Buckstones:
Bking:
So why introduce a gas N2O where over half its molecular weight is made up of nitrogen that does not burn.
Why not CO2 or even NO2? The nitrogen being introduced must replace some of the oxygen because you have a finite volume that the gas occupies.A gas with twice the oxygen content would make more sense.
And I meant by saying Nitrogen is inert that it does not combine with other elements I meant it is non flammable.
Most nitrogen compounds are formed by ionisation of the air by lightning.
Maybe the gasses with a full oxygen molecule requires a much higher catalytic potential to split the molecule but can find any information on the Ev levels required to split them.
CO2 is used to extinguish fires, it’s produced within the engine when fuel burns anyway so pointless feeding more in, it will just stop fuel burning.
NO2 is a nasty poisonous and corrosive brown gas, it is the stuff that you see above the liquid in bottles of concentrated Nitric acid.
It WILL combine with fuels to burn but the combustion can be explosive instead of a controlled steady burn, just as pure oxygen would not give stable burning.
Just remembered to post a warning about one case where CO2 will make a fire worse: some racing car wheels were made of Magnesium, if CO2 is sprayed onto burning magnesium the magnesium splits it, using the Oxygen to burn leaving particles of black Carbon. It is the same type of reaction as the Thermite reaction where Aluminium uses the Oxygen in Iron Oxide to form molten Iron to weld things like railway line rails.
Many years since I studied chemistry and worked in laboratories but the science of boosting engines with Nitrous Oxide is still the same as far as I know.