13:21
Location: Douai, North




by echo-moteur² » 07/05/08, 01:30

Thank you for your support.

Bpval wrote:“Perhaps Echo-Motor3 next year will be more successful. Congratulations on your approach
Too bad for the results more than mixed ... and the cap !!! ??? "


In order to start the tests, while being certain of having steam production, we left the engine running, and waited to visually observe this creation.
Then we found that the vacuum created by the engine in the system was not enough to draw the steam. The latter therefore had no preferred direction, and went out where it could, and therefore by the air supply from the system. Hence the installation of the plug.

Remundo wrote:“In addition, I think that the injection of water, to express its full potential, requires more elaborate engines, in particular with variable valve timing and variable compression ratio, combined with precise control of steam production. The optimization window is probably very small: not enough water: no effect, too much water: flooding the engine, degraded combustion ... ”



The theory of the optimal zone of the production of vapor, is indeed a hypothesis which had crossed our mind, during the exploitation of the results. This would explain why there is a point drop in consumption, however small, which does not affect all plans.
In the same way that the optimal mixture is 1 gram of fuel for 15 grams of air, one might think that there is an ideal amount of water vapor. Quantity that it is not possible to control (except during sizing) with such a system, devoid of electronic management. This is the kind of theory to which we alluded in the conclusion of the technical part of the final dossier.

Christophe wrote:"What about pollution ?? "


As specified in the report, it was planned to carry out pollution tests, using a gas analysis bay. Unfortunately, due to lack of time and availability of equipment, we did not have access to it. Hence the regrettable absence of this test.

Christophe wrote:"How long did your tests last (effect of descaling by water?"


Concretely, the tests were carried out during the school holidays, on April 14 and 15, in the afternoon. The descaling test was carried out in the afternoon of Tuesday, which means that the engine had already run on Monday, and part of the afternoon of Tuesday. We therefore roughly estimate the operation of the engine with the system at 2 hours.

Remundo wrote:"Their opacimeter was defective"


No, we have never reported any “opacimeter” malfunction.

Christophe wrote:"Make tests at load and high torque compared to the maximum power / torque ... but we never exceeded 65% load apparently. "


Our engine showing certain signs of fragility, our supervisors advised us not to seek it unduly. An engine failure would have been the worst case (not enough time to start looking for a spare engine), so we preferred not to take a risk and play the card of caution.

Christophe wrote:In fact your tests are exactly the same as those made on a tractor test bench: no dynamic test (measurement when the torque varies) was carried out. So without a "peak" of power / combustion temperature, the effect is reduced ... or even zero.

Maybe the bench is not capable of it ... but in this case a tractor bench does as well. Too bad ... I understood that dynamic tests would have been possible ... "


As you will probably have understood, we were pressed for time and close to being unable to carry out the tests. Thus, we favored the study at constant regime, the implementation of which was altogether easier. With hindsight, and especially now that we know much more precisely how a test bench works, it is true that we would do otherwise, by imposing a precise cycle, varying most of the parameters of the engine, so as to approach the behavior of the engine in road use.

Christophe wrote:"Pkoi phase 1 and 2 were not done at 70 and 80 Nm ???


It was not planned at the outset to make the part called "optimization" in the summary table. This followed a simple observation: steam was not produced for the configurations initially proposed (at 50 Nm, and for 1500 and 2000 revolutions per minute).

Christophe wrote:In terms of load curves: how do you explain the "saw teeth" of certain tests? As well as some changes of "bearings"? All the same, these are not negligible changes in load ... "


Regarding the "significant" load changes, we do not agree. By relying on the scale, we realize that there is a "zoom" effect, and that ultimately, the saw teeth, or the bearings, are in fact only variations of 1% at most of the engine stress. Amount small enough to be justified by the inaccuracies due to the bench.

Christophe wrote:"Finally, only one series of tests is" significant "in my opinion: the test at 2500 tr and 50 Nm because it is the only one which can compare with the origin under the same load conditions although it does not is not loaded enough but hey ... "


Not having observed a cleaning effect, due to the lack of longevity of the test, we compared phase 4 to a complement, even a substitute, of phase 1, serving as a comparative basis. Phase 5 was compared to these results.

