Tire inflation with Nitrogen or ?

[[email protected]]

Michelin recomends inflating tires with nitrogen. What about Argon? I
got a bottle of argon I use in Mig welding aluminum. Isn't argon
better than Nitrogen? What about the common 75% Argon and 25% CO2
welding mixture?

[Scott[_1_]]

What about hydrogen? It's lighter than air and will boost lift at the
same time ;)

Scott



wrote:
> Michelin recomends inflating tires with nitrogen. What about Argon? I
> got a bottle of argon I use in Mig welding aluminum. Isn't argon
> better than Nitrogen? What about the common 75% Argon and 25% CO2
> welding mixture?
>

--
Scott
http://corbenflyer.tripod.com/
Gotta Fly or Gonna Die
Building RV-4 (Super Slow Build Version)

[Maxwell]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Michelin recomends inflating tires with nitrogen. What about Argon? I
> got a bottle of argon I use in Mig welding aluminum. Isn't argon
> better than Nitrogen? What about the common 75% Argon and 25% CO2
> welding mixture?
>

I'm not sure about the other aspects, but nitrogen is about 1/3 the price.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Scott wrote:
> What about hydrogen? It's lighter than air and will boost lift at the
> same time ;)
>
> Scott
>

Little bitty molecules will leak out faster.

[Dan[_2_]]

Scott wrote:
> What about hydrogen? It's lighter than air and will boost lift at the
> same time ;)
>
> Scott
>
The nice thing about filing tyres with hydrogen is one can easily
find leaks with a lighted match.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Dan[_2_]]

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
> Scott wrote:
>> What about hydrogen? It's lighter than air and will boost lift at the
>> same time ;)
>>
>> Scott
>>
>
> Little bitty molecules will leak out faster.
>
>
Not as fast as helium which has a smaller molecule. For a good time
partially fill the tyre with water.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, "Maxwell" > said:
> wrote in message
oups.com...
>> Michelin recomends inflating tires with nitrogen. What about Argon? I
>> got a bottle of argon I use in Mig welding aluminum. Isn't argon
>> better than Nitrogen? What about the common 75% Argon and 25% CO2
>> welding mixture?
>>
>
>I'm not sure about the other aspects, but nitrogen is about 1/3 the price.

And ordinary compressed air is already 80% nitrogen.


--
Paul Tomblin > http://blog.xcski.com/
"Faced with the prospect of rereading this book, I would rather have my brains
ripped out by a plastic fork." - Charles Cooper reviews the new Gates book.
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1107-514105.html

[clare at snyder.on.ca]

On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 22:54:43 +0000 (UTC),
(Paul Tomblin) wrote:

>In a previous article, "Maxwell" > said:
> wrote in message
oups.com...
>>> Michelin recomends inflating tires with nitrogen. What about Argon? I
>>> got a bottle of argon I use in Mig welding aluminum. Isn't argon
>>> better than Nitrogen? What about the common 75% Argon and 25% CO2
>>> welding mixture?
>>>
>>
>>I'm not sure about the other aspects, but nitrogen is about 1/3 the price.
>
>And ordinary compressed air is already 80% nitrogen.
But the oxygen and ozone, along with a few other gasses does
accellerate the deterioration of the rubber, and the nitrogen stays in
better than the rest (co2 included) Also more temperature stable,
pressure-wize.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[Maxwell]

<clare at snyder.on.ca> wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 22:54:43 +0000 (UTC),
> (Paul Tomblin) wrote:
>
>>In a previous article, "Maxwell" > said:
> wrote in message
oups.com...
>>>> Michelin recomends inflating tires with nitrogen. What about Argon? I
>>>> got a bottle of argon I use in Mig welding aluminum. Isn't argon
>>>> better than Nitrogen? What about the common 75% Argon and 25% CO2
>>>> welding mixture?
>>>>
>>>
>>>I'm not sure about the other aspects, but nitrogen is about 1/3 the
>>>price.
>>
>>And ordinary compressed air is already 80% nitrogen.
> But the oxygen and ozone, along with a few other gasses does
> accellerate the deterioration of the rubber, and the nitrogen stays in
> better than the rest (co2 included) Also more temperature stable,
> pressure-wize.
>

Yeah, I forgot to mention the pressure aspect until after I hit send. But a
lot of the racers love it because they have less pressure rise as the tires
heat up. Probably the best reason I can see for using it in a auto.
Especially in summer.

[Peter Dohm]

> >>>> Michelin recomends inflating tires with nitrogen. What about Argon? I
> >>>> got a bottle of argon I use in Mig welding aluminum. Isn't argon
> >>>> better than Nitrogen? What about the common 75% Argon and 25% CO2
> >>>> welding mixture?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>I'm not sure about the other aspects, but nitrogen is about 1/3 the
> >>>price.
> >>
> >>And ordinary compressed air is already 80% nitrogen.
> > But the oxygen and ozone, along with a few other gasses does
> > accellerate the deterioration of the rubber, and the nitrogen stays in
> > better than the rest (co2 included) Also more temperature stable,
> > pressure-wize.
> >
>
> Yeah, I forgot to mention the pressure aspect until after I hit send. But
a
> lot of the racers love it because they have less pressure rise as the
tires
> heat up. Probably the best reason I can see for using it in a auto.
> Especially in summer.
>
>
When I saw that 8 replies were already posted, I was sure that someone had
provided a serious response; but it was not bo be.

I have long forgotten the periodic table, so I used Wiki. Argon is shown as
atomic number 18, so it is a good sized molecule--although possibly smaller
than N2--and is supposedly used when Nitrogen is not sufficiently inert.

It seems like it should work just fine, even if mixed later with dry
nitrogen or even with air; but I would call the tire manufacturer and ask.

Peter

[Kyle Boatright]

<clare at snyder.on.ca> wrote in message
...
>>
>>And ordinary compressed air is already 80% nitrogen.
> But the oxygen and ozone, along with a few other gasses does
> accellerate the deterioration of the rubber, and the nitrogen stays in
> better than the rest (co2 included) Also more temperature stable,
> pressure-wize.
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

I'm not 100% sure what Clare means by "more temperature stable, pressure
wise.", but all gasses follow Boyle's law, which is Pressure x Volume =
Number of moles x Avogadro's number x Temperature... PV=NRT. Essentially,
for a given temperature increase, all gasses expand (or increase pressure,
given a fixed volume) at the same ratio.

KB

[Maxwell]

"Peter Dohm" > wrote in message
...
>> >>>> Michelin recomends inflating tires with nitrogen. What about Argon?
>> >>>> I
>> >>>> got a bottle of argon I use in Mig welding aluminum. Isn't argon
>> >>>> better than Nitrogen? What about the common 75% Argon and 25% CO2
>> >>>> welding mixture?
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>I'm not sure about the other aspects, but nitrogen is about 1/3 the
>> >>>price.
>> >>
>> >>And ordinary compressed air is already 80% nitrogen.
>> > But the oxygen and ozone, along with a few other gasses does
>> > accellerate the deterioration of the rubber, and the nitrogen stays in
>> > better than the rest (co2 included) Also more temperature stable,
>> > pressure-wize.
>> >
>>
>> Yeah, I forgot to mention the pressure aspect until after I hit send.
>> But
> a
>> lot of the racers love it because they have less pressure rise as the
> tires
>> heat up. Probably the best reason I can see for using it in a auto.
>> Especially in summer.
>>
>>
> When I saw that 8 replies were already posted, I was sure that someone had
> provided a serious response; but it was not bo be.
>
> I have long forgotten the periodic table, so I used Wiki. Argon is shown
> as
> atomic number 18, so it is a good sized molecule--although possibly
> smaller
> than N2--and is supposedly used when Nitrogen is not sufficiently inert.
>
> It seems like it should work just fine, even if mixed later with dry
> nitrogen or even with air; but I would call the tire manufacturer and ask.
>

Possibly true, but still 3 times the price. I wonder why Michelin recommends
nitrogen.

[Rich S.[_1_]]

"Maxwell" > wrote in message
...
>
> > Possibly true, but still 3 times the price. I wonder why Michelin
> > recommends
> nitrogen.

No moisture, as may be found in the output of an air compressor.

Rich S.

[Maxwell]

> When I saw that 8 replies were already posted, I was sure that someone had
> provided a serious response; but it was not bo be.
>
> I have long forgotten the periodic table, so I used Wiki. Argon is shown
> as
> atomic number 18, so it is a good sized molecule--although possibly
> smaller
> than N2--and is supposedly used when Nitrogen is not sufficiently inert.
>
> It seems like it should work just fine, even if mixed later with dry
> nitrogen or even with air; but I would call the tire manufacturer and ask.
>

Better get in touch with Ingersoll-Rand and NASCAR. Apparently you know
something they don't.


Nitrogen runs cooler thus less thermal expansion, and is more predictable
due to less moisture content. But don't take my word for it.

Ingersol-Rand

consistent tire pressure

cooler running tires

Longer tire life

Better fuel mileage

Increased safety

Eliminates false alarms for Tire Sensor-equipped vehicles.

http://www.nitrogendirect.com/?gclid=CJ3BqoX4u4sCFRf9IgodRyLXvg



How Stuff Works

Why don’t they use normal air in race car tires?

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/question594.htm



How Stuff Works

How NASCAR Race Cars Work

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/nascar5.htm

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Rich S." > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Maxwell" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> > Possibly true, but still 3 times the price. I wonder why Michelin
>> > recommends
>> nitrogen.
>
> No moisture, as may be found in the output of an air compressor.

Even more important, is the fact that there is no oxygen to cause oxidation
in the metal wheel and to affect the rubber of the tire.

Other inert gas is not a problem, but it is usually going to be more
expensive, since many tire shops now have nitrogen/oxygen separators to get
the nitrogen to use in the tires, without the cost of buying all of the
bottled gas.

I would be concerned about using a argon-carbondioxide mix, because of the
fact that there is still oxygen in the mix.
--
Jim in NC

[Peter Dohm]

"Maxwell" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> > When I saw that 8 replies were already posted, I was sure that someone
had
> > provided a serious response; but it was not bo be.
> >
> > I have long forgotten the periodic table, so I used Wiki. Argon is
shown
> > as
> > atomic number 18, so it is a good sized molecule--although possibly
> > smaller
> > than N2--and is supposedly used when Nitrogen is not sufficiently inert.
> >
> > It seems like it should work just fine, even if mixed later with dry
> > nitrogen or even with air; but I would call the tire manufacturer and
ask.
> >
>
> Better get in touch with Ingersoll-Rand and NASCAR. Apparently you know
> something they don't.
>
>
> Nitrogen runs cooler thus less thermal expansion, and is more predictable
> due to less moisture content. But don't take my word for it.
>
> Ingersol-Rand
>
> consistent tire pressure
>
> cooler running tires
>
> Longer tire life
>
> Better fuel mileage
>
> Increased safety
>
> Eliminates false alarms for Tire Sensor-equipped vehicles.
>
> http://www.nitrogendirect.com/?gclid=CJ3BqoX4u4sCFRf9IgodRyLXvg
>
>
>
> How Stuff Works
>
> Why don't they use normal air in race car tires?
>
> http://auto.howstuffworks.com/question594.htm
>
>
>
> How Stuff Works
>
> How NASCAR Race Cars Work
>
> http://auto.howstuffworks.com/nascar5.htm
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
No, I don't have any special knowledge, except that the OP stated that he
happens to have argon on hand for another purpose. Therefore in his
particular case it is possible that it is less costly than stocking a second
type of compressed gas.

Whereas the original question involved only a choice of nitrogen vs argon,
my supposition is that the two are comparable in performance--with the
possible exception that I don't know how the leakage rate of a single atom
might compare to a diatomic molecule made of two slightly smaller atoms.

However, I am not a chemist nor a physicist and the above is only my
supposition that they only recomend nitrogen because it is available, cheap,
and adiquate--so if it was mine I would ask the manufacturer, which is
Michelin in this case. Of course, I happen to subscribe to nationwide local
calling; so, if they put me on hold, it doesn't bother me to put them on
SpeakerPhone while I continue working.

I really do hope that the OP will give Michelin a call, and post the result;
because we are really beating this issue to death, and doind so in a vacuum.

Peter

BTW, I am curious about the claim regarding false alarms on tire pressure
sensor equipped vehicles; but the link provided no explanation.

[Roger[_4_]]

On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 21:01:12 +0000, Scott >
wrote:

>What about hydrogen? It's lighter than air and will boost lift at the
>same time ;)

Leaks out like crazy.
>
>Scott
>
>
>
wrote:
>> Michelin recomends inflating tires with nitrogen. What about Argon? I
>> got a bottle of argon I use in Mig welding aluminum. Isn't argon
>> better than Nitrogen? What about the common 75% Argon and 25% CO2
>> welding mixture?
>>
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[andrew m. boardman]

Kyle Boatright > wrote:
>I'm not 100% sure what Clare means by "more temperature stable, pressure
>wise.", but all gasses follow Boyle's law, which is Pressure x Volume =
>Number of moles x Avogadro's number x Temperature... PV=NRT.

The problem with a strict gas-law analysis is that a tire filled with
compressed air has moisture hanging around in both vapor and liquid form;
the ratio varies with temperature, which makes the math all annoying and
nonlinear, and worse, variable between tires.

On the other hand, this often gets translated to "nitrogen doesn't expand
when heated, unlike air" by authors who really ought to know better; this
is complete crap. The difference is *really* marginal, though cutting
down on oxidation is much more relevant.

[Maxwell]

"andrew m. boardman" > wrote in message
...
> Kyle Boatright > wrote:
>>I'm not 100% sure what Clare means by "more temperature stable, pressure
>>wise.", but all gasses follow Boyle's law, which is Pressure x Volume =
>>Number of moles x Avogadro's number x Temperature... PV=NRT.
>
> The problem with a strict gas-law analysis is that a tire filled with
> compressed air has moisture hanging around in both vapor and liquid form;
> the ratio varies with temperature, which makes the math all annoying and
> nonlinear, and worse, variable between tires.
>
> On the other hand, this often gets translated to "nitrogen doesn't expand
> when heated, unlike air" by authors who really ought to know better; this
> is complete crap. The difference is *really* marginal, though cutting
> down on oxidation is much more relevant.

One of the web sites claim that a tire will run cooler on nitrogen. If it
did, that alone could explain some of the advantage to lower pressure rise.
But what I'm fuzzy on, is why would nitrogen run cooler? And how much
cooler?

[Scott[_1_]]

Ya, but...you can use a match to find the leak ;)

Scott



Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
> Scott wrote:
>
>>What about hydrogen? It's lighter than air and will boost lift at the
>>same time ;)
>>
>>Scott
>>
>
>
> Little bitty molecules will leak out faster.
>
>

--
Scott
http://corbenflyer.tripod.com/
Gotta Fly or Gonna Die
Building RV-4 (Super Slow Build Version)

[Scott[_1_]]

So, all jokes aside, what is the reasoning of using Nitrogen? Something
to do with no oxidizing because of lack of O2??? I get many years out
of a set of baloney skins and the tread wears off before they rot out,
so it seems like it would just be added expense. Plus, I believe a tank
of Nitrogen would last 100 lifetimes if all you used it for was to fill
airplane tires.

Scott


Paul Tomblin wrote:

> In a previous article, "Maxwell" > said:
>
> wrote in message
oups.com...
>>
>>>Michelin recomends inflating tires with nitrogen. What about Argon? I
>>>got a bottle of argon I use in Mig welding aluminum. Isn't argon
>>>better than Nitrogen? What about the common 75% Argon and 25% CO2
>>>welding mixture?
>>>
>>
>>I'm not sure about the other aspects, but nitrogen is about 1/3 the price.
>
>
> And ordinary compressed air is already 80% nitrogen.
>
>

--
Scott
http://corbenflyer.tripod.com/
Gotta Fly or Gonna Die
Building RV-4 (Super Slow Build Version)

[Scott[_1_]]

Except for those of us that use inner tubes...



