series reactors

[abyssin3]

Has anyone tried to connect two reactors in series?
Let me explain: usually, we have (the dots are white):

Engine <- Intake <--------
... | ......................................... |
Debut Echapement ............... |
... | ......................................... |
... | ----> -----------> --- reactor--
... |
Exhaust outlet

Serial" :
Engine <- Intake <------- <----
... | ......................................... | ... |
Debut Echapement ............... | ... |
... | ----> -----> --- reactor (1) --.... |
... | ............................................. |
... | ----> ------> - reactor (2) ------
... |
Exhaust outlet

This means that in this system the exhaust gases are cleaned twice. That is to say that we would have (assuming that pollution is reduced by a factor of 2):

For the first reactor (Initial pollution of 1 (unburnt, etc., except CO2)):
1st motor revolution P = 1 * 0.5 = 0.5
2nd: P = 0.5 * 0.5 = 0.25
3rd: P = 0.25 * 0.5 = 0.125
Knowing that a limit threshold of reactor efficiency prevents us from going below a certain value (hence the fact that a pantonized engine pollutes anyway).

The existence of a reactor afterwards on the exhaust line could allow this value to be further reduced, Ex:
P = 0.125 * 0.5, etc

resulting in derisory releases, and an optimization of the system. Of course, this is purely theoretical, and I don't think it can lead to a completely non-polluting engine. That said, for assemblies that work "moderately", it could be a way to overcome an inefficient reactor (= put two well placed)

[Former Oceano]

Hi, I don't have to have the same definition of serial editing as you ...

Your editing:
Engine <- Intake <------- <----
... | ......................................... | ... |
Debut Echapement ............... | ... |
... | ----> -----> --- reactor (1) --.... |
... | ............................................. |
... | ----> ------> - reactor (2) ------
... |
Exhaust outlet

what I would call a parallel connection of the reactors.

By serial assembly, it would rather be a montage like this that I would have thought of:

Engine <--- Intake <--------
... | ........................................... |
Start Exhaust ............... |
... | ........................................... |
... | -> - Reactor1 -> - Reactor2-
... |
Exhaust outlet

[Other]

Hello

I have a little difficulty with a serial installation, whether at the heat level or at the restriction level.

At the beginning I made rods of 12 inches 33cm as Pantone said now I am in the 150mm and even 110mm
that makes 3 reactors in series of 100mm for a rod of 300mm

What you should know about a small engine that the temperature drops considerably at the start of the reactor whether it is long or short so the second reactor will only have a little heat.
It is certain that a small reactor placing in a large exhaust duct a large part of the long heat of the exhaust duct (especially those who have a holy fear of restriction and who grow their exhaust duct)
A by ZAC and I think we are the only ones to do it this way. (plant the reactor in the original pipe and I make an additional deflector)

What I did not understand in the presentation of Abyssinian is the reduction in pollution with 2 reactors,
The reduction of pollution must be done at the source in the combustion chamber.
Although I have never measured the reduction in pollution. If there is any, tand better, I have enough to measure water and oil.
What interests me is the autonomy of the vehicle what I can do with a tank! a measure that does not lie ..

Andre

[abyssin3]

Exocean,
I had thought about it, but in parallel, it would rather be that:

Engine <- Intake <------- <----
... | ......................................... |
Debut Echapement ............... |
... | ----> -----> --- reactor (1) - |
... | ........ | ................................ |
... | ........------> - reactor (2) -
... |
Exhaust outlet

That is to say a single outlet on the exhaust,

As for making a purely series assembly (the two reactors one after the other) I am not sure that it is more efficient, especially if there is an air flow which limits the efficiency (or diameter smaller reactor -> air circulating faster -> less efficient?). hence the interest of taking two air intakes, which allows to recover even more heat in passing.

[abyssin3]

Andre

What you should know about a small engine that the temperature drops considerably at the start of the reactor whether it is long or short so the second reactor will only have a little heat.

It is precisely for this that I did not want to put them in series exactly, but to arrange for each reactor to have its dose of heat.

What I did not understand in the presentation of Abyssinian is the reduction in pollution with 2 reactors

It's quite simple in fact, it's a bit like if you imagine a treatment plant whose efficiency would not be perfect, if we put a second station on the water that leaves, the total efficiency is multiplied by that of the second, so that the effect is more important than putting two simply in parallel.

In the case of the pantone reactor, it would just consist in putting in addition a reactor further on the exhaust line to clean up the gases which have already been once.
I imagine that it should have an impact on consumption too. Because exhaust gases are used as much as possible.