Hey physics guys!!( everyone else too)
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 613
Likes: 0
From: Dubuque, IA
Car: 2006 'Nox 91 Camaro RS 91 1500 Silv
Engine: GM 3.8L, 305 SBC, 350 SBC
Transmission: Auto, auto, auto
Hey physics guys!!( everyone else too)
So one of the guys on here (TekViper) threw an idea at me earlier.
What if we were to shoot a blast of compressed air down the intake. What if we would hook a hose or a few hoses to the intake somewhere (will probably need to be before the MAF) and shoot this blast of air into the engine. What kind of pressure would be needed to make any kind of boost.
On a side note, I think it would be cool to shoot the air through 6 hoses down through the six seperate passages in the upper plenum so there would be a more direct shot of the air. I don't konw how functional that would be since i think it would cause the car to run lean as a result of no extra fuel going into the engine with the extra air.
Also, I don't know how functional it would be but it would be cool to do the same thing just lower pressure and with good old propane.
How realistic would all this be (mostly wondering about the first idea since the other ones are kinda outlandish)
What if we were to shoot a blast of compressed air down the intake. What if we would hook a hose or a few hoses to the intake somewhere (will probably need to be before the MAF) and shoot this blast of air into the engine. What kind of pressure would be needed to make any kind of boost.
On a side note, I think it would be cool to shoot the air through 6 hoses down through the six seperate passages in the upper plenum so there would be a more direct shot of the air. I don't konw how functional that would be since i think it would cause the car to run lean as a result of no extra fuel going into the engine with the extra air.
Also, I don't know how functional it would be but it would be cool to do the same thing just lower pressure and with good old propane.
How realistic would all this be (mostly wondering about the first idea since the other ones are kinda outlandish)
Supreme Member

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,550
Likes: 4
From: Charleston, SC
Car: 91 Camaro Vert
Engine: 02 LS1, HX40
Transmission: 2002 LS1 M6
thats exactly how nitrous systems work.
the prob with compressed air is the volume needed.
a engine sucks ALOT of air.
the solution to this is to use less air, but have a higher oxygen content.
now if you used pure oxygen, you would burn a hole in the pistion quite quickly.
so you need somthing to stablize it..... like nitrogen..
thats why we use nitrous instead of air or oxygen... you can shoot some(with the approperate amount of fuel) and get more power without overheating everything.
the prob with compressed air is the volume needed.
a engine sucks ALOT of air.
the solution to this is to use less air, but have a higher oxygen content.
now if you used pure oxygen, you would burn a hole in the pistion quite quickly.
so you need somthing to stablize it..... like nitrogen..
thats why we use nitrous instead of air or oxygen... you can shoot some(with the approperate amount of fuel) and get more power without overheating everything.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 613
Likes: 0
From: Dubuque, IA
Car: 2006 'Nox 91 Camaro RS 91 1500 Silv
Engine: GM 3.8L, 305 SBC, 350 SBC
Transmission: Auto, auto, auto
i guess i didn't realize the amount of air needed.
Just out of curiosity could some body show me the calculations to find how much air our cars suck in and how much extra we'd need for say 7 psi of boost
I'm not doubting you guys or anything, just trying to further my knowledge of physics
So if some kind of genius on these boards could write all that out for me or even email it to me that would be great
Just out of curiosity could some body show me the calculations to find how much air our cars suck in and how much extra we'd need for say 7 psi of boost
I'm not doubting you guys or anything, just trying to further my knowledge of physics
So if some kind of genius on these boards could write all that out for me or even email it to me that would be great
Supreme Member
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 1,431
Likes: 1
From: Huntsville, AL
Car: '00 Chevrolet Corvette
Engine: LS1
Transmission: 4L60E
Axle/Gears: 2.73
Originally posted by Damien00677
i guess i didn't realize the amount of air needed.
Just out of curiosity could some body show me the calculations to find how much air our cars suck in and how much extra we'd need for say 7 psi of boost
i guess i didn't realize the amount of air needed.
Just out of curiosity could some body show me the calculations to find how much air our cars suck in and how much extra we'd need for say 7 psi of boost
Atmospheric pressure is 14.7 psi, so to get 7 psi of boost (21.7 psi), you would have to cram 1.48 (21.7 / 14.7) times as much air into the engine. In one rotation, at 7 pounds of boost, your engine would ingest 4.14 (2.8 * 1.48) litres of air. Let's say you want to spin your engine to 6000 rpm. That's 24,864 litres in a minute. Better have a big compressed air tank
. Last edited by Mark305TBI; Jul 30, 2003 at 09:12 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
From: The Nest
Car: 1985 GMC Jimmy/1998 Chevy Malibu
Engine: 3.2L turbo Hybrid/bone stock 3100
Transmission: T-5 soon to be 700R4/4T40E
This idea was tried, way back in the '60s, when everybody had ideas and actually tried them out. Some were pretty far fetched, and some even worked. LOL
Anywaythe one car that comes to mind using the static compressed air theory (stored compressed air in a tank), was a rail, that I have or at least had a picture of, and a small article on. The rail was longer than any other rail of the time due to the volumn of air needed, I don't remeber the exact dimentions, but the tank was very large. The main poblem was storing enough compressed air for a full 1/4 mile run at a constant pressure. The testing of the rail showed that it ran out of stored air (high pressure) before the end of the run, I think they actually figured out they needed a tank with about twice the volumn to have a full run, which would have been way too long to actually use, and would also be quite a bit heavier, the needs then went up, and so on. It's kinda hard to explain, but if you want forced induction nothing beats turbo or supercharging, this is what they were designed to do.
Anywaythe one car that comes to mind using the static compressed air theory (stored compressed air in a tank), was a rail, that I have or at least had a picture of, and a small article on. The rail was longer than any other rail of the time due to the volumn of air needed, I don't remeber the exact dimentions, but the tank was very large. The main poblem was storing enough compressed air for a full 1/4 mile run at a constant pressure. The testing of the rail showed that it ran out of stored air (high pressure) before the end of the run, I think they actually figured out they needed a tank with about twice the volumn to have a full run, which would have been way too long to actually use, and would also be quite a bit heavier, the needs then went up, and so on. It's kinda hard to explain, but if you want forced induction nothing beats turbo or supercharging, this is what they were designed to do.
Trending Topics
Supreme Member
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,461
Likes: 0
From: BFE, MD
Car: 13 Ram 1500/ 78 Formy
Engine: 5.7 / 7.4
Transmission: 6sp / TH350
Axle/Gears: 3.55 posi / 3.23
This sounds vaguely familiar..............
any way, if you shot the air down through the runners, you would create a lean sitiation.
any way, if you shot the air down through the runners, you would create a lean sitiation.
Supreme Member

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,564
Likes: 1
From: Central FL
Car: 91 Camaro
Engine: 3.1...not hardly stock
Transmission: 700r4....not stock either
Axle/Gears: 3.73
i have a slightly different idea but along the same lines... what about using a single NOS fogger in the intake tube but spraying racing alchol (not beer, sorry). racing alcohol would be a little safer to carry and probably less harmfull for the engine. plus, spraying a fuel doesn't require the injectors giving more fuel. possiblity??
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
From: The Nest
Car: 1985 GMC Jimmy/1998 Chevy Malibu
Engine: 3.2L turbo Hybrid/bone stock 3100
Transmission: T-5 soon to be 700R4/4T40E
Originally posted by AM91Camaro_RS
i have a slightly different idea but along the same lines... what about using a single NOS fogger in the intake tube but spraying racing alchol (not beer, sorry). racing alcohol would be a little safer to carry and probably less harmfull for the engine. plus, spraying a fuel doesn't require the injectors giving more fuel. possiblity??
i have a slightly different idea but along the same lines... what about using a single NOS fogger in the intake tube but spraying racing alchol (not beer, sorry). racing alcohol would be a little safer to carry and probably less harmfull for the engine. plus, spraying a fuel doesn't require the injectors giving more fuel. possiblity??
Originally posted by The_Raven
That sounds a LOT like water/alcohol injection, used on forced induction engines mostly.
That sounds a LOT like water/alcohol injection, used on forced induction engines mostly.
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 760
Likes: 0
From: Chillicothe Ohio
Car: 89 RS 355/ 89 IROC Convert
Engine: Hot Cam 355/TPI 305
Transmission: All 700r4's
The phase change when the alcohol changes from a liquid to a gas in route to the combustion chamber lowers the air temp of the incoming charge. This is why its very important to use a good pump and nozzle to get a infe mist. Then the alcohol also ups the octane rating of the fuel you are using. Combe more octane and lower temps and you can run more boost and more timing.
Supreme Member

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,974
Likes: 0
From: Pueblo Co
Car: 1989 C4
Engine: L98
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: 307
Originally posted by AM91Camaro_RS
i have a slightly different idea but along the same lines... what about using a single NOS fogger in the intake tube but spraying racing alchol (not beer, sorry). racing alcohol would be a little safer to carry and probably less harmfull for the engine. plus, spraying a fuel doesn't require the injectors giving more fuel. possiblity??
i have a slightly different idea but along the same lines... what about using a single NOS fogger in the intake tube but spraying racing alchol (not beer, sorry). racing alcohol would be a little safer to carry and probably less harmfull for the engine. plus, spraying a fuel doesn't require the injectors giving more fuel. possiblity??
Its been done a long time ago. People would use rubbing alcohol with a small pump and inject it into the engine like a N2O system poor mans NOS. It does work but it looks like a home made meth lab setup in your car. Much easyer to go with a real N20 setup and forget about it.
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
From: Texas
Car: Right now 93 Lumina
Engine: 3.4 DOHC
Transmission: 4T60-E
Originally posted by SSC
Its been done a long time ago. People would use rubbing alcohol with a small pump and inject it into the engine like a N2O system poor mans NOS. It does work but it looks like a home made meth lab setup in your car. Much easyer to go with a real N20 setup and forget about it.
Its been done a long time ago. People would use rubbing alcohol with a small pump and inject it into the engine like a N2O system poor mans NOS. It does work but it looks like a home made meth lab setup in your car. Much easyer to go with a real N20 setup and forget about it.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Zachattack0925
Tech / General Engine
2
Aug 12, 2015 09:54 PM
Zachattack0925
Transmissions and Drivetrain
4
Aug 12, 2015 09:52 PM





