Direct oxygen feed to an engine - stupid idea?

Direct oxygen feed to an engine - stupid idea?

Author
Discussion

GreenV8S

30,201 posts

284 months

Wednesday 28th May 2003
quotequote all
I must have read the same article, I remember it also said the engine has a working life of about 500 revolutions!

james

1,362 posts

284 months

Wednesday 28th May 2003
quotequote all

CraigAlsop said:

funkihamsta said: What about hyrdrogen peroxide (H2O2). This would probably spontaneously degrade to H20 and O2. Evaportation would cool the charge, whilst the oxygen would er...burn. Why hasn't this been done? Too expensive/dangerous?
Isn't this what the shuttle uses for its solid fuel boosters?



Yeah. And look what happened to it....

John_S4x4

1,350 posts

257 months

Thursday 29th May 2003
quotequote all
In regards to the shuttle booster rockets, I believe that solid rocket motors could be alot safer in the future. Nasa have developed the idea of making the rocket fuel of candle wax !! or to be more precise, parrafin wax - so I am led to believe. With the system, they can also switch off the solid fuel rocket too, which is a great plus.
Going back to the Hydrogen Peroxide, why not have a silver coating on the piston crowns then ?
Regards John S

annodomini2

6,862 posts

251 months

Thursday 29th May 2003
quotequote all
The only solid fuelled rocket motors that can be shut down are hybrids, they use a liquid oxidiser which can be turned off. I'm well up in the space scene and thats the first I've heard about new fuels for boosters

ATG

20,577 posts

272 months

Thursday 29th May 2003
quotequote all
Liquid oxygen - the best there is, accept no substitutes, etc ...

How to make a bomb: Dip cotton wool in liquid 02. Take step back. Throw lit matches at it.

How to make a rocket: Dip cigarette in liquid O2, light tip and duck.

How to dispose of those anoying diamonds. Heat, drop in liquid O2 and watch them burn (produces CO2, bad for the environment, naughty!)

Storage in a car wouldn't be that much more difficult than storing hydrogen. I guess the reason no one has done it is that it is over the top for an internal combustion engine. Nitrous oxide is safer and easier to handle and gives you enough oxidation to bend the chassis round the drive shaft.

There is some great film of the rocket plane to which MrsD referred. It was pretty compact, about the size of a car and powered by a compact little rocket engine (about the size of a big sewing machine). Performance crapped on everything else in the sky ... but it ran out of juice after a few minutes. Pretty useless as a weapon because it was flying so much faster than any Allied fighters that it couldn't engage them before it had gone hurtling straight past, but hell, it was an experimental vehicle. Thank god they lost when they did. Another year of technological development and the Nazi's would have had some terrifying kit.

dontlift

9,396 posts

258 months

Thursday 29th May 2003
quotequote all

GreenV8S said: I must have read the same article, I remember it also said the engine has a working life of about 500 revolutions!


Sounds like yer Average AJP Tiv Engine......

Roadrunner

2,690 posts

267 months

Sunday 8th June 2003
quotequote all
Back in 1986 I was running a radio controlled 1/8th scale car. It was powered by a 3.5cc Nova Rossi glow plug engine (the Ferrari of model motors). It was standard procedure to run this on a mix of petrol and 5% nitro methane. Some drivers upped this to about 20% though! Even on 'normal' mix it would hit 70mph!

I wonder if you could add a little nitro methane to other engines? Would be fun in a track car!