Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Metalworking (rec.crafts.metalworking) Discuss various aspects of working with metal, such as machining, welding, metal joining, screwing, casting, hardening/tempering, blacksmithing/forging, spinning and hammer work, sheet metal work. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
There seems to be differences of opinions on the properties of carbon
monoxide gas. One source says its heavier than air another says its lighter, so.......is it heavier or lighter than air? To be honest I rather trust the info from this forum than various websites and media types. -- \\\|/// ( @ @ ) -----------oOOo(_)oOOo--------------- oooO ---------( )----Oooo---------------- \ ( ( ) \_) ) / (_/ The original frugal ponder! Koi-ahoi mates.... |
#2
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
|
#4
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
"Ecnerwal" wrote in message ... In article , (Roy) wrote: There seems to be differences of opinions on the properties of carbon monoxide gas. One source says its heavier than air another says its lighter, so.......is it heavier or lighter than air? To be honest I rather trust the info from this forum than various websites and media types. And you slept though Chemistry, saying "when will I ever use this boring stuff..." CO: 12+16=28, .vs. air, a mixture of 78% 14+14 (N2) and 21% 16+16 (O2), plus 1% others. So, slightly lighter than air. But not much. And very, very deadly in high concentrations - read a bit on the wood/biomass gasification websites to be reminded - evidently the old "head in the oven" method of suicide dated back to cooking gas that was mostly CO, and 1 or two deep breaths would do the job... There's also the matter of diffusion and convection - just because a gas is heavier than air doesn't mean it will all sink to the floor. Don't know what you are doing, but I suggest a CO meter/alarm with a digital readout - $50 bucks or so, well spent. |
#5
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
"Ecnerwal" wrote in message ... In article , (Roy) wrote: There seems to be differences of opinions on the properties of carbon monoxide gas. One source says its heavier than air another says its lighter, so.......is it heavier or lighter than air? To be honest I rather trust the info from this forum than various websites and media types. And you slept though Chemistry, saying "when will I ever use this boring stuff..." CO: 12+16=28, .vs. air, a mixture of 78% 14+14 (N2) and 21% 16+16 (O2), plus 1% others. So, slightly lighter than air. But not much. And very, very deadly in high concentrations - read a bit on the wood/biomass gasification websites to be reminded - evidently the old "head in the oven" method of suicide dated back to cooking gas that was mostly CO, and 1 or two deep breaths would do the job... Don't know what you are doing, but I suggest a CO meter/alarm with a digital readout - $50 bucks or so, well spent. -- Cats, coffee, chocolate...vices to live by CO 12+16=28 (14+14)+ (16+16) ?? By that reasoning Beryllium is lighter than air at a molecular weight of 9.0112. Simply adding molecular weights or even their atomic number is not a method of determining density. Realize that if you take one liter of water and add 100 cc of salt to that water and stir until it is dissolved you will not necessarily end up with 1.1 liters of material. The specific gravity of CO is 0.968 times that of air. It is therefore lighter than air. However, it is freely mixable in air and therefore won't "settle" any more than salt water will settle if poured into a bucket of fresh water. Not to mention, how is carbon monoxide formed. In almost every case carbon monoxide is formed by the partial combustion of a hydrocarbon. That partial combustion generally release is a large amount of heat and therefore the carbon monoxide would be even less dense following the typical gas laws that as temperature increases volume increases and density decreases. The other problem with carbon monoxide is one of affinity. It does not take a large concentration of carbon monoxide to lead to problems because the hemoglobin molecule binds carbon monoxide much more tightly than oxygen. Hemoglobin will bind the carbon monoxide and then only very slowly release it. As a result hemoglobin is no longer able to carry oxygen to the cells. Ultimately what happens with carbon monoxide is that the organs die for lack of oxygen. You can think of it almost like carbon monoxide is like a sticky form of argon. Argon is not a poison however if you breathe pure argon you die because you cannot get oxygen to your blood.and ultimately to your cells. If you take one big breath of pure argon then on the next breath you breathe normal air there won't be a problem. But if the argon had the ability to stick in your lungs then on the next breath the oxygen still wouldn't get in and you would end up suffocating. There is no lack of blood pressure necessarily nor is there any lack of blood flow it is simply that the blood being supplied to the organ is not carrying oxygen. Functionally it would be like replacing all the persons blood with salt water. For a short few seconds the heart would pump that salt water around but the organs would not receive any oxygen and therefore would die fairly rapidly. Is interesting to look at the treatment of carbon monoxide poisoning. If one is placed in pure oxygen then the mathematical probability of any oxygen atom bumping into the hemoglobin molecule during the time that it is in the lungs goes up by a factor of 5. (Going from a concentration of approximately 21 percent up to 100 percent) likewise going into a hyperbaric chamber at one atmosphere of pressure will double that mathematical probability even over pure oxygen. There is also a slight benefit to hyperbaric oxygen in that it causes more oxygen to be dissolved into the liquid phase of blood completely separate from hemoglobin itself. It isn't in this post specifically but I noticed a posting somewhere else about the possible explosion hazard of carbon monoxide. Carbon monoxide is definitely combustible(autoignites at 630C) however it would be extremely unlikely for it to explode or readily burn at room temp. If you think about it, a catalytic converter is an "engine" designed to burn carbon monoxide! It uses rare earth metals as catalysts to allow the combination of carbon monoxide with more oxygen producing carbon dioxide. Ultimately the catalytic converter is fully burning the carbon atom which ultimately started as a hydrocarbon. The other factoid about carbon monoxide that I like is the concept that it is an "odorless" gas. Certainly this is technically true that carbon monoxide as a pure gas doesn't have any discernible odor however in almost every case when carbon monoxide is being produced it is being produced because of inefficient combustion. That inefficient combustion almost always yields hydrocarbon fragments as well. Hydrocarbon fragments tend to give off an odor. So although it is true that carbon monoxide itself has no odor, the friends that it keeps typically do. If there is a case where the combustion is just inefficient enough to produce carbon monoxide but not hydrocarbon fragments then you will get and odorless gas. This is almost like saying that natural gas is odorless. Technically it is but when it is produced it is mixed with hydrogen sulfide to give it a discernible odor. Therefore natural gas does have an odor because natural gas in the most common state has been given an odor. I had seen another posting talking about cyanosis associated with carbon monoxide poisoning. I believe I saw someone respond already that the color changes not cyanosis but rather a cherry red color. I've seen a number of carbon monoxide poisoning cases however I can't really say that I ever was able to notice this color difference. These were in cases with laboratory verified toxic levels of carbon monoxide. I read it in all the textbooks and I would answer it on a test question but I can't say as though I've ever actually seen it. It was a very interesting discussion to be sure |
#6
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
On Fri, 6 Jan 2006 15:40:36 -0500, "Mr. Bla" wrote:
Simply adding molecular weights or even their atomic number is not a method of determining density. It is for gases though (to a good approximation) Maybe beryllium is gaseous on your planet ? It would work then. |
#7
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
Andy Dingley wrote:
On Fri, 6 Jan 2006 15:40:36 -0500, "Mr. Bla" wrote: Simply adding molecular weights or even their atomic number is not a method of determining density. It is for gases though (to a good approximation) Maybe beryllium is gaseous on your planet ? It would work then. I was about to mention the same thing. :-) ...lew... |
#8
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
One other nasty thing about CO that I didn't notice anybody mention is
that the hemoglobin in your red blood cells with preferentially absorb CO rather than O2 if CO is present. That's part of the reason it's so toxic. It locks up your hemoglobin and you suffocate for lack of O2. But it's also an anesthetic (as is CO2) so you just fall asleep. I've been a runner forever (well since 1961 - close enough). Back in the 70's when I used to smoke a pipe, I noticed I just didn't seem to have as much energy the next day. Turns out it takes ~36 hours for CO to equilibrate out of your hemoglobin when there is no CO present in the air. One pipe full of tobacco and I was probably 5% impaired. Pretty scary. That's why they treat CO poisoning with pure O2, they're trying to get the hemoglobin to let go of the CO. Bottom line, be very careful around any source of CO. You could end up dead and never know it. Jim |
#9
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
"Jim McGill" wrote in message ... One other nasty thing about CO that I didn't notice anybody mention is that the hemoglobin in your red blood cells with preferentially absorb CO rather than O2 if CO is present. That's part of the reason it's so toxic. It locks up your hemoglobin and you suffocate for lack of O2. But it's also an anesthetic (as is CO2) so you just fall asleep. I've been a runner forever (well since 1961 - close enough). Back in the 70's when I used to smoke a pipe, I noticed I just didn't seem to have as much energy the next day. Turns out it takes ~36 hours for CO to equilibrate out of your hemoglobin when there is no CO present in the air. One pipe full of tobacco and I was probably 5% impaired. Pretty scary. That's why they treat CO poisoning with pure O2, they're trying to get the hemoglobin to let go of the CO. Bottom line, be very careful around any source of CO. You could end up dead and never know it. Jim Ya, Jim, I'll be careful. tomorrow. I begin setting up a new meat packing machine that uses a VERY small dose of CO in the inerting gas which fills the package after the air has been vacuumed out.. I've insisted that the mixer and supply bottles be stored in the open air. All connections in the factory will be welded stainless steel. |
#10
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
In article , Tom Miller says...
Ya, Jim, I'll be careful. tomorrow. I begin setting up a new meat packing machine that uses a VERY small dose of CO in the inerting gas which fills the package after the air has been vacuumed out.. I've insisted that the mixer and supply bottles be stored in the open air. All connections in the factory will be welded stainless steel. In some places that would not be considered sufficient. Consider a vented toxic gas cabinet, and double-walled tubing, with the outer space vented and exhausted. At the least, leak check all the connections before using it, and consider the drill when changing cylinders. CO detectors too? The only reason I mention this is that a co-worker got a whiff of arsine gas at a plant at one time. The cylinders were stored in a vented gas room, but both belts had broken on the exhaust fan, *and* the regulator had been installed such that there was a tiny leak. He went in the room and though, hmm, something smells like garlic... The damage was fortunately small and he recovered. Jim -- ================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ================================================== |
#11
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
Roy wrote: There seems to be differences of opinions on the properties of carbon monoxide gas. One source says its heavier than air another says its lighter, so.......is it heavier or lighter than air? To be honest I rather trust the info from this forum than various websites and media types. Air is a mixture of about 80% nitrogen (molecular weight approx. 28) and 20% oxygen (molecular weight approx. 32). Carbon monoxide has a molecular weight of approximately 28. So it's very slightly lighter than air. That only matters for a short while, though. Because it won't be too long before the gases mix thoroughly, regardless of their densities. How long is hard to say. You can calculate the time for perfectly still gases, but it's drastically reduced when the gases are stirred up even a little bit, as they are by people moving around, changes in barometric pressure, etc. John Martin |
#12
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
"John Martin" (clip) but it's drastically reduced when the gases are stirred up even a little bit, (clip) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The gasses stir themselves, due to the molecular velocities and collisions. It's silly to talk about settling between carbon monoxide and air, and ignore that air is a mixture of oxygen, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, etc. Why doesn't it settle? |
#13
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
Leo Lichtman wrote: "John Martin" (clip) but it's drastically reduced when the gases are stirred up even a little bit, (clip) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The gasses stir themselves, due to the molecular velocities and collisions. It's silly to talk about settling between carbon monoxide and air, and ignore that air is a mixture of oxygen, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, etc. Why doesn't it settle? Entropy. John Martin |
#14
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
"Roy" wrote in message ... There seems to be differences of opinions on the properties of carbon monoxide gas. One source says its heavier than air another says its lighter, so.......is it heavier or lighter than air? To be honest I rather trust the info from this forum than various websites and media types. It is slightly lighter than air. It also enters the blood stream around 300 times easier than oxygen, IIRC from my medical training. If you suspect you or someone is affected, look at their nails. Cyanosis, bluing of nailbeds and lips, is a sign. As another poster said, get a good CO alarm. This is one that has a constant digital readout of what the CO is at any moment, as well as a memory. If the danger level is 400ppm, I don't want to wait until then. Or if it only goes up to 396, and the alarm doesn't sound. By then, you will have a doozy of a headache, and feel bad for a while. CO is lethal and kills people every day. One of the things that makes it so lethal is that it is silent and odorless. Get a good detector. I have Kidde brand. Steve |
#15
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
In article c0bvf.6904$JT.3204@fed1read06, Steve B says...
If you suspect you or someone is affected, look at their nails. Cyanosis, bluing of nailbeds and lips, is a sign. Interestingly this is absolutely untrue. CO poisioning exhibits itself as nail beds, lips, etc as being bright cherry red. Carboxyhemolglogin is every bit as red as the oxygenated variety - even more so. In fact this is a strong indicator of CO exposure. Jim -- ================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ================================================== |
#16
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
On 5 Jan 2006 08:44:55 -0800, jim rozen
wrote: In article c0bvf.6904$JT.3204@fed1read06, Steve B says... If you suspect you or someone is affected, look at their nails. Cyanosis, bluing of nailbeds and lips, is a sign. Interestingly this is absolutely untrue. CO poisioning exhibits itself as nail beds, lips, etc as being bright cherry red. Carboxyhemolglogin is every bit as red as the oxygenated variety - even more so. In fact this is a strong indicator of CO exposure. Jim Jeezus..Jim got something right for a change...**** me running! G Gunner The aim of untold millions is to be free to do exactly as they choose and for someone else to pay when things go wrong. In the past few decades, a peculiar and distinctive psychology has emerged in England. Gone are the civility, sturdy independence, and admirable stoicism that carried the English through the war years .. It has been replaced by a constant whine of excuses, complaints, and special pleading. The collapse of the British character has been as swift and complete as the collapse of British power. Theodore Dalrymple, |
#17
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
On Thu, 5 Jan 2006 07:35:29 -0800, "Steve B"
wrote: If you suspect you or someone is affected, look at their nails. Cyanosis, bluing of nailbeds and lips, is a sign. That's usually a sign that they're already dead (or good as). CO is hazardous enough that it has a good chance of killing long before visible signs are evident. And for that matter they'll turn a deep pink from CO, rather than blue. For chronic low-level CO exposure, a slight headache might be all the symptomatic indication you get. Then one day the wind is blowing the other way down your gas heater flue and you wind up dead instead. Back in the days of individual room gas heaters (coal gas) we really did lose an awful lot of people to these accidents. |
#18
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
Andy Dingley wrote: On Thu, 5 Jan 2006 07:35:29 -0800, "Steve B" wrote: If you suspect you or someone is affected, look at their nails. Cyanosis, bluing of nailbeds and lips, is a sign. That's usually a sign that they're already dead (or good as). CO is hazardous enough that it has a good chance of killing long before visible signs are evident. And for that matter they'll turn a deep pink from CO, rather than blue. (snip) In my practice of yoga I occasionally induce syncope (fainting from low blood pressure). Most yogis do not practice this way. It seems about a 50% reduction of blood pressure and associated (unknown %) reduction in flow to the brain can induce a loss of conciousness. What is happening is the brain is continuously metabolizing oxygen at about 20 watts, so it just sucks the oxygen right out of the blood, and metabolism stops. The way this is relevant to the thread is that it's a timed effect. One cannot sustain induced syncope for long. However, with exposure to CO and so the blockade of O2 capacity, the blood carries and delivers less O2 to the brain for a long time; as long as it takes for the CO to respirate (diffuse, ventilate). More CO in the circulating blood, less capacity to deliver O2. 9 pints of the red stuff, and I think less than one gram of circulating O2 or CO, maybe on the order of a milligram. Let's see 20 respirations per minute, is it about a liter each or five liters? So that's 1 or maybe 5 moles per minute. Around 40 or 200 grams per minute; 20% is absorbed. So a flow of 8 or 40 grams per minute. Back to volume that's a regulator flow of, er, the square root of three times the cosine of Ethiopia, I'd say.... Circulation of 9 pints takes of order a minute or maybe 10 minutes, but I am so uncertain about that, why continue? Argon/CO mix used for TIG welding steel is particularly hazardous. Argon displaces O2 in free air, CO displaces O2 in the blood. I write much of the above from a careful study of recreational N2O use. Ever hear of Olney's lesions? Brrr. That's another topic. The only use of N2O in metalworking I know of is with butane in small Sparklets. 8 gm size; one of these of pure CO, inhaled, and held, would likely end one's life, but the standard suicide warning would apply: What If It Just Gave You a Headache? Brrrr. Is it called producer gas, the low-value mix of CO and H2? Doug Goncz Replikon Research Falls Church, VA 22044-0394 |
#19
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
|
#20
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
"As another poster said, get a good CO alarm. This is one that has a
constant digital readout of what the CO is at any moment, as well as a memory. If the danger level is 400ppm, I don't want to wait until then. Or if it only goes up to 396, and the alarm doesn't sound. By then, you will have a doozy of a headache, and feel bad for a while. CO is lethal and kills people every day. One of the things that makes it so lethal is that it is silent and odorless. Get a good detector. I have Kidde brand. " Would somebody discuss the different types of CO detectors and their pros and cons? Thanks TMT |
#21
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
"Steve B" wrote in message news:c0bvf.6904$JT.3204@fed1read06... "Roy" wrote in message ... There seems to be differences of opinions on the properties of carbon monoxide gas. One source says its heavier than air another says its lighter, so.......is it heavier or lighter than air? To be honest I rather trust the info from this forum than various websites and media types. It is slightly lighter than air. It also enters the blood stream around 300 times easier than oxygen, IIRC from my medical training. If you suspect you or someone is affected, look at their nails. Cyanosis, bluing of nailbeds and lips, is a sign. Steve, Are you sure about the cyanosis? I was always taught that the first indication of CO poisoning was a red face, as the haemoglobin soaked up the CO preferentially and the reduction in oxygen content in the blood causes increased circulation to compensate. I was raised in Canada, and it was a common cause of accidental death in the winter. A car would get stuck in the snow,and the occupants would leave the car running to keep warm . If the wind was blowing from behind the car,exhaust fumes would enter the car through air ducts and kill the passengers fairly quickly. Tom |
#22
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
"Roy" wrote in message ... There seems to be differences of opinions on the properties of carbon monoxide gas. One source says its heavier than air another says its lighter, so.......is it heavier or lighter than air? To be honest I rather trust the info from this forum than various websites and media types. this is something i don't understand and have been wanting to ask here. there have been posts about filling vessels with internal combustion engine exhaust fumes as a in-a-pinch back purge. thing i was wondering was, isn't carbon monoxide (as a component of exhaust gases) flammable/explosive? isn't carbon monoxide what is produced as "fuel" in a wood gassification generator? b.w. |
#23
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
On Thu, 05 Jan 2006 18:20:02 GMT, William Wixon wrote:
thing i was wondering was, isn't carbon monoxide (as a component of exhaust gases) flammable/explosive? How many PPM CO are you expecting? |
#24
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
On Thu, 05 Jan 2006 18:20:02 GMT, "William Wixon"
wrote: there have been posts about filling vessels with internal combustion engine exhaust fumes as a in-a-pinch back purge. thing i was wondering was, isn't carbon monoxide (as a component of exhaust gases) flammable/explosive? The point with inert gas filling is to displace _oxygen_, usually because the vessel is already unavoidably full of some flammable hydrocarbon. If you can't stop there being fuel present, shut off the oxidiser. |
#25
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
On Thu, 05 Jan 2006 18:20:02 GMT, "William Wixon"
wrote: "Roy" wrote in message .. . There seems to be differences of opinions on the properties of carbon monoxide gas. One source says its heavier than air another says its lighter, so.......is it heavier or lighter than air? To be honest I rather trust the info from this forum than various websites and media types. ----------- this is something i don't understand and have been wanting to ask here. there have been posts about filling vessels with internal combustion engine exhaust fumes as a in-a-pinch back purge. thing i was wondering was, isn't carbon monoxide (as a component of exhaust gases) flammable/explosive? isn't carbon monoxide what is produced as "fuel" in a wood gassification generator? b.w. ============= Yes but only if oxygen is present. The idea is that you fill the tank with motor exhaust fumes which are effectively depleted of oxygen thus any explosive/flamable vapor can ignite because there is no oxygen present. Many people get the same results by purging with c02 fir extinguisher. I don't know how effective it was [tank did not explode] but I have seen several welders squirt the shielding gas from their metal-arc systems to displace the air before tig welding on a gas tank. Same idea is used in many military aircraft. After the fuel tank explosion on flight 800 aircraft civilian aircraft were supposed to do this also. Should be accomplished by about 2050. Uncle George |
#26
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
On Thu, 05 Jan 2006 17:41:12 -0600, F. George McDuffee
wrote: snip Same idea is used in many military aircraft. After the fuel tank explosion on flight 800 aircraft civilian aircraft were supposed to do this also. Should be accomplished by about 2050. Uncle George Yep, but it seems they have disconnecte dit on lots of the latest versions of fighters....They used to use Halon 1301 as a fuel tank inerting agent...Cargo types use a foam of some sort that is flame proof and takes up a lot of space but is somehow supposed to still allow sufficient fuel capacity.......IIRC its a blue color......F-16's used Halon but somewhere along the line the USAF dropped it like a hot potatoe.......and deactivated all the systems. I don;t know if its fact or not, but was told they now have installed a nitrogen system in its place, however the jets at my old unit still do not have any inerting systems installed and they rotate in and out of the Iraqi theater continually so its not like they may not be exposed to combat conditions so there is not a need for it...... As to flight 800.......its amazing what and how a lot of aircraft civil and military alike have tons of wiring running in and around fuel cells......The F-16 has some pretty major wire bundles routed right through the main fuel cells in nothing more than a thin wall alum tube or just a grommet and no tube.......or conduit.......and just about all connections are common electrical crimp on connections on things like fuel probes (low voltage type) but these same aircraft get hit by lightning all the time and have lots of burned through insulation. most of the wires used was that crappy kapton type insulated stuff which is about as durable as the coating on an electric motors windings.......While the AC pack helped create flight 800's unsafe condition with heating of the fuel, I just can't seem to think military aircraft are just as prone, since on most fighters the entire fusealage surounds the engines and in that fusealage is a tank for fuel where ever they can be placed.....In a way I believe what NTSB found with 800, but in other ways I don't buy it all as they state. -- \\\|/// ( @ @ ) -----------oOOo(_)oOOo--------------- oooO ---------( )----Oooo---------------- \ ( ( ) \_) ) / (_/ The original frugal ponder! Koi-ahoi mates.... |
#27
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
Roy wrote:
On Thu, 05 Jan 2006 17:41:12 -0600, F. George McDuffee wrote: snip Same idea is used in many military aircraft. After the fuel tank explosion on flight 800 aircraft civilian aircraft were supposed to do this also. Should be accomplished by about 2050. Uncle George Yep, but it seems they have disconnecte dit on lots of the latest versions of fighters....They used to use Halon 1301 as a fuel tank inerting agent...Cargo types use a foam of some sort that is flame proof and takes up a lot of space but is somehow supposed to still allow sufficient fuel capacity.......IIRC its a blue color......F-16's used Halon but somewhere along the line the USAF dropped it like a hot potatoe.......and deactivated all the systems. I don;t know if its fact or not, but was told they now have installed a nitrogen system in its place, however the jets at my old unit still do not have any inerting systems installed and they rotate in and out of the Iraqi theater continually so its not like they may not be exposed to combat conditions so there is not a need for it...... As to flight 800.......its amazing what and how a lot of aircraft civil and military alike have tons of wiring running in and around fuel cells......The F-16 has some pretty major wire bundles routed right through the main fuel cells in nothing more than a thin wall alum tube or just a grommet and no tube.......or conduit.......and just about all connections are common electrical crimp on connections on things like fuel probes (low voltage type) but these same aircraft get hit by lightning all the time and have lots of burned through insulation. most of the wires used was that crappy kapton type insulated stuff which is about as durable as the coating on an electric motors windings.......While the AC pack helped create flight 800's unsafe condition with heating of the fuel, I just can't seem to think military aircraft are just as prone, since on most fighters the entire fusealage surounds the engines and in that fusealage is a tank for fuel where ever they can be placed.....In a way I believe what NTSB found with 800, but in other ways I don't buy it all as they state. -- \\\|/// ( @ @ ) -----------oOOo(_)oOOo--------------- oooO ---------( )----Oooo---------------- \ ( ( ) \_) ) / (_/ The original frugal ponder! Koi-ahoi mates.... Almost every new car today has a fuel pump inside the tank..... Its a mith that flight 800 blew up from a fuel tank pump John |
#28
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
On Thu, 05 Jan 2006 23:44:52 -0500, John
wrote: Roy wrote: On Thu, 05 Jan 2006 17:41:12 -0600, F. George McDuffee wrote: snip Same idea is used in many military aircraft. After the fuel tank explosion on flight 800 aircraft civilian aircraft were supposed to do this also. Should be accomplished by about 2050. Uncle George Yep, but it seems they have disconnecte dit on lots of the latest versions of fighters....They used to use Halon 1301 as a fuel tank inerting agent...Cargo types use a foam of some sort that is flame proof and takes up a lot of space but is somehow supposed to still allow sufficient fuel capacity.......IIRC its a blue color......F-16's used Halon but somewhere along the line the USAF dropped it like a hot potatoe.......and deactivated all the systems. I don;t know if its fact or not, but was told they now have installed a nitrogen system in its place, however the jets at my old unit still do not have any inerting systems installed and they rotate in and out of the Iraqi theater continually so its not like they may not be exposed to combat conditions so there is not a need for it...... As to flight 800.......its amazing what and how a lot of aircraft civil and military alike have tons of wiring running in and around fuel cells......The F-16 has some pretty major wire bundles routed right through the main fuel cells in nothing more than a thin wall alum tube or just a grommet and no tube.......or conduit.......and just about all connections are common electrical crimp on connections on things like fuel probes (low voltage type) but these same aircraft get hit by lightning all the time and have lots of burned through insulation. most of the wires used was that crappy kapton type insulated stuff which is about as durable as the coating on an electric motors windings.......While the AC pack helped create flight 800's unsafe condition with heating of the fuel, I just can't seem to think military aircraft are just as prone, since on most fighters the entire fusealage surounds the engines and in that fusealage is a tank for fuel where ever they can be placed.....In a way I believe what NTSB found with 800, but in other ways I don't buy it all as they state. -- \\\|/// ( @ @ ) -----------oOOo(_)oOOo--------------- oooO ---------( )----Oooo---------------- \ ( ( ) \_) ) / (_/ The original frugal ponder! Koi-ahoi mates.... Almost every new car today has a fuel pump inside the tank..... Its a mith that flight 800 blew up from a fuel tank pump John Nobody said fuel tank *PUMP*. What went was the fuel tank. Ignition source is still unknown although there are some good suspects. In any event if the tank had been filled with an inert gas [exhaust, freon, nitrogen, etc.] there would have been no explosion. It is not expensive to install and use a fuel tank inerting system. Same thing for smoke/fire alarms in the bagage compartments. In many communities you can be fined [and possibly jailed for repeat offenses] if you don't have an operating smoke alarm in your home. FAA still refusing to required either smoke/fire alarms and/or fuel cell inerting on airliners, despite NTSB suggestions and numerous incidents, several of which have resulted in the loss of the aircraft, crew, and passengers. Uncle George |
#29
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message ... On Thu, 05 Jan 2006 18:20:02 GMT, Yes but only if oxygen is present. The idea is that you fill the tank with motor exhaust fumes which are effectively depleted of oxygen thus any explosive/flamable vapor can ignite because there is no oxygen present. Many people get the same results by purging with c02 fir extinguisher. I don't know how effective it was [tank did not explode] but I have seen several welders squirt the shielding gas from their metal-arc systems to displace the air before tig welding on a gas tank. Same idea is used in many military aircraft. After the fuel tank explosion on flight 800 aircraft civilian aircraft were supposed to do this also. Should be accomplished by about 2050. Uncle George i figured someone was going to say that. so, if you can use a flammable gas (carbon monoxide) to displace oxygen, couldn't you purge the oxygen out of the tank with propane? i understand the idea of purging oxygen to prevent fire/explosion but it doesn't make sense to me to use a flammable gas to do so (but i don't have as much experience as you guys). b.w. |
#30
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
On Fri, 06 Jan 2006 03:18:03 GMT, "William Wixon"
wrote: i figured someone was going to say that. so, if you can use a flammable gas (carbon monoxide) to displace oxygen, couldn't you purge the oxygen out of the tank with propane? Yes, you certainly could. However you'd then have a problem with the propane igniting too easily outside the tank, where it's inevitably oxygen rich. CO is harder to ignite and less energetic than propane, so a leak of CO to the atmosphere doesn't become a secondary hazard (for typical volumes and risks). CO is far from an ideal inerting gas. However it's often commonly available as engine exhaust (which may contain considerable nitrogen, CO2, and water vapour too). It's rarely used from choice, but in the case of oil tanker ships (for example) it was often used simply because it was the only practical gas to hand. Another risk with exhaust gas inerting is that diesel exhaust can contain a significant amount of oxygen under some engine conditions. |
#31
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
On Thu, 05 Jan 2006 17:41:12 -0600, F. George McDuffee
wrote: Same idea is used in many military aircraft. Although not the RAF C130 that was downed in Iraq. The inquiry into this has just published its results, one of which being that lack of an inerting system was a contributory factor in the loss of the aircraft. |
#32
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
CO is combustible in air, but has a pretty high auto igntion
