Usefulness of the pantone reactor rod

[carburologue]

Hello,

I ask the question: I wanted to know if the reactor and more particularly if the magnetized rod really had an impact on the gas which emerges from it.
Because on youtube, a guy runs a mower without a reactor, just with the bubbler and claims that he mixes water + alcohol, petrol and oil etc ... but that the reactor is not necessary.
By cons, pollution issue, it does not rule.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93EzLr6Irrk

[Christophe]

We must distinguish 100% pantone and Gillier Pantone, water doping.

In the 1st case, it improves the carburation "a little" (look at my report there are pollution control tests with or without a rod). cf
https://www.econologie.com/rapport-d-ing ... es-93.html
https://www.econologie.com/mesures-de-la ... s-321.html

I quote:

c) Test without stem. Slow motion.

Configuration: Rod removed from the reactor. Regime slowed. minimal pollution achievable.

Figures without stem. Slow motion. : CO = 0.2% CO2 = 3.5%, ppm HC = 3100, O2 = 16.3%.

d) Test without stem. one essence.

Configuration: Rod removed from the reactor. Maximum load 1500 W. Minimum pollution achievable without water injection.

Figures without rod load 1500 W without water injection: CO = 4.2%, CO2 = 7.6%, ppm HC = 350, O2 = 6.2%.

e) Test without stem. Gasoline and water.

Configuration: Rod removed from the reactor. Maximum load 1500 W. Minimum pollution achievable with water injection.

Figures without rod load 1500 W with water injection: CO = 7.4%, CO2 = 6.1%, ppm HC = 260, O2 = 5.6%.

For magnetism it is complete blank until someone demonstrates the opposite.

On the other hand the magnetism is a consequence of the ionization of a moving gas and ca everyone noticed it: when the engine turns, there is magnetism in the reactor.
cf. https://www.econologie.com/ionisation-de ... -3324.html

We have already talked a lot about the subject, use the search engine: https://www.econologie.com/forums/search.php

ps: I like your signature!

[Christophe]

For the lazy,

a) without stem:



b) with rod:



Without rod: we have an engine that pollutes to death, with we have an engine that does better than catas pots ...

This concerns ONLY THE 100% Pantone.

For doping I think that the rod has, at least, a role of misting / ionization (partial) ...

[Chatham]

Without rod: we have an engine that pollutes to death, with we have an engine that does better than catas pots ...

This concerns ONLY THE 100% Pantone.

Better than the catamaran: no because with a catamaran in good condition the CO level is too low to be measured with a standard device ... it was also still the case at the CT of my old personal car after 10 years and 120000 km ... And with the pantone, it's a safe bet that these good pollution figures become bad during load changes (acceleration / deceleration) ... while with a catamaran it is still correct.
the difference between with rod and without rod undoubtedly come from a strong imbalance of total richness because one passes from a restrictive mode (with rod) to a mode "richer than without pantone" ...

[Christophe]

Chatam you're incorrigible ... you compare a DIY with an industrial solution ... how much in cost in billion € the development of the cat? Put the same on the pantone and we will see the result ...

No there is no imbalance ... in both cases these are the best possible adjustable ... in other words: the lowest depollution point.

On the other hand, the composition of the gasoline in the "bubbler" was not constant, it is the ONLY counter admissible argument.

[carburologue]

thank you christophe for your intervention
oh well, you like my signature