Here the decontamination surveys during my studies End Project qualified unit SAGEM OPTIMA 5040. This project is available on this page.
1) Preliminary remarks:
1) As pourez see these surveys were conducted in a Controle Technique Automobile center. This reflects the practical difficulties encountered during this project I had to actually move (with my own) the test bench to perform these measurements (over a weekend). Despite what you think pourait, an engineering school is not necessarily well equipped!
2) These measures are not those that have been exploited in the report. Indeed, a few weeks later, we managed to get a 4 gas analyzer at the ENSAIS. This explains the differences in numbers you may find. On these readings, the power could not be accurately measured. I simply had an electric resistive load variable from 0 to 1500 W as well as a frequency-meter to measure the speed of rotation. The denomination "Full power" therefore corresponds to 1500 W and not 4000 (nominal power of the group).
3) These measures are from ... more June 2001 3 years have passed and strictly no serious proposal for R & D was proposed to me not! When I contacted the ADEME I had no constructive answer! A Renault BE engineer was simply contemptuous with the system and myself to the limit insults.
4) For each statement, I would make brief comments, yours are welcome in the reactions below. For more details you will need read my report.
5) The size of each file is fairly consistent (200 KB) to maintain maximum lisibité. We apologize nearby low-speed connections ...
6) It is regrettable not to have the original configuration 100% in pollution figures. This could be done for practical reasons.
7) These surveys are more qualitative than quantitative. In general the mass analysis reduced to the energy produced would be much more interesting ... .But this requires industrial means much greater than I had (and have) not ...
8) From a purely scientific point of view it is essential to bear in mind the following when 3 reading these statements:
a) A large part of the environmental remediation undoubtedly comes from the almost perfect gasification mixture. Just before combustion, we are no longer in the presence of fog but a gas. Nevertheless rodless tests tend to prove anything else happens: the stem promotes heating of gas contributes to a better gasification.
b) The solution of the bubbler used at the time is not the most sense because it is only the most volatile parts of the gasoline that evaporate and thus burning. Who said volatiles said necessarily better combustion and pollution control. Furthermore it impoverishes and gasoline (up to reduce its PCI by 2).
c) According to the internal technology of the analyzer it is possible (but not certain) that the results displayed by either éronés:
- The fact that no more fuel burned
- The presence of an excess of water vapor in the exhaust gas.
I think the latter remark applies particularly to the carbon footprint.
Despite these 3 point, the results are still quite amazing especially at the effect of water on the clean (we arrive at 000 ppm) and the exhaust gases are cleaner than the air in the garage this pollutant.
For each measurement, a scan of the statement of the abatement equipment has been made, it all have this form:
Click on the title of each measure to see the records.
I) Pollution carburetor operation and reactor as a muffler (see the complete study for details)
The figures in slow motion: CO = 4,5 2% CO1.7 =% ppm HC = 7000, 2% = O13.
The midrange figures: CO = 5.04 2% CO1.9 =% ppm HC = 8200, 2% = O13.7.
The full power numbers: CO = 6.4 2% CO3.6 =% ppm HC = 3850, 2% = O11.4.
Our analysis: this translates a very bad combustion (even for a small petrol engine "undepolluted" compared to the automotive engines). This is probably due to the "pot-reactor" which is no longer "tuned" to the engine and slight modifications on the intake. In addition, the fully original pot is located at the end of the exhaust system. Exhaust suction is therefore certain. The modification of the exhaust system does not support combustion!
II) "Pantone" operating pollution in various configurations (see full study for details)
Configuration: gasoline injection through the reactor without water adition.
The figures in slow motion: CO = 0.7 2% CO4.6 =% ppm HC = 88, 2% = O13.6.
Configuration: gasoline injection through the reactor with water adition.
The full load figures: CO = 0.03 2% CO6.4 =% ppm HC = 95, 2% = O11.9.
Configuration: gasoline injection through the reactor without water adition. optimum settings.
The digits to 1000 W: CO = 0.06 2% CO6.2 =% ppm HC = 000, O2 = 12.2%.
Configuration: Constant load on gas bubbler. Valve closed water.
The water valve closed figures: CO = 0.80 2% CO6.9 =% ppm HC = 033, 2% = O10.5.
Configuration: Constant load on gas bubbler. Valve open water.
Figures valve open water: CO = 0.01 2% CO6.2 =% ppm HC = 000, O2 = 12.1%.
III) Other configurations
Configuration: Essence replaced by Diesel in bubbler. No water injection. Regime slowed.
The figures Diesel idling: CO = 0.15 2% CO3.3 =% ppm HC = 2500, 2% = O15.9.
Configuration: Gasoline replaced by Gasoil in bubbler. No water injection. Maximum "possible" load (ie fairly low, 500 W approx)
The numbers Gasoil load "max": CO = 0.45% CO2 = 7.0%, ppm HC = 1600, O2 = 7.2%.
Configuration: Rod removed from the reactor. Regime slowed. minimal pollution achievable.
Figures rodless. Slow motion. : CO = 0.2 2% CO3.5 =% ppm HC = 3100, 2% = O16.3.
Configuration: Rod removed from the reactor. Max W. 1500 attainable minimum pollution without water injection.
Figures rodless load 1500 W without water injection: CO = 4.2% CO2 = 7.6%, HC ppm = 350, 2% = O6.2.
Configuration: Rod removed from the reactor. Max W. 1500 attainable with minimum pollution of water injection.
Figures rodless 1500 W load with water injection: CO = 7.4% CO2 = 6.1%, HC ppm = 260, 2% = O5.6.
IV) Other measures
Configuration: Motor screeching halt after carburetor test.
The figures "in pot": CO = 0.01%, CO2 = 0.00%, ppm HC = 1720, O2 = 20.6%.
Configuration: Ambient air garage in technical control. Measures taken to 3 m test bench.
The air of the garage: CO = 0.00% CO2 = 0.00%, HC ppm = 39, 2% = O20.9.
Our analysis: the ambient air is more "polluted" than the exhaust in pantone configuration for the best results. What more can be said ?