Morgans wrote:


>
>
> Even more important, is the fact that there is no oxygen to cause oxidation
> in the metal wheel and to affect the rubber of the tire.
>

[Blueskies]

"Dan" > wrote in message ...

: Not as fast as helium which has a smaller molecule. For a good time
: partially fill the tyre with water.
:
: Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

And then let it freeze ;-)

Dan, not USAF, still working....

[Blueskies]

"Maxwell" > wrote in message ...
:
: "andrew m. boardman" > wrote in message
: ...
: > Kyle Boatright > wrote:
: >>I'm not 100% sure what Clare means by "more temperature stable, pressure
: >>wise.", but all gasses follow Boyle's law, which is Pressure x Volume =
: >>Number of moles x Avogadro's number x Temperature... PV=NRT.
: >
: > The problem with a strict gas-law analysis is that a tire filled with
: > compressed air has moisture hanging around in both vapor and liquid form;
: > the ratio varies with temperature, which makes the math all annoying and
: > nonlinear, and worse, variable between tires.
: >
: > On the other hand, this often gets translated to "nitrogen doesn't expand
: > when heated, unlike air" by authors who really ought to know better; this
: > is complete crap. The difference is *really* marginal, though cutting
: > down on oxidation is much more relevant.
:
: One of the web sites claim that a tire will run cooler on nitrogen. If it
: did, that alone could explain some of the advantage to lower pressure rise.
: But what I'm fuzzy on, is why would nitrogen run cooler? And how much
: cooler?
:
:

Go back to the nitrogen is drier for your answer...

[Maxwell]

"Blueskies" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Maxwell" > wrote in message
> ...
> :
> : "andrew m. boardman" > wrote in message
> : ...
> : > Kyle Boatright > wrote:
> : >>I'm not 100% sure what Clare means by "more temperature stable,
> pressure
> : >>wise.", but all gasses follow Boyle's law, which is Pressure x Volume
> =
> : >>Number of moles x Avogadro's number x Temperature... PV=NRT.
> : >
> : > The problem with a strict gas-law analysis is that a tire filled with
> : > compressed air has moisture hanging around in both vapor and liquid
> form;
> : > the ratio varies with temperature, which makes the math all annoying
> and
> : > nonlinear, and worse, variable between tires.
> : >
> : > On the other hand, this often gets translated to "nitrogen doesn't
> expand
> : > when heated, unlike air" by authors who really ought to know better;
> this
> : > is complete crap. The difference is *really* marginal, though cutting
> : > down on oxidation is much more relevant.
> :
> : One of the web sites claim that a tire will run cooler on nitrogen. If
> it
> : did, that alone could explain some of the advantage to lower pressure
> rise.
> : But what I'm fuzzy on, is why would nitrogen run cooler? And how much
> : cooler?
> :
> :
>
> Go back to the nitrogen is drier for your answer...
>

Where at, I didn't see anything on it.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Dan wrote:
> Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
>> Scott wrote:
>>> What about hydrogen? It's lighter than air and will boost lift at
>>> the same time ;)
>>>
>>> Scott
>>>
>>
>> Little bitty molecules will leak out faster.
>>
>>
> Not as fast as helium which has a smaller molecule. For a good time
> partially fill the tyre with water.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

True but only because H runs in pairs. :)

[CW Crane]

Scott > wrote:

>So, all jokes aside, what is the reasoning of using Nitrogen? Something
>to do with no oxidizing because of lack of O2??? I get many years out
>of a set of baloney skins and the tread wears off before they rot out,
>so it seems like it would just be added expense. Plus, I believe a tank
>of Nitrogen would last 100 lifetimes if all you used it for was to fill
>airplane tires.
>
>Scott

The reason I use compressed nitrogen at the races is because it is the easiest
way to get compressed "air". Otherwise I would have to carry a compressor or an
air tank.

If you don't already have a compressor, it may be a good way to get a source of
compressed air for your hangar. A small bottle and regulator is very convenient
for filling tires and other uses.

CW

[Peter Dohm]

> > : But what I'm fuzzy on, is why would nitrogen run cooler? And how much
> > : cooler?
> > :
> > :
> >
> > Go back to the nitrogen is drier for your answer...
> >
>
> Where at, I didn't see anything on it.
>
>
The documentation will probably be difficult to locate; but I'll make a
guess and wait for someone to correct me.

Nitrogen probably runs stightly warmer than compressed air that was not
dried. However, the water in the moist air *may* change state during
operation; which would lead to a greater pressure increase--that might lead
to the presumption that the temperature rise was greater.

We reason for saying that water *may* change state is that it might not be a
big deal for a C-150 used for training in Florida, where the tire
temperature range over the course of a day should be fairly narrow; but
could get nasty for a B-747.

Also, whether correctly or not, I would expect high pressure bottled gas to
be *very* dry; but I don't know whether gas from a small concentrator will
be significantly drier than dried compressed air. In any case, the gas from
the small concentrator will almost certainly be less pure.

