Scientific and theoretical summary of the Pantone system

Transport and new transport: energy, pollution, engine innovations, concept car, hybrid vehicles, prototypes, pollution control, emission standards, tax. not individual transport modes: transport, organization, carsharing or carpooling. Transport without or with less oil.
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79120
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973




by Christophe » 21/02/14, 15:21

dede2002 wrote:These are rough calculations, in which you will have to include temperatures and pressure, neither am I a specialist in thermodynamics ...


: Arrow: https://www.econologie.com/forums/dopage-mot ... t4883.html
0 x
User avatar
Flytox
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 14138
Registration: 13/02/07, 22:38
Location: Bayonne
x 839




by Flytox » 21/02/14, 18:42

dede2002 wrote:The best engines before the catalyst era produced less than 2% toxicants (0.5% CO), not sure a "decatalyzed" catalyst engine would do the same.

Hence the importance of taking measurements with and without catalytic converter, and with and without pantone. And to be able to do "better than the catalyst", or at least be sure not to produce CO at idle speed.

Otherwise you will have to keep the catalyst!


The problem is that when decatalysting, we end up with an ignition ignition map which is no longer optimized for this type of operation with a significantly weaker exhaust back pressure etc ... (the engine breathes more)

It would therefore be necessary to reconstruct beforehand an optimized Pantone ignition ignition map, then make the comparison without catalyst ..... : Cry: : Mrgreen:
0 x
Reason is the madness of the strongest. The reason for the less strong it is madness.
[Eugène Ionesco]
http://www.editions-harmattan.fr/index. ... te&no=4132
dede2002
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 1111
Registration: 10/10/13, 16:30
Location: Geneva countryside
x 189




by dede2002 » 23/02/14, 08:35

Christophe wrote:
dede2002 wrote:These are rough calculations, in which you will have to include temperatures and pressure, neither am I a specialist in thermodynamics ...


: Arrow: https://www.econologie.com/forums/dopage-mot ... t4883.html


Thank you Christophe :D ,

I read, I read ... I try to read everything.
I will have questions to ask!

Flytox, I do not think that the back pressure of the catalyst is very significant, and it can be compensated by that of the reactor, or by reducing the section.
Some vehicles (WV for example) have a measurement before the catalytic converter accessible under the hood, and control / adjustment values ​​before / after.
example:
Image

Pascalou, I come back to the 8% that I did not understand.
In fact, once the gases have left the exhaust valve (or the turbo) they no longer have an engine effect.
I tried to calculate the quantity of heat contained in the gases, with a delta t of 500 ° I arrive at 9%.
This is part of the picture.
An unknown: the temperature of the gases at the time of the measurement which gives 14% of water and 15% of CO2?
Because the mass water value seems false.
Image
edit:
since the densities of the gases are at 0 ° and that of the vapor at 100 °, I modified the density value of the vapor to 4 to obtain 1 l of water per liter of petrol.
A little empirical my method ...
I have less volume than at the entrance, to improve ...
I have to find the density of the 3 gases at the temperature of the measurement ...?
Image
A+

ps: has anyone ever taken a test for gas analysis in operation, at the reactor outlet?

Or analyze everything that leaves the reactor in operation, without connecting it to the intake?
0 x
dede2002
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 1111
Registration: 10/10/13, 16:30
Location: Geneva countryside
x 189




by dede2002 » 23/02/14, 09:57

Too bad I can't edit, there are formula errors above ...
I took the other end, 1 kg of water and 2.3 kg of CO2 per l. of petrol.

Image
0 x
User avatar
Flytox
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 14138
Registration: 13/02/07, 22:38
Location: Bayonne
x 839




by Flytox » 23/02/14, 13:15

dede2002 wrote:Flytox, I do not think that the back pressure of the catalyst is very significant, and it can be compensated by that of the reactor, or by reducing the section.
Some vehicles (WV for example) have a measurement before the catalytic converter accessible under the hood, and control / adjustment values ​​before / after.
example:
Image


Excellent, I had not made the connection! Actually the pressure drops can be adjusted relatively easily in a very similar way, it becomes just a small plumbing problem where we choose the diameters of the different exhaust pipes / reactor. :P

For the measurement before and after catalyst, this allows a verification without contesting the functioning / contribution of the catalyst. :P

Or analyze everything that leaves the reactor in operation, without connecting it to the intake?


Not too closely followed there, If we talk about Gillier Pantone on petrol engine, what are you talking about analyzing? Without connecting to the intake, this changes a whole bunch of parameters, gas flow in the reactor, its temperature, can be the composition (percentage of water droplets / number of droplets of water in the vapor, electrification etc ...) in fact all the chances that it may be representative of what we are trying to illustrate ....
0 x
Reason is the madness of the strongest. The reason for the less strong it is madness.

[Eugène Ionesco]

http://www.editions-harmattan.fr/index. ... te&no=4132
dede2002
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 1111
Registration: 10/10/13, 16:30
Location: Geneva countryside
x 189




by dede2002 » 23/02/14, 14:10

I imagine a test machine, with an oil burner or a stationary engine (for example) to simulate an exhaust pipe, with the possibility of measuring and modulating the temperature * (and the speed of the exhaust gases) .

One (or more) reactors tested, with adjustable evaporator and level, suction to simulate the intake, also modular, and capture of the outlet gases for analysis.
Or to try to burn them in a blowtorch ...?

History of validating-invalidating-quantifying the hypothesis of hydrogen formation?

And trying to understand the part of the reactor in the process, that of improving combustion in the chamber.

* before and after the reactor

ps: a little hs, 1 billion vehicles catalyzed with 3g of (very) precious metal, that's 3000 tonnes.
recycling rate? complicated considering the melting temperature
ecological and social impact ???

In connection with the hypothesis of being able to replace the catalyst ...
0 x
User avatar
Pascalou
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 89
Registration: 23/01/14, 10:08
Location: Magdeburg, Germany




by Pascalou » 23/02/14, 21:37

Hello, your calculations are beautiful! You know I have long been convinced that the gillier system can replace the catamaran. and even do much more! This is why it is not generalized! There's nothing to sell! Lots to lose, Money reigns, which makes no money, everyone cares!
Yes it's great 'make yourself an experimental machine! That way you will be able to check things yourself, do tests, and realize this forgotten wonder. I also do calculations, but I'm not finished.
0 x
The energy is unlimited, it is not a problem, man is the problem!
https://www.econologie.com/fichiers/partag ... xfBlcC.doc
User avatar
Flytox
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 14138
Registration: 13/02/07, 22:38
Location: Bayonne
x 839




by Flytox » 23/02/14, 23:13

For the production / presence of hydrogen, read the founding doc of our favorite OuebMunster Christophe : Mrgreen: :

- https://www.econologie.com/rapport-d-ing ... es-93.html
0 x
Reason is the madness of the strongest. The reason for the less strong it is madness.

[Eugène Ionesco]

http://www.editions-harmattan.fr/index. ... te&no=4132
User avatar
Pascalou
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 89
Registration: 23/01/14, 10:08
Location: Magdeburg, Germany




by Pascalou » 24/02/14, 10:29

Hi! I took a closer look at your calculation, and it's much more complicated than you think. There are so many parameters that come into play that you cannot calculate what you are looking for as easily.
I can give you interesting documents on the subject if you wish. But they are very technical and full of complex formulas.

Above all, you have to distinguish between engine efficiency and% of fuel burned

But here is a short explanation on the 8% loss I give.
In our internal combustion engines, the% of fuel burned in the engine is 92% (the rest is burned in the exhaust manifold, and in the cat.)
So on the PCI, 92% of the energy is released for the motor, the rest is lost.

The efficiency of the engine is the ratio of the energy released and the energy returned in the end, or the useful energy.
So out of its 92%, which we will consider as 100% of the energy available to the engine, we have approximately 35% which leave in the exhaust ', 15% of friction, 20% of cooling and radiation. So there is only 30% on the crankshaft, and even less on the engines where the speed varies, so in the end, we have about 20% on the crankshaft!
These are bases calculated by specialists, recognized by all, they do not need to be questioned.
After, if these bases are the same in pantone, it is another story.
But you have to start from what is sure is defined, so you can move forward.

So 35% of the thermal energy released leaves through the exhaust and is lost, not 8 or 10%.
0 x
The energy is unlimited, it is not a problem, man is the problem!

https://www.econologie.com/fichiers/partag ... xfBlcC.doc
dede2002
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 1111
Registration: 10/10/13, 16:30
Location: Geneva countryside
x 189




by dede2002 » 24/02/14, 13:30

Hello,

Yes, I would like to have clarifications regarding my calculation.
For example the variation of the heat capacity of gases as a function of temperature.
Regarding the values ​​"recognized by all", I see them as variables depending on many factors, the friction on the one hand, and especially the temperature of the gases at the valve outlet.
The warmer they are, the better the efficiency, because less heat loss during the engine cycle ... to be discussed.

I remember the prototype Japanese adiabatic engine (Toyota?), Which we had presented in class in 1979.
We did not talk about the performance, just the fact that it did not require cooling because the refractory ceramic chamber was insulated.
By deduction, in this engine all the calories lost were in the exhaust gases ...

As for what burns after the valve opens, this is what we try to avoid, and the problem is crucial at maximum power rpm when "the piston goes as fast as the flame" *.
At low speed, we would not have this problem ...?

Question thermal efficiency, I once made a precise measurement (in class) with a 1.4 l petrol engine. turbocharged.

We did all the speed ranges, with an electronic balance and a stopwatch, and the best yield obtained was 15%.
The engine was worn, it provided 10 hp less than on paper.
The most surprising thing was that the best performance was obtained at maximum power, and not at maximum torque.

* edit: when the piston goes as fast as the flame, the pressure at the time of the best torque (piston at ~ 1/3 of the stroke) is perhaps higher, proportional to that at pmh after ignition? (intuition...)



If I had to do it again, I would make at least 10 different curves, degree by degree with the throttle valve, by measuring the corresponding manifold pressure, instead of "stupidly" measuring thoroughly ...

So I tend to relativize the values ​​"recognized by all".

A+ :D
0 x

Back to "New transport: innovations, engines, pollution, technologies, policies, organization ..."

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 223 guests