New Echo Motor 2 project, Mines de Douai

Edits and changes to engines, experiences, findings and ideas.
the middle
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4075
Registration: 12/01/07, 08:18
x 4




by the middle » 08/11/07, 14:13

echo-moteur² wrote:Hello,
We were just going to put a post on the forum to ask you about some model of engine (diesel) you would advise us to work.

We thought we were sponsored by a breakage or a garage. This might not leave us the choice as to the model.
The other possibility would be to buy an engine.

For "lejustemilieu", your proposal for the Nissan seems interesting to us. We would like to know if it is already equipped with a G system or if it is original.

For Christophe, do you have a phone number or an e-mail address to contact the town hall of Vitry sur Orne.

Thank you for your interest in our project.

See you soon.
The Echo-Engine team.

No, no, the car is strictly original, the grandmother of 87 years who owned this vehicle did not think of rolling with oil, and even less with a booster of water vapor
In fact, I thought I would take the time to retype the bodywork of this car, and install it in water and oil restaurants ...
In short, the hazard could do things well.
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79126
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10974




by Christophe » 08/11/07, 14:23

echo-moteur² wrote:For Christophe, do you have a phone number or an e-mail address to contact the town hall of Vitry sur Orne.


Of course : http://www.vitry-sur-orne.com/coordonnees.asp
And there: http://www.vitry-sur-orne.com/personnel_communal.asp

It was Aurélie Reder who took care of the file in May / June ...
0 x
xcom
I discovered econologic
I discovered econologic
posts: 4
Registration: 08/11/07, 10:05




by xcom » 09/11/07, 08:42

Hello, I'm new here (so do not shoot me too fast :) )

To be clearer, I will detail my message in several points:

1. I do not know anything about the Pantone process and so I do not have a priori, favorable or not ... all that interests me is to explain what the defenders and users of the Pantone observe. My specialty is chemistry ... on the other hand, in mechanics, I do not know anything :)

2. I'm here because one of my students who read S&V told me about this process. I myself have not read the article, the content of which leaves a rather mixed impression, it seems. Anyway, it has the merit of existing and arousing curiosity (the proof, I'm here).

3. As far as I could understand, the main criticism that is made to the testers of this process is to lack scientific rigor. Since you have the opportunity to work on a project in collaboration with a school, as part of project-based learning, if I understood correctly, try to take advantage of it and work according to a well-defined protocol. Some more specific remarks on this subject:

a / The main qualities of the work should be reproducibility and controls ... otherwise, again, it will be difficult to take the conclusions seriously.

b / Pay attention to the vocabulary you use. I have, for example, noted a certain confusion between ion and radical ... it is this kind of abuse of language which makes credit for the hypotheses advanced and which tends to tick scientists (must believe that I am immune). I understand that some of these notions are a bit unclear for most people and that it may not seem to be of fundamental importance to the person who gets concrete results on a day-to-day basis, but unfortunately, paying attention to these details is the only one. a valid way to have your work taken seriously by the scientific community (which, like any community, is imperfect ... errare humanum est ... and scientists are also humans).

c / I know it is tempting to take the opportunity to ask students to test several parameters that can influence performance. Unfortunately, as they pointed out, their means, both material and human, are limited, so it is necessary, I think, not to disperse and risk, then, to dilute the results to the point that nothing very conclusive remains. This is only the opinion of a novice, but I believe that the best would be to limit oneself to the construction of a pantone engine judged as "efficient" by the community of this site and to accumulate the results allowing to prove or not the efficiency of the engine, before attempting to assess which parameters may or may not further improve the possible performance or explain the origin (which can always be done by an echo-engine3 team next year. since it will be all the more motivating for the students of the academic year 2008-2009 to continue the work of their predecessors if the latter have obtained solid and possibly conclusive results). What the Pantone community is lacking now is formal and concrete proof, established following a well-defined protocol that answers the main questions concerning the effective improvement or not of the yield, without harming the performance. If you have this proof, the number of schools that are likely to be interested in this project will increase and you will then be free to suggest that one or the other test one or the other parameter. , again following a well-established protocol and accumulating concrete results, following a scientific approach.

d / I thought I read somewhere that lawnmower engines work particularly well with the Pantone system. Wouldn't it be more viable, economically and practically (easier handling to put down and remove from the test bench) to work on this kind of engine? Would it then be possible to obtain two identical engines, one being transformed, and the other kept in its own state, in order to be able to make an objective comparison at any time (concept of "blank")? It would probably be less impressive than a single big high tech engine, but perhaps more rigorous.

