Ok, but next time I take the wife to Cosco I am going to hang out at the tire change center and watch the procedure, I just can't imagine the techs there going through this process. Maybe I'm wrong. But even if they do follow along with this process or some other, I still am not convinced it makes a difference simply because since Henry Ford started his company, compressed air has been used in tires and this Nitrogen thing has been made available to the general public for what, maybe the last 4-5-6 years, has it really helped in any way? Phil
Nobody's saying it's NECESSARY. Dinosaur oil is just fine, it'll even hold your 458 engine together. If you don't like it, don't believe it, don't do it. How many people are really getting a benefit from this? As long as you replace your tires in less than a decade and you check the air pressure regularly and don't worry about having consistent tire pressure for your sessions on the track, you won't get anything. I'm not selling the stuff, I'm just relaying the results of the study done here at the auto manufacturer I work at. If you've got testing data to the contrary, let's see it! I wish I could share what I base my statements on.
Don- Correct. We just used it on aircraft in the USAF and USN for grins and giggles, no other reason. Taz Terry Phillips
I know many of you are going to FREAK about the source, but I found a paper by a really smart tire guy I've met before. Here it is: http://www.getnitrogen.org/pdf/FordBaldwinResearchRaper.pdf You will note that the principal author was employed by Ford at the time, not some Nitrogen Council, etc. He now works at the increasingly well-known Exponent, Inc. Here's his list of publications, I'd bet you could find more in them: http://www.exponent.com/john_baldwin/#tab_publications
The paper is interesting. From reading it you can conclude I suppose that for aerospace or fleet/trucking situations, or racing, nitrogen makes sense. If you put a lot of miles on your personal/business auto, I suppose it makes sense also. But there's been some discussion on a few of the tire threads in the 308 section that folks don't want their tires lasting 10 years. That may sound odd, but if you don't track your car, and only manage to put maybe 2k miles on the car a year like a lot of us do, the tires are going to get hard and wear from a UV perspective before the tires actually wear out from usage. Not sure if nitrogen will prevent this. A lot of folks seem to be going with more sticky compounds that will wear sooner, because for a limited use car, they would get a 3-5 year life out of the tire regardless. This thread is like the belt change interval debate, or the conventional versus synthetic oil debate, or the water-wetter debate, there are believers and non-believers, and it's a personal taste sort of thing. Phil
Phil- I am in both camps. I think it is a great idea, but I personally am not going to take the effort to make it happen. Here in NM, where the humidity at 6pm is often 6-8%, air from my little portable compressor works just fine. Taz Terry Phillips
It's gotta be good to be putting relatively dry air in those tires, but the author of the paper above told me that it's you guys in the hottest parts of the country that set the lower limit on tire life. Heat accelerating chemical processes and all that. Of course, you're offsetting that with the drier air. In the end, I firmly believe that the science to back up the claims about nitrogen is valid, but it's not intensely needed for the average driver (if we'd actually check our tire pressures). I'd like to have it, if it came walking into my garage and jumped into my tires, but I'm not going out of my way for it. Most people won't be likely to see much real benefit. Probably not $8/tire worth! But I'd do it for $2 if it was offered just to try.
Don- There are now two really good aftermarket TPMS systems available for Ferraris that did not come with them OEM. In my case, my TPMS software was accidentally wiped out when my Superamerica instrument panel was rebuilt. I put a Schrader system in mine and it works great with a AA battery powered monitor. Both Schrader and a British company, TyreSure, also have 12v powered systems where the monitor can be hard wired or plugged into the cigarette lighter. Both systems use the tire valve stem as the antenna, so nothing to do except mount the sensors/valve stems on the tires and, very simply, program the monitor. I am planning on writing something up for Tech Q&A if there is any interest. Schrader on top, TyreSure on the bottom. TyreSure has offered a group discount if anyone is interested. Taz Terry Phillips Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
Yep, I didn't make it as clear as I should have but yes, the air is still wet, but compared to how it went in, it is drier.
Sorry, he may know a lot about testing tire materials of construction and I am sure he has some valid points, but when he starts off by stating that water vapor is less soluble in nitrogen gas than in oxygen, I quit reading. It shows he doesn't understand gases and gas behavior, didn't bother to completely research his subject which, in my pea brain logic, makes the rest of his work suspect. Brock
I saw a long term study they're doing here at Consumer Reports, not sure if it's been published yet...but the short summary was, if you're not Michael Schumacher in an F1 car it's a waste of $$$. Of course in Ferrari terms it's a pretty small waste
OK, I'll admit I was horrible in all of that chemistry and a lot of thermo, so I think what you're saying is that the statement about water having low solubility in N2 is bunk, right? I note that he seemed to be comparing it to air, not O2. But I'm not sure I remember how it all works, doesn't this chart I dug up from some online course about solubility indicate that O2 dissolves better in H2O than N2, would it work the same in reverse? Basically, I don't know if H2O is more soluble in N2, O2 or air, fill me in on what he got wrong there. (I would say "go with what you admit about the rest of it!" but I know how that is when you see, or feel, that someone has started off incorrect assertions.) I'd think if he was making fundamental errors in his work, since his areas of specialization seem to include tire degradation, that he would have been straightened out at some point along the way...no? Image Unavailable, Please Login
No there is a fundamental difference. In the bottle of compressed N2 there are about 0.02% H2O molecules--that is what's in the bottle is extremely dry. This has to do with the way N2 is obtained. The water freezes out many hundreds of degrees before the N2 liquifies and is easily removed in its solid form before the N2 is collected, allowed to expand back into gass and bottled. The N2 in the bottle is very pure and very dry and (almost completely) free of O2 and other trace gasses. From wikipedia: Nitrogen gas is an industrial gas produced by the fractional distillation of liquid air, or by mechanical means using gaseous air (i.e. pressurized reverse osmosis membrane or Pressure swing adsorption). Commercial nitrogen is often a byproduct of air-processing for industrial concentration of oxygen for steelmaking and other purposes. When supplied compressed in cylinders it is often called OFN (oxygen-free nitrogen).[12] Compressed air, on the other hand, is "just what's in the air" before it got compressed and put in the tank. This is not "that dry".
