steam injection without pantone reactor

Water injection in thermal engines and the famous "pantone engine". General informations. Press clippings and videos. Understanding and scientific explanations on the injection of water into engines: ideas for assemblies, studies, physico-chemical analyzes.
laurent.delaon
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 168
Registration: 13/08/05, 17:49




by laurent.delaon » 02/03/07, 00:32

Hello,

camel1 wrote:Finally, as far as I am concerned, the mass has already been said, since we know that with simple injection, we obtain in the best case "only" 15% maximum, where we have exceeded the bar 30%, on variable driving conditions, with many short trips. and without losing sight of the fact that this is an average ...
The 15% more, which they released you?



If you don't know where the 15% comes from, how can you say it is a "maximum" value then?
0 x
User avatar
camel1
Pantone engine Researcher
Pantone engine Researcher
posts: 322
Registration: 29/01/05, 00:29
Location: Loire
x 1
Contact :




by camel1 » 02/03/07, 02:19

Laurent Hi!

laurent.delaon wrote:Hello,
If you don't know where the 15% comes from, how can you say it is a "maximum" value then?


I think you've misunderstood me, when I talk about maxi, it's the gain brought by a simple injection of water without a reactor.
Those who have experienced, and who have reported, give results between 8 and 15% depending on the case ...
Similarly, a number who had reactors that did not work had a gain of this order.

The question that arises, in the case of the proto on the merco (and others), is to know where the gain 15% additional, you seize?

A + + +
Michel
0 x
We were on the brink, but we made a big step forward ...
Other
Pantone engine Researcher
Pantone engine Researcher
posts: 3787
Registration: 17/03/05, 02:35
x 12




by Other » 02/03/07, 03:22

Hello
If you don't know where the 15% comes from, how can you say that it is a "maximum" value then
?


We do not know where 15% comes from or where 30% comes from
We know that it takes very little pulverized water and a little more with a panton
Now it would be necessary for someone who tried the VIX to confirm 1000 km with a water supply.
Or that those who walked exclusively by steam confirms it.
What we want to know is how to always have 30% and more in all engine speeds.
In the end we know that there is an economy with water in an engine, but to make it admit to Mr everyone it must be substantial, measurable and repetitive, it is the challenge ..
Because at the moment few people who (have titles) believe in water, for them it is insignificant.
but no time to waste to preach in the desert, a small number work there and they know ..

Yet last I replaced water with pure alcohol and then with gasoline and it is with water that I have the best performance (because with 2 liters of gasoline in the bubbler must that I count it in my consomation, my ratio is adjusted pile hair with the reading of the Lambda probe.


Andre
1 x
laurent.delaon
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 168
Registration: 13/08/05, 17:49

to measure is to err. But how much?




by laurent.delaon » 03/03/07, 10:21

camel1 wrote:Laurent Hi!

laurent.delaon wrote:The question that arises, in the case of the proto on the merco (and others), is to know where the gain 15% additional, you seize?


It's simple that comes from the uncertainty of measurement; all the more inaccurate as it is not repeated.

Hence the risk of drawing erroneous conclusions.

This is the baba of metrology.
0 x
User avatar
Asgard bone tyr
My R21 Pantone on TF1 :)
My R21 Pantone on TF1 :)
posts: 160
Registration: 06/02/05, 18:21
Location: all over
x 1




by Asgard bone tyr » 03/03/07, 13:18

Several people do tests and apparently we can win a liter 100km without a reactor but it stops!
After that, it becomes risky! and the amount of water must have remained very modest !!!
To achieve results with so little, you still have to set a minimum!
To my knowledge, it's not essential to try! As said andré it's already quite long and complicated tests, must not lose!
How would you like to modify or refine a material without element (reactor) to allow this transformation ??? Chambrin it would be deceived ???
1 x
User avatar
camel1
Pantone engine Researcher
Pantone engine Researcher
posts: 322
Registration: 29/01/05, 00:29
Location: Loire
x 1
Contact :

Re: measure what is wrong. But how much?




by camel1 » 03/03/07, 14:09

Hello !

laurent.delaon wrote:
camel1 wrote:The question that arises, in the case of the proto on the merco (and others), is to know where the gain 15% additional, you seize?


It's simple that comes from the uncertainty of measurement; all the more inaccurate as it is not repeated.

Hence the risk of drawing erroneous conclusions.

This is the baba of metrology.


Question metrology (and methodology), I do not think I have any lesson to receive, when a gain is validated on a power bench, with a measurement conso established by weighing timed, it is no longer in the approximate, but in the simple systematic error of the measuring device (2,5% for the scale, and 1 / 10 s for my thumb which stops the stopwatch). From the moment when one highlights differences greater than 15%, one is necessarily outside the margins of noise.
This is undoubtedly the whole difference in method, precisely, between measuring on a bench, with precisely defined conditions, which make it possible to make comparisons "all things being equal", and the "full to full" method that you use , Laurent Delaon, who is subject to variable external conditions and your way of driving ... Anyone who works seriously on the pantone has learned to be wary of their own way of driving, because we know that depending on the nervousness of driving, the consumption can change considerably, therefore, even by doing, as you recommend it, 5 consecutive fill-ups, you will have in the end only a weighted result of a supposed phenomenon, allied to a behavior which remains a point of interrogation, transferring this question mark to your overall result.

While on a bench, a given braking torque with a given engine speed can only lead to a measurement outside the operator's field of influence (objectivity of the experiment and the measurements - subject already discussed elsewhere). .)

As you say, there are always uncertainties, but there are methods that can reduce them to a quantified (and acceptable) range.
And 15% more, unless you take those who lead the tests for perfect morons, is not a result that can be dismissed by a hand, as you seem to want to do. under the pretext that the manipulation was not repeated X times ...

Knowing how to play with uncertainties is the basis in mechanical engineering (to mention only this subject).

Making a prototype is a part of measurement, part of drawing, and part of realization. If you do not master a minimum of the measure (and the errors which are attached to it) you will make a buggy realization, the punishment in the matter being the observation "It does not fit!"

Obviously, you stopped at the doors of the pantone, probably repelled by the immensity of the task to carry out its development, and telling you that basically, if a simple injection of steam is enough, why get bored ... perfectly respectable attitude.
From there to put you above others, to rely on your results as a reference, and put in a simplistic way on the account of the error of measurement all the other results is an attitude which can not claim to be scientific.

I do not know your scientific and technical course, but I promise you for next week an avalanche of results to analyze ... we will resume this discussion after this phase ...

Hello !

Michel
0 x
We were on the brink, but we made a big step forward ...
Other
Pantone engine Researcher
Pantone engine Researcher
posts: 3787
Registration: 17/03/05, 02:35
x 12




by Other » 03/03/07, 16:00

Hello
It's simple that comes from the uncertainty of measurement; all the more inaccurate as it is not repeated.

Hence the risk of drawing erroneous conclusions.

This is the baba of metrology.


If you have to doubt a test bench of a large institute, (not a garage bench tinkered with doubtful instruments)
What are we going to rely on to measure?
Instant measurement of consumption and power and torque is the fastest way to improve and understand what parameters need to be changed to improve the system.
This will take 10000 km to do an analysis ever in going out

(not understand how it works exactly that it will come after or during the sessaies after having proceeded by elimination
to understand precisely what is happening in the engine is the domain of scientist and I am very far from having this knowledge, other we will do it for)
For the moment, the maximum efficiency with the value of the steam input, output, amount of vapor and air entering the reactor, and the amount of water / gasoline swallowed which gives the best performance is being researched on the bench. .
We miss a standard like the one our grandfather has established with 1 / 14,7 carburetors

Laurent does not take this as a criticism in your regard you work with steam, you arrive at good results, it is necessary that also tests to know how to improve your results, if only having a constancy and results repetitive , do not blame whatever our level of tools and care provided to our montages this is still a problem during our tests and I would not say the many times that during a test of 300km there was a few things that was missing, the whole test is to resume, when you do this with a trip of agrement you are not always dressed to search in the engine in addition your family comes tané that you stop in the halt to examine your Consumption of water levels hood in the air ect ..
You're done doing your test alone 100km in one direction and you come back full measure it becomes hard for the back in the long run and The 300TD is far from comfortable like the Buick ..

Andre
0 x
User avatar
PITMIX
Pantone engine Researcher
Pantone engine Researcher
posts: 2028
Registration: 17/09/05, 10:29
x 17




by PITMIX » 03/03/07, 20:39

Hello
Well I will try to put some water in the wine (it's not good! :frown: )

Laurent obtained significant savings without a reactor and he made these measurements of conso over thousands of km.
Camel1 and Asguard pass their cars on bench and also get very interesting savings with reactor.

What is interesting to raise in this face to face with and without a reactor is that without a reactor, it seems that it does not facilitate the task.
The GV system with constant level is very practical but it is not enough either to install it to obtain savings.
I think that Laurent is one of the few to develop a reactorless system and achieve positive results.
Others like Rabbit also get a fair economy with a drip of water in the intake.
I think it's very interesting not to leave behind such experiences.
I had hoped that a simpler system than the reactor would give results more easily even if they are moderate.
If this is not the case, it's not cool.
But given the proportion of experimenter in favor of the reactor difficult to draw an objective conclusion.
1 x
laurent.delaon
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 168
Registration: 13/08/05, 17:49

Re: measure what is wrong. But how much?




by laurent.delaon » 03/03/07, 23:05

Hello,

Question metrology (and methodology), I do not think I have any lesson to receive, when a gain is validated on a power bench, with a measurement conso established by weighing timed, it is no longer in the approximate, but in the simple systematic error of the measuring device (2,5% for the scale, and 1 / 10 s for my thumb which stops the stopwatch).

Ben precisely Camel, the shoemaker is always the worst shod. So if you have a balance is a laboratory gas balance (I doubt it ...) you have actually 2.5% error but otherwise you are beyond 10%.

From the moment when one highlights differences greater than 15%, one is necessarily outside the margins of noise.


Theorem that remains to show ... But do not spend too much time because your statement is false metrologically.
What is right, however, is that this measure is framed by the margins of error of different measuring devices.
But that is not enough to compare TWO measures between them in a scientific way unfortunately.

This is undoubtedly the whole difference in method, precisely, between measuring on a bench, with precisely defined conditions, which make it possible to make comparisons "all other things being equal", and the "full to full" method that you use , Laurent Delaon, who is subject to variable external conditions and your way of driving ...


Ben it is more accurate repeating with imprecise material that measuring once with a material say a little more precise.
Moreover in my case I evaluated my conso without system (imprecise repeated measures) BEFORE intaller my system. So the driving factor is integrated before AND after. I can compare my results. Remind me how did you evaluate your drinks before and after? You'll do it soon it's true but you did not do it. Also before announcing that you have results presented as acquired you should have done that. Or relativize the thing.

All those who work seriously on the pantone have learned to be wary of their own way of driving, because we know that following the nervousness of driving, the conso can change considerably, therefore, even by doing, as you recommend, 5 full consecutive you will ultimately have a weighted result of a supposed phenomenon, combined with a conduct that remains a question mark, postponing this question mark on your overall result.


Not precisely not in my case (doubly because I do not have a pantone) you see. Reread explanation above.

You on the other hand you announce results as acquired and after you check them and you speak of being serious it is right?

While on a bench, a given braking torque with a given engine speed can only lead to a measurement outside the operator's field of influence (objectivity of the experiment and the measurements - subject already discussed elsewhere). .)


It is true we are out of the influence of the operator but is it really necessary? are not all cars driven by a driver? what is its influence?
Also have little freedom (see above) of this phenomenon because not everyone has a bench even if it is true it is more convenient for comparison (subject to knowing how to use and operate properly).
But the bench contributes nothing to the development of endurance and reliability of the system in real conditions. You'll see when the montage of the Mercedes Didier will leak (leaked into the pot) after 5000km.

As you say, there are always uncertainties, but there are methods that can reduce them to a quantified (and acceptable) range.

Forks are not quantified, depending on the repetitions and the variability of the measurements.
Have undergone more than have the reduies.

And 15% more, unless you take those who lead the tests for perfect morons, is not a result that can be dismissed by a hand, as you seem to want to do. under the pretext that the manipulation was not repeated X times ...

I do not rule out a single result I'm afraid it's different.

Knowing how to play with uncertainties is the basis in mechanical engineering (to mention only this subject).


He learns the mechanics so ... (or revises ...)
Mecanique stay modest huh? welds and pipes: we are more in plumbing boilermaking than the general mechanics ... (if I looked at your photos ...)

Making a prototype is a part of measurement, part of drawing, and part of realization. If you do not master a minimum of the measure (and the errors which are attached to it) you will make a buggy realization, the punishment in the matter being the observation "It does not fit!"

Note the caveman melted a bronze ax, did he draw a picture before? did he take measurements? was the ax buggy? perhaps....
It seems to me that you exaggerate a little. It's a trend at home ...

Obviously, you stopped at the doors of the pantone, probably repelled by the immensity of the task to carry out its development, and telling you that basically, if a simple injection of steam is enough, why get bored ... perfectly respectable attitude.
From there to put you above others, to rely on your results as a reference, and put in a simplistic way on the account of the error of measurement all the other results is an attitude which can not claim to be scientific.

I made a complete study of a pantone reactor and then thinking about it I opted for the current system. So I did not fall into the panel of the Pantone from my point of view, and I allow myself to point out that There is not really any focus in pushing a steel rod into a tube (well, it's really minimal).
When to my results being I think the only one to have realized them and to have proceeded in this way I am above anyone because no one has done it by myself.
The polemics.