Christophe wrote:"I am convinced that if the original 80 Nm test had been done, it would have shown an even greater relative gain ..."


First of all, remember that we are only student-engineers, striving to keep the most neutral vision possible on the issue. Without wanting to be offended, wouldn't you wait too long for a “scientific” study to arrive saying “yes! there is indeed a decrease in consumption of 30%, and a decrease of 80% in pollution. "?


Finally, know that it is with great bitterness that we see today that the study that we have carried out has not been as thorough as we would have liked.

PS: Oooops! Sorry for this long post ...
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79120
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973




by Christophe » 07/05/08, 10:35

1) Thanks for the details, I have formatted your post with quotes (try to use them next time it will be easier for you too, you have to click on the "Quote" button of a message).

Notes to your answers:

: Arrow: 2 hours of water injection is roughly 100km on the road ...

: Arrow: Ok for the caution I understand well but in this case, although you said it (but hey when the harm is said to be hard to deny), I would not have been as categorical as you in your conclusions on zero gain...

: Arrow: I looked at the 2500 tr 50Nm Phase 2 and Phase 5 tests in more detail:

Phase 2 (fig. 43), system mounted without water: duration 230s, load 56,5% (first 20 seconds are at negligible average at 56% but still note the same behavior on the other curve of phase 5 therefore obviously no effect), consumption: 3.84 kg / h.

Phase 5 (fig. 51), active system with water and smaller rod: duration 200s, load 56%, consumption 3.62 kg / g. Sawtooth behavior of the load. This is an important remark I think because even if the variations are small, it should be known if these variations come from a real variation of the engine load or measurement error. I think it's about very real variations and this is important.

Indeed: a variation in brutal charge and however small it is in amplitude implies higher combustion temperatures and a more "visible" effect of water. Can phase 5 be compared to a dynamic mini test?

All this explains the lack of results on stabilized regimes which are ideal (engine manufacturers like ... necessarily) but not significant for real use where the load varies constantly ...

Some other questions / comments:

2) I had seen the Zoom effect for sawtooth but my remark also concerned the causes of these bearings: regulation of the failed engine or irregularity of the bench? Particularly Phase 5 ... In other words: for the technicians / engineers of the test center is this normal behavior or which means a tired engine (maybe?)?

3) I still haven't found water consumption. Have you never measured it?

For the ratio in "average" use it is around 1/5 of fuel. In charge I think it's more important. I believe I told you in person in Douai ...

4) I think there is a lot to share your bitterness. I knew the difficulties of student projects you know ...

5) For the moment do you think that a 3 project will be possible? This project could only focus on testing! Which would be really good.

6) Is a supplement on pollution possible? before S&V and S&A articles?

7) Options 1 to 3 have not been tested at all I think?

ps: who is coaching? The lab or the teachers / tutor?
0 x
bpval
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 561
Registration: 06/10/06, 17:27




by bpval » 07/05/08, 11:16

Hello

After reading the report, in fact, there is no mention of water consumption. : Shock:

Odd for a manipulation consisting in dealing with water doping (water doping is however very present in the report)

Have you made any tests prior to the "test bench" to find out if your GVI and engine fulfilled their role: steam and suction in the intake manifold.

In fact, if water consumption is negligible or almost zero, we are far from the desired goal: DOPING WITH WATER

ciaio
0 x
PIF PAF POUM
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79120
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973




by Christophe » 07/05/08, 11:20

bpval wrote:In fact, if water consumption is negligible or almost zero, we are far from the desired goal: DOPING WITH WATER

ciaio


Well that's why in phase 5 (smaller rod so more water sucked) there is a "semblance" of result ... well I hope :)

But again, all this shows one thing: we are still at the prototyping stage ... :|
0 x
User avatar
echo-moteur²
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 23
Registration: 06/11/07, 13:21
Location: Douai, North




by echo-moteur² » 09/05/08, 01:05

Christophe wrote:

"Phase 5 (fig. 51), active system with water and smaller rod: duration 200s, load 56%, consumption 3.62 kg / g. Sawtooth behavior of the load. This is an important remark I think because even if the variations are small, it should be known if these variations come from a real variation of the engine load or measurement error. I think these are very real variations and this is important.