You are kinda talking apples and oranges with Henry's law here. The graph you present represents the partial pressures of various gases above liquid water, the key word here being liquid. In truth gases are soluble in water, and the amount solubility is governed by the chemistry of the gas itself. So each has a unique solubility and thus each come to the various equilibrium partial pressures in the atmosphere above the liquid as shown in your graph (volumes, temperature and pressure play a role here too). A good example of one gas that is very soluble in water is CO2. Compared to the likes of N2 and O2, copious amounts will dissolve ....and is the basis for all the fizz in a personal favorite, beer. But when water is vaporized, it too becomes a gas just like N2, O2 or another personal favorite, N2O. Now we are talking apples to apples. All gases behave more or less the same (hence the ideal gas law) and they just kinda float around as molecules randomly bump into each other whether they be O2, N2 or H2O. No such thing as water vapor being "soluble" in N2 gas or vice versa.....it is akin to saying O2 gas is soluble in N2 gas, it just doesnt work that way with gases. Hope that helps... Brock
Yawn....I'll stick with the air that comes out of a compressor, It's always worked for me! Now, if you want to put nitrogen into my tyres and install green valve caps, I won't complain, as long as you don't charge me extra for it! In the late 60s and early 70s I owned 3 Firestone stores and, as far as I can recall, I never saw a tyre fail because of the atmospheric gasses that inflated it! Sparky
My scuderia runs great because it still has the fresh Italian air in the tires right from the factory. LOL Vic
Let's look into importing some of that Italian air,i'm sure a lot of guys would pay big bucks for that,especially if you get a certificate proving it was harvested in Maranello. B.
OK, Brock, I think I'm hip to what you're saying. So the issue is the quote in the abstract about "nitrogen's inherently low water absorption characteristics". I think I see where you're coming from and that "bearing" would perhaps have been a better word? At this hour, I'm more excited about the prospect of Italian air. Or, how about some Italian NITROGEN!! How much would that cost? P.S.-"partial pressure" sure brings back nightmares...wow
I used to have nitrogen in my old tires. When new wheels and tires were put on I used just plain compressed air. For a road car I don't feel it makes much diff. If you want nitrogen them go ahead if it makes you feel better. Nothing wrong with that. If it is offered free or a low charge then go ahead with the nitrogen.
Terry, It does not keep temps down, it prevents a combustuble mixture from forming inside the tire. While the military does not have to adher to AD's, the commercial world does. Here is the AD that addresses filling transport catagory commercial aircraft tires with nitrogen. 87-08-09 AIRBUS INDUSTRIE, BOEING, BRITISH AEROSPACE, LOCKHEED, AND MCDONNELL DOUGLAS: Amendment 39-5613. Applies to Airbus Industries Models A300 and A310; Boeing Models 707, 720, 727, 737, 747, 757, and 767; British Aerospace Models BAe 146 and BAC 1-11; Lockheed Model L-1011; and McDonnell Douglas Models DC-8, DC-9 (includes MD-80 series), and DC-10; certificated in any category. To eliminate the possibility of a chemical reaction between atmospheric oxygen and volatile gases from the tire inner liner producing a tire explosion, accomplish the following, unless already accomplished: A. Within 180 days after the effective date of this AD, to ensure that all aircraft tires mounted on braked wheels do not contain more than 5 percent oxygen by volume, accomplish paragraph 1. or 2., below. Either of these procedures is acceptable, or they may be used together: 1. Install a placard, either in each wheel well or on or near each landing gear strut incorporating braked wheels, and in a location so as to be easily seen and readable by a person performing routine tire servicing. This placard shall state "INFLATE TIRES WITH NITROGEN ONLY." The words "SERVICE" or "FILL" may be substituted for the word "INFLATE". 2. Incorporate into the FAA-approved maintenance program procedures that include the following items: a. On braked wheels, install only tires that have been inflated with dry nitrogen or other gases shown to be inert such that the gas mixture does not exceed 5 percent oxygen by volume. b. Tires on braked wheels may be serviced with air at remote locations where dry nitrogen is not available, provided that: i. the oxygen content does not exceed 5 percent by volume; or ii. within the next 15 hours time-in-service, the tire must be purged of air and inflated with dry nitrogen so that the oxygen does not exceed 5 percent by volume. B. An alternate means of compliance or adjustment of the compliance time, which provides an acceptable level of safety, may be used when approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Northwest Mountain Region (Airbus Industrie, Boeing, and British Aerospace models); or the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Northwest Mountain Region (Lockheed and McDonnell Douglas models). C. Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with FAR 21.197 and 21.199 to operate airplanes to a base for the accomplishment of the modification required by this AD. This Amendment becomes effective June 1, 1987.
Seth- Sounds good to me. Air compressed to 160 psi (what we used on the F-111, IIRC, higher on other aircraft) would do a pretty good job of fanning a brake fire. That would be a lot of oxygen. Taz Terry Phillips
Maranello air ain't that good, trust me. Especially in the summer. Makes Los Angeles smell like babies breath.