4. I was a little long, sorry ... even my intervention may seem inappropriate, sorry also for that ... but I want to tell you that it is for the simple purpose of helping you and this help can without doubt to be all the more effective as I have the typical profile of the people who criticize you the most, by my training ... with a little less than a priori.

5. If you have questions related to chemistry, I can try to help you on this point, just contact me in MP (I think it is possible on this kind of forum, is not it ?)

6. Peace and prosperity : Mrgreen:
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79126
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10974




by Christophe » 09/11/07, 08:59

Hi Xcom,

A) I rather agree with your different points except for the mower: it's generally very basic DIY to discover the system and no one can make an accurate energy balance on a lawn mower ... But the system actually allows to run a mower with heavier fuels ...

B) I deduce that you are a teacher of chemistry (or Physical Sciences and Chemistry)? I will be brief ...

a) Regarding the S&V article, there is a lot to complain about, and we argued widely about it on this subject:

https://www.econologie.com/forums/article-pa ... t4204.html

Moreover, the controversy continues ... :)

b) Regarding the "chemistry" of the system, I can only advise you to read this document in depth: https://www.econologie.com/ionisation-de ... -3324.html

With Julien, we are doing an update of this document ... the V2 should appear within a week or two.

This explanation was almost "zapped" (or at least distorted in the insert on the QED) by the journalist from S&V while it is fundamental ... too bad ...

C) There is a good chance that the process mentioned by Michel Barnier about the reduction of trawler consumption in yesterday's 4 truths is a water doping system, see:
https://www.econologie.com/forums/sarkozy-le ... t4265.html

D) Yes credibility and reproducibility are lacking to the system (this is perhaps why the engine manufacturers are not interested yet at least publicly?) but given the number of montages ...it is no longer a valid argumente.
And one of the most credible testimony is this one, made on a City Hall vehicle!

https://www.econologie.com/moteur-panton ... -3404.html

Pkoi the results on the bench are lacking?
Reflection elements here:
https://www.econologie.com/forums/dopage-pas ... t4099.html

E) And to end on an "optimistic" note: I think (rightly I hope) that scientific truth always wins ... (some say that you just have to wait for your detractors to die) ... c 'is pkoi "we" will win : Cheesy:
Last edited by Christophe the 09 / 11 / 07, 09: 48, 1 edited once.
0 x
the middle
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4075
Registration: 12/01/07, 08:18
x 4




by the middle » 09/11/07, 09:30

Hello Christophe, and the others too.
It might be time to give a name to the research you are doing.
Because in general, the name of pantome is evoked, the noise is dispersed, and people type this name on the search engines.
Result, they discover that God is in the circuit, a running in poles, it also adds cocacola, in short, this name throws a terrible discredit on your work.
As proof, the gentleman who is perhaps a teacher tells us about a lawnmower ... it means that he typed pantome on a search engine.
Rather you give a name to this research, soon pantome will become a ghost.
I have no reason?
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79126
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10974




by Christophe » 09/11/07, 09:46

lejustemilieu wrote:I have no reason?


If toutafait besides the kit sellers have done it then good ... pkoi not "us" .... but we would have to start a brainstorming right?

On the wiki I tried to use the term "water injection" rather than pantone ... but the title is still "pantone engine" ...

https://www.econologie.com/wiki-moteur-p ... hp/Accueil
0 x
the middle
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4075
Registration: 12/01/07, 08:18
x 4




by the middle » 09/11/07, 09:54

Typing on Google is one of the answers
The method of brainstorming is to gather a group of selected people who are asked to freely express their ideas, thoughts and intuitions ...
Not bad ... it's an idea ...
0 x
xcom
I discovered econologic
I discovered econologic
posts: 4
Registration: 08/11/07, 10:05




by xcom » 09/11/07, 09:57

To answer two previous messages, it is obvious that the first reflex is to do a search on Pantone. I am not sure, however, that changing the name of the process has a major impact on how the public or the scientific community can view it.

What would be interesting, on the other hand, is that the most experienced among you, make a synthesis of the various assumptions made about the operation of your process and themselves, demonstrate why some have been rejected and what are the new ones. explanations offered, somewhat following the principle of a "review" article. It would thus allow new interested parties not to have to repeat everything that has been said on the subject and to lose interest immediately, because the first attempts at explanations concerning this process were far-fetched, which you yourself recognize . A kind of standard document: "Pantone process and its derivatives, myths and realities".

Regarding the document "steam ionization ..." I think I will wait for version 2, which I suppose takes into account criticisms that have already been formulated (eg: the diagram with a "very hot" "Endothermic" reactor at the top of the first page doesn't help your case, I think). That said, if you want a (positive) pre-review, I would like to stick to it (as long as you are interested in the opinion of a chemist).

Regarding the objection concerning reproducibility ... we must understand here "reproducibility of the results under comparable conditions (same engine, same assembly, same tests, etc.)" The fact that many testimonies are collected does not allow generally not to convince a scientist. For example (and don't be offended, this is just an example ... but at first glance, many people could testify that the sun revolves around the earth ... and yet ...

On the other hand, if you define a protocol and following this protocol to the letter, with precise measurements carried out with a rigor and a scientific logic, there it would be more difficult not to believe it (even if, a scientific theory is true only when it is shown that it is not true).

It may seem a bit obtuse behavior, but it avoids many drifts.

PS chemistry teacher, to answer Christophe's question
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79126
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10974




by Christophe » 09/11/07, 10:08

xcom wrote:What would be interesting, on the other hand, is that the most experienced among you, make a synthesis of the various assumptions made about the operation of your process and themselves, demonstrate why some have been rejected and what are the new ones. explanations offered, somewhat following the principle of a "review" article.


But it's already done ...

Synthesis doping with water

It is a wiki so editable to wish by who wants it ...

xcom wrote:Regarding the document "steam ionization ..." I think I will wait for version 2, which I suppose takes into account criticisms that have already been formulated (eg: the diagram with a "very hot" "Endothermic" reactor at the top of the first page doesn't help your case, I think). That said, if you want a (positive) pre-review, I would like to stick to it (as long as you are interested in the opinion of a chemist).


Precisely your "wise" opinion on the V1 would make a V2 even more constructive ...

xcom wrote:The fact that many testimonials are collected does not generally convince a scientist.


A scientist (I am one, at least in part because he is inactive) has a lot of trouble to question himself ... and to look at information from unofficial sources .... And this especially in FRANCE. ..

See the behavior of the journalist from S&V who refuses even to speak to the conditional ones about our most plausible hypotheses (some of it is JUST SENSE scientific ...)

xcom wrote:On the other hand, if you define a protocol and following this protocol to the letter, with precise measurements carried out with a rigor and a scientific logic, there it would be more difficult not to believe it (even if, a scientific theory is true only when it is shown that it is not true).


Yes, but that will not be enough for the same reason as mentioned above: "we" are not "officials" ... and I am not even talking about the necessary means ...
0 x
xcom
I discovered econologic
I discovered econologic
posts: 4
Registration: 08/11/07, 10:05




by xcom » 09/11/07, 11:19

Christophe wrote:Precisely your "wise" opinion on the V1 would make a V2 even more constructive ...


Ok, I'll try to see that pretty quickly (since you plan to put your V2 online shortly).

Then I will clarify a little my way of thinking ... I'm not sure we understand each other completely and I do not want to pollute (too much) the thread of the discussion :)

Can I return my answer in MP? Or do you prefer that I open a new thread?
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

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

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : Google Adsense [Bot] and 180 guests