Supplying Oxygen to Air Intake System
Athiril
01-25-2004, 09:55 PM
Hypothetical performance question
What would happen if i supply oxygen to the air intake system in the car that goes to get mixed into the fuel mixture? What would happen if i accidentally supplied Hydrogen instead? would the oxygen be safe in small amounts? and would it have any benefits?
What would happen if i supply oxygen to the air intake system in the car that goes to get mixed into the fuel mixture? What would happen if i accidentally supplied Hydrogen instead? would the oxygen be safe in small amounts? and would it have any benefits?
SaabJohan
01-26-2004, 12:06 PM
Pure oxygen is reactive with several materials, in other words it's very dangerous to supply it to the intake system of a car. When oxygen content increase combustion speed and temperature will increase. With 30-40% oxygen we will have such high temps and pressures that the engine can't withstand it.
Hydrogen is a fuel and will be burned like any other fuel, it's properties are however different and it will therefore require a different fueling. For example BMW have hydrogen fueled four-stroke engines.
Hydrogen is a fuel and will be burned like any other fuel, it's properties are however different and it will therefore require a different fueling. For example BMW have hydrogen fueled four-stroke engines.
454Casull
01-26-2004, 04:01 PM
It would be very expensive and dangerous to use pure oxygen as the oxidiser in an engine. The injection of a small amount, however, is fine if your fuel system can handle it (that's what nitrous does, anyway).
Athiril
01-26-2004, 08:51 PM
The air mixture from the atmosphere is like 21% oxygen and 78% nitrogen, and 1% misc, i was going to like add a little extra oxygen into the air filter, so i get a mixture of like 25% oxygen, and 74% nitrogen, etc, but still have the same amount of air flowing through the air filter, say 1000kg of air an hour before i put extra oxygen in, and 1000kg of air after i add the extra oxygen in.
Athiril
01-26-2004, 08:52 PM
btw: my car is an R30 Skyline, 2.4Litre L24(E) engine, 6 cylinder
Porsche
01-26-2004, 11:08 PM
How much oxygen would be required? I think it would simply be impractical to have to set up a system (tank most importantly) that could feed enoguh oxygen to make a significant, and not harmful gain.
replicant_008
01-27-2004, 06:12 PM
This all depends on the application.
If you have an enhanced air diving licence you can obtain EANx 34 (34% oxy and 66% nitrogen).
An average dive tank at 216 bar (Yep over two hundred bar) or 3,240 psi holds about 80 cubic feet.
Just for arguments sake because I don't know the stats for a L24 - but at say 450cfm max - even if you get the whole contents of the tank out of the valve (unlikely) you'd deplete the contents of the tank in less than 11 seconds. With two tanks aboard you'd be lucky to get a quarter mile run.
If you have an enhanced air diving licence you can obtain EANx 34 (34% oxy and 66% nitrogen).
An average dive tank at 216 bar (Yep over two hundred bar) or 3,240 psi holds about 80 cubic feet.
Just for arguments sake because I don't know the stats for a L24 - but at say 450cfm max - even if you get the whole contents of the tank out of the valve (unlikely) you'd deplete the contents of the tank in less than 11 seconds. With two tanks aboard you'd be lucky to get a quarter mile run.
SaabJohan
01-28-2004, 11:24 AM
Do we have a new winner of the darwin award perhaps?
Pure oxygen is quite cheap, but remember that it reacts with several materials. It's enough that the feeding lines are contaminated (plumbing must be oxygen safe and cleaned with acetone). What happends then if the pure O2 comes in contact with oil/fuel in the intake?
Remember that N2O is inert before the compression phase where it separate, O2 isn't.
Pure oxygen is quite cheap, but remember that it reacts with several materials. It's enough that the feeding lines are contaminated (plumbing must be oxygen safe and cleaned with acetone). What happends then if the pure O2 comes in contact with oil/fuel in the intake?
Remember that N2O is inert before the compression phase where it separate, O2 isn't.
replicant_008
01-28-2004, 01:23 PM
Correct SJ. Even on EANx36 most of the gear needs to be serviced to Oxy Standards because of the nature of the mixing process may result in exposure to pure oxygen.