Basically, I believe that this is serious business on almost any jet. And
at the other extreme, when I was flying a C-150 or a C152 is a student, I am
pretty sure that I was the only student who ever verified that tire
pressures met spec when they didn't quite pass a visual--and reinflated as
needed on a couple of occasions--but AFAIK they never had any problems, so
the tires on the little trainers were *very* forgiving. In between is
probably in between.

I hope this helps.

Peter

[Dan[_2_]]

Blueskies wrote:
> "Dan" > wrote in message ...
>
> : Not as fast as helium which has a smaller molecule. For a good time
> : partially fill the tyre with water.
> :
> : Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
> And then let it freeze ;-)
>
> Dan, not USAF, still working....
>
>
Works rather well for the kick off in a football game :)

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[GeorgeB]

On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 20:16:53 -0400, "Kyle Boatright"
> wrote:

><clare at snyder.on.ca> wrote in message
...
>>>
>>>And ordinary compressed air is already 80% nitrogen.
>> But the oxygen and ozone, along with a few other gasses does
>> accellerate the deterioration of the rubber, and the nitrogen stays in
>> better than the rest (co2 included) Also more temperature stable,
>> pressure-wize.
>>
>> --
>> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>
>I'm not 100% sure what Clare means by "more temperature stable, pressure
>wise.", but all gasses follow Boyle's law, which is Pressure x Volume =
>Number of moles x Avogadro's number x Temperature... PV=NRT. Essentially,
>for a given temperature increase, all gasses expand (or increase pressure,
>given a fixed volume) at the same ratio.
>
>KB

Kyle, those of us in hydraulics would really like to buy some of your
ideal gas ... our accumulators would work SO much better. <GRIN>

Argon does not conduct heat as well as nitrogen, likely insignificant
to any of our applications. Argon, I _think_ but cannot document, is
a monoatomic gas; nitrogen is diatomic. The heat/compression
equations are different; look at polytropic constants. Real gasses
are very complex in their behaviors.

Argon is more inert and more expensive. Over the years, I've searched
for definitive advantages for one over the other; all I have been able
to find is that even in non-price sensitive applications, like
military aircraft accumulators, where even the smallest advantage
would be taken, nitrogen is used.

I'd like to see some real research; there are some electro-hydraulic
applications that would gladly pay for the argon to improve system
stability, if it will.

George

[Dan[_2_]]

Scott wrote:
> So, all jokes aside, what is the reasoning of using Nitrogen? Something
> to do with no oxidizing because of lack of O2??? I get many years out
> of a set of baloney skins and the tread wears off before they rot out,
> so it seems like it would just be added expense. Plus, I believe a tank
> of Nitrogen would last 100 lifetimes if all you used it for was to fill
> airplane tires.
>
> Scott
>

Nitrogen has other uses. Since it won't hold water I have used it to
dry out electrical connectors, get rid of the itch inside a cast, fill a
solar panel etc.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[jerry wass]

Dan wrote:
> Scott wrote:
>> So, all jokes aside, what is the reasoning of using Nitrogen?
>> Something to do with no oxidizing because of lack of O2??? I get many
>> years out of a set of baloney skins and the tread wears off before
>> they rot out, so it seems like it would just be added expense. Plus,
>> I believe a tank of Nitrogen would last 100 lifetimes if all you used
>> it for was to fill airplane tires.
>>
>> Scott
>>
>
> Nitrogen has other uses. Since it won't hold water I have used it to
> dry out electrical connectors, get rid of the itch inside a cast, fill a
> solar panel etc.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired


I filled my tires with propane---C3-H8 (or something like that)pretty
big molecule--shouldn't leak very fast & since I was running my cars on
propane ,with a quick fitting air hose & chuck--refilling was never a
problem.

[Paul Dow (Remove Caps in mail address)]

Besides the flammability issue, a problem with propane, or "God's gas"
as Hank Hill calls it, is that it has a very low vapor pressure. Since
it turns to liquid under low pressure, the steel on the BBQ tank can be
very thin unlike a nitrogen tank. If you did fill tires with it, they
would primarily be filled with liquid.


Jerry Wass wrote:
>
>
> I filled my tires with propane---C3-H8 (or something like that)pretty
> big molecule--shouldn't leak very fast & since I was running my cars on
> propane ,with a quick fitting air hose & chuck--refilling was never a
> problem.

[Vaughn Simon]

"Paul Dow (Remove Caps in mail address)" > wrote in
message ...
> Besides the flammability issue, a problem with propane, or "God's gas" as Hank
> Hill calls it, is that it has a very low vapor pressure. Since it turns to
> liquid under low pressure, the steel on the BBQ tank can be very thin unlike a
> nitrogen tank. If you did fill tires with it, they would primarily be filled
> with liquid.

You could indeed have a problem below zero temperatures, but at normal room
temperatures the propane would remain a gas. See the right side of this
diagram: http://www.elyenergy.com/pdf/CO26.pdf

Vaughn

[Peter Dohm]

> > Besides the flammability issue, a problem with propane, or "God's gas"
as Hank
> > Hill calls it, is that it has a very low vapor pressure. Since it turns
to
> > liquid under low pressure, the steel on the BBQ tank can be very thin
unlike a
> > nitrogen tank. If you did fill tires with it, they would primarily be
filled
> > with liquid.
>
> You could indeed have a problem below zero temperatures, but at
normal room
> temperatures the propane would remain a gas. See the right side of this
> diagram: http://www.elyenergy.com/pdf/CO26.pdf
>
> Vaughn
>
>
That's a very interesting chart. It definitely shows why some gasses could
prove to be a really bad choice...

Peter

[Roger[_4_]]

On 11 Apr 2007 09:59:15 -0700, wrote:

>Michelin recomends inflating tires with nitrogen. What about Argon? I
>got a bottle of argon I use in Mig welding aluminum. Isn't argon
>better than Nitrogen? What about the common 75% Argon and 25% CO2
>welding mixture?

Most likely the reason for Nitrogen is two fold. It's a large
molecule so leaks slower than most other gases and it's *relatively*
inert compared to Oxygen. It's also quite dry compared to air from a
compressor. Compared to other "tank" gasses it's inexpensive.

The Argon/CO2 mix would also work as the O2 is already bonded to
carbon, but in aviation...is it permissible. Any "inert" gas should
work fine, but they may be expensive and I'm not sure about expansion
with temperature.

With the new tires and low leak tubes (I have nearly a year on the
mains since I last filled them) I see no real reason for not using
compressed air except for the manufacturers recommendations.
Air dryers are quite common in many shops where the air is used for
spray painting. (water makes for "fish eyes") so moisture isn't a
problem with "that " air. Air from a small compressor would be
different. I'd guess I get between a half to full pint when I blow
down my 80 gallon tank in the shop.

With the older "natural rubber" tubes, both water and O2 cause
deterioration albeit, slowly and are not normally a big problem as far
as I've seen.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Peter Dohm]

> >Michelin recomends inflating tires with nitrogen. What about Argon? I
> >got a bottle of argon I use in Mig welding aluminum. Isn't argon
> >better than Nitrogen? What about the common 75% Argon and 25% CO2
> >welding mixture?
>
> Most likely the reason for Nitrogen is two fold. It's a large
> molecule so leaks slower than most other gases and it's *relatively*
> inert compared to Oxygen. It's also quite dry compared to air from a
> compressor. Compared to other "tank" gasses it's inexpensive.
>
> The Argon/CO2 mix would also work as the O2 is already bonded to
> carbon, but in aviation...is it permissible. Any "inert" gas should
> work fine, but they may be expensive and I'm not sure about expansion
> with temperature.
>
--------some snipped------------

The OP stated that he has pure Argon for Aluminum welding.

Presuming that it is acceptable for his tires, the couple of cubic feet of
Argon per year would save the additional effort, space and expense of
maintaining an additional tank and regulator.

It makes sense to be; but I admit that I already have too much "stuff" for
my available space.

Peter

[Drew Dalgleish]

At work I run a large front end loader. About a year ago the company
switched from air filled to nitrogen filled at the recommendation of
the tire supplier. Used to be at the end of an 8 hour shift the tires
would be hot to touch or too hot to touch. Now they're just pleasantly
warm. Good for leaning on while waiting for a ride. I don't know if
argon would be any good or not.

[Dan[_2_]]

Peter Dohm wrote:

<snip>
>
> It makes sense to be; but I admit that I already have too much "stuff" for
> my available space.
>
> Peter
>
>
You worded that wrong. It should be : my available space isn't enough
for my stuff :) Time to expand into the living room.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Kyle Boatright]

"GeorgeB" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 20:16:53 -0400, "Kyle Boatright"
> > wrote:
>
>><clare at snyder.on.ca> wrote in message
...
>>>>
>>>>And ordinary compressed air is already 80% nitrogen.
>>> But the oxygen and ozone, along with a few other gasses does
>>> accellerate the deterioration of the rubber, and the nitrogen stays in
>>> better than the rest (co2 included) Also more temperature stable,
>>> pressure-wize.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>>
>>I'm not 100% sure what Clare means by "more temperature stable, pressure
>>wise.", but all gasses follow Boyle's law, which is Pressure x Volume =
>>Number of moles x Avogadro's number x Temperature... PV=NRT. Essentially,
>>for a given temperature increase, all gasses expand (or increase pressure,
>>given a fixed volume) at the same ratio.
>>
>>KB
>
> Kyle, those of us in hydraulics would really like to buy some of your
> ideal gas ... our accumulators would work SO much better. <GRIN>

My wife will tell you that my gas is far from ideal... ;-)

<<snip>>>
>
> George

KB

[Paul Dow (Remove Caps in mail address)]

Ahhh. The Internet. Is there nothing it can't teach us?
So it looks like at 100% propane at 20 deg F. will turn it into liquid.
It probably wouldn't get to 100% though since there's always going to be
some air in the tire.
Thanks for the info. It looks like I was told some wrong stuff on how
it reacts. The person said it would partially become liquid if put in a
toy balloon.

Thanks for clearing that up Vaughn

Vaughn Simon wrote:
>
> You could indeed have a problem below zero temperatures, but at normal room
> temperatures the propane would remain a gas. See the right side of this
> diagram: http://www.elyenergy.com/pdf/CO26.pdf
>
> Vaughn
>
>

[Ernest Christley]

Drew Dalgleish wrote:
> At work I run a large front end loader. About a year ago the company
> switched from air filled to nitrogen filled at the recommendation of
> the tire supplier. Used to be at the end of an 8 hour shift the tires
> would be hot to touch or too hot to touch. Now they're just pleasantly
> warm. Good for leaning on while waiting for a ride. I don't know if
> argon would be any good or not.