temperature. Typical exhaust CO level from a gasoline engine is that is operating at a stoichometric air fuel ratio is around 0.5 to 1%. Stoic. on a gasoline engine is about 14.7:1 air to fuel ratio on a mass basis. CO goes concentration goes up very quickly if the engine is running rich of stoic. or has poor cylinder to cylinder fuel distribution, or a missfire. An engine will run quite nicely at 5% CO. Unfortunatly, if the engine fuel distribution is bad or the engine is missfiring, the O2 concentration in the exhaust will also go up. If a gasoline engine is running at stoic, and has good fuel distribution, the exhaust could be fairly "inert", but this cannot be counted on unless it is being monitored with a gas analyzer. With after treatment, ie. a functioning catalyst and running at stoic., CO and HC exhaust concentrations can be in the PPM range. William Wixon wrote: "Roy" wrote in message ... There seems to be differences of opinions on the properties of carbon monoxide gas. One source says its heavier than air another says its lighter, so.......is it heavier or lighter than air? To be honest I rather trust the info from this forum than various websites and media types. this is something i don't understand and have been wanting to ask here. there have been posts about filling vessels with internal combustion engine exhaust fumes as a in-a-pinch back purge. thing i was wondering was, isn't carbon monoxide (as a component of exhaust gases) flammable/explosive? isn't carbon monoxide what is produced as "fuel" in a wood gassification generator? b.w. |
#33
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
oldjag wrote: CO is combustible in air, but has a pretty high auto igntion temperature. Typical exhaust CO level from a gasoline engine is that is operating at a stoichometric air fuel ratio is around 0.5 to 1%. Stoic. on a gasoline engine is about 14.7:1 air to fuel ratio on a mass basis. CO goes concentration goes up very quickly if the engine is running rich of stoic. or has poor cylinder to cylinder fuel distribution, or a missfire. An engine will run quite nicely at 5% CO. Unfortunatly, if the engine fuel distribution is bad or the engine is missfiring, the O2 concentration in the exhaust will also go up. If a gasoline engine is running at stoic, and has good fuel distribution, the exhaust could be fairly "inert", but this cannot be counted on unless it is being monitored with a gas analyzer. With after treatment, ie. a functioning catalyst and running at stoic., CO and HC exhaust concentrations can be in the PPM range. My new-to-me 2002 Aprilia RS50 scootah idles at about 50:1 air:fuel and has a lovely muffler power band and mellow tone. I've hit 55 on it. From a 50! Looking forward to dropping in a 70 kit, gas porting the rings, and riding the Blue Ridge. It's got the Ditech system. Direct Injection Technology. Kinda like a diesel injector, but it's actually a rich mixture of air and fuel being injected. Scavenged by clean air and I think an oil spray. There's no conventional carb. (I haven't got a manual yet. There's not much you can do to one of these. It's all regulated by a silicon chip.) Anyhoo, it was the bang-for-buck cleanest thing I could get in my price range. After we sell the condo, I'm going to go for a hybrid and start playing with ultracapacitors again. For more on that; see "Happy New Year". Doug Goncz Replikon Research Falls Church, VA 22044-0394 |
#34
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
In article ,
(Roy) wrote: There seems to be differences of opinions on the properties of carbon monoxide gas. One source says its heavier than air another says its lighter, so.......is it heavier or lighter than air? To be honest I rather trust the info from this forum than various websites and media types. Take a look at this while your at it... has some good links at the end. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_Monoxide Be careful messing with this stuff... Erik |
#35
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
Roy wrote:
There seems to be differences of opinions on the properties of carbon monoxide gas. One source says its heavier than air another says its lighter, so.......is it heavier or lighter than air? To be honest I rather trust the info from this forum than various websites and media types. Just add up the atomic weights and determine it for yourself. CO OO NN ...lw... |
#36
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Question on Carbon Monoxide gas
Look at a chemical chart -
Carbon Nitrogen oxygen are in those three positions. 6 ele 7 ele 8 ele ele= electrons Since air is 70%+ Nitrogen, 30% Oxygen - CO indicates a 50% mixture - of carbon to Oxygen. 5*6 + 5*8 ~ 70 for CO - 7*7 + 3*8 ~ 73 So by electron count - CO is lighter. The mass of each atom is : 12.+ , 14.+ , 16.00 so with mass : 5*12 + 5*16 = 140 while 7*14 + 3*16 = 146 So when we do a better job with mass values - CO is just lighter. martin Martin Eastburn @ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net NRA LOH & Endowment Member NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder Roy wrote: There seems to be differences of opinions on the properties of carbon monoxide gas. One source says its heavier than air another says its lighter, so.......is it heavier or lighter than air? To be honest I rather trust the info from this forum than various websites and media types. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Good morning or good evening depending upon your location. I want to ask you the most important question of your life. Your joy or sorrow for all eternity depends upon your answer. The question is: Are you saved? It is not a question of how good | Woodworking | |||
OT Guns more Guns | Metalworking | |||
Simple question regarding Ceiling tiles and sound? | Home Ownership | |||
Knife Steel FAQ updated | Metalworking |