I do not know your scientific and technical course, but I promise you for next week an avalanche of results to analyze ... we will resume this discussion after this phase ...


There is no need to have done studies to have common sense and imagination and know how to tinker.
It is a habit apparently of you to generalize quickly and to draw hasty and erroneous conlusions.
Do you think that I am incapable of understanding the results of your measurements under the pretext that you would have made studies that would allow you to do so without doubt?

I too hallucinate ...
0 x
User avatar
camel1
Pantone engine Researcher
Pantone engine Researcher
posts: 322
Registration: 29/01/05, 00:29
Location: Loire
x 1
Contact :

Re: measure what is wrong. But how much?




by camel1 » 04/03/07, 00:46

Re hello
laurent.delaon wrote:Hello,

Moreover in my case I evaluated my conso without system (imprecise repeated measures) BEFORE intaller my system. So the driving factor is integrated before AND after. I can compare my results. Remind me how did you evaluate your drinks before and after? You'll do it soon it's true but you did not do it. Also before announcing that you have results presented as acquired you should have done that. Or relativize the thing.


You take me for an idiot?
I drove a year without pantone before making and build my proto, carefully watching my driving, carefully surveying my consos for tens of thousands of km.
I took care to look at what box reports I used on test paths, precisely to be able to make the difference afterwards.
Didier rolls with his mercury for more than 10 years, but maybe in your opinion, his conso statements on 700 000 km are statistically false and his knowledge of the reactions (soft) of his engine is reduced by an early attack of Alzeimer's disease : Mrgreen: !

What I'm going to do next is measure bench that I've already seen on the full, with all the difficulties associated with the development of a prototype ... so simple can it appear. ..

You on the other hand you announce results as acquired and after you check them and you speak of being serious it is right?


See above...

It is true we are out of the influence of the operator but is it really necessary? are not all cars driven by a driver? what is its influence?
Also have little freedom (see above) of this phenomenon because not everyone has a bench even if it is true it is more convenient for comparison (subject to knowing how to use and operate properly).
But the bench contributes nothing to the development of endurance and reliability of the system in real conditions. You'll see when the montage of the Mercedes Didier will leak (leaked into the pot) after 5000km.


My poor Laurent, I think you did not understand our approach. It is not for us to prove that it works, but to chopper the information allowing us to find the optimum operating points, and to draw the conclusions to improve the drawing. This passage on the bench is not intended to come to fart on this forum, concerning results that have already been announced, but to advance in terms of R & D by collectively giving ourselves the means we do not have in our respective garages and workshops ...
For your comment about the leak in the pot, I regret to tell you that after a year and a half, and 14 000 km, that of my 205 did not flinch, when Didier, after more than 2000 km, and disassembly, we found nothing of such ...

He learns the mechanics so ... (or revises ...)
Mecanique stay modest huh? welds and pipes: we are more in plumbing boilermaking than the general mechanics ... (if I looked at your photos ...)


Do you teach? It is true that the prototypes do not have a "high tech" look, but it is already miraculous that they exist, given the means at our disposal.
I do the mechanics of my cars for fifteen years, Didier is mechanic since 25 years, so your remark with two bullets ... : Lol:

It seems to me that you exaggerate a little. It's a trend at home ...


As for the exaggeration, those who have the patience to read this forum will make their own idea ... : Lol:

I made a complete study of a pantone reactor and then thinking about it I opted for the current system. So I did not fall into the panel of the Pantone from my point of view, and I allow myself to point out that There is not really any focus in pushing a steel rod into a tube (well, it's really minimal).


It would be interesting for everyone here if you deign to give us the details of this reflection which led you to consider the pantone as a "panel" in which you should not fall. It would probably save us a lot of time.

As for your remark on the development of what you consider to be a trivial assembly of tube and rod, I think that those who try hard to improve their assemblies, by doing all sorts of tests, will appreciate the abyss which separates a thinker who is as magnificent as you from the needy as we are!


There is no need to have done studies to have common sense and imagination and know how to tinker.


There, I join you!

It is a habit apparently of you to generalize quickly and to draw hasty and erroneous conlusions.
Do you think that I am incapable of understanding the results of your measurements under the pretext that you would have made studies that would allow you to do so without doubt?

I too hallucinate ...


I do not know what you're talking about, when to my hasty conclusions, or what mistakes it's about ...

I do not think of your ability to understand or not these results, I do not have the honor to know you to know this kind of thing, the only thing that I see, and that transpires in your writings, it is your sourness and your vanity ... : Cry:

Hello !

Michel
0 x
We were on the brink, but we made a big step forward ...

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Go back to "Water injection in heat engines: information and explanations"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 107 guests