Superoxygenated Water/Methanol Injection

[TAZ]

Hi,

I've read this in vwvortex ... :shock:


What makes my setup of possible interest is that I am injecting superoxygenated water/methanol just before the throttle body. The reason for oxygenated water - 2-10 times the dissolved oxygen content of regular water - is that water injection displaces some oxygen volume in the intake charge. Dissolved superoxygenation fits oxygen in between the hydrogen and as such does not increase its resting volume, but contributes bonus oxygen to compensate for that displaced by the water and methanol. Likewise, hydrogen will not combust, whereas methanol will, so a water/methanol mix has high latent heat absorption as well as combustability, with methanol, an oxygenated fuel, also adding a little extra oxygen to catalise combustion. The stainless steel tanks and their contents are refrigerated to near freezing point (meth stops it from freezing), so I also get a really cold mist into the intake plenum.

http://www.imagehdd.com/d1y2004/9685Pressure_tanks.JPG

What is your opinion on this??? :? :?

Thanks,

[Richard L]

This should work very well.

The combination od added oxygen and super-cooler mixture will improve your power significantly.

[hotrod]

The chilled water makes sense, (provided you don't get the intake charge too cold for good combustion without needing additional ignition advance).

But I don't buy his "science" about super oxygenation --- smacks of marketing hype to me.

Larry

[Slump]

Sheesh, if you're going to bother with all that, just use Nitrous.

[chucktoo]

Or Nitromethane in the methanol - Oh sounds like dragster fuel .

[tici]

TAZ, are those beverage tanks? Looks like.
Are you using a pump or you just fill the tanks half and put pressure air on them?

I wanted to try this: a tank like your, water and/or methanol, pressure air and a line to a fuel injector placed before the throttle body.
To spray just apply a voltage to the injector!
No valves, no nothing. You can also modulate the voltage to obtain more or less liquid depending for example on the manifold pressure.
Or just a simple pressure switch.

The water temperature doesn't matter: the evaporation energy of water is about 100 times higher that the caloric energy, so you will cool the same using 5?C or 90?C water (40F or 195F).

[TAZ]

tici,

It's not my setup.....
I've read this in vwvortex (www.vwvortex.com).

I wanted the experience guys to check if this is bulls@"t or not...

It seams strange setup with huge tanks all over the spare space ... :lol: :lol: :shock:

[masterp2]

Hi,


http://www.imagehdd.com/d1y2004/9685Pressure_tanks.JPG

What is your opinion on this??? :? :?

Thanks,

Looks to me like the "pilot" is making a bid for the Darwin awards.

[gaiaresearch]

Hello Taz and Hotrod

The science in this instance is real, though admittedly there is a lot of crap published on the subject.

Might I suggest that you visit the following link: http://www.pakdaman.de/english/pages/hypoxie.html and search for the text "60 mg", which will confirm the minimum dissolved O2 figure achievable using this technique. I have on many occassions checked the oxygen content of the water after 10 minutes of depressurising at room temperature, using advanced scientific laboratory dissolved oxygen meters and the results are consistently between 60-100+ mg/L of dissolved oxygen. Most meters don't measure beyond 14mg/L, since water under natural circumstances would not exceed 14mg/L, with normal standing water usually at 7mg/L.

My superoxygenating equipment is shown below for what it's worth.

I have worked closely with Richard on partial co-development of the Aquamist 2D system, having used my car as the prototype test car. I have had some interesting experiences subsequently experimenting with superoxygenated water/methanol, which is what the illustrated stainless steel beverage tanks are for, running two comparative switchable blends. Two tanks enable me to do approximately a 1000km inter-city cross country run, requiring only repressurisation with oxygen along the way. The tank pressure also serves to pre-pressurise the water-pump by 3 bar, giving it less to do and minimising system pressure drops.


Regards

Stuart

http://www.imagehdd.com/d1y2004/4079H2O8maker.JPG[/img]

[tici]

Stuart,
I don't know what the additional 100 mg/L oxygen will do, I bet nothing because in the air there is about 20% of this gas.
About 50'000 mg/sec of pure oxygen in my LS1 engine at WOT ;)

However: this of the beverage bottles is turning in my head since a couple of days. Is it realistic to fill one of those bottles with water or watever, pressurize the bottle and spray the liquid without a pump?
I think those bottles can handle some more pressure than 3 bar, so why not "spray from the bottle"?
A little 12V air pump
A pressure switch + safety valve for the bottle
A pressure switch to spray


Why not?

Stefano

[masterp2]

Stuart,
I don't know what the additional 100 mg/L oxygen will do, I bet nothing because in the air there is about 20% of this gas.
About 50'000 mg/sec of pure oxygen in my LS1 engine at WOT ;)


Stefano

That's the perspective we needed. But wait, it may cool the seat back in the summer!

[tici]

Michael, you can also fill the tanks with beer and install a in-car-bar!
OK, not so much alcohol but still it will cool the engine enough :D

Stefano

[gaiaresearch]

Guys, as Taz quoted me:

"Water injection displaces some oxygen volume in the intake charge. Dissolved superoxygenation fits oxygen in between the hydrogen and as such does not increase its resting volume, but contributes bonus oxygen to compensate for that displaced by the water and methanol. .......The stainless steel tanks and their contents are refrigerated to near freezing point (meth stops it from freezing), so I also get a really cold mist into the intake plenum."

I see several advantages from little intervention. We need water tanks anyway, so its not like its all superfluous.

If you are injecting from a warm or hot tank (eg windscreen washer tank), the water will also have given up some of its O2 (those bubbles leaving a pot of heating water). Similarly with air, which as it expands, contains less oxygen by volume.

If you are injecting 20% water to fuel, then 1/5 of the 20% of O2 in your induction is displaced. Superoxygenation can ensure that there is 10 X more O2 in that 1/5th displacement. Surely optimising these losses, with such a simple intervention is worth it. If your water is warm to hot, then this O2 gain increases proportionately.

Cooling and thereby optimising the intake charge is after all, one of the reasons that we are water injecting. Storing the water/methanol mix at freezing temps furthermore ensures that you will be getting a nice cooling ice-cold, rather than an aggravating warm to hot shower on a stinking hot summer day. I know which I would prefer to cool me down.

Yes, tank spraying is feasible, much like an agricultural sprayer, but I have found that the pressurised tank and pump work better, in that I have found it easier to regulate water pressure than oxygen pressure, but I am still experimenting and don't really want to reduce Richard's sale of those dinky pumps. Mmmmm, you are thinking "A quick visit to the patent office"! So much for my silly ideas. :cool:

Regards

Stuart

[tici]

Cp of water is 4.182 kJ/kg*K
Evaporating heat of water is 2'256 kJ/kg

Difference between a hot day (100F) to cooled water (40F) = 33K = 140 kJ/kg

94% of the cooling energy is because of evaporation
6% of the cooling is because of the cool water

does it really matter to use cold water?

[masterp2]

Guys, as Taz quoted me:


If you are injecting 20% water to fuel, then 1/5 of the 20% of O2 in your induction is displaced. Superoxygenation can ensure that there is 10 X more O2 in that 1/5th displacement. Surely optimising these losses, with such a simple intervention is worth it. If your water is warm to hot, then this O2 gain increases proportionately.

Cooling and thereby optimising the intake charge is after all, one of the reasons that we are water injecting. Storing the water/methanol mix at freezing temps furthermore ensures that you will be getting a nice cooling ice-cold, rather than an aggravating warm to hot shower on a stinking hot summer day. I know which I would prefer to cool me down.


Stuart

Well, I am all for patent office worthy innovation. But you have a dead horse here. You have already been shown that 96% of the cooling comes from water (or whatever) evaporating. You can decrease this substantially if: you can cool your solution to -200C (in which case it is frozen) or pressurize it to 50 atm (see Darwin remark). You might get this figure down to 90%. But I doubt you will be able to run the headlights with the power left over from using your car as a generator plant for this project. What good is 10 extra HP, if you have to tap 25 HP off the alternator to make it?

The gift of water injection is that it uses solvents that are already in perfect state in our existing ambient atmospheric conditions. Potential energy for combustion when atomized. Want to make it better? Find a solvent, miscible in water, liquid state to a low temp, that has it's own vapor pressure, is mildly combustible and has a Latent heat of vaporation as good as water, with the same cost as water. THAT is worthy of patenting.

[gaiaresearch]

Hello Guys

A few bracketed additive corrections to my last post:

"Surely optimising (efforts against) these losses, with such a simple intervention is worth it. If your water is (currently) warm to hot, then this O2 gain (via such intervention) increases proportionately.

The tanks, by the way, are pressurised 8-10bar. Below 3 bar, you start to lose dissolved oxgen to the reduced gas head above the water.

I am not good at math, but it would be an interesting exercise to calculate the combined O2 gain achieved by said intervention when applied to Hodrod's setup and estimated 50'000 mg/sec of pure oxygen . I would not write it off, even if the gain from just the superoxygenation, let alone the induction cooling/air-density factor (less work for the pump also means less heat to the systemic water) were calculated. Since water is H2O and can be increased to H2O10 then we get 90% more oxygen into that 1/5 water to fuel ratio.

The point you appear to be missing here is that I am all for water, the "universal solvent". Water, being H20, is 1/3 O2. We all want O2, so why not use O2 as the pressurising gas. Eventually, when I get the regulation sorted, I will replace the pumps as primary pressurisers, perhaps completely, or maybe use them as part of an on-board water superoxygenating system.

I don't accept the weak argument that cooling the water to freezing will have an insignificant cooling effect, My cold shower analogy applies, as would untold number of even more appropriate analogies.

Show me where I am doing anything that is a waste of time. Need tank, need water need oxygen, need cooling. Agreed?

Why not fill the tank with superoxygenated water and prior to use, store it in a freezer? Are you guys just being negative for the sake of it? Seems to me to be the case. I will do it this way simply because it involves nothing more than oxygenating and sticking it overnight in the freezer.


Regards

Stuart

[tici]

Why not use hydrogen peroxide?
This is a REAL source of oxygen.
Maybe a little dangerous... :roll:

10 bar? This is 145 PSI. Why still using a pump? The majority of the systems are between 100 and 200 PSI. I'm still playing with the idea of a tank-nopump-valve-nozzle-system. As I asked before: why not?

Stuart, I'n mot negative about your system, I'm just thinking at the whole thing. A car where I jump in in the morning, go to work, with a blower under the hood and evaporation cooling system.
Do I really have to carry a water tank from my freezer to the car in the morning, at the office put it in a second freezer and in the evening go home with the same tank?
Not really practical...

What should I do with the "additional" oxygen molecules? Add more fuel to adjust the AF-ratio?
How much power would this mean?

H2O10: I probably have to go back to my prof. and ask him why the hell have I learned chemistry during years and still don't know how this molecule look like...

[masterp2]

Stuart,

Nobody is being negative for the heck of it. Two degreed chemical engineers have now told you that the concept lacks reality. If I thought it was plausible you would have my ear. I'm just trying to be nice.


"Storing the water/methanol mix at freezing temps furthermore ensures that you will be getting a nice cooling ice-cold, rather than an aggravating warm to hot shower on a stinking hot summer day. I know which I would prefer to cool me down."

With this statement, you are showing that you don't have a grasp on the purpose of water injection, or evaporative cooling. Evaporative cooling is what happens after you get out of the shower (and why you quickly grab a towel on the cool dry days) If you truly want to cool off a 1200 F degree cylinder, how does a 30 degree shower water temp change help? Sure, it does fine on a 98 degree body, but if you really want to cool off, get out of the (hot) shower and jump in front of a fan (Oh, the image!). This is what happens in water injection! I guarantee, you will have the same chilling effect, hot or cold shower, once in front of the fan.

Water is not 33% 02. The oxygen in water is not available for combustion, until a force like lightning makes it available. O2 (gas)dissolved in water is, and then only when allowed out of solution (as an evolved gas, much like CO2 in the aforementioned beverage containers).

The numbers are not lying. And if I am off by only 1000%, it is still not a base hit. For the effort, use liquid oxygen (but you won't get me in the car)

But still, post your results, the father of the light bulb came under the same types of attitudes. There is nothing lost in failing, only learning experiences.

[gaiaresearch]

Thanks for the input guys.

I work from home and take my S3 into the mountain passes once a week.

My butt dyno and my ear tells me that the car does not wane as quicky with the mix than without it.

I did not raise the posted topic. Someone pointed me to it and I confirmed that superoxygenation was possible. I have some downpipe restrictions to deal with early next year and then I will post comparative data, positive or negative, since I will not pursue something that I have determined to be useless.

Till then, I will enjoy following your really good technical discussions under other topics and post here anything that I think might be of interest and request that you do the same.

Regards

Stuart

[tici]

S3 = Audi S3 or Lotus Elise S3?

[masterp2]

Stuart

Another thing to remember, the colder it is, the slower it moves, especially true in nozzles. If, you can insulate every line, and get solution to the nozzle still cold, it will have greater viscosity, and atomization will be worse, and flow rate will be lower, assuming same pump pressure. (you can prove this in the shower as well)

My butt dyno doesn't work very well, usually more placebo going on in my head than anything, especially the harder I try to make something what it is not. Numbers don't lie though.

[tici]

Hot water would be even better: remember, it has to evaporate. This will be easier if water is already close to boil, much easier than if it was close to freeze. No risk of water droplets in the manifold.
And this is not BS!

My butt-o-meter is really sensitive to noise: the louder the stronger.
This maybe explains because everyone is buying cat-back's thinking it will bring power.
I reinstalled the Stock exhaust 3 weeks ago and I'm happy! I had an extremely noisy Corsa: cool the 1st week but a real pain during long trips. I installed tar plates and a special noise dampening foam in the whole car and it was still too loud.
...headers are still there... they do make the difference :cool:

[gaiaresearch]

Actually, you guys are, for the most part, full of crap!

Quote (masterp2): "you don't have a grasp on the purpose of water injection....If you truly want to cool off a 1200 F degree cylinder, how does a 30 degree shower water temp change help? Sure, it does fine on a 98 degree body, but if you really want to cool off, get out of the (hot) shower and jump in front of a fan (Oh, the image!). This is what happens in water injection!."

ST: Man we are injecting for two reasons, but you only focus on one. Temps going to my throttle-body are down from around 150 to around 50 degrees Centigrade after misting the intercoolers. Misting ice-cold water at the throttle-body drops this and slows its rise, increasing the density of the charge and hence the concentration of oxygen. That's the first reason. We agree on the second.

Quote (masterp2): "The oxygen in water is not available for combustion, until a force like lightning makes it available. O2 (gas)dissolved in water is, and then only when allowed out of solution."

ST: I disagree. Firstly, the O2 comprising water will evolve to a gas in the combustion chamber and second, all of the 10 times extra oxygen in superoxygenated water is 'dissolved' and will evolve on entering the combustion chamber, if not earlier in the plenum and runners, which is all the more reason to chill the water and delay the evolution of O2 until it enters the combustion chamber,which will optimise the density of the charge and the concentration of O2 for catalysis.

I have 6 temp probes and a digital reader in my induction system, a digital EGT and digital broad-band A/F Ratio readers and I will very carefully gather the data, since the last person I want to kid is myself. I don't expect my interventions to profoundly improve matters over a short operational time-frame, but I do anticipate worthwhile improvements under longer WOT conditions, which is where it matters most and gains significance.

Thanks again for the input.

Regards

Stuart

[gaiaresearch]

Quote (masterp2): "the colder it is, the slower it moves, especially true in nozzles. If, you can insulate every line, and get solution to the nozzle still cold, it will have greater viscosity, and atomization will be worse, and flow rate will be lower, assuming same pump pressure."

ST: Duh! It's injecting in the engine bay, not a bloody refrigerator.

Quote (masterp2): "usually more placebo going on in my head than anything".

ST: Agreed.

Quote (tici): "Hot water would be even better: remember, it has to evaporate. This will be easier if water is already close to boil, much easier than if it was close to freeze. No risk of water droplets in the manifold".

ST: Duh! I repeat. It's injecting in the engine bay, not a bloody refrigerator.

Quote (tici): "My butt-o-meter is really sensitive to noise: the louder the stronger."

ST: Again. Agreed.


Regards

Stuart

[masterp2]

There it is folks, the last word. Just one recommendation...high school chemistry.

"Quote (masterp2): "The oxygen in water is not available for combustion, until a force like lightning makes it available. O2 (gas)dissolved in water is, and then only when allowed out of solution."

ST: I disagree. Firstly, the O2 comprising water will evolve to a gas in the combustion chamber and second, all of the 10 times extra oxygen in superoxygenated water is 'dissolved' and will evolve on entering the combustion chamber"

If you can extract oxygen gas from H2O, with less than a 100,000 V charge, you can retire a very rich man and save the environment, and save a lot of NASA's present day problems! You'd be my hero. Liquid water evolves into gaseous water Mr Rocket Scientist :idea: , not oxygen and hydrogen gas. You really need a rag stuffed in your mouth. :oops: BTW, 10 times .01%, is .1%!!!, like the song goes "nothing from nothing leaves nothing". I'm sure you would also disagree when I state: that the lower the temp of your water, the lower it's dissolved capacity for O2, or any gas.

:?: I don't know why you decided to make this so personal, I just know I have no desire to be your audience, ignorance is not for me. If you can't carry a little dignity, lecture at the dog pound...

[masterp2]

Hello Guys

Since water is H2O and can be increased to H2O10 then we get 90% more oxygen into that 1/5 water to fuel ratio.

The point you appear to be missing here is that I am all for water, the "universal solvent". Water, being H20, is 1/3 O2.

The "new" chemistry, "water... is 1/3 O2". :shock: WOW. (poking fun LOL-technically water is 1/6 O2 :lol: ) (what is H2010? they never covered that! :roll: )

[gaiaresearch]

master2p

Reverend chemistry guru, two things to clarify.

1) I did not come onto this forum proclaiming a breakthrough of the decade for the internal combustion engine, or any engine for that matter, nor even any breakthrough at all. I merely responded to Hotrod's remark in response to Taz's request for you guy's opinion on my post on the Vortex as follows:

"What makes my setup of possible interest is that I am injecting superoxygenated water/methanol just before the throttle body. The reason for oxygenated water - 2-10 times the dissolved oxygen content of regular water - is that water injection displaces some oxygen volume in the intake charge. Dissolved superoxygenation fits oxygen in between the hydrogen and as such does not increase its resting volume, but contributes bonus oxygen to compensate for that displaced by the water and methanol."

Richard expressed his opinion that: "This should work very well.The combination of added oxygen and super-cooler mixture will improve your power significantly."

Hotrod opinioned that: "The chilled water makes sense.........but I don't buy his "science" about super oxygenation --- smacks of marketing hype to me."

So far so good. To respond to doubts about the "science about super-oxygenation", I provided a link to one of the contemporary pioneers in my field. No comment from the critics, just snide remarks, jokes and petty negativity at every turn thereafter on not being able to cope with science outside of the syllabus, though my pressurised tank hinted at some potetial within the paradigm.

All I was attempting to do was to reintroduce the oxygen displaced by the volume of water and methanol being injected and drop some of the intake charge heat in the process. For some, this is just too much effort, or impossible, neither of which I agree with, given that I am attempting to optimise the output of my standard turbo system, rather than counting minor peturbations in a tsunami, as with you big turbo-chargers and superchargers, within which context, you might be right about the relevance of the gains.

2) Now to your last remarks.

Quote (master2p): "If you can extract oxygen gas from H2O, with less than a 100,000 V charge, you can retire a very rich man and save the environment, and save a lot of NASA's present day problems! You'd be my hero. Liquid water evolves into gaseous water Mr Rocket Scientist, not oxygen and hydrogen gas."

ST: Just a minute. I did NOT say that the O2 comprising the water would evolve to a gas in the combustion chamber and participate in catalysis, that honour fell to the dissolved oxygen, ie that over and above the 7mg/L which comprised the H2O which was super-oxygenated. Frankly, I don't know exactly what the fate of the O2 of the water itself would be, but that of the dissolved O2 is pretty clearly evolved as O2 gas, as from whence it came. Studies of the combustion of the hydrogen/oxygen bonds of H2O2 might throw more light on that situation,which would certainly involve reactive oxygen species with multiple, both welcome and unwelcome fates under various conditions.

Finally, you are probably correct to ask what H2O10 is, since it obviously isn't correct to depict the oxygen as bonded, when it is just filling the cavities between the bonded molecules, so I apologise for your wasting a few keystrokes on my behalf on that score. Nevertheless, it is rather immature to make fun of that which you do not understand, for mere want of a better informed response.

Peace

Stuart

[Richard L]

I like to clear up a few confusion here and hope the discussion will continue in a more constructive vein.

Stuart first came to the thread on my request, just to help to clarify his aim for the "oxygenated water". From looking at the first picture posted of the elaborate set up on this thread I have to ask Stuart to be here to explain it before people getting the wrong idea and escalating negative comments down the line.

Dissolving gas into water under pressure and low temperature is a common method of making fizzy drinks. Stuart use the same method to add oxygen into water, nothing new and doesn't require a rocket scientist to understand his intention.

I think the confusion started when the discussion was turning away from his intended aim and somwhow got into splitting the water molecules into oxygen and hydrogen. Injecting ice cold water and a fair amount of dessolved oxgen is a good power enhancing move.

Imagine pouring a can of cold fizzy drink into a warm glass, the release of carbon dioxide is instant. I think the same will happen when the hot charge meets the oxygenated water, instant release of oxygen. I am only guessing here but it is logical enough for me to assume that.

Water evaporate at any temperature above freezing point - the rate of evaporation is subject to the surface area. I will try to explain, liquid water molecules are held together by a force called van der Walls force, if sufficient energy is applied, the molecules expand and some will break away from this bond, it is commonly known as evaporation.

This process often happens on the surface of the water puddle as the force is less strong due less exposure to other surrounding molecules. In order to accelerate the vapourating process, you need greater surface areas. This is why atomised water has more heat absorbing effect. Regardless of the inertial temperature of the water. The colder the water temperature the more heat it will aborb. Introducing steam into the inlet tract has virtually no cooling effects.

Some systems such as oxygen/hydrogen fuelcell requires humidified air to be efficient, water is often heated to allow faster evaporation and cooling the air is not important. Ice water has greater cooling properties than hot water provided the droplet size is the same.

I think all contributors on this thread are correct in its own right but unfortunately not all were discussing the same topics. I think this discussion is getting too detailed and require more concise and careful reading into the poster's statement before posting comments.

[hotrod]

Leaving aside all the other issues lets look at the real world numbers.
people sometimes forget just how small milligrams/liter is.

Assuming you are achieving the 80 milligram / liter of disolved oxygen mentioned in that paper (which is the upper limit claimed).

You have a 400 hp engine, and you run the 1/4 mile in 13 seconds flat. You are injecting pure superoxygenated water at a rate of 500 cc/min.

Your engine will process a maximum of 42 lbs/min of air as it moves down the 1/4 mile. In the 13 seconds of the run that comes out to 42 x .02316 = 9.7272 lb O2, or 4416.1488 grams of O2.

===============
Correction in the above I forgot to reduce the air flow to the fraction consumed in 13 seconds as stated. Formula should have been:


42 lb air / min x .02316 lb O2/lb air = 9.7272 lb O2/min. 13 seconds of consumtion at this rate equals ( 13/60 ) x 9.7272 lb O2/ min = 2.10756 lb O2/ run , or 956.83224 grams of O2.
======================

Meanwhile your WI is injecting 500 cc of water / min or 108.33 cc of water. This equals 0.10833 Liters, at 80 mg/liter you have added 8.666 mg of additional oxygen to the 4416.1488 that is in the air.

======================
Correction the above should read

Meanwhile your WI is injecting 500 cc of water / min or 108.33 cc of water. This equals 0.10833 Liters, at 80 mg/liter you have added 8.666 mg of additional oxygen to the 956.83224 that is in the air.



You have increased the engines oxygen intake by 0.0001962 %.

============
The above should read:


(956.83224 + .008666)/956.83224 = 956.840906/956.83224 = 1.000009057 or 0.000957 %

You have increased the engines oxygen intake by 0.000957 %.

400 hp x .000009057 = 0.003622788 hp

===============

Since one cubic foot of air holds about 0.016212 lb of O2, or 0.000009382 lb/ cubic inch or .0042594 gm of O2 per cubic inch, your additional .008666 gram of dissolved O2 is approximately equal to the oxygen contained in one half of a cubic inch of air.

===============

The above should be corrected to:

Since one cubic foot of air holds about 0.016212 lb of O2, or 7.360248 gm / cubic ft or 0.004259403 gm/ cubic inch , your additional .008666 gram of dissolved O2 is approximately equal to the oxygen contained in 2.03 cubic inches of air.

================

And that is a best case scenario.


I think I'll just stick with plain cold water and not worry about dissolved oxygen content.

Larry

[masterp2]

master2p

Frankly, I don't know exactly what the fate of the O2 of the water itself would be, but that of the dissolved O2 is pretty clearly evolved as O2 gas, as from whence it came. Studies of the combustion of the hydrogen/oxygen bonds of H2O2 might throw more light on that situation,which would certainly involve reactive oxygen species with multiple, both welcome and unwelcome fates under various conditions.



See, this is EXACTLY what I am taking about.

There IS NO O2 in WATER, AGUA, H2O!!!!!!! Only GOD has the patent to dissociate elemental oxygen from water. O2, oxygen gas, 21% of the air you breath, comes from PLANTS and "O2" is not shorthand for elemental oxygen.This has already been said several times, but it is not getting understood... Time I let it go.

H2O2 is hydrogen peroxide, from first aid kits, etc. What are we taliking about NOW???????

Richard

"Injecting ice cold water and a fair amount of dessolved oxgen is a good power enhancing move is sound."

A vehicle consumes a roomful of air per minute, WOT, 20% of that is Oxygen gas, roundabout 20 pounds, of O2 gas, per minute. I only need a 10% improvement in this to consider it significant improvement. I'm not as picky as a lot of people. I'd say that scrubbing 10% of the nitrogen from the air would be more possible. But let's play.

First you need a source of 100% O2, (not air) and then the equipment to compress it, what, 100 times to force it between the water molecular structure, maybe some paint can agitator to make it go faster, and what do we come up with? If it's not 2 pounds of 02 upon release (per minute) then I'm thinking "why did I need to add an electrical circuit to my house to power all this equipment". And by all the physical realities, it's less than 1/10,000 of this.

My take is this: Your chances of killing yourself due to the danger of the processes involved, are better than realizing a measurable improvement in performance due to oxygen content.

As far as being colder. Sure make it 0 C. It doesn't matter. What matters is whether water's specific heat can make a conductive contribution to air cooling, is whether or not it makes it into the charge airstream at that temp. My engine compartment runs around 60 C when heatquenched. Good luck keeping water cold while running through lines at 7 feet per second. A 150 psi pump, by itself raises the water temp 10-20 degrees if I recall.

[Richard L]

I did not calculate the power increase due to oxgen, it could be 0.00001 %, but it is still an increase. The combination of cold water may improve the yield.

Sturat was merely trying to replace the oygen displaced by water vapour. As fas as I am concerned, I am interested any any form of experiment, someone wil be injecting pure oxygen, or peroxide soon.

[gaiaresearch]

I'll happily take the extra half cup of chilled O2, for the chill and the O2. Geeeez, I could have pressurised my tanks with carbon dioxide and contributed no extra oxygen and would probably have been shot down for displacing the teaspoon of dissolved O2 in the non superoxygenated water.
I have nothing to lose and something to gain. When the data comes in, if it is positive, it will in all probability be denied, on the basis of positions already taken. Life is full of paradoxes and anomalies. If one does not stick ones's neck out, one might never realise that there is air above the surface of the water. :lol:

Peace

Stuart

[masterp2]

I think it should be tested. Nobody will shoot down charted results in a controlled experiment. You should not let others condemn something you feel so passionate about. Moan as much as you want, I am pretty sure, that there will be a performance decrease. By supercooling the solution, it will inject at a much reduced rate, calculate it yourself.. So unless you compensate for the temp induced viscosity change, by increasing the pressure, or bigger nozzles, less solution is atomized. If you measure flow rate in the controlled experiment, and they are the same, you will know the solution did not stay cold to the nozzle.

Don't believe me? That's ok. Go to the kitchen and turn the water on the hot side. Measure the volume of cold water coming out for 10 seconds, then when it is good and hot, measure for 10 more seconds in another container, and tell me if you don't get 20% more.

[Richard L]

Leaving aside all the other issues lets look at the real world numbers.
people sometimes forget just how small milligrams/liter is.

Assuming you are achieving the 80 milligram / liter of disolved oxygen mentioned in that paper (which is the upper limit claimed).

You have a 400 hp engine, and you run the 1/4 mile in 13 seconds flat. You are injecting pure superoxygenated water at a rate of 500 cc/min.

Your engine will process a maximum of 42 lbs/min of air as it moves down the 1/4 mile. In the 13 seconds of the run that comes out to 42 x .02316 = 9.7272 lb O2, or 4416.1488 grams of O2.

Meanwhile your WI is injecting 500 cc of water / min or 108.33 cc of water. This equals 0.10833 Liters, at 80 mg/liter you have added 8.666 mg of additional oxygen to the 4416.1488 that is in the air.

You have increased the engines oxygen intake by 0.0001962 %.

Since one cubic foot of air holds about 0.016212 lb of O2, or 0.000009382 lb/ cubic inch or .0042594 gm of O2 per cubic inch, your additional .008666 gram of dissolved O2 is approximately equal to the oxygen contained in one half of a cubic inch of air.

And that is a best case scenario.


I think I'll just stick with plain cold water and not worry about dissolved oxygen content.

Larry


I read your calculation with interest, couldn't quite get the correct % of oxygen increase by mass.

4400g of oxygen injected against 80mg/litre/min (40mg/500ml/min). The % of oxygen is 40/4400 = 0.9%, for a 400BHP engine, 1% extra oxygen is 4 BHP - is small but an significant increase?

[hotrod]

Richard, your right I did make a minor mistake in the above calculation, but I think your off by a factor of 1000 on yours. Your dividing milligrams by grams.

Larry

Correction -- It looks like I did drop a step in my first set of calculaions, here is the corrected numbers

Assuming you are achieving the 80 milligram / liter of dissolved oxygen mentioned in that paper (which is the upper limit claimed).

You have a 400 hp engine, and you run the 1/4 mile in 13 seconds flat. You are injecting pure superoxygenated water at a rate of 500 cc/min.

===============
Computed based on air consumed in 13 second quarter mile pass:

Your engine will process a maximum of 42 lbs/min of air as it moves down the 1/4 mile.
In the 13 seconds of the run that comes out to 13/60 = 0.21667 x 42 = 9.1 lb of air

9.1 x .2316 = 2.10756 lb O2, or 956.8 grams of O2. <---- air is 23.16% O2 by mass

Meanwhile your WI is injecting 500 cc of water / min
13/60 x 500 = 108.33 cc of water.
This equals 0.10833 Liters, at 80 mg/liter you have:

0.080 x 0.10833 = 0.008664 gm of additional oxygen to the 956.8 that is in the air.
{ corrected the above had one too many zeros on the milligrams expressed as grams the original was 0.0080 x 0.10833
Boy its hard to keep track of all the zeros when your dealing with quantities that are so small}

You have increased the engines oxygen uptake by .000009058

If hp is directly proportional to O2, then you've increased the power out by
400 x .000009057 = 0.0036339 hp

If the engines power peak of 400 hp is at 6000 rpm, you have increased the engines torque at that rpm by .00318 ft lb or 0.05088 ft ounces.
===============
computed in oxygen uptake / min

42 lbs / min air = 19068 gm/min air
Oxygen content is .2316 by mass.
19068 x .2316 = 4416.1488 gm/min


500 cc/min at 80 mg/liter = 40 mg/min = .004 gm/min

.004 / 4416.1488 = .000009058

[masterp2]

I can't get 1%. This whole thread is bizarre.

I think larry is off by a decimal place, I think because he forgot to factor that air charge is only 21% O2.

I get .001% O2 increase, so I'd say .004 HP, unmeasurable gain.

[masterp2]

Ooops, looks like he beat me to it.

[gaiaresearch]

And for every 1 degree Centigrade drop, you gain 3 hp

[gaiaresearch]

And with every calculation error I lose faith in your numbers.

Stuart

[hotrod]

And for every 1 degree Centigrade drop, you gain 3 hp

Not correct! Power varies approximately by the square root of the change in absolute temperature of the intake air (assuming the ignition timing and such are optimized for the temperature change).

If you measure hp at 20 deg C, ( 293 deg K ) and at 25 deg C ( 298 deg K )
then the power difference will be approximately (sqrt (298/293)) = sqrt (1.01706) = 1.008497.

That makes the power increase approximately equal to .001699 / deg or .1699%.

On a 400 hp engine for each 1 deg C drop in intake temp you would gain about 0.67 hp. The cooling effect of your setup is 1870 times more significant than the alleged increase in oxygen.

Larry

[Richard L]

hot rod,

I was 1000 times out, I used the "g" instead fo "mg", thank you for correcting me.

[tici]

For a moment it was interesting to follow this thread... now it becomes senseless.
My hope is that the majority of all I find on the web is real and not based on fantasy and nonsense as some statements I saw here.
Chemistry is not an opinion, neither physics.
Have fun with your cars guys! With or without WI...

Stefano

[hotrod]

Richard, and Michael thanks for the double checks -- its not easy to whip out a mathmatical proof off the top of your head and keep all the details, factors, decimals, units etc. straight when your composing in stream of consciousness mode in one of these little message windows.

I've had a long term interest in chilled injection cooling and the complications it entails.

If you over cool the intake mixture you run into two problems. First you need to modify your ignition timing to account for the changes in burn time and fuel vaporization. In severe cases you may need to heat the fuel to get it to vaporize properly.

On first blush you would expect the power increase due to changing the mixture temperature and the change in charge density that results to give you a directly proportional power increase. In fact the change is closer to the square root of the change in absolute temperature due to several effects. The colder the air flow is the slower the sonic speed in the air mixture, so air flow into the cylinder is less during the early and late stages of valve lift with very cold air, when the valve opening becomes a critical flow orfice.

Assuming the pressure ratio is high enough to achieve critical flow. For air the pressure ratio across the orfice must exceed 1.89:1 to get critical flow.
As a result you don't see this effect at low boost and rpm because the pressure ratio across the valve never gets that high.

Second as the intake charge air gets colder it substantially increases the heat it gains passing through the intake manifold and past the hot intake valves, partially negating the cooling. If the intake air is hot enough it can actully loose heat to the intake manifold under high boost conditions with poor intercooling.

As most things with engines, its not as simple as it looks at first blush.

Larry

[Slump]

I kind of said it flippantly before, but if anybody is seriously thinking about this sort of thing - there's a better mousetrap:

nitrous oxide. It really disassociates into oxygen (and nitrogen), it supercools the intake charge, it's cheaper, it's proven, and a 35 shot dry setup is only a couple hundred dollars.

[masterp2]

In my diesel application, it's for cooling a vehicle, pulling 15,000 lbs, that is working for more than 6 seconds. Nitrous has no application there.

Also, don't see how it is possible cheaper than, let's say, water, or WW fluid.

[Richard L]

Have you tried nitromethane with water injection? it is like putting in methanol Plus nitrous all in one package.

[JohnA]

...nitrous oxide. It really disassociates into oxygen (and nitrogen), it supercools the intake charge,....

supercools?

as in 'absolute zero' territory, or a figure of speech?

I had a friend who was mumbling about NOS and supercooling and the like, and he had mixed up degrees F with Celcious.
...as for the 'supercooling' effect of a tiny amount of nitrous liquid (IF it is liquid still!) in a torrent of hot incoming air...well it will be diluted more than you think mate.

And the latent heat of nitrous oxide is much lower than that of water. Even lower than petrol in fact.

...as for the 'cheaper' bit, I can't tell what other people's taps run, but mine run water :wink:

[Slump]

...nitrous oxide. It really disassociates into oxygen (and nitrogen), it supercools the intake charge,....

supercools?



Figure of speech.. I should just say "cools".

[tici]

Have you tried nitromethane with water injection? it is like putting in methanol Plus nitrous all in one package.

I used nitromethane years ago for my radio controlled models...
Cool for that application but I think it lowers the octanes like hell if used with gas.

[Richard L]

Have you tried nitromethane with water injection? it is like putting in methanol Plus nitrous all in one package.

I used nitromethane years ago for my radio controlled models...
Cool for that application but I think it lowers the octanes like hell if used with gas.

Thereis someone recently used it and got some interesting results:
http://www.aquamist.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=3884#3884

It would be interesting if it used with water, it will balance out the flash point of the nitro and contribute something towards the speeding up the burn rate of a water injected setup.

[tici]

Hehe! It sounds interesting, but I'm a little conservative about fuel: gas in the car and alcohol and nitromethane in the models :D

By the way: next summer I want to try the WI and I have a couple of questions about the Aquamist system. Is it better to discuss this issue by email or can we stay on this topic?

It's about a LS1 engine (V8, 5.7 L). Stock it makes about 320 HP at the flyweel, with a non intercooled Vortech it's about 420 - 440 HP with 5 PSI of boost.
According to many sources 5 PSI is too low for water injection, still I don't like the extremely high temperatures I saw last summer...


Stefano

stefano.tenzi@dplanet.ch

[Richard L]

Hydrogen peroxide contains around 20% of oxygen by weight when disassociated into water and oxygen, may be this can be used instead of oxygenated water. The oxygen content is more than Nitrous Oxide.

Handling H2O2 is a problem.

[masterp2]

What is the reaction involve as a catalyst, to evolve 02 from it? I don't think you get O2 from misting h2o2.

[Richard L]

Hydrogen peroxide contains around 20% of oxygen by weight when disassociated into water and oxygen, may be this can be used instead of oxygenated water. The oxygen content is more than Nitrous Oxide.

Handling H2O2 is a problem.

I made a mistake, it contains nearly 50% of oxygen by weight.

The mixture decomposes to oxygen under heat. Under the influence of catalysis, it produces OH radicals - the start of all hydrocarbon chain reaction upon ignition and burn. It accelerates the fuel's burn-rate.

H2O2 is one of the most powerful oxidizers known -- stronger than chlorine, chlorine dioxide, and potassium permanganate. And through catalysis, H2O2 can be converted into hydroxyl radicals (. OH) with reactivity second only to fluorine.

http://www.h2o2.com/intro/properties/thermo07b.gif

More properties here:
http://www.h2o2.com/intro/properties.html

[masterp2]

Before exploring this further, one might ask, is it affordable? and safe to handle? What happens if you mix it with an alcohol? Does it eat rubber, etc.?

Seems some potential is there for an aux O2 source, but by itself does not appear to be a fuel source. If it can exist as a soluble medium in methanol and water, without reaction to another product (that would defeat the purpose) then an aqueous solution with H2O2 plus meth as a fuel, could be very promising for additional combustion energy, in an environment that limits air flow (all of our vehicles). But like the oxygenated meth idea, the question should be answered "is it an appreciable increase in O2 flow rate?" My first impression is possibly "yes". I am sure Hotrod is hard at work on this.


We should dig into this more.

[Richard L]

Compared to Nitromethane, H2O2 is dirt cheap, it is manufactured in huge volumes.

Material compatibilities is a matter of digging in deep on internet search engines. Commercially, H2O2 is used widely in water process industries and distributed in plastics (mostly in polypropeylene). It is just a matter of time when someone come up with a system that will inject it into an engine.

We have experimented on it some six years ago but didn't continue due to lack of interest on water injection market. Things has changed in the recent years and we may restart the project again.

[masterp2]

an excerpt from an interesting article:

"Unlike the drugstore version of hydrogen peroxide, which is about 97 percent water, the rocket-propulsion variety has just the opposite concentration -- 3 percent water and 97 percent hydrogen peroxide -- and it has had critical contaminants removed, Heister said.

This purified, concentrated form of H2O2 is broken down with chemical catalysts, yielding oxygen that combusts with alcohol-based fuels, such as methanol or ethanol, which can be derived from corn. Such a propulsion system would provide an inexpensive alternative to today's nonrenewable hydrocarbon fuels that are processed from crude oil, Heister said.

