Hi friends !
I just made a small update of the site, concerning the probably useless preparation (according to Laurent) of the next passage to the power bench ...
It's here : http://reaction.directe1.free.fr/Merco220D/020307.html
Good reading !
A + + +
Michel
Mercedes 240 D from Didier
hi Camel1
I would like to know several things.
Between the steam generator and the reactor there is an air intake.
What is the diameter of this one?
I noticed on my car that with the GV connected directly to the intake, with an air intake of 1 to 2mm of water goes up if I use the intake venturi.
Do you plan to delete it or leave it and make more air intake?
Your GV seems tilted towards the back of the car. It's just ?
I would like to know several things.
Between the steam generator and the reactor there is an air intake.
What is the diameter of this one?
I noticed on my car that with the GV connected directly to the intake, with an air intake of 1 to 2mm of water goes up if I use the intake venturi.
Do you plan to delete it or leave it and make more air intake?
Your GV seems tilted towards the back of the car. It's just ?
0 x
- camel1
- Pantone engine Researcher
- posts: 322
- Registration: 29/01/05, 00:29
- Location: Loire
- x 1
- Contact :
Hi Pit!
The air intake is 14mm in diameter.
Remove the air intake? well no, we need the air flow to entrain the vapor in the reactor ...
Put a larger air intake, will know ...
As André says, we must, for a given reactor, play on the air / vapor ratio which gives the optimum.
For the moment, we are in the empirical, to answer your question would be to answer the question: what maximum volume of aerosol per second can be treated by the reactor, with what proportion air / vapor.
And I'm afraid that only a series of systematic tests performed on a dedicated bench is the only quick solution to achieve this ... you see the problem to realize the impact of a single parameter, when 'you have to drive to test ...
The GVs of the merco and the 205 are effectively tilted back, with a slope of at least 45 °.
As for your 1 to 2 mm air intake, that means that the vacuum is primarily aimed at leaving your GV, under these conditions, no wonder you can have upwelling ...
In fact, in my opinion, the depression, as far as the mainsail is concerned, has no other object than to put it in ideal condition to facilitate the production of a more or less saturated steam (limit T ° <100 ° C at a pressure of 1 bar)
If you pull too much into the GV, you put it outside of its normal operating conditions, and there ...
What is important is the vacuum on the inlet branch side, the reactor inlet must remain "free", in particular at the air intake.
Voilou ...
A + + +
Michel
PITMIX wrote:hi Camel1
I would like to know several things.
Between the steam generator and the reactor there is an air intake.
What is the diameter of this one?
I noticed on my car that with the GV connected directly to the intake, with an air intake of 1 to 2mm of water goes up if I use the intake venturi.
Do you plan to delete it or leave it and make more air intake?
Your GV seems tilted towards the back of the car. It's just ?
The air intake is 14mm in diameter.
Remove the air intake? well no, we need the air flow to entrain the vapor in the reactor ...
Put a larger air intake, will know ...
As André says, we must, for a given reactor, play on the air / vapor ratio which gives the optimum.
For the moment, we are in the empirical, to answer your question would be to answer the question: what maximum volume of aerosol per second can be treated by the reactor, with what proportion air / vapor.
And I'm afraid that only a series of systematic tests performed on a dedicated bench is the only quick solution to achieve this ... you see the problem to realize the impact of a single parameter, when 'you have to drive to test ...
The GVs of the merco and the 205 are effectively tilted back, with a slope of at least 45 °.
As for your 1 to 2 mm air intake, that means that the vacuum is primarily aimed at leaving your GV, under these conditions, no wonder you can have upwelling ...
In fact, in my opinion, the depression, as far as the mainsail is concerned, has no other object than to put it in ideal condition to facilitate the production of a more or less saturated steam (limit T ° <100 ° C at a pressure of 1 bar)
If you pull too much into the GV, you put it outside of its normal operating conditions, and there ...
What is important is the vacuum on the inlet branch side, the reactor inlet must remain "free", in particular at the air intake.
Voilou ...
A + + +
Michel
0 x
We were on the brink, but we made a big step forward ...