Load variation or measurement error, that is the question!
More seriously, as we have explained in previous messages, the variations observed are too small for us to be able, in all objectivity, to give responsibility to our system.


Indeed: a sudden variation in load and however small in amplitude implies higher combustion temperatures and a more "visible" effect of the water.


It all depends on what is meant by "visible". When we looked to see if our system was creating steam (i.e. when the system was installed on the engine, but the reactor outlet was not connected to the intake), we found visually this production. We then observed the influence of variations in engine stress (when the actual test was not in progress, it was we who played on the stress, that is to say on the way we pulled on the accelerator). It became clear to us that the response time was particularly low (not to say instantaneous), but that this variation in production, which can be seen visually, was for greater variations in demand, of the order of 5 to 10 %. However, taking into account the hypothesis of a very precise and very limited operating window, you cannot refute your theory.


I had seen the Zoom effect for the saw teeth but my remark also concerned the causes of these bearings: regulation of the engine which failed or irregularity of the bench? Particularly Phase 5 ... In other words: for the technicians / engineers of the test center, this is normal behavior or which means a tired engine (maybe?)?


In fact, during the exploitation of the results, the conclusions of our external tutor (engineer from the CRITT M2A research center) were much sharper than ours. According to him, the results in consumption clearly showed the uselessness of our system on engine performance. So it seems to be normal behavior.


I still haven't found the water consumption. Have you never measured it?


For various reasons (security, time, material, vibrations, etc.), we were unable to measure the water consumption. However, we can safely say that the water level in our tank was constantly dropping. This is a sign of non-zero water consumption.


Is a supplement on pollution possible before the S&V and S&A articles?


Our departure for the course being fixed for May 19, and our external tutor being on the move at least until this date, this will unfortunately not happen.


Options 1 to 3 have not been tested at all I think?


These two options have indeed not been tested. In particular, we could not see the influence of the acidity of the water on the performance of the engine. We thought we'd do it with a lemon juice solution, but again, time ran out.


Who is coaching? The lab or the teachers / tutor?


This is our external tutor, who works at CRITT M2A.



Bpval said:

Odd for a manipulation consisting in dealing with water doping (water doping is however very present in the report)

Have you made any tests prior to the "test bench" to find out if your GVI and engine fulfilled their role: steam and suction in the intake manifold.

In fact, if water consumption is negligible or almost zero, we are far from the desired goal: DOPING WITH WATER


As said before, phases 3 and 5 started, when we could see visually the production of steam. It is therefore with perfect certainty that we affirm that the engine operated with a mixture of air, diesel, and steam. And a fortiori that it was indeed a doping with water.



As for the rest of the project, we would have liked an Echo-Motor 3 team to continue our work. It is for this reason that we will send a message next week, to first grade students. Several aspects will make this task a little difficult:
- Find a team also motivated by the technical side of the project, but also by the consequent workload
- Convince the School that the project always has an innovative side
- Find a new customer. The CRITT M2A does not wish to continue its collaboration with the project, we must see to what extent we can compensate for the absence of this technical and financial partner. We can then consider a more "theoretical" project, looking for the most favorable quantity of steam, but its implementation remains unclear for the moment. In this regard, if anyone has ideas to offer, we would be delighted to listen to them.

See you soon

The Echo-Motor² technical team
0 x
Other
Pantone engine Researcher
Pantone engine Researcher
posts: 3787
Registration: 17/03/05, 02:35
x 12




by Other » 09/05/08, 06:47

Hello

It's been 3 years and thousands of km on diesel, that I drive in water doping and I regularly make corrections to improve it.
And you think that operating a few hours mounting on a bench that you will find the right dosages?


At a glance the assembly looks like that of Vitry, except that I find the conduits between the GV and reactor a little long
Did you follow the same adjustments as that of Vitry?
To make a good test, you need an assembly that works, that is to say a certified copy to one that is functional.

One time, too much water and the test is compromised .. (it takes several km to make it functional)
a high water level in the GV you make the engine drink liquid and the engine overconsumes.