My point is that given the volume required say at 450 cfm using only EANx 36 which contains 70% more oxygen than regular air you'd have immense difficulty containing and delivering enough to make a difference - assuming you'd even do a quarter you still have issues getting the contents of 160 cu ft of air out of two dive tanks in less than 20 seconds...
My point is that given the volume required say at 450 cfm using only EANx 36 which contains 70% more oxygen than regular air you'd have immense difficulty containing and delivering enough to make a difference - assuming you'd even do a quarter you still have issues getting the contents of 160 cu ft of air out of two dive tanks in less than 20 seconds...
Porsche
01-28-2004, 10:32 PM
Wait, are your calculations based on feeding the oxygen all by itself, or the oxygen with all the other air? 450cfm, is an awful lot of extra air to be adding just to boost the oxygen content by a few percent, I would think that 160 cft would get you a lot more than a 1/4 mile, unless everything you said is based around the idea of that much oxygen needing to be added just to boost the percentage from 21% to 25% what is the flow rate of the L24?
Oops, jsut read the bit about the 70% more oxygen content, does that not mean you've based everytihng around a 91% oxygen mix?
Hmmm, even if it did work, like the Hydrogen powered cars (some fo the earlier ones) anything at 216 bar isn't goign to like getting hit, it would definately be illegal given the pressures, which are hardly adequate at that.
Oops, jsut read the bit about the 70% more oxygen content, does that not mean you've based everytihng around a 91% oxygen mix?
Hmmm, even if it did work, like the Hydrogen powered cars (some fo the earlier ones) anything at 216 bar isn't goign to like getting hit, it would definately be illegal given the pressures, which are hardly adequate at that.
Athiril
01-29-2004, 06:28 AM
I was intending to add extra oxygen into the existing air mix going through the air intake system, not supply all the air on my own, I would only need to supply a little of oxygen to raise the percentage to 25% oxygen mixture, i dont know the flow rate of the L24E, but I was going to use an EGO and put a little bit in at a time to see the results on the EGO, which means I wouldn't need heavy equipment and an oxygen tank that would get depleted in seconds as people keep telling me, I already said in my second post to add oxygen to existing air, not blast a whole tank of oxygen through in seconds.
replicant_008
01-29-2004, 01:51 PM
To clarify a few points:
- Regular air is 20.9% oxygen and the rest is mainly nitrogen
- EANx 36 is 36% oxygen and 64% nitrogen. This is a blend generally made from pure oxygen and nitrogen. 36/21 = 171.4% ie 71% more. If this was fed at 1 bar ie normal air pressure you'd effectively introduce enough oxygen to be equivalent to 1.7 bar of boost.
- 450 cfm was a guess based on the maximum flow rate of a twin throat Weber Carb for a medium displacement in-line six. I made a rough assumption based on full throttle and max revs to illustrate the high quantity of air required and also the difficulty in getting this out of two dive tanks in the time required. Even at 160 cfm you'd get a minute but you still have issues in getting this out of the cylinders and still regulate it down from a peak of 216 bar down to 1 bar.
- Regular air is 20.9% oxygen and the rest is mainly nitrogen
- EANx 36 is 36% oxygen and 64% nitrogen. This is a blend generally made from pure oxygen and nitrogen. 36/21 = 171.4% ie 71% more. If this was fed at 1 bar ie normal air pressure you'd effectively introduce enough oxygen to be equivalent to 1.7 bar of boost.
- 450 cfm was a guess based on the maximum flow rate of a twin throat Weber Carb for a medium displacement in-line six. I made a rough assumption based on full throttle and max revs to illustrate the high quantity of air required and also the difficulty in getting this out of two dive tanks in the time required. Even at 160 cfm you'd get a minute but you still have issues in getting this out of the cylinders and still regulate it down from a peak of 216 bar down to 1 bar.
454Casull
01-29-2004, 03:46 PM
0 bar is generally considered to be ambient pressure, right?
replicant_008
01-29-2004, 05:27 PM
At sea level - the mean atmospheric pressure is 1 bar - 1 bar of boost would mean that the total intake manifold pressure would be 2 bar (1 bar ambient + 1 bar boost).
For interest's sake, for every 10 metres you descend underwater at sealevel the pressure increases by 1 bar - so at 40 metres the pressure is 5 bar (or 4 bar more than at sea level). And you should see what that can do to an egg...