Breaking down peroxide not only would provide oxygen for combustion but also would produce steam, an important byproduct that could be used to run a turbine to generate electricity, Heister said.

Hydrogen peroxide has a history in aviation; for example, it was used in the German V-2 rocket and the experimental X-15 rocket plane."

[maxc]

Water already has oxygen in it.

[JohnA]

Water already has oxygen in it. HEAT it to release it. ..
Diamonds have lots of carbon in them, but we don't see any billionaire show-off using them in the fireplace. :wink:

I.e. getting pure oxygen and hydrogen from water might be a bit more involved than that :D

[maxc]

The peak temp of combustion is about 2500F. Very few particals may reach 3600F.

[JohnA]

steam yes, by all means :D

But neither oxygen nor hydrogen get released.
Don't make the mistake that some poeple think it's like nitrous oxide releasing oxygen under combustion conditions. That one is different. :wink:

[maxc]

At 572F nitrous oxide breaks down to nitrogen and oxygen?http://members.aol.com /agspeed/nos.htm#1 :?

[JohnA]

thereabouts, it's a temp/pressure combination.
Water is much harder to break down on a molecular level.

[maxc]

thereabouts, it's a temp/pressure combination.
Water is much harder to break down on a molecular level.Very true. But it is all about the post expandion of pre-injected water. :shock:

[masterp2]

With any technology that exists today, gaseous oxygen is not obtainable from water. Unless you have an unlimited cheap access to lightning :shock:

The main problem is that is takes so much more energy to create O2, than you could reap from it. It can be done, but it escalates fuel cost.

[maxc]

You don't need more oxygen to get more expandion.

[rarson]

I wish I had read this thread earlier.

I would like to try an H2O2 setup. I can't see running it being much more of a problem than running water. The real problem is going to be simply storing it so that it doesn't give up those extra oxygen molecules. I also haven't located any sources yet (I've yet to even try) but I've been told you can get "food grade" h2o2 relatively cheap, which is 60%.

I'm thinking the net result of adding H2O2 to the combustion chamber will be an immediate release of the extra oxgyen, and the resulting water flashing to steam... a nice combination of the two things we're trying to accomplish (add oxgyen and further expansion). I'd be injecting it as close to the head as possible.

I wanted to try a dual setup, pre-turbo water with meth injection at the TB. Now I'm thinking of doing direct-port H2O2 instead of the meth. It'll certainly be easier and probably cheaper to get H2O2. My goal is to eliminate the intercooler.

For the pre-compressor setup, I plan on building a tank to store in the engine bay. That way, the tank will be at ambient engine bay temps, pretty warm, and should give better atomization.

There is a wealth of information nuggets in this thread and a lot of stuff I either didn't know or hadn't considered before. I hope we can keep the discussion going. As far as the superoxygenated water goes, it certainly makes sense to me to pressurize the tank with oxygen, but only if it's a cost-effective solution (which it probably isn't) because I think it's been shown it won't make too much of a difference.

[JohnA]

... it certainly makes sense to me to pressurize the tank with oxygen, but only if it's a cost-effective solution (which it probably isn't) because I think it's been shown it won't make too much of a difference.
It may also be wise to ensure that it doesn't become a fire hazard

[jmlegacy]

So... about that H202 stuff.

Has anyone tried using that 6% solution to see if it acts as a catalyst? I.E Faster fuel ignition with the help of water as pre-ignition buffer?

Back in the days of making rocket fuel 1% red iron oxide would tremendously change the burn rate of our propellant. I can only imagine if H202 would have a similar effect in I.C.E engines

[Richard L]

I will be very interested to hear the results. Not sure what it will do to the wetted components along the way. H2O2 is a very powerful oxidant.

[parmas]

HYDROGEN PEROXIDE H202

The boiling point of H2O2 has been extrapolated as being 150.2 °C, approximately 50 °C higher than water. In practice hydrogen peroxide will undergo potentially explosive thermal decomposition if heated to this temperature. It may be safely distilled at lower temperatures under reduced pressure

USES :

bipropellant rocket
Explosives
Glow sticks

Hydrogen peroxide should be stored in a cool, dry, well-ventilated area and away from any flammable or combustible substances. It should be stored in a container composed of non-reactive materials such as stainless steel or glass (other materials including some plastics and aluminium alloys may also be suitable).[69] Because it breaks down quickly when exposed to light, it should be stored in an opaque container, and pharmaceutical formulations typically come in brown bottles that block light

Hydrogen peroxide, either in pure or diluted form, can pose several risks, the main one being that it forms explosive mixtures upon contact with organic compounds.[71] Highly concentrated hydrogen peroxide itself is unstable and can cause a boiling liquid expanding vapour explosion (BLEVE) of the remaining liquid. Distillation of hydrogen peroxide at normal pressures is thus highly dangerous.

It is also corrosive, especially when concentrated, but even domestic-strength solutions can cause irritation to the eyes, mucous membranes and skin.[72] Swallowing hydrogen peroxide solutions is particularly dangerous, as decomposition in the stomach releases large quantities of gas (10 times the volume of a 3% solution), leading to internal bleeding. Inhaling over 10% can cause severe pulmonary irritation.[

[parmas]

Nitromethane

Nitromethane is used by hobbyists as a fuel in motor racing, particularly drag racing, as well as for radio-controlled models (such as cars, planes and helicopters) and is commonly referred to in this context as "nitro". The oxygen content of nitromethane enables it to burn with much less atmospheric oxygen.

The amount of air required to burn 1 kg (2.2 lb) of gasoline is 14.7 kg (32 lb), but only 1.7 kg (3.7 lb) of air is required for 1 kg of nitromethane. Since an engine's cylinder can only contain a limited amount of air on each stroke, 8.7 times more nitromethane than gasoline can be burned in one stroke.

Nitromethane, however, has a lower specific energy: gasoline provides about 42–44 MJ/kg, whereas nitromethane provides only 11.3 MJ/kg. This analysis indicates that nitromethane generates about 2.3 times the power of gasoline when combined with a given amount of oxygen

Nitromethane has a laminar combustion velocity of approximately 0.5 m/s, somewhat higher than gasoline, thus making it suitable for high-speed engines. It also has a somewhat higher flame temperature of about 2,400 °C (4,350 °F). The high heat of vaporization of 0.56 MJ/kg together with the high fuel flow provides significant cooling of the incoming charge (about twice that of methanol), resulting in reasonably low temperatures

Nitromethane is usually used with rich air–fuel mixtures because it provides power even in the absence of atmospheric oxygen. When rich air–fuel mixtures are used, hydrogen and carbon monoxide are two of the combustion products. These gases often ignite, sometimes spectacularly, as the normally very rich mixtures of the still burning fuel exits the exhaust ports. Very rich mixtures are necessary to reduce the temperature of combustion chamber hot parts in order to control pre-ignition and subsequent detonation. Operational details depend on the particular mixture and engine characteristics.

In model aircraft and car glow fuel, the primary ingredient is generally methanol with some nitromethane (0% to 65%, but rarely over 30%, and 10–20% lubricants (usually castor oil and/or synthetic oil). Even moderate amounts of nitromethane tend to increase the power created by the engine (as the limiting factor is often the air intake), making the engine easier to tune (adjust for the proper air/fuel ratio).

[parmas]

NITROMETHANE Internal Combustion tips and tuning

Eventually, Edelbrock settled on a 20 percent nitro/80 percent methanol mix that added 40 hp.

According to Gene Adams, if you consider high-octane racing gasoline as the baseline fuel, replacing it with methanol-the best alcohol fuel-is worth a 5-to-10-percent power gain. But 80-to-90-percent nitro is worth two to three times the power of the alky

What's the secret? Nitromethane carries its own oxygen, so it needs much less atmospheric oxygen to burn. The theoretical ideal or stoichiometric air/fuel ratio for gasoline is 14.7:1. That means, 14.7 pounds of air are needed to burn 1 pound of gas. Methanol, which also carries oxygen, has a stoichiometric ratio of 6.45:1. But with 100 percent nitro, the ratio is 1.7:1! Because the displacement of an engine cylinder is fixed, this means-assuming 100 percent volumetric efficiency (VE)-8.7 times more nitromethane than gasoline can be burned during one combustion cycle.

On paper, gasoline has about four times more heating value than nitromethane: at least 19,000 Btu/lb for gas compared with just 4,850 Btu/lb for nitro. But that doesn't take into account the fuel's specific energy (SE) value, which is derived by dividing the heat value by the air/fuel ratio (Btu/lb ÷ A/F), telling us how much heat energy is delivered per pound of air into the motor. At stoichiometric air/fuel ratios, the nitro's SE value is around 2.2 times greater than gasoline!

Racing nitro motors run far richer than the theoretical 1.7:1 ratio, and Adams says it's possible to dump nitro at ratios approaching 0.5:1. "At 80 percent nitro and above, the optimum air fuel/ratio no longer exists and the power output becomes well related to the actual amount of fuel fed into the engine by weight," adds Ray Hall Turbo. At 0.5:1, the SE potential of nitro could be six times greater than gas.

Compared to methanol, nitro's theoretical SE advantage is nearly 40 percent at stoichiometric and more than 110 percent at theoretical max power ratios. When you add in nitro's high heat of vaporization (about twice that of methanol), you also get a significant cooling effect in the chamber. Since nitro wants to explode instead of burn in a controlled manner like a properly tuned gasoline-fueled engine, anything you do to reduce chamber hot spots is critical!

All this still doesn't take into account that at extremely rich ratios, the nature of nitro's chemical reaction under combustion changes, producing new end products including hydrogen-another compound that really likes to go "boom" (remember the Hindenburg?).

Although it's possible to run 100 percent nitro-Art Chrisman is said to have done so, with carburetors to boot-experts like Gene Adams don't recommend it. "Even if the rules allow it," Adams says, "cutting nitro with another fuel makes the car more consistent. It'll run cleaner and there's less tendency to drop cylinders. In my experience 98 percent is best overall."

Methanol Brews

Methanol remains the most popular fuel used to cut nitromethane, if only because many sanctioning bodies currently ban the alternatives. Nevertheless, there's a good reason to cut nitro with up to 10 percent methanol: It helps suppress detonation. Ray Hill Turbo recommends a 2.5 percent water/7.5 percent methanol cut to reduce both preignition and detonation tendencies with, it claims, "almost the full power capability of undiluted nitromethane."

Nitro doesn't mix with gasoline-they separate, with the gas on top
Initial start-up with high nitro concentrations is very tricky. Jeff Prock says, "You must get the engine cycling. It won't start up spinning at 200 rpm like a gas engine would. You need to get some heat in the engine and spin it at 1,800 to 2,000 rpm." There's so much fuel pouring into the cylinders that failure to get the engine spinning fast enough before controlled ignition can hydro-lock the engine, or even blow a head off. The common practice is to start and warm up the engine on gas or alcohol.

Once you get a nitro engine going, it may not want to stop. At 7,500 rpm on the top end, there's so much heat in the engine it may keep running under autoignition even if you shut off the magnetos. Essentially, it becomes a diesel. Fuelers today shut down by turning off the fuel pumps as well as the ignition.

Don't Get Mixed Up

Correctly lending nitro involves far more than a mixing cup. The specific gravity (SG) of fuels varies per batch and purity; methanol's out-of-the-barrel concentration can vary 5 percent or so. The by-weight mixture is also dependent upon temperature, both during the initial mix as well as if the temperature changes afterward. As temperature rises, the weight (as measured by SG) decreases. For tuning, it's the percentage by weight that's important, so it is necessary to mix the fuel using a hydrometer and keep track of mixture temperature.

"Nitro engines require lower compression ratios. Normally aspirated with modern race gas or methanol, 15:1 compression ratios are typical. With nitro, you're looking at about 10 to 11:1. A blown motor might run 6.0:1 compression with nitro, 8.5:1 with gasoline, and 12.0 to 13.0:1 on alcohol.

Running Out of Timing

Popularly, nitro is considered a "slow-burning" fuel, but the burn rate is between gas and methanol. The problem is that on high end, nitro-fueled engines, only about 10 percent of the fuel in the chamber is vapor when the burn starts; the rest is liquid. The vapor burns first, which ideally creates enough heat to vaporize the rest of the fuel. But it takes time to create that heat-hence the great amount of lead needed, about twice what you'd use with an equivalent gasoline-fueled engine. Adams says, "Normally aspirated we usually run 60 degrees of lead or 50 degrees with a supercharger. A gasoline-fueled, normally aspirated Hemi might only need 27 to 28 degrees."

Hammered

Nitromethane is weird stuff. You can strike a match next to a puddle of it and nothing will happen. But Jeff Prock says-based on personal experience when he was a kid-if you put a few drops of it on an anvil and hit it with a hammer, there will be a small explosion, somewhat akin to an old cap going off in a toy gun. More seriously, that means you don't want to risk dropping barrels off a truck. The explosion chance is remote, but it is possible, especially on a hot day.

http://www.hotrod.com/how-to/engine/hrdp-1304-what-is-nitromethane-anyway/

[parmas]

Methanol - 5 Gallon -$32.50

Nitromethane - 5 Gallon - $280

Hydrogen peroxide - 5 Gallon - $43

[parmas]

http://www.academia.edu/1999665/EFFECT_OF_INJECTING_HYDROGEN_PEROXIDE_IN TO_DIESEL_ENGINE

EFFECT OF INJECTING HYDROGEN PEROXIDE INTO DIESEL ENGINE