Did you measure the reactor outlet temperature?

the amount of water consumed, the water level in the steam generator, the vacuum before entering the intake manifold
even the reactor inlet temperature.

Contrary to popular belief, water doping can work at half speed.

Andre
0 x
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 15992
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5188




by Remundo » 09/05/08, 10:45

echo-moteur² wrote:Find a new customer. The CRITT M2A does not wish to continue its collaboration with the project, we must see to what extent we can compensate for the absence of this technical and financial partner. We can then consider a more "theoretical" project, looking for the most favorable quantity of steam, but its implementation remains very vague for the moment. In this regard, if anyone has ideas to offer, we would be delighted to listen to them.


Hello Eco Motorists, hello André and Christophe,

Bad news for you if your test benches are removed :frown:

Concerning the "theoretical" aspect, it is a way which is not the good one to promote and to have a clear heart on the potential decreases in consumption.

The possible theoretical research that could be launched is combined cycle thermodynamics in the same machine, (by heat reinjection) and fundamental research in combustion chemistry.

The first is hyper-pointed, especially when it is necessary to take into account filling faults and heat exchanges with the engine block ...

The second is practically chemical speculation because nobody really knows what's going on in a TDC cylinder... We know roughly that combustion is booming and that it is heterogeneous, and that dozens of coupled reactions, some of which have radical chains, are at stake ... :?

So friends, I would tell you to do like the Americans ... look with a protocol and precise measurements if it works experimentally, if only on a single engine, even old ... and if you don't understand why ... You don't care! :D

Be pragmatic all, not theoretical :!:

I agree with André for his long process of optimizing the Gillier system, moreover, André, your knowledge could well be used by the eventual Echo Motor 3 team so that they place themselves directly on the optimization window, and finally prove or deny its existence : Idea:

And how much do you estimate your reductions in consumption after your modifications and prolonged experiments?

@+
0 x
Image
User avatar
echo-moteur²
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 23
Registration: 06/11/07, 13:21
Location: Douai, North




by echo-moteur² » 09/05/08, 13:07

André wrote

At a glance the assembly looks like that of Vitry, except that I find the conduits between the GV and reactor a little long
Did you follow the same adjustments as that of Vitry?
To make a good test, you need an assembly that works, that is to say a certified copy to one that is functional.


We described our approach in one of the previous subjects, and we talked about our contact with Alexandre Gregoire, who took care of setting up the system on Vitry vehicles. Most of the dimensions of our system are identical to his, only some improvements in terms of form have been made (but with his agreement). So we tested a fixture that was advertised as working.

high water level in the G

V you make the engine drink liquid and the engine overconsumes.


This is not visible in the photo, but as the engine and the system were mounted, it can be said that the engine outlet was about 50 centimeters lower than the engine air intake. This eliminates any risk of causing the intake of the engine water in the liquid state.

Did you measure the reactor outlet temperature?

the amount of water consumed, the water level in the steam generator, the vacuum before entering the intake manifold
even the reactor inlet temperature.


These kinds of measures were planned, but the material was not available when the tests were carried out, so they could not be carried out.

It's been 3 years and thousands of km on diesel, that I drive in water doping and I regularly make corrections to improve it.


As Remundo suggests, your experience in this area is probably much more important than ours, which is why it would be very interesting for us, as for a possible Echo-Motor 3 team, if you would give us details on the kind of corrections you make.

And you think that operating a few hours mounting on a bench that you will find the right dosages?


At the risk of repeating ourselves, we recall that time and funds were sorely missed during this project, amputating our test protocol from many potentially interesting elements. But you will be able to see without problem, by reading carefully the conclusions of our report, that at no time have we buried the principle of water doping. Most of the negative remarks we have made are self-critical: they concern the tests that we have been able to do, and leave many (if not all?) Doors open to the general principle.


Remundo wrote

Bad news for you if your test benches are removed


This is indeed a most credible hypothesis. We are indeed sure that if we have test benches next year, it will not be those of CRITT M2A. We can certainly still hope to have the support of a builder, or another center with the same activities, but we have seen this year how difficult the search for partners could be. For this reason, if someone could provide us with an interesting contact, it would be a good point for the continuation of the project.

The possible theoretical research that could be launched are combined cycle thermodynamics in the same machine (by heat re-injection) and fundamental research in combustion chemistry.

The first is hyper-pointed, especially when it is necessary to take into account filling faults and heat exchanges with the engine block ...

The second is practically chemical speculation because nobody really knows what happens in a TDC cylinder ... We know roughly that a combustion is booming and that it is heterogeneous, and that dozens of coupled reactions, some of which have radical chains, are at stake ... Confused


Interesting note. Do you happen to know companies that work in this sector of activity?

Be pragmatic all, not theoretical


In our case, the work we have done mainly contains 2 issues. First of all a technical issue, ie to "advance research" concerning the Gillier Pantone system. ! then, a school issue, since we are accountable to the School, it is in front of it that we present the project. And if we have understood that this was the first issue that mainly interested you (which is easily understood, and which we do not question), the search for why remains much more than a simple detail for the School , as we could see during the defense. It is therefore an aspect that should absolutely not be neglected in view of the continuation of the project.


See you soon

The Echo-Moteur² team
0 x
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 15992
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5188




by Remundo » 09/05/08, 16:00

echo-moteur² wrote:Interesting note. Do you happen to know companies that work in this sector of activity?

Be pragmatic all, not theoretical


In our case, the work we have done mainly contains 2 issues. First of all a technical issue, ie to "advance research" concerning the Gillier Pantone system. ! then, a school issue, since we are accountable to the School, it is in front of it that we present the project. And if we have understood that this was the first issue that mainly interested you (which is easily understood, and which we do not question), the search for why remains much more than a simple detail for the School , as we could see during the defense. It is therefore an aspect that should absolutely not be neglected in view of the continuation of the project.

See you soon

The Echo-Moteur² team


Hello again,

Regarding the injection of water, we must do technological monitoring of patents and theses, as Christophe does.

Here is an international that just came out
http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPOD ... =GB2394511
WIPO wrote:Pub No .: WO / 2007/118435 Int.Application Number: PCT / DE2006 / 000665
Date of advertisement. int .: 25.10.2007 Date of filing int .: 15.04.2006

IWC: F02M 25/038 (2006.01), F01N 5/02 (2006.01)
Submitter: SCHILKE, Andreas [DE / DE]; Sudetenstr. 26, 38302 Wolfenbüttel (DE).
Inventor: SCHILKE, Andreas [DE / DE]; Sudetenstr. 26, 38302 Wolfenbüttel (DE).
Title: (FR) INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE WITH DIRECT WATER INJECTION
(DE) VERBRENNUNGSMOTOR MIT DIREKTER WASSEREINSPRITZUNG

abstract:
The invention relates to the arrangement of an additional direct injection device for water preheated by exhaust gases in a conventional internal combustion engine with pistons. The water evaporating directly into the combustion chamber creates additional entrainment energy, which would otherwise be dissipated as waste heat



There are universities that do research in combustion ... type combustion modeling on google for example. Of course, it's mainly the builders who work on it and keep the info to themselves. But that's normal ... it's R&D insurance.

To estimate the energy savings by recirculation, this is possible either by carrying out calculations by hand, more or less refined, or by software. For example THERMOPTIM does this for nuclear power plants which draw part of the steam and thus carry out a heat re-injection which can approach the Gillier principle.
http://www.thermoptim.org/sections/tech ... s/turbines

You can also find data a little more "confidential" by the language barrier among "Deutsch".

For example, type in "Wasser Einspritzung Verbrennung Motor" on Google and you dive into German R&D on water injection in combustion engines.

Finally here, there is no shortage of work for who knows how to find it intelligently 8)

On the theoretical justification aspect, apart from the modeling of heat recirculation, you do not have the means to discuss seriously on heterogeneous combustion in an engine in the presence of water potentially cracked in H + HO- or H * OH *, no more than your teachers, neither myself, nor perhaps many people in this world ... 8)

@+
0 x
Image

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Water injection in the engines: the assembly and experimentation"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 143 guests