Let us know how hot your light aircraft tires are after taxiing for 8
hours. 8*)

Tire get hot from flexing. Many a trucker has burned his load after a
tire with low pressure got to hot. Could it be that they were running
more pressure with the nitrogen than they were with the compressed air?

[Ernest Christley]

Maxwell wrote:

>
> How Stuff Works
>
> Why don’t they use normal air in race car tires?
>
> http://auto.howstuffworks.com/question594.htm
>
>
>
> How Stuff Works
>
> How NASCAR Race Cars Work
>
> http://auto.howstuffworks.com/nascar5.htm
>


Let's us know how you do in the "Airport Taxi 500".

Most of us taxi on a few miles on each flight, and that at only a "fast
walk" speed, though some of us cheat and make it a slow jog.

[Maxwell]

"Ernest Christley" > wrote in message
...
> Maxwell wrote:
>
>>
>> How Stuff Works
>>
>> Why don’t they use normal air in race car tires?
>>
>> http://auto.howstuffworks.com/question594.htm
>>
>>
>>
>> How Stuff Works
>>
>> How NASCAR Race Cars Work
>>
>> http://auto.howstuffworks.com/nascar5.htm
>>
>
>
> Let's us know how you do in the "Airport Taxi 500".
>
> Most of us taxi on a few miles on each flight, and that at only a "fast
> walk" speed, though some of us cheat and make it a slow jog.

Grin. I'd really like to run the Taxi 500, but then I would have to give up
lawnmower racing. I just simply afford to do both.

[Drew Dalgleish]

On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 01:20:16 -0400, Ernest Christley
> wrote:

>Drew Dalgleish wrote:
>> At work I run a large front end loader. About a year ago the company
>> switched from air filled to nitrogen filled at the recommendation of
>> the tire supplier. Used to be at the end of an 8 hour shift the tires
>> would be hot to touch or too hot to touch. Now they're just pleasantly
>> warm. Good for leaning on while waiting for a ride. I don't know if
>> argon would be any good or not.
>
>Let us know how hot your light aircraft tires are after taxiing for 8
>hours. 8*)
>
>Tire get hot from flexing. Many a trucker has burned his load after a
>tire with low pressure got to hot. Could it be that they were running
>more pressure with the nitrogen than they were with the compressed air?

Welll I don't plan on taxiing for 8 hours or to fill with nitrogen so
there isn't going to be a report.

Tire pressure is checked daily and hasn't been changed. Heavy
equipment tires are expensive ( $5000-20000 for the ones we use ) and
there's now up to a 6 month waiting period for new ones. They take
tire care seriously where I work.

[[email protected]]

OK. I sent an email to Michelin technical dept asking about using
Argon. They essentially replied "we don't recommend it because we did
not test it" or simply translated "we don't know".

On Apr 11, 11:59 am, wrote:
> Michelin recomends inflating tires with nitrogen. What about Argon? I
> got a bottle of argon I use in Mig welding aluminum. Isn't argon
> better than Nitrogen? What about the common 75% Argon and 25% CO2
> welding mixture?

[Peter Dohm]

> On Apr 11, 11:59 am, wrote:
> > Michelin recomends inflating tires with nitrogen. What about Argon? I
> > got a bottle of argon I use in Mig welding aluminum. Isn't argon
> > better than Nitrogen? What about the common 75% Argon and 25% CO2
> > welding mixture?
>
> wrote in message
oups.com...
> OK. I sent an email to Michelin technical dept asking about using
> Argon. They essentially replied "we don't recommend it because we did
> not test it" or simply translated "we don't know".
>
Thanks for the update. I was just about curious enough to give them a call.

Personally, if it was mine and was a Cessna 152 without wheel pants, I would
probably try it.

But a lot depends upon the cost of a tire failure, the inconvenience of
maintenance, and the cost of the smallest bottle of N2--the smallest bottles
are pretty small.

OTOH, if I had the right components lying around, it would be hard for meto
resist comparing the leakage rate on a spare wheel and tire--or the trusty
old hand truck with the pneumatic tires. At least, that might give a
comparison to dry air. :-)

Peter

[Lynn Coffelt]

> Nitrogen has other uses. Since it won't hold water I have used it to
> dry out electrical connectors, get rid of the itch inside a cast, fill a
> solar panel etc.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

During my few years maintaining aircraft, most nitrogen uses called for
"dry" nitrogen. It can have moisture included. Hydraulic accumulators and
co2 fire extinguishers needed dry nitrogen or dry air. Many air compressors
used around aircraft had silica gel dryer cartridges in-line, and were
generally accepted as OK when dry nitrogen was not available. IIRC nitrogen
in tires was standard in the YF-12, SR-71 and some F-104's being used in
test programs.
Old Chief Lynn

[Dan[_2_]]

Lynn Coffelt wrote:
>> Nitrogen has other uses. Since it won't hold water I have used it to
>> dry out electrical connectors, get rid of the itch inside a cast, fill a
>> solar panel etc.
>>
>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
> During my few years maintaining aircraft, most nitrogen uses called for
> "dry" nitrogen. It can have moisture included. Hydraulic accumulators and
> co2 fire extinguishers needed dry nitrogen or dry air. Many air compressors
> used around aircraft had silica gel dryer cartridges in-line, and were
> generally accepted as OK when dry nitrogen was not available. IIRC nitrogen
> in tires was standard in the YF-12, SR-71 and some F-104's being used in
> test programs.
> Old Chief Lynn
>
>
>
>
The geniuses at Rockwell designed the T-39 with bolt on wings. This
meant the 6 (3 per side) fuel quantity pip connectors were in the wheel
wells. Instead of using water proof connectors they used standard pip
connectors that had no seals. We had to periodically blow them out with
nitrogen and re-wrap them in F-4 tape. I will refrain from using the
language here that I used when working on those [expletive deleted]
airplanes.

