Pantone / Doping water, some details?

[yakakliker]

After studying doping with water for some time, I decided to act on my vehicle (this will certainly be the subject of some posts when I have some feedback).

There are, however, some gray areas on the differences between Pantone and water doping:

When I look at the Pantone system on the famous lawnmower, I see a system recycling a portion of the exhaust gases that pass through a bubbler containing a mixture of water / gasoline then passes through the reactor to start again in the engine intake.
(Correct me if im wrong)

When I look at the water doping system, I take ambient air, which passes through the bubbler to charge in moisture, through the reactor to enter the engine intake.

At first glance, the 2 systems are very similar.

And yet, at no time do we speak of anything other than the water in the bubbler or the recycling of the exhaust gases for "water doping"? (I am thinking among other things of the water / drain oil mixture for example)

For reasons, are these differences and has not we just adopted exactly the same principle for diesel engines (recycling of these gases in a water / hydrocarbon mixture)?

Have there been any tests with, for example, in the bubbler, that of the oil of draining? (efficiency / pollution)

Yes, I look a little heavy like that but I reassure you, when you know me it's worse!

[yakakliker]

I see that my question unfortunately does not emulate ...

I will thus deepen a little the bottom of my thought:

I read somewhere on the site that diesel engines can be "doped" with gas.

However, this system is of little interest at present given the price of the said gas.

In parallel, the Pantone (I think the lawnmower) apparently, is able to work with for example water and oil drain (there I would like a confirmation, maybe it is a mistake)

If this is the case, then it means that the Pantone "transforms" the used oil (a waste) into a gas efficient enough to run the mower.

Can not we then adapt this system to the Diesel allowing the blow:

1) To recycle the oil of drain
2) A reduced flammable gas supply that may be of interest.
3) An increase in the effectiveness of doping

However, I am surprised to see no discussion on the subject but maybe I looked bad ....

[Other]

Hello

For reasons, are these differences and has not we just adopted exactly the same principle for diesel engines (recycling of these gases in a water / hydrocarbon mixture)?

There are experimental montages, just to know if it works.
and there are mounts to be operational on the road, without having to drag a toolbox into the suitcase. with a minimum of maitenance ..

In a mount doping with water on a diesel, I tested as the assembly of (MMM) to pass the oil vapor of the breather, after a few thousand km, it is a fouling of the stem if one lets pass vapors oil, cold reactor (driving in town, descent, idling) while water evaporates once hot without dirtying the stem ..
as for the exhaust to be passed through the reactor of a diesel that ends up also dirty the rod, and I can not say, beyond doubt, that dirty the stem with soot carbon it Damage to the proper functioning of the sytéme (it took a 1000 km when I went back to the water and air, to find my good results ..

For the mower engine that works with oil (or rather oil vapor) there are very few who have made functional assemblies.
cold engine you are forced to start the gasoline to heat the reactor, then have a powerful auxilaire heating for the bubbler oil .. So a laboratory plant ..
the only results I had was with a hot bubbler, and in this case, difficult to pass enough water in the same reactor without too much cool, (to the oil must have a heat high enough to run the reactor
I doubt that on a diesel turbo we have this heat)
Anyway a diesel works well with oil directly in the injectors.

Andre

[yakakliker]

Thank you André for your answer.

The discussion is closed (at least for the moment ...)

[coucou789456]

and if we replaced the bubbler with an ultrasound system to produce a fog

[Christophe]

Not enough flow and not regulated ..

We've already talked about dozens of times ... https://www.econologie.com/forums/search.php

[Flytox]

Hello yakakliker

In parallel, the Pantone (I think the lawnmower) apparently, is able to work with for example water and oil drain (there I would like a confirmation, maybe it is a mistake)

For the drain oil, here we are an "green" site, burn oil drain as fuel is a total heresy. The induced pollution is daunting. A normal consumption of oil on a normal engine is derisory but already responsible for 1 / 3 rejected soot particles ...

Arghhh! I find more the beautiful "camenbert" which gave the various pollutants ... In short, the oils are additive with lots of chemicals, and all these additives are powerful aggravating factors for the production of soot and other filth in the exhaust.

If you want to make a gesture for the planet, please burn only natural oil or fried recycle.
A+

[yakakliker]

Hello yakakliker

For the drain oil, here we are an "green" site, burn oil drain as fuel is a total heresy. The induced pollution is daunting. A normal consumption of oil on a normal engine is derisory but already responsible for 1 / 3 rejected soot particles ...

A+

Sorry, I thought I read that the Pantone allowed the use of hydrocarbons of any kind (including oil) with the specificity of almost no pollutants but apparently the information is false.

Sorry.

[Christophe]

Yeah, wrong and false.

You have to read bullshit written by smart guys who copy / paste the nonsense of the pantone itself ... without experimenting

What saddens me is that there is a will, on wikipedia in particular, to keep this bullshit "up to date" ... while there are end results with doping with water from the pantone.
Last example in date: https://www.econologie.com/moteur-propre ... -3889.html

Can be a hit of lobbyists to keep the hogwash online ...

[yakakliker]

Failing to advance doping, this discussion will at least have the merit of clarifying certain points.