Hello
The air intake has a minimum, it is certain that if we calculate the residual surface rod reactor is a diameter of 16mm -14 mm rod = 47,1mm square evening a tube of 7,75 mm
so an 8mm tube will do, bigger will not change much.
For those who use a carburetor like Zac it is necessary that the nozzle is smaller if it wants a depression in the venturi of the small carburetor is 6mm and less.
In my first experiments with an electric kettle to make steam I pushed the steam by a branch of the cross and in the other branch I suck the air in the reactor no danger of sending too much steam into the reactor.
If we reread the data of David who said to avoid putting the water in boiling, he is right if we suck directly in the bubbler we are at (pressurize rapid boiling in the bubbler) and saturate the reactor with hot steam, but with a simple air intake it works.
The bubbler becomes a steam generator, not efficient, but it makes steam
what is the supply of auxiliary steam leaving the reactor?
(Do a vapor test directly without going through the reactor?
or make a vapor mixture with that which leaves the reactor?
Andre
Remove the air intake? well no, we need the air flow to entrain the vapor in the reactor ...
Put a larger air intake, will know ...
The air intake has a minimum, it is certain that if we calculate the residual surface rod reactor is a diameter of 16mm -14 mm rod = 47,1mm square evening a tube of 7,75 mm
so an 8mm tube will do, bigger will not change much.
For those who use a carburetor like Zac it is necessary that the nozzle is smaller if it wants a depression in the venturi of the small carburetor is 6mm and less.
In my first experiments with an electric kettle to make steam I pushed the steam by a branch of the cross and in the other branch I suck the air in the reactor no danger of sending too much steam into the reactor.
If we reread the data of David who said to avoid putting the water in boiling, he is right if we suck directly in the bubbler we are at (pressurize rapid boiling in the bubbler) and saturate the reactor with hot steam, but with a simple air intake it works.
The bubbler becomes a steam generator, not efficient, but it makes steam
what is the supply of auxiliary steam leaving the reactor?
(Do a vapor test directly without going through the reactor?
or make a vapor mixture with that which leaves the reactor?
Andre
0 x
- camel1
- Pantone engine Researcher
- posts: 322
- Registration: 29/01/05, 00:29
- Location: Loire
- x 1
- Contact :
Hi Andrew!
Yes, it is to easily switch to the direct steam test ...
A + + +
Michel
Andre wrote:Hello
what is the supply of auxiliary steam leaving the reactor?
(Do a vapor test directly without going through the reactor?
or make a vapor mixture with that which leaves the reactor?
Andre
Yes, it is to easily switch to the direct steam test ...
A + + +
Michel
0 x
We were on the brink, but we made a big step forward ...
Camel you read me wrong.
I meant removing the venturi to suck less and not removing the air intake.
Okay, I'll try with a tee and a strong air intake.
If on one side we increase the suction thanks to the venturi and that on the other we make a strong air intake at the outlet of the GV, this amounts to canceling the depression almost at the level of the GV. Ok this is very good to prevent the water from rising.
this would cancel the function of the GV.
But in fact that largely answers my Question. It takes a lot of air and very little steam.
I thought that by making a 2mm air intake and having a weak suction it would be the same.
I meant removing the venturi to suck less and not removing the air intake.
Okay, I'll try with a tee and a strong air intake.
If on one side we increase the suction thanks to the venturi and that on the other we make a strong air intake at the outlet of the GV, this amounts to canceling the depression almost at the level of the GV. Ok this is very good to prevent the water from rising.
this would cancel the function of the GV.
But in fact that largely answers my Question. It takes a lot of air and very little steam.
I thought that by making a 2mm air intake and having a weak suction it would be the same.
0 x
-
- I understand econologic
- posts: 168
- Registration: 13/08/05, 17:49
Re: Mercedes 340 D from Didier
camel1 wrote:
I just made a small update of the site, concerning the probably useless preparation (according to Laurent) of the next passage to the power bench ...
Ha, did I say that? can you provide proof of what you say?
You make me say things that suit you on things I never said.
I noted that the assembly dropped on the merco (the supply tube) well before 4000km ... In addition for the temperature probes it will be the same. They will gradually lose degrees and break down. This is suitable for immediate use but not for the long term.
You see it does not appear on your diagrams.
0 x
Hi everybody
For you Pitmix.
Your GV regulation problem, I think we are all facing
to this handicap. Obviously with a Venturi the water crosses this GV
in no time: with 250 mm of vacuum (at 2000 revolutions) ...!
I found a 1/2 parade by inlaying a 56/100 Jet
(0,56 mm in diameter), a jet carburetor jet.
in a rubber hose between the Constant level and the inlet of the
GV. I'm not far from the truth (2,1 l R21 D engine).
This allows the steam to "generate" after the mainsail before entering
into the reactor with a 3 mm diameter nozzle.
- Constant level: 1 cm below the low point of the GV
- This morning it was 1/14 of the GO consumed. (7% water)
- Route: 3,8 km (one way: 1,9 km downhill and back: 1,9 km uphill ...)
-T ° exit GV: 74 °
-T ° exit "gas" reactor: 65 ° in the descent and 72 ° in the rise: almost too much!
-Electrification: 70 mv down and up: 160 mv
-Water consumption: 1/3 downhill and 2/3 uphill.
- GO consumption: 176,9 cm3
I am getting to know this route: I have done it at least 40 times and each outing
is encrypted ... including a dozen times before all Pantone ...!
In terms of economy, I am well above 20% on this journey (I do not
give no figures because it is very controversial, even violently, to
about this topic)
On the other hand, flat, at 90, it's only 10 to 13% of savings in GO
This is Pit, if that can help you. I’m running on a 2.1 l and I think it’s
is a 1,9 L Revise the ribs downwards.
Kenavo. A ..56
For you Pitmix.
Your GV regulation problem, I think we are all facing
to this handicap. Obviously with a Venturi the water crosses this GV
in no time: with 250 mm of vacuum (at 2000 revolutions) ...!
I found a 1/2 parade by inlaying a 56/100 Jet
(0,56 mm in diameter), a jet carburetor jet.
in a rubber hose between the Constant level and the inlet of the
GV. I'm not far from the truth (2,1 l R21 D engine).
This allows the steam to "generate" after the mainsail before entering
into the reactor with a 3 mm diameter nozzle.
- Constant level: 1 cm below the low point of the GV
- This morning it was 1/14 of the GO consumed. (7% water)
- Route: 3,8 km (one way: 1,9 km downhill and back: 1,9 km uphill ...)
-T ° exit GV: 74 °
-T ° exit "gas" reactor: 65 ° in the descent and 72 ° in the rise: almost too much!
-Electrification: 70 mv down and up: 160 mv
-Water consumption: 1/3 downhill and 2/3 uphill.
- GO consumption: 176,9 cm3
I am getting to know this route: I have done it at least 40 times and each outing
is encrypted ... including a dozen times before all Pantone ...!
In terms of economy, I am well above 20% on this journey (I do not
give no figures because it is very controversial, even violently, to
about this topic)
On the other hand, flat, at 90, it's only 10 to 13% of savings in GO
This is Pit, if that can help you. I’m running on a 2.1 l and I think it’s
is a 1,9 L Revise the ribs downwards.
Kenavo. A ..56
0 x
Well done Alex
You don't argue! you are in the numbers if you roll a little faster on the flat it will stay above 20% and in certain condition you will rub yourself to 30% it is by playing on the air vapor ratios that you will improve but the small variations are difficult to measure
water consumption revolves around these figures even 10% at a time your economy will be less but the couple will increase and in other tests you will put even less water and the economy will be good without you knowing Why..
What will baffle you that the dosages of water the 20% you will always always do it with medium setting, but when you rub the 30% e tque you can not reproduce it every time it becomes infuriating, the first question that you are going to ask yourself is it possible that it does more sometimes and on sections of travel it does less and why.
Monitors the outlet temperature of the reactor.
Because if you are looking to reduce consumption, water with a very hot reactor the outlet can go up and conversely if you want more water the outlet becomes colder, this is one of the problems depending on the dimensions of the reactor, so difficult to balance the water flow and its output temperatur, you have to ask yourself the question is this the water flow which has the most influence or the temperature of this vapor, at the outlet, or both
You just fell into the long tests, analyze and examine the results well so as not to waste too much time.