As an aside I love those pip connectors. They used to be made by
Dage. I have no idea who makes 'em now. I sure would like to find out
since I need some.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Lynn Coffelt]

> The geniuses at Rockwell designed the T-39 with bolt on wings. This
> meant the 6 (3 per side) fuel quantity pip connectors were in the wheel
> wells. Instead of using water proof connectors they used standard pip
> connectors that had no seals. We had to periodically blow them out with
> nitrogen and re-wrap them in F-4 tape. I will refrain from using the
> language here that I used when working on those [expletive deleted]
> airplanes.
>
> As an aside I love those pip connectors. They used to be made by
> Dage. I have no idea who makes 'em now. I sure would like to find out
> since I need some.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

I think the T-39 wing was basically a rehashed F-86 wing. The F-86 wing
we
took off and reinstalled (to gain access to the fuselage main tank) was a
real challenge to us green behind the ears greasemonkeys. We showed our
chief inspector the parts we had left over.......... After a "one-time"
flight
back home, he made us do it over, and not have any parts left over.
I served my time hammering on several F-4 models, but I just never
heard
of "F-4 tape", so I had to Google it up, and I'm not sure I ever used any on
F-4's
but I recognized the "Googled" description and think it was the stuff we
used
a lot around the T-38's at Edwards.
Old Chief Lynn

[Dan[_2_]]

Lynn Coffelt wrote:
>> The geniuses at Rockwell designed the T-39 with bolt on wings. This
>> meant the 6 (3 per side) fuel quantity pip connectors were in the wheel
>> wells. Instead of using water proof connectors they used standard pip
>> connectors that had no seals. We had to periodically blow them out with
>> nitrogen and re-wrap them in F-4 tape. I will refrain from using the
>> language here that I used when working on those [expletive deleted]
>> airplanes.
>>
>> As an aside I love those pip connectors. They used to be made by
>> Dage. I have no idea who makes 'em now. I sure would like to find out
>> since I need some.
>>
>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
> I think the T-39 wing was basically a rehashed F-86 wing. The F-86 wing
> we
> took off and reinstalled (to gain access to the fuselage main tank) was a
> real challenge to us green behind the ears greasemonkeys. We showed our
> chief inspector the parts we had left over.......... After a "one-time"
> flight
> back home, he made us do it over, and not have any parts left over.
> I served my time hammering on several F-4 models, but I just never
> heard
> of "F-4 tape", so I had to Google it up, and I'm not sure I ever used any on
> F-4's
> but I recognized the "Googled" description and think it was the stuff we
> used
> a lot around the T-38's at Edwards.
> Old Chief Lynn
>
>
>
>
F-4 tape is the silicone tape that only adheres to itself. It comes
in red or black. It's been called that since at least the mid 1970s in
all the circles I was in including the years I was on F-4Es. I don't
recall the correct nomenclature.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Lynn Coffelt]

..
> > I served my time hammering on several F-4 models, but I just never
> > heard
> > of "F-4 tape", so I had to Google it up, and I'm not sure I ever used
any on
> > F-4's
> > but I recognized the "Googled" description and think it was the stuff we
> > used
> > a lot around the T-38's at Edwards.
> > Old Chief Lynn
> >
> >
> >
> >
> F-4 tape is the silicone tape that only adheres to itself. It comes
> in red or black. It's been called that since at least the mid 1970s in
> all the circles I was in including the years I was on F-4Es. I don't
> recall the correct nomenclature.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Mid 1970's? My gosh, Dan, you're just a kid! That's when I retired! F-4
tape name maybe came after I left the struggle!
Old Chief Lynn

[Dan[_2_]]

Lynn Coffelt wrote:
> .
>>> I served my time hammering on several F-4 models, but I just never
>>> heard
>>> of "F-4 tape", so I had to Google it up, and I'm not sure I ever used
> any on
>>> F-4's
>>> but I recognized the "Googled" description and think it was the stuff we
>>> used
>>> a lot around the T-38's at Edwards.
>>> Old Chief Lynn
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> F-4 tape is the silicone tape that only adheres to itself. It comes
>> in red or black. It's been called that since at least the mid 1970s in
>> all the circles I was in including the years I was on F-4Es. I don't
>> recall the correct nomenclature.
>>
>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
> Mid 1970's? My gosh, Dan, you're just a kid! That's when I retired! F-4
> tape name maybe came after I left the struggle!
> Old Chief Lynn
>
>
I know I am not getting older, the GIs are getting younger :) When I
go out to the base the active duty types look unbelievably young. Then
again my father has a picture of me when I got out of the Army in 1973.
I look like a child in it which shocks me when I see it since I aged so
much in Viet Nam.

I had to retire when I used the terms "auto lean" and "recip" and no
one around me knew what I was talking about. Anyway, back in the brown
shoe days......

In actuality I am neither maturing nor aging, I am fermenting.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired