Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=76.96.62.64; envelope-from=rlwhite@comcast.net
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 12:29:48 -0700
From: Bob White <rlwhite@comcast.net>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Carlos' theory on Nitros
Message-Id: <20071106122948.2b9149d5.rlwhite@comcast.net>
In-Reply-To: <list-2458624@logan.com>
References: <list-2458624@logan.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

How do you know those cans aren't put together well Bob?

Never mind, I think I figured it out! :)

Bob W.


On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 19:00:18 +0000
bobperk90658@bellsouth.net wrote:

> You know that any liquid or gas in a closed container can B L E V E  (Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapor Explosion).  You add enough heat to a can of hair spray and the results can kill ya.  It_s a good idea not to warm your rattle can spray paint on a hot plate either .:>). It_s a good thing those cheep paint cans are not put together well.
>  
> Bob Perkinson
> 
> 
> -------------- Original message from "Ed Anderson" <eanderson@carolina.rr.com>: -------------- 
> 
> ﻿ 
> Good observation, Bob.
> 
> I believe the article accompanying the photo inferred the cause could have been an electric blanket used to keep the bottle warm that  may have caused it to over pressure.  Still impressive damage just from compressed gas - I could imagine it blowing the lid off the trunk, but this trashed the car and about took out the garage as well.
> 
> Ed
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: bmears9413@aol.com 
> To: Rotary motors in aircraft 
> Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 10:36 AM
> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Carlos' theory on Nitros
> 
> 
> I would bet it was just a bottle explosion. doesnt look like there was any fire.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ken Welter <rotarycoot.ken@gmail.com>
> To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
> Sent: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 9:11 am
> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Carlos' theory on Nitros
> 
> 
>    I have been flying for 1400 with nitrous and its the only way I can get the coot out of the water, I use it for about a 5 second burst to get it up on the step and may give a longer burst if I need to get out of rough water or out a tight spot, also use it to get a heavy load out of a short runway.
> 
> 
>   Good explanation on wet and dry, I use the wet system made by NOS.
> 
> 
>   Yes Bruce used it for the time to climb and also Pushy Galore used it to set a altitude record of 32,000 ft with a 0-200, they used 10 lbs at a rate of 1 lb per minute, actually made it to 34.000 ft but when the nitrous ran out the plane stalled and he dropped to 32,00 ft to hold level flight to set the record.
> 
> 
>  As for that blown up trunk there is no way that nitrous did it alone as its just an oxidizer and is no more dangerous than the oxygen bottle next to you for breathing, I suspect he may have had a leaky gas can in that trunk with it on a hot day and the blow off disk blew off and mixed with the gas to cause the explosion.
> 
> 
>   Ken
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The principle difference between dry and wet Nitrous injection is that with the "wet" kind you injected additional fuel along with the nitrous input into the air intake. So the manifold is "wet" with fuel.    With "dry" concept, you pour the nitrous oxide through the normal air intake and increased the fuel through the normal fuel injectors by extending injector PW during the Nox injection or turning on additional injectors.  Since with this approach the intake does not have fuel squirted (except through the normal injector ports) the manifold remains "dry.
> 
>  Variations abound but this is the basic conceptual difference between the two.   Some claim you need a mass flow sensor to do the "Dry" approach, but that is not really correct, you just need some means of sensing the onset of Nox flow and increasing the fuel flow to match. 
> 
> I was interested, but after seeing what nitrous oxide can do (see photo of auto that had a bottle in its trunk), I lost interest {:>)
> 
> Ed
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> 
> From: Tracy Crook
> To: Rotary motors in aircraft
> Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 8:32 PM
> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Carlos' theory on Nitros
> 
> 
> About the only thing I would consider it for is for a quick boost on an amphib to get off the water or challenging Bruce Bohannon to a climb contest.
> 
> Carlos was explaining the difference between wet & dry nitrous injection which I still don't feel like I understand well enough to explain myself.
> 
> I was trying to explain an idea I had for using the EC2 to deliver the extra fuel required (via the EFI injectors) when injecting NOX instead of using a separate gasoline injection port.  Not sure I explained it well enough for Carlos.  It might not even be a good idea.  Goofs on laughing gas tend to be expensive.
> 
> Tracy
> 
>  
> On 11/5/07, Bob Tilley <btilley@mchsi.com> wrote:
> 
> Tracy,
> 
> I walked up on a conversation between you and Carlos. Ya'll were
> discussing Nitros in our applications. Can you give us a synopsis of
> the conversation. I picked up just enough to tell he was not for it.
> Please explain!!!
> 
> Bob
> 
> --
> Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> Archive and UnSub:   http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:explosionPic1[1].jpg (JPEG/«IC») (0011978E)
> --
> Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> Archive and UnSub:   http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail!


-- 
N93BD - Rotary Powered BD-4 - http://www.bob-white.com
3.8 Hours Total Time and holding
Cables for your rotary installation - http://www.roblinphoto.com/shop/