Be careful in up and down consumption tests
this benefits consumption, the good test is on a medium flat road and on a long journey because the first 15 km the reactor does not have the same reaction
I remember a consumption test on a plane over an hour you make it go up sharply during the major part of the test then in reduction you quietly redescend you arrive at super good consumption! But in reality the ascent and descent must be excluded from the tests, only the correct horizontal flight test has constant and significant speed.
Andre
In terms of economy, I am well above 20% on this journey (I do not
give no figures because it is very controversial, even violently, to
about this topic)
On the other hand, flat, at 90, it's only 10 to 13% of savings in GO
You don't argue! you are in the numbers if you roll a little faster on the flat it will stay above 20% and in certain condition you will rub yourself to 30% it is by playing on the air vapor ratios that you will improve but the small variations are difficult to measure
)This morning it was 1/14 of the GO consumed. (7% water
water consumption revolves around these figures even 10% at a time your economy will be less but the couple will increase and in other tests you will put even less water and the economy will be good without you knowing Why..
What will baffle you that the dosages of water the 20% you will always always do it with medium setting, but when you rub the 30% e tque you can not reproduce it every time it becomes infuriating, the first question that you are going to ask yourself is it possible that it does more sometimes and on sections of travel it does less and why.
Monitors the outlet temperature of the reactor.
Because if you are looking to reduce consumption, water with a very hot reactor the outlet can go up and conversely if you want more water the outlet becomes colder, this is one of the problems depending on the dimensions of the reactor, so difficult to balance the water flow and its output temperatur, you have to ask yourself the question is this the water flow which has the most influence or the temperature of this vapor, at the outlet, or both
You just fell into the long tests, analyze and examine the results well so as not to waste too much time.
Be careful in up and down consumption tests
this benefits consumption, the good test is on a medium flat road and on a long journey because the first 15 km the reactor does not have the same reaction
I remember a consumption test on a plane over an hour you make it go up sharply during the major part of the test then in reduction you quietly redescend you arrive at super good consumption! But in reality the ascent and descent must be excluded from the tests, only the correct horizontal flight test has constant and significant speed.
Andre
0 x
Hello
Camel1 I confirm what I said be careful if you use the venturi with live GV.
Either you have to make a bigger air intake or you remove the venturi.
I just did the test with a 12mm air inlet tube the water is still coming up so I run the engine under engine speed at 2000rpm at 40-50km / h.
Alex I didn't quite understand.
Is it an air intake that you made between the float and the GV with the nozzle or a restriction of the water supply after the float?
If it is a bridle in the end your float is a safety and it only passes what the nozzle passes.
It is like putting a water carb, right?
Camel1 I confirm what I said be careful if you use the venturi with live GV.
Either you have to make a bigger air intake or you remove the venturi.
I just did the test with a 12mm air inlet tube the water is still coming up so I run the engine under engine speed at 2000rpm at 40-50km / h.
Alex I didn't quite understand.
Is it an air intake that you made between the float and the GV with the nozzle or a restriction of the water supply after the float?
If it is a bridle in the end your float is a safety and it only passes what the nozzle passes.
It is like putting a water carb, right?
0 x
-
- Similar topics
- Replies
- views
- Last message
-
- 3 Replies
- 8429 views
-
Last message by jrneco
View the latest post
11/03/16, 20:29A subject posted in the forum : Water injection in engines: montages and experiments
-
- 11 Replies
- 34249 views
-
Last message by Tibo1987
View the latest post
26/02/14, 19:46A subject posted in the forum : Water injection in engines: montages and experiments
-
- 7 Replies
- 11367 views
-
Last message by Flytox
View the latest post
26/04/11, 22:07A subject posted in the forum : Water injection in engines: montages and experiments
-
- 23 Replies
- 31836 views
-
Last message by Jean Valjean
View the latest post
13/04/11, 23:01A subject posted in the forum : Water injection in engines: montages and experiments
-
- 4 Replies
- 10399 views
-
Last message by sabetlo711
View the latest post
12/02/11, 17:06A subject posted in the forum : Water injection in engines: montages and experiments
Back to "Water injection in the engines: the assembly and experimentation"
Who is online ?
Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 157 guests