For interest's sake, for every 10 metres you descend underwater at sealevel the pressure increases by 1 bar - so at 40 metres the pressure is 5 bar (or 4 bar more than at sea level). And you should see what that can do to an egg...
Porsche
01-29-2004, 11:50 PM
Jesus, that means that Alvin would have to have withstood some..... 400 or so bar of pressure, that's 6000 psi... If I did everything. That's significant.
BTW, you are clearly an engineer of some sort, where did you acquire all this technical knowledge?
BTW, you are clearly an engineer of some sort, where did you acquire all this technical knowledge?
replicant_008
02-01-2004, 01:43 PM
Actually, I have a business degree - the knowledge of pressure and gases comes from being a Master Scuba Diver and I've spent the past 10 years or so helping out various friends with karts, open-wheelers and other race cars. You learn a lot when building a car from the ground up and building the loom and electronics especially if you have data logging and laptop adjustable engine management.
dericos
05-27-2011, 04:02 AM
Yes, I had a NOS system for my Miata. No, I didn't have the heart to install it after 3 years and sold it. Yes, I was a professional SCUBA diver ( which is really totally irrelevant here ).....
[ Not relevant to this discussion but should be good background ( for me at least )!
Let me get this straight?
Question 1) NOS drops the air temperature (which is always good!) AND increases O2 at the level of 33% O2 to 66% N2 ratio ( as opposed to 21% O2 to 79% N2 normally ) thereby increasing O2 which increases more fuel input ( by the reaction of the O2 sensors to increased O2 in the exhaust).....? IS THIS CORRECT? Q1(
Question 2) NOS breaks up into it's elemental parts ( N20 ) during the heat of combustion? Q2(
Question 3) NOS is inert until it breaks up into it's elements during the heat of combustion? Q3(
]
I think the increased flammability issue mentioned above by SaabJohan pretty much answered my questions about adding pure O2 instead of NOS to the air intake! (That might be a deal breaker to me, as the O2 tank would be in the trunk with my battery ( enclosed space 4 foot away !!! ) and above the gas tank!!!!)
But as I did come here with pretty much the same question as Athiril... just a lil O2 boost as per a NOS system..... he last mentioned 25% O2 mixture.....?
Question 4) The effects and problems of adding a little bit of oxygen to raise the percentage to 25-30% oxygen mixture ( as per a NOS system)? Q4(
Question 5) Would the increased flammability issue negate a consumer application here? Q5(
and.... since we are not talking about running a pure O2 intake as with a torpedo nor a pure Oxygen underwater breathing aparatus let's stay on topic.....
(Flame me if you want but 5 questions on the table here)
TY Gentlemen!
[ Not relevant to this discussion but should be good background ( for me at least )!
Let me get this straight?
Question 1) NOS drops the air temperature (which is always good!) AND increases O2 at the level of 33% O2 to 66% N2 ratio ( as opposed to 21% O2 to 79% N2 normally ) thereby increasing O2 which increases more fuel input ( by the reaction of the O2 sensors to increased O2 in the exhaust).....? IS THIS CORRECT? Q1(
Question 2) NOS breaks up into it's elemental parts ( N20 ) during the heat of combustion? Q2(
Question 3) NOS is inert until it breaks up into it's elements during the heat of combustion? Q3(
]
I think the increased flammability issue mentioned above by SaabJohan pretty much answered my questions about adding pure O2 instead of NOS to the air intake! (That might be a deal breaker to me, as the O2 tank would be in the trunk with my battery ( enclosed space 4 foot away !!! ) and above the gas tank!!!!)
But as I did come here with pretty much the same question as Athiril... just a lil O2 boost as per a NOS system..... he last mentioned 25% O2 mixture.....?
Question 4) The effects and problems of adding a little bit of oxygen to raise the percentage to 25-30% oxygen mixture ( as per a NOS system)? Q4(
Question 5) Would the increased flammability issue negate a consumer application here? Q5(
and.... since we are not talking about running a pure O2 intake as with a torpedo nor a pure Oxygen underwater breathing aparatus let's stay on topic.....
(Flame me if you want but 5 questions on the table here)
TY Gentlemen!
curtis73
05-27-2011, 11:06 AM
Normally, I would close this thread (its a no-no to revive threads from 2004) but you ask some good questions. I'll leave it open for now.
Question 1) NOS drops the air temperature (which is always good!) AND increases O2 at the level of 33% O2 to 66% N2 ratio ( as opposed to 21% O2 to 79% N2 normally ) thereby increasing O2 which increases more fuel input ( by the reaction of the O2 sensors to increased O2 in the exhaust).....? IS THIS CORRECT?
Correct. If 10% of your intake charge is N2O, and N2O and atmospheric air are 33% and 21% respectively, it will increase the percentage of oxygen by 10% of the difference... basically make it 22.2% oxygen.
Question 2) NOS breaks up into it's elemental parts ( N20 ) during the heat of combustion?
Correct. The majority of it disassociates during compression, the rest disassociates as combustion spreads across the chamber.
Question 3) NOS is inert until it breaks up into it's elements during the heat of combustion?
Correct again. It is categorized as a non-flammable gas
I think the increased flammability issue mentioned above by SaabJohan pretty much answered my questions about adding pure O2 instead of NOS to the air intake! (That might be a deal breaker to me, as the O2 tank would be in the trunk with my battery ( enclosed space 4 foot away !!! ) and above the gas tank!!!!)
Agreed. The amount of pure oxygen you could inject is extremely limited which is why N2O is such a common choice. It provides you with the same O2 enrichment in a safer package.
Pure O2 will not burn, but it makes darn near anything around it practically explosive. Cast iron will burn in the presence of pure oxygen, so one little backfire through the carb could cause catastrophic damage to you, the car, bystanders in a 1/4 mile radius, and could rip a hole in the space-time continuum. I learned that on Star Trek, so it has to be true.
Question 4) The effects and problems of adding a little bit of oxygen to raise the percentage to 25-30% oxygen mixture ( as per a NOS system)?
You would lack the stability of the N2O compound. If you had (for instance) a mixture of oxygen and an inert gas like Argon, the oxygen is free and available for combustion all the time. N2O remains inert until its in the combustion chamber. See space-time continuum comment above :)
Question 5) Would the increased flammability issue negate a consumer application here?
Yup. We're talking insane levels of flammability. Like dynamite levels. One little backfire, spark, oxygen leak, anything, and you're looking at instant death. There might be nothing left of you except some ashy bone fragments.
Question 1) NOS drops the air temperature (which is always good!) AND increases O2 at the level of 33% O2 to 66% N2 ratio ( as opposed to 21% O2 to 79% N2 normally ) thereby increasing O2 which increases more fuel input ( by the reaction of the O2 sensors to increased O2 in the exhaust).....? IS THIS CORRECT?
Correct. If 10% of your intake charge is N2O, and N2O and atmospheric air are 33% and 21% respectively, it will increase the percentage of oxygen by 10% of the difference... basically make it 22.2% oxygen.
Question 2) NOS breaks up into it's elemental parts ( N20 ) during the heat of combustion?
Correct. The majority of it disassociates during compression, the rest disassociates as combustion spreads across the chamber.
Question 3) NOS is inert until it breaks up into it's elements during the heat of combustion?
Correct again. It is categorized as a non-flammable gas
I think the increased flammability issue mentioned above by SaabJohan pretty much answered my questions about adding pure O2 instead of NOS to the air intake! (That might be a deal breaker to me, as the O2 tank would be in the trunk with my battery ( enclosed space 4 foot away !!! ) and above the gas tank!!!!)
Agreed. The amount of pure oxygen you could inject is extremely limited which is why N2O is such a common choice. It provides you with the same O2 enrichment in a safer package.
Pure O2 will not burn, but it makes darn near anything around it practically explosive. Cast iron will burn in the presence of pure oxygen, so one little backfire through the carb could cause catastrophic damage to you, the car, bystanders in a 1/4 mile radius, and could rip a hole in the space-time continuum. I learned that on Star Trek, so it has to be true.
Question 4) The effects and problems of adding a little bit of oxygen to raise the percentage to 25-30% oxygen mixture ( as per a NOS system)?
You would lack the stability of the N2O compound. If you had (for instance) a mixture of oxygen and an inert gas like Argon, the oxygen is free and available for combustion all the time. N2O remains inert until its in the combustion chamber. See space-time continuum comment above :)
Question 5) Would the increased flammability issue negate a consumer application here?
Yup. We're talking insane levels of flammability. Like dynamite levels. One little backfire, spark, oxygen leak, anything, and you're looking at instant death. There might be nothing left of you except some ashy bone fragments.
wicker7
08-03-2011, 04:26 AM
I too have been thinking of adding pure oxygen to the intake of my 4.0 6cylinder jeep Wrangler. At 11 mpg I need help quick. My plan is to start with a mpg meter and an oxygen flow meter so I can slowly add the small volume of oxygen to the intake. According to my calculations, I should be able to add to the existing atmosphere intake, up to 20 cfms of oxygen at 2000 rpms which is about 70 mph. this would increase the oxygen by about 5%. This is not for racing only normal driving conditions, so of course at slower speeds there would be less volume of oxygen to keep the same 5% increase. Also, I have been using oxygen in welding for 35+ years and don't understand the inordinate fear of using oxygen. I haven't seen anyone blow up. I did start a fire one time in a field with a cutting torch but thats why you have a fire extinguisher on hand. :biggrin:
Moppie
08-03-2011, 04:36 AM
How do the plan to introduce the O2 to the inlet?
The danger comes from how you do that.
The danger comes from how you do that.
jdmccright
08-03-2011, 09:32 AM
O2 and flammability? Google "Apollo 1" and read on what happens to substances immersed in a pure oxygen atmosphere.
Using oxygen for welding is one thing...you want a hot, clean burning oxyacetylene flame. Driving around with a pressurized bottle of pure O2 to feed into the carb is overkill IMO. From an economical stand point, I don't see how bumping the O2 level will decrease how much you spend per mile.
The misconception here isn't trying to achieve higher MPGs, which you might succeed in doing. But the cost of that O2 bottle has to be added to the cost of the gasoline burned over the miles driven to get the real cost per mile.
For example, a car getting 30 MPG costs about $0.117/mile when a gallon costs $3.50. By comparison, your 11-MPG Jeep costs you $0.318/mile.
Disregarding the costs to install such in injection system and the cost of purchasing the bottles for refill, the cost of a bottle of O2 gas has to be spread out over the number of miles driven. Now, I have no clue on what the price should be for a reasonable size refill, let's say $100. And I'd have to do some serious calc to figure out how long a cylinder would last at a certain CFM of flow for your engine. So for simplicity sake a bottle lasts one tank.
Your Jeep has about a 20-gallon tank, giving you a current range of 220 miles. Lets say with O2 injection you bump that to 13 MPG...YAY, right? Not quite.
With 13 MPG you'll go 260 miles, but you've spent $70 on gas and $100 on O2, resulting in a cost of $0.654/mile. That's not saving. If the bottle lasted 5 tanks, that's still an added $20 of oxygen you've used...$0.346/mile, though closer to your break-even point.
With this in mind, I'd suggest spending the money on finding out why you get such horrible MPG in the first place. You don't mention a specific model, year, 2WD/4WD, etc., but you should be getting 16-22 MPG for a 4-L Cherokee. To get 11, there is something very wrong.
Hope this helps and good luck!
Using oxygen for welding is one thing...you want a hot, clean burning oxyacetylene flame. Driving around with a pressurized bottle of pure O2 to feed into the carb is overkill IMO. From an economical stand point, I don't see how bumping the O2 level will decrease how much you spend per mile.
The misconception here isn't trying to achieve higher MPGs, which you might succeed in doing. But the cost of that O2 bottle has to be added to the cost of the gasoline burned over the miles driven to get the real cost per mile.
For example, a car getting 30 MPG costs about $0.117/mile when a gallon costs $3.50. By comparison, your 11-MPG Jeep costs you $0.318/mile.
Disregarding the costs to install such in injection system and the cost of purchasing the bottles for refill, the cost of a bottle of O2 gas has to be spread out over the number of miles driven. Now, I have no clue on what the price should be for a reasonable size refill, let's say $100. And I'd have to do some serious calc to figure out how long a cylinder would last at a certain CFM of flow for your engine. So for simplicity sake a bottle lasts one tank.
Your Jeep has about a 20-gallon tank, giving you a current range of 220 miles. Lets say with O2 injection you bump that to 13 MPG...YAY, right? Not quite.
With 13 MPG you'll go 260 miles, but you've spent $70 on gas and $100 on O2, resulting in a cost of $0.654/mile. That's not saving. If the bottle lasted 5 tanks, that's still an added $20 of oxygen you've used...$0.346/mile, though closer to your break-even point.
With this in mind, I'd suggest spending the money on finding out why you get such horrible MPG in the first place. You don't mention a specific model, year, 2WD/4WD, etc., but you should be getting 16-22 MPG for a 4-L Cherokee. To get 11, there is something very wrong.
Hope this helps and good luck!
Black Lotus
08-03-2011, 08:22 PM
I too have been thinking of adding pure oxygen to the intake of my 4.0 6cylinder jeep Wrangler.
We have pictures at work of an older airplane (727) in South America where the airlines maintenence facilities decided they wanted to modify a gaseous passenger oxygen system, which runs at 1850 PSI. When they finished their work, the mechanic opened a cylinder to the system and promptly burnt a 3 ft diameter hole in the side of the airplane. All the stainless steel tubes in the area went missing as well. I imagine the individual who opened the shutoff valve saw spots for about a week.
Amazing what will happen when you don't use "oxygen clean" techniques in the fabrication and preparation of the tubes.
As far as I know, the airplane is still in a corner of the airfield, occupied by the local jungle bats.
Any speck of dust, any spot of grease, anything that is combustable in the tube or oxygen rated flexhose can start a fire.
Further, when opening the valve on a cylinder charged up to full pressure, a pressure wave will travel down the tube and, if encountering any dead end, will heat the tube up locally, possibly causing a fire in the area as well.
There are ways to deal with this, but it's none of your business.....;)
So, don't even think about it.
Liquid oxygen (LOX) is even cooler. Get a leak anywhere, and if it runs out onto the tarmac you can have a friendly little blaze right there on the pavement.
Gaseous oxygen and LOX is actually pretty safe, you just have to know your business when designing and servicing it.
But if you miss one step, you can burn your vehicle to the ground.
Or lets just say it will burn out of control until the oxygen in the cylinder runs out.
We have pictures at work of an older airplane (727) in South America where the airlines maintenence facilities decided they wanted to modify a gaseous passenger oxygen system, which runs at 1850 PSI. When they finished their work, the mechanic opened a cylinder to the system and promptly burnt a 3 ft diameter hole in the side of the airplane. All the stainless steel tubes in the area went missing as well. I imagine the individual who opened the shutoff valve saw spots for about a week.
Amazing what will happen when you don't use "oxygen clean" techniques in the fabrication and preparation of the tubes.
As far as I know, the airplane is still in a corner of the airfield, occupied by the local jungle bats.
Any speck of dust, any spot of grease, anything that is combustable in the tube or oxygen rated flexhose can start a fire.
Further, when opening the valve on a cylinder charged up to full pressure, a pressure wave will travel down the tube and, if encountering any dead end, will heat the tube up locally, possibly causing a fire in the area as well.
There are ways to deal with this, but it's none of your business.....;)
So, don't even think about it.
Liquid oxygen (LOX) is even cooler. Get a leak anywhere, and if it runs out onto the tarmac you can have a friendly little blaze right there on the pavement.
Gaseous oxygen and LOX is actually pretty safe, you just have to know your business when designing and servicing it.
But if you miss one step, you can burn your vehicle to the ground.
Or lets just say it will burn out of control until the oxygen in the cylinder runs out.
wicker7
08-05-2011, 09:21 PM
Great info, thanks. It is all in my mind at present. I thought I said earlier it was a Wrangler, 4x4, 33" tires, 6 cylinder. That is partially the reason for the bad mileage. Anyway safety first, you can be sure I will not burn my Jeep or the city to the ground. I may just switch it over to diesel which would present a totally different set of problems. It just pisses me off that cars don't get 100-200 mpg. Hybrids are a joke at 50 mpg. My system would be no different than NO2 except I would not replace the atmospheric intake, but only add a small amount of oxygen starting at 0. the reason no2 has to replace atmosphere is because it is already mixed.2/3 is inert gas, I can get 78% nitrogen breathing. Like I said it is all in my head now and at the volumn I'm talking about it may not be feasible, possible, but not cost effective. Thanks again, so far this is the only site that even mentioned the subject.
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2025