I remember seeing a program about another solution to the problem, but I
don't remember it very clearly.

The idea was to prevent jet fuel spills from burning - IIRC the fuel
actually foamed up automatically and acted as its own fire retardant,
and it kept tanks under pressure form exploding (the test was a plane
crashing into a barrier - with the additive there was no plane-engulfing
fireball)

It was ditched because it caused other problems and didn't prevent fuel
spill fires as well as originally hoped.

-Adam

Joe Farr wrote:

>A few years back, the aviation industry played around with an idea of 'contaminating' their aviation fuel with a chemical that prevented it for burning. The chemical was removed just before it entered the actual engine. Now that must be one hell of a process when you think about the amount of fuel a jumbo's engine needs. Perhaps it would be possible to alter the chemical properties of the H2/O2 mix or add a 'dampening agent' to make it more stable (less likely to blow up in your face) but reverse the affects in the actual engine compartment on demand.
>It's just a thought.
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Roman Black [mailto:fastvid@EZY.NET.AU]
>Sent: 21 July 2002 14:44
>To: PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
>Subject: Re: [OT]: Hydrogen Powered Cars
>
>
>Peter L. Peres wrote:
>
>
>>On Sun, 21 Jul 2002, Roman Black wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>I personally think that his simple idea of injecting some
>>>water into the intake is brilliant, using most of the heat
>>>energy to cause a massive volume increase of the water
>>>vapour.
>>>
>>>
>>Always assuming that the the intake valves on the engine are perfectly
>>closing and there will be no (zero) flame leakage back through the intake
>>manifold towards the bomb (I mean, tank with compressed H2 O2 in
>>stochastic mixture).
>>
>>Of course you can compress H2 O2 stochastic mixture. It will work just
>>fine, as long as there is no catalyst around. By catalist, I mean, any
>>organic substance, such as oil, grease, a fingerprint, most plastics, most
>>rubbers, most paints (in the context of exposure to oxygen). Notice that
>>by grace I did not mention any real catalysts, such as manganese or
>>vanadium left over from the tools that machined the tanks and the
>>fixtures. I am quite sure that it will work under perfect conditions, but
>>real life isn't like that. I have seen the aftermath of a few (two) oxygen
>>and acetylene explosions and I know that I don't want any of that under
>>me, in a car or motorcycle.
>>
>>Peter
>>
>>PS: I am not at all againts these innovations, but some of them have the
>>potential to kill, provenly. The least I can do is to talk about this.
>>
>>
>
>
>That's a good point, and one I respect. I'm quite
>capable of handling hydrogen safely, as obviously
>you are, but many others may not be. :o) I do remember
>blowing up a number of apparati(!) in the late '70s
>when I was experimenting with electrolysis cells
>as a teenager. :o)
>
>Compressing the oxy/hyd mixture is something I have
>stayed away from, the thoughts of diesel effects etc
>are very worrying. Dr. Brown's assertion was that the
>gas mixture was extremely safe, providing temperature
>was considered, and some of his more "reckless"
>demonstrations were regarding the compression and
>handling of the mixture using crude pumps, obviously
>full of oils etc. Better him than us.
>
>I'm surprised they aren't a heap of *really good*
>oxy/hyd welders on the market, which is sad, but no
>I don't expect to see many hydrogen powered vehicles
>on the roads, at least not for some time.
>-Roman
>
>--
>http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
>[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
>
>--
>http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
>[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads