Small summary (on fuel savers)?

[hyst]

Hello,

I discovered forum a short time ago, by being interested in various subjects treated here, and thinking of finding good information there in order to advance much faster, which seemed to me true at first.
but I think that in the end, everyone contradicts everyone (this is not a criticism), and although it advances things since different hypotheses are emitted on a subject, it brings a lot of confusion for a newcomer like me. What is true false? Who to believe? if i try this or that will i not damage my engine or other (what financially i cannot afford)? So I think a lot of people go their way ...

I understand of course that almost everything is in the testing phase, etc. So I could spend 3 or 4 years reading all the subjects of the forum even before putting my hand on a tool in order to get started in a real project. and I also understand that some have already spent years before getting to where you are (time, money etc), and although I do not wish to have everything ready, everything cooked (it is precisely the difficulty that interests me).

Hence the subject of this post, would it not be advantageous to have a small summary of things that are certain and certain for each subject, (for example the principle of the "panton" system and that of the "hho" (I does not debate the reliability of these methods they are cited as an example)? Subsequently everyone is free to learn more in depth about what has been tested so far; test this or that path not explored ... this one not having for objective to be discussed, so as not to fall back into a discussion like any other, but just to explain the basic principles and possibly a reference to the main post concerning the subject in question .


This would allow newcomers to come up with new ideas (may be good), rather than discourage them very quickly.

See you soon

[dedeleco]

Very useful to make syntheses to see clearly and Christophe does it sometimes, as on the water doping of the engines recently.

But it's a huge job and we all tend to be superficial !!

In addition, given the huge documentation on the internet and google, the work is gigantic, if we want to be serious and objective !!

[Alain G]

Welcome to Hyst Econology!

There is a very simple way to have the conclusion of the discussions by formulating a request on the subject which interests you and the regulars of the site will answer you on the conclusion of the treated subjects!

[hyst]

indeed I realize the magnitude of the task, and the fact that it is difficult to achieve without encroaching on your research time, on the other hand I come over my reading to come across the post of christophe who correspond quite what i was talking about ...

but an idea came to me why not include a "beginner" section for each subject or beginners to talk to each other in an understandable way (not everyone understands for example the chemical formula or certain thermal baths used by our scholars), but everyone, even a beginner, has a knowledge of his own in one or more areas of his own, which allows himself to help each other, while connecting someone who knows well to explain or guide towards old post questions remain unanswered?

(to answer alain) if i asked all the questions that arise to me, it is you who would spend years answering them which is not the goal either .....

+ + + +
hyst

[dedeleco]

wikipedia is very useful for this with sometimes a high level of specialist.
Often wikipedia in foreign language, English, German, etc. is better !!

But in some areas, basic training takes years and the best are popular articles, but we do not fully understand then.

google gives lots of popular articles, often in English !!

The best is to ask questions indicating their level, as some do.

With modern technology, our life undergoes all this technology with its progress and its lies and its dangers: nuclear, chemistry and products that we breathe and eat, etc ...

Even washing your tiles you breathe neurotoxic !!

[Alain G]

(to answer alain) if i asked all the questions that arise to me, it is you who would spend years answering them which is not the goal either .....

+ + + +
hyst

Well, I am not alone in answering and especially not qualified in all subjects where several members are clearly better qualified than me!

They will be happy to answer you!

[hyst]

it's nice to see that we can count on mutual help

so I will allow myself a 1st question:
How do I go about building a nuclear power plant?

no just kidding ;)

in fact I started with the idea of ​​dismantling a car engine and turning it into an electric generator .... (its the basic idea to consume less .... "edf tax") , which over the course of my reading lead to discover the panton system then hho ... which confused me a little about my first idea

at first glance the hho system seems more easily achievable and more profitable, I focused on it.

today on this forum I see that :
1 few people have tested it and those who have not returned its results on this forum
2 that bcp doesn't believe it

result I ask myself the following questions:
1 does the hho system really work (I ask the opinion of anyone who tested it not simply by received idea or disbelief)
2 why so few people at least test this system to get an answer on?

then if I refer to the document dating from 2000 that I found, the panton system works on a simple mower motor independently (see http://www.crazymoto.net/index.php?showsujet=209647), out of what I find now it's ecopra style things, which effectively reduce fuel consumption and pollution, but still keep it coming from the tank .... so question an automobile engine can it operate on the panton system itself (ie water-fuel mixture connect directly to the intake and exhaust)

while waiting for answers I am going to read the post "beginner of christophe who will answer maybe some of my questions

[dedeleco]

A nuclear power plant is as simple as burning wood if the radiation was not dangerous !!
Even simpler, much simpler than a fuel engine with Pantone, we take the good isotope of uranium in two blocks and we bring them together and it starts to heat if close enough and to diverge, and explode, if we do not regulate not the temperature by regulating the distance or what is between, as moderator, water, graphite, cadmium, forming the control bars !!
Multiplication of neutrons to control !!
Fermi around 1941, Manhattan project, did this for the first atomic pile, and died in 1950 !!
Read wikipedia, Manhattan project, with all the secrets, even the bombs, Henrico Fermi, atomic pile, etc.
Before you have to make the right uranium, enrich or plutonium as in this project (reactors or separation factories) !!
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projet_Manhattan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan_Project

The first self-sustaining chain reaction
The first major scientific obstacle was removed on December 2, 1942 below the bleachers of Stagg Field at the University of Chicago, where a team led by Fermi started the first self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction. A coded phone call from Compton saying, "The Italian navigator (ie Fermi) has landed on the new world, the natives are friendly" at Conant in Washington, DC, announced the success of the experiment.

If the radiation did not kill, we would have it in our garage all !!
Marie Curie's gram of radium heats up on its own !!
She died too, like her daughter and her husband, much later !!

[hyst]

lol I learned a lot ...

except that it's not the answers to this question that mattered to me;) (knowing it doesn't hurt, however)


Christophe's posts have already answered a certain question as I expected ..... I recognize that he knows what he is talking about and that he has done his post very well .... hat!

I have more to read other post (many I think) and possibly to participate in one of the training offered by lapierreangulaire .... but the one near me is before September is far ...

on the other hand if someone had an answer as for the real operation of the process hho I am taker .... otherwise I think to test that by myself I should be able to manufacture a dry cell at lower cost and use the engine envisaged in my previous post (hoping not to destroy it).

[Flytox]

Hello hyst, Welcome.

then if I refer to the document dating from 2000 that I found, the panton system works on a simple mower motor independently (see http://www.crazymoto.net/index.php?showsujet=209647), out of what I find now it's ecopra style things, which effectively reduce fuel consumption and pollution, but still keep it coming from the tank .... so question an automobile engine can it operate on the panton system itself (ie water-fuel mixture connect directly to the intake and exhaust)

The link you quote is interesting and made this montage famous, but is somewhat Neanderthal ....

Running an engine with "75%" water (just shows that whoever claims it doesn't know how to measure, what is in the tank is not equal to what the engine consumes and the engine is systematically suffocates long before having drunk it whole !!!))

In any case it has no interest (75% water), the yield is lousy as soon as the proportion of water increases too much, just enough to run the engine without possible use of power.

For a Pantone or Gillier Pantone which allows a real reduction in consumption and pollution, mounted on a vehicle, the quantity of water swallowed is "low", of the order of 5 to 15%? of fuel